6
so many words to gesture vaguely at the core of world systems theory (hexbear.net)
submitted 4 months ago by to c/badposting@hexbear.net
2 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

western civilization - meaningless nonsense you can project anything onto (especially reactionary shit)

North Atlantic countries - what about Australia, New Zealand, Japan, and sometimes South Africa?

NATO - ditto

geordi-yes english speaking world

simple, if slightly reductive. Adequately describes most geopolitical actors in the bunch, pisses off europeans that see themselves as distinct from the United States despite being joined at the hip (and the french won't even speak french to anyone anyway)

taking the Echopraxia approach: is it a vampire? no. Does vampire get the gist across well enough that you neatly skip over expending energy delving into the minutia? yes

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 1 point 4 months ago (1 child)

I think "anglo-american empire" accurately describes the core nations of the bloc, the vassalization of peripheral nations like Germany and RoK, and better highlights the historical nature of the bloc (i.e. how America essentially took over the UKs role as Imperial Hegemon).

I don't think it is possible to describe this political formation without being reductionist. I maintain "anglo-american empire" is more descriptive but I also think "English speaking world" is adequate.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •