America and the Third World: Revolution and Intervention (review)

170 SAISREVIEW European views toward the United States. While France, Germany, and Great Britain exhibit their own nuances, each has displayed an ambivalent attitude toward its superpower ally. In Grosser's analysis, this ambivalence stems from the European antipathy toward capitalism; an antipathy that was spawned decades ago and that has lived on in the minds of the European publics. So, while America is culturally and politically their most compatible superpower, there remains an element of ideological distaste. The new alignment of power brought about by World War II only aggravated this ideological aversion as the proud European states were forced to admit their dependence on the capitalist, less-than-civilized, and naive United States. Grosser uses a parody of the Lord's Prayer that circulated in London after the Marshall Plan was announced as a humorous example of these slightly antagonistic feelings , while quickly pointing out that the Marshall aid was generally well received: Our Uncle which art in America Sam be thy name, Thy navy come, thy will be done, In London as 'tis in Washington. Give us this day our Marshall aid, And forgive us our un-American activities, As we forgive your American activities against us; And lead us not into Socialism But deliver us from Communism, For thine is our Kingdom, The Atom power and the Tory For ever and ever: G-men. In analyzing the course ofrelevant events, Grosser uses the impact ofpersonalities as his second major tool. One might argue that he is an adherent of the "Great Man" theory of history: to the influence of individuals is attributed the decisive elements of history. He awards a special place to Jean Monnet, the "inspirer" who, through the strength ofhis character and personal relationships with major political leaders, was able to push toward a united Europe in a way perhaps not available to any other individual. When Grosser quotes Monnet: "Nothing is possible without men: nothing is lasting without institutions," one feels that this quotation sums up his own philosophy. Myra Struck America and the Third World: Revolution and Intervention. By John L. S. Girling. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1980, 220 pp. "Globalism is more than a policy: it is a condition." Thus John BOOK REVIEWS 171 Girling concludes his study of socio-economic change and American response to such change in the Third World. By this he means not only that American policy in the Third World is conditioned by a global point ofview to the detriment ofunderstanding particular circumstances, but that the world condition lends itself to such an interpretation. Consequently , he sees the "reordering of the international economic system" as a positive step that could potentially result in a qualitative change in the American world view; a step that might reduce the dangers of global military catastrophe. Girling begins his analysis of both revolution and intervention by contrasting the pluralist and neo-Marxist viewpoints. Generally, he agrees with neo-Marxist analysis when it is descriptive but not when it is prescriptive. It should be noted, however, that he misses an important aspect of the neo-Marxist concept of imperialism/dependency, i.e., that intervention by the advanced capitalist countries in the Third World is a necessary consequence of capitalist development. On the other hand, he sees pluralist analysis, when applied to the Third World, as an attempt to impose American values on an area where they correspond poorly with reality. Thus the problems ofAmerican foreign policy in the Third World stem largely from inaccurate assumptions. The key to Girling's analysis lies in the stability/instability dialectic. Unfortunately, he does not seem to realize the critical nature of this point. Pluralist epistemology offers a static analysis; it studies how things are, rather than how they change. Therefore, it is not surprising that Americans should view stability as virtually synonomous with security. Girling states the American attitude: "Pluralist development requires security: and the domestic security of eachis the international security ofall." The American debate is then "how best to create and maintain a stable structure of peace" (emphasis supplied). Herein lies the connection between stability and globalism. But is this not a view that leads the United States into intervention in...