Mattei, Ugo 2003 'a Theory of Imperial Law-- A Study on U.S. Hegemony and the Latin Resistance' Global Jurist Frontiers, Vol. 3, Issue 2 (61 Pp.)

7/28/2019 Mattei, Ugo 2003 'a Theory of Imperial Law-- A Study on U.S. Hegemony and the Latin Resistance' Global Jurist Fr

1/63


2/63

A Theory of Imperial Law: A Study on U.S.

Hegemony and the Latin Resistance

Ugo Mattei

Abstract

This essay attempts to develop a theory of imperial law that is able to explain post-Cold War changes in the general process of Americanization in legal thinking.

KEYWORDS: imperialism, legal theory, hegemony


3/63

INTRODUCTION*

Thisessayattemptstodevelopatheoryofimperiallawthatisabletoexplainpost-ColdWarchangesinthegeneralprocessofAmericanizationinlegalthinking.Myclaimisthatimperiallawisnowadominantlayerofworld-widelegalsystems.1Imperiallawisproduced,intheinterestofinternationalcapital,byavarietyofbothpublicandprivateinstitutions,allsharingagapinlegitimacy,sometimescalledthedemocraticdeficit.Imperiallawisshapedbyaspectacularprocessofexaggeration,aimedatbuildingconsentforthepurposeofhegemonicdomination.Imperiallawsubordinateslocal legal arrangements world-wide, reproducing on the global scale the samephenomenonof legaldualism that thus far has characterizedthe lawofdeveloping

countries.Predatoryeconomicglobalizationisthevehicle,theall-mightyally,andthebeneficiary of imperial law. Ironically, despite its absolute lack of democraticlegitimacy,imperiallawimposesasanaturalnecessity,bymeansofdiscursivepracticesbrandeddemocracyandtheruleoflaw,areactivelegalphilosophythatoutlawsredistributionofwealthbasedonsocialsolidarity.2Atthecoreofimperiallawthereis

*ThisPaperispublishedwithpermissionoftheIndianaJournalofGlobalLegalStudieswhereitisforthcoming.UgoMatteiisAlfredandHannaFrommProfessorofInternationalandComparativeLaw,U.C.Hastings;ProfessoreOrdinariodi DirittoCivile,UniversitdiTorino. J.D.UniversityofTurin(1983);LLM,BoaltHallU.C.Berkeley(1989).ThisarticlehasbeenproducedtobediscussedattheIndianaGlobalLawSymposium(April5,2002)andattheHarvardCriticalGlobalizationConference(April12and13,2002).Ihavedeliveredthisarticleatavarietyofworkshopsandconferencesincluding

theConferenceonAmericanizationoflegalthoughtheldinParis(ArchivesdePhilosophieduDroit,June2000);theMaxPlankInstitute(Hamburg,GermanyMay2002);StanfordUniversity(October2001),theDepartmentofAnthropologyofU.C.Berkeley(September2001)andtheUniversityofFlorence(April2002).IwishtothankProfessorsAlfredAman,forinvitingmeatIndiana;ProfessorDavidKennedyforinvitingmeatHarvard;ProfessorJurgenBasedowfortheMaxPlank;ProfessorHoratiaMuirWattforParis;ProfessorVittoriaBarsottiforFlorence.Iwishalsotospeciallythank,forcomments,reactionsandencouragementonearlyversions:DuncanKennedy,GeorgeFletcher,VincenzoVarano,MauroBussani,ElisabettaGrande,HansBaade,AnnadiRobilant,LauraNader,DiegoLopezMedina,JamesGordley,MariellaPandolfi,andDavidTrubeck.

1.Asalayerofthelaw,imperialismcanbestudiedbymethodologiessuchasthoseinvokinglegalpluralism.SeegenerallyMarcoGuadagni,LegalPluralism,in THENEWPALGRAVE:ADICTIONARYOFECONOMICSANDTHELAW542(PeterNewmaned.,1998)[hereinafterT HENEWPALGRAVE].Foratheoryof legal pluralism in the process of globalization, see F.G. Snyder, Governing Globalization, inTRANSNATIONALLEGALPROCESSES:GLOBALIZATIONANDPOWERDISPARITIES65(MichaelLikoskyed.,2002)[hereinafterTRANSNATIONALLEGALPROCESSES]. 2.Thisessaywillnotdiscussthekindofredistribution(infavorofthewinners)thatisfosteredbyeconomicglobalizationandbyitsviolentre-structuringofcapitalism. Forthebestrecentdiscussionavailableonthisdifferentkindofredistribution,seegenerallyWILLIAMK.TABB,THEAMORALELEPHANT:GLOBALIZATIONANDTHESTRUGGLEFORSOCIALJUSTICEINTHETWENTY-FIRSTCENTURY(2001).Every

Mattei:ATheoryofImperialLaw

Produced by The Berkeley Electronic Press, 2


4/63

U.S. law, as transformed andadapted after the Reagan-Thatcher revolution, in the

processofinfiltratingthehugeperipheryleftopenaftertheendoftheColdWar.AstudyofimperiallawrequiresacarefuldiscussionofthefactorsofpenetrationofU.S.legalconsciousnessworld-wide,aswellasacarefuldistinctionbetweenthecontextofproductionandthecontextofreception 3ofthevarietyofinstitutionalarrangementsthatmakeimperiallaw.Factorsofresistanceneedtobefullyappreciatedaswell.

I.AMERICANLAW:FROMLEADERSHIPTODOMINANCE

TheyearsfollowingtheSecondWorldWarhaveshownadramaticchangeinthepatternofworldhegemonyinthelaw.Leadinglegalideas,onceproducedinContinentalCivilianEuropeandexportedthroughtheperipheryoftheworld,arenowforthefirst

timeproducedinacommonlawjurisdiction:theUnitedStates.4

ThereislittlequestionthatthepresentworlddominanceoftheUnitedStateshasbeeneconomic,military,andpoliticalfirst,andlegalonlyinamorerecentmoment,sothatareadyexplanationoflegal hegemony can be found with a simple Marxist explanation of law as asuperstructureoftheeconomy.5Nevertheless,thequestionoftherelationshipbetweenlegal,political,andeconomichegemonyisnotlikelytobecorrectlyaddressedwithinacause-and-effectparadigm.6Ultimately,addressingthisquestionisaveryimportantareaofbasicjurisprudentialresearchbecauseitrevealssomegeneralaspectsaboutthenatureoflawasadeviceofglobalgovernance.

Observinghistoricalpatternsoflegalhegemonyallowsustocritiquethedistinctionbetweentwomainpatternsofgovernancethroughthelaw(andoflegaltransplants).7

deeptransformationinprocessesofproductionthroughhistoryimpliesredistributionofwealthacrosssocialclassesinfavorofthewinners.SeeKARLPOLANY,THEGREATTRANSFORMATION:THEPOLITICALANDECONOMICORIGINSOFOURTIME(1944).Inthisessay,however,Iwilltalkofredistributioninthesenseoffavoringsocialsolidarity,andthereforeaimedatmoreequality.

3. Onthisusefultheoreticaldistinction,seeDiegoLopezMedina,ComparativeJurisprudence(2000)(unpublishedJ.S.D.dissertation,HarvardLawSchool)(onfilewithauthor).

4.Mirroringthisphenomenon,newcontinentalphilosophicalideaswereincorporatedandproducedintheUnitedStatesby1969withJacquesDerridasseminal lecturesatJohnsHopkinsUniversity. Seegenerally JACQUESDERRIDA,MARGINSOFPHILOSOPHY(AlanBasstrans.,Univ.ofChicagoPress1982)(1972).

5. Seegenerally3KARLMARX,CAPITAL:ACRITIQUEOFPOLITICALECONOMY(DavidFernbachtrans.,PenguinBooks1981)(1867).

6. ComparativistsarefamiliarwiththediscussionbetweenWatsonandFriedmanonwhetherlawcancorrectlybeperceivedasaresponsetosocialneeds.ThebasicargumentsfortheoppositepositionsaresetforewardinAlanWatson,LegalTransplants.AnApproachtoComparativeLaw(1974);W.Friedmann,LawinChangingSociety(1959).

7.The literature on legal transplants is now very extensive. See, e.g., ALAN WATSON, LEGALTRANSPLANTS:ANAPPROACHTOCOMPARATIVELAW(1974).

2 GlobalJuristFrontiers Vol.3[2003],No.2,Artic


5/63

Scholarsoflegaltransplantshavetraditionallydistinguishedtwopatterns.Thefirstis

lawasdominancewithouthegemony,inwhichthelegalsystemisultimatelyacoerciveapparatusassertingpoliticalandeconomicpowerwithoutconsent.Thisareaofinquiryandthismodelhavebeenusedtoexplaintherelationshipbetweenthelegalsystemofthemotherland and that of the colonies within imperialistic colonial enterprises. Theopposing pattern, telling a story of consensual voluntary reception by anadmiringperipheryoflegalmodelsdevelopedandprovidedforatthecenter,isusuallyconsideredthemostimportantpatternoflegaltransplants.Itisdescribedbystressingontheideaofconsentwithinanotionofprestige.8

Little effort isnecessary tochallenge the sufficiency of this basic taxonomy inintroducinglegaltransplants.Lawisadetailedandcomplexmachineryofsocialcontrolthatcannotfunctionwithanydegreeofeffectivenesswithoutsomecooperationfroma

varietyofindividualsstaffinglegalinstitutions.Theseindividualsusuallyconsistofaprofessionalelitewhicheitheralreadyexistsoriscreatedbythehegemonicpower.Suchaneliteprovidesthedegreeofconsenttothereceptionofforeignlegalideasthatisnecessaryforanylegaltransplanttooccur.Hence,thedistinctionbetweenimperialisticandnon-imperialistictransplantsisamatteronlyofdegreeandnotofstructure.Inordertounderstandthenatureofpresentlegalhegemony,itisnecessarytocapturethewayinwhich the law functions to build a degree of consent to the present pattern ofinternationaleconomicandpoliticaldominance.9

InthisessayIsuggestthatafundamentalculturalconstructofpresumedconsentisthe rhetoric of democracy and the rule of law utilized by the imperial model ofgovernance,10triumphantworldwidetogetherwiththeneo-Americanmodelofcapitalism

developedbytheReaganandThatcherrevolutionearlyinthe1980s.Iarguethatthelasttwentyyearshaveproducedthe triumphinglobalgovernanceofreactive,politicallyirresponsibleinstitutions,suchasthecourtsoflaw,overproactivepoliticallyaccountableinstitutionssuchasdirectadministrativeapparatusesoftheState.11

8.For a critical discussion, see ELISABETTA GRANDE, IMITAZIONE E DIRITTO: IPOTESI SULLACIRCOLAZIONE DEI MODELLI (2001). See also MARTIN HEIDEGGER, THE QUESTION CONCERNINGTECHNOLOGYANDOTHERESSAYS135,153(WilliamLovitttrans.,1977)(notingasimilarpatterninhiscontinentalphilosophy).

9. Cf. WILLIAMI.ROBINSON,PROMOTINGPOLYARCHY:GLOBALIZATION,U.S.INTERVENTION,ANDHEGEMONY21-25(1996)(providingasimilarmethodologyinpoliticalscience).

10. SeegenerallyMICHAELHARDT&ANTONIONEGRI,EMPIRE(2001)(developinganddiscussingtheideaofimperialgovernance). SeealsoMICHELALBERT,CAPITALISMVS.CAPITALISM:HOWAMERICASOBSESSIONWITHINDIVIDUALACHIEVEMENTAND SHORT-TERM PROFIT HASLEDITTOTHEBRINKOFCOLLAPSE16(PaulHavilandtrans.,1993)(usingtheexpressionneo-Americaneconomicmodel).ForadiscussionofAlbertstheoryasappliedtolegaltransplants,see infranotes203-07andaccompanyingtext.

11. See WILLIAM K.TABB, supranote2,at17-22(discussingthedifferencebetweenpoliticalandeconomicglobalization).




6/63

Thisessayattemptstoopenaradicalrevisionofsomeacceptedmodesofthought

aboutthelawastheyappeartoday,atwhathasbeencalledtheendofhistory.12

Itsaimistodiscusssomewaysinwhichgloballegalityhasbeencreatedinthepresentstageofworld-widelegaldevelopment.Itwillshowhowdemocracyandtheruleoflaw,inthepresentlegallandscape,arejustanotherrhetoricoflegitimizationofagiveninternationaldynamicofpower.Itwillalsodenouncethepresentunconsciousstateinwhichthelawisproducedanddevelopedbyprofessionalconsentbuildingelites.Theconsequencesofsuchunconsciousnessarecreatingalegallandscapeinwhichthelawisnaturallygivingupitsroleofconstrainingopportunisticbehaviorofmarketactors.Thisprocessresultsinthedevelopmentoffakedrulesandinstitutionsthatarefunctionaltotheinterestsofthegreatcapitalandthatdramaticallyenlargeinequalitywithinsociety.Ipredictthatsuchalegalenvironmentisunabletoavoidtragicresultsonaglobalscale

suchasthoseoutlinedinthewell-knownparableofthetragedyofthecommons.13

Myobjectofobservationisalegallandscapeintransition.Iwishtoanalyzethispathoftransitionfromonepoliticalsetting(thelocalstate)toanotherpoliticalsetting(worldgovernance)inwhichAmerican-framedreactiveinstitutionsareassertingthemselvesaslegitimateandlegitimatinggoverningbodies,whichIcallimperiallaw.Imperiallawisthe product of a renowned alliance between state and economic institutions, acooperativegameinwhichaverylimitednumberofpowerfulplayersareatplay. 14

Whileintheagesofcolonialismsuchpoliticalbattlesforinternationalhegemonyweremostlycarriedonwithanopenuseofforceandpoliticalviolence(insuchawaythatfinal extensive conflict between superpowers was unavoidable), in the age ofglobalizationandofeconomicEmpirepoliticalviolencehasbeentransformedintolegal

violence.

II.DEVELOPINGOURTOOLS

A.HegemonyandCounter-Hegemony:FromGramscitotheEmpire

MystudyoflegalimperialismbuildsonAntonioGramscisnotionofhegemony.15

Gramscidefineshegemonyaspowerreachedbyacombinationofforceandconsent.

12. Seegenerally FRANCISFUKUYAMA,THEENDOFHISTORYANDTHELASTMAN(1992)(introducingsuccessfullythefortunate,buthighlymisleadingexpressiontheendofhistory).

13. SeeGarrettHardin,TheTragedyoftheCommons,162SCIENCE1243,1244(1968).14. See generallySUSANGEORGE,REMETTRELEOMCSAPLACE(2001).15. HegemonyhasbeenakeyconceptinGramscisreflections.Ithasbeendeveloped,outsideofany

systematiceffort,throughouthiswork. SeegenerallyANTONIOGRAMSCI,SELECTIONSFROMTHEPRISONNOTEBOOKSOFANTONIOGRAMSCI(QuintinHoare&GeoffreyNowellSmitheds.&trans.,1971); seealsogenerally AN ANTONIO GRAMSCI READER: SELECTED WRITINGS, 1916-1935(D.Forgacsed.,1988)(providingagoodselectionofGramsciswork).



7/63

Powercannotbereachedonlybybruteforce;itneedstobeimposedbyindividualsthat

voluntarily accept government. Building on this suggestion, Louis Althusser hassuggestedthatforceistheprovinceoftherepressiveapparatusesofthestatelikethearmyandthepolice,whileconsentisgainedbymeansofwhathecalledtheideologicalapparatusesofthestatelikeschools,churches,ormedia. 16Suchideologicalapparatusesmakehegemonymoreacceptableandatthesametimemakeideologyacross-classconcept, thus goingbeyond the narrow Marxist ideaofideologyasa class-specificdevice.17Hegemonyisthereforereachedatleastinpartbyadiffusionofpower(neededinordertogainconsensus)betweenapluralityofindividuals.SuchdiffusionofpowerbecomesakeyconceptinMichelFoucaultsrefutationoftheideaofhegemonyasatop-down imposition of power. Through his work, Foucaultconceivedofpower asarelationalpositioninherentintheverypostureofeveryindividualinsocietywhich,in

turn,isdeterminedbytheso-calleddiscursivepractices.18

Diffusionofpowercarriesasaconsequencethebirthofcounter-hegemony,itselfapowerfultooltodefeattop-downattemptsofhegemony. FrenchcriticalthinkerGuiDebordfocusesontheimpactofmediaandnewcommunicativetechnologyonhumanbehavioranddevelopsthenotionoftheindividualasspectatorandconsumerwithinwhathedefinesasthespectaclesociety.MaintainingtheMarxisttraditionoffocusingontheactualmeansofproductionthatdeterminetheorganizationofsociety,Deborddemonstratesthatthespectacleisnotamarginalaspectofthepost-modernsociety.Rather,itdeterminesitsveryeconomicstructure,capableoftransformingtheexploitedproletariatintoamuchcourtedconsumer.19Theproletariatisnotconsideredonlyaslaborforce. InanotionthatisdevelopedalsobyFrenchsociologistBaudrillard,the

16. LOUISALTHUSSER,LOSTATOEDISUOIAPPARATI(1997).17. See LOUISALTHUSSER,LENINANDPHILOSOPHYANDOTHERESSAYS(BenBrewstertrans.,1971); see

also LOUIS ALTHUSSER&E.BALIBAR,READINGCAPITAL(1997)(discussingthefull-fledgedovertakingofideologyasaclass-specificdevice).

18. MICHELFOUCAULT, ARCHAEOLOGYOFKNOWLEDGE(AlanM.SheridanSmithtrans.,Routledge1989)(1972).Thebasicnotionsapproachedinthetext,however,havebeendevelopedthroughoutFoucaultsmassivescholarlyproduction.Seegenerally,e.g., MICHELFOUCAULT,THEFOUCAULTREADER(PaulRabinowed.,1984).

19. ThistransformationoftheproletarianintoaconsumernotonlyupdatesbutalsoradicallytransformsthewayinwhichMarxisttheoryworks.RevolutionaryideologistLuckacssnotionsof commodification,reificationand,inparticular,contemplationareusedbyDebordtoseehowtheonceexploitedproletarianandnowconsumerispersuadedbythestructureoftheshowoftheexistenceofasecondnature.SeeGEORG LUKCS, HISTORY AND CLASS CONSCIOUSNESS: STUDIES IN MARXIST DIALECTICS (RodneyLivingstonetrans.,MerlinPress1971)(1968).




8/63

consumerisaworkerwhodoesnotknowtowork. 20Understandingthespectacle

allowsabetterunderstandingofpresent-dayAmericanhegemony.Thewaysinwhichpatternsoflawhavebeenhistoricallyexportedcanbecapturedwithin a variety of models. A first model is direct imperialistic/colonial rule, orimpositionoflegalpatternsbymilitaryforce,asithappenedduringtimesofmilitaryconquest(i.e.theNapoleonicCodeimposedinBelgium;McArthursreformsinpost-WorldWarIIJapan,andsoforth). Thisnotionofimpositionbyforceneedstobequalified,bytakingintotheaccountthestructuralneedforinstitutionalstaffingandforcooperationofinstitutionalactorstomakeasystemwork.21

Asecondmodelcanbedescribedasimpositionbybargaining,inthesensethatacceptanceofalegalmodelispartofasubtleblackmail.22TargetedcountriesarepersuadedtochangethelawaccordingtoWesternstandardsinordertogetaccesstothe

internationalmarketandtoremaineconomicallyviable.HistoryoffersexamplesofthismodelinChina,Japan,andEgyptearlyinthelastcentury,andtoday,thisisthemostimportantwayinwhichtheWorldBank,InternationalMonetaryFund,WorldTradeOrganization,andEuropeanUnionoperatethroughthedevelopingandformersocialistworld.

Athirdmodel,constructedasfullyconsensual,hasbeenpresentedasdiffusionbyprestige,focusingonadeliberateprocessofinstitutionaladmirationthatleadstothereceptionoflaw.23MyclaimisthattheprocessofAmericanizationinthelastfewyearscanonlybeunderstoodwithinaclearperceptionthatideologicalapparatusesareatplay,producing spectacular propaganda that allows the produced legal consciousness tocirculate.

Thesepreliminaryremarksshowsomeshortcomingsofthecomparativediscussionsoflegaltransplantsthatproceedoutsideoftheanalyticalframeworkofhegemonyandcounter-hegemony.Indeed,thehegemony/counter-hegemonyframeworkiscrucialtounderstandingthatforcecanneverbyitselfbesufficient;italwaysneedsamoreorlessextensivedegreeofinstitutionalconsenttooperate.Whatisevenmoreimportantisthatthe framework allows us to perceive the naively anthropomorphic nature of mosttraditionalanalyses.Legaltransplantscannotbeseenashappeningastheresultofthe

20. JEANBAUDRILLARD,THECONSUMERSOCIETY:MYTHSANDSTRUCTURES14-18(ChrisTurnertrans.,SagePublications1998)(1970).

21. See supranote9andaccompanyingtext.22. See Sally Falk Moore,An International Legal Regime and the Context of Conditionality, in

TRANSNATIONAL LEGAL PROCESSES, supranote1,at333(describingthemodelalsoascontextofconditionality).

23. SeeWATSON,supranote7;seealso RodolfoSacco,LegalFormants: ADynamicApproachtoComparativeLaw,39AM.J.COMP.L.343,397-400(1991)(introducingthenotionofprestige);GRANDE,supranote8(discussingthenotionofprestige).



9/63

choiceofonemindthatfreelyorcoactivelyreceivestheproducedmodel.Bothinthe

phaseofproductionandinthephaseofreception,legaltransplantsarealivelydialecticbetween consent and dissent, between hegemonic and counter-hegemonic forces,betweenmainstreamandcriticalapproaches.Inotherwords,dominantanddominatedpositionshavetobeconsideredinthepicturebecausetheyallowanunderstandingofthehighcomplexityofthepicture.

B.ReactiveInstitutionsastheFundamentalStructureofU.S.Law

Inpreviouspapers,IhaveoutlinedthefundamentalstructurebehindwhatIcalledtheruleofprofessionallawandthehistoricalreasonsforcurrentAmericanintellectualleadershipintheworldslegallandscape. 24ThefundamentalstructureofAmericanlawhasunfoldedtobecomeapoliticallylegitimizedsysteminwhichstraightpoliticalpoweriscounterbalancedbyadoublesetofprofessional(counter-majoritarian)checks.SuchasystemistheresultofimportsfromEuropedigestedandmadespectacularbywayofexaggerationintheUnitedStates.

Bytheearlypartofthelastcentury(acenturysignificantlylabeledtheAmericancentury),25U.S.lawhadalreadyreceivedfromEurope,anddigestedinagenuinelyoriginalway,thefundamentalcomponentsofitslegalstructure.TheEnglishcommonlawtraditionhastransmittedtotheformercolonytheidealofjudgesasoraclesofthelawandofastrong,independentjudiciaryastheinstitutionalframeworkinwhichjudgescanperformtheirroleofguardiansofindividualrights.Americanlawhasdevelopedthislegacyandexaggeratedittothepointofinventingconstitutionaladjudication.Judgesarenotonlytheoraclesofthelawandtheleadersoftheprofessionallegalsystem;theyalsohavethepowertodeclare,intheprocessofadjudication,politicaldecisionmakingasunconstitutional.26 Becauseofsuchoutstandingextensionof judicialpowerwithinAmericanlaw,thebelief,alreadynoticedbyTocqueville,27thatanypoliticalproblemcan

24. SeeUgoMattei,Three PatternsofLaw:TaxonomyandChangeintheWorldsLegalSystems,45AM.J.COMP.L.5(1997)(explainingtheruleofprofessionallaw)[hereinafterThree PatternsofLaw];UgoMattei,WhytheWindChanged:IntellectualLeadershipinWesternLaw,42AM.J.COMP.L.195(1994)(explainingU.S.leadership).

25. See,e.g.,OLIVIERZUNZ,PERCHILSECOLOAMERICANO?[WHYTHEAMERICANCENTURY?](2002);seealso,e.g.,ERICHOBSBAWM,AGEOFEXTREMES:THESHORTTWENTIETHCENTURY,1914-1991,at15(1994).Seegenerally GIOVANNIARRIGHI,THELONGTWENTIETHCENTURY:MONEY,POWER,ANDTHEORIGINSOFOURTIMES(1994).

26. SeeMarburyv.Madison,5U.S.137,178(1803).27. ALEXISDETOCQUEVILLE,DEMOCRACYINAMERICA,(RichardD.Heffnered.,SignetClassic2001)

(1956).Veryrecently,animportantbookhasdiscussedadversariallegalism,somethingsimilartomyidea of reactive institutional setting, as the American way of law. See ROBERT A. KAGAN,ADVERSARIALLEGALISM: THEAMERICAN WAYOFLAW(2001).Kagansworkbuildsandexpands,beyondthelimitsofprocedure,importantandinfluentialideassetforwardincomparativelawbyDamaka




10/63

soonerorlaterbedecidedbyacourtoflawhasbeencarriedtoitssymbolicextremein

theNurembergTrials,andpossiblytoitsverylimitinBushv.Gore.28

ThecivillawtraditionhasalsotransmittedsomefundamentalmodesofthoughtthatU.S.lawhasbeenbusyexpandingandexaggeratingthroughthenineteenthandtwentiethcenturies.FrancehasconveyedtotheUnitedStatestheideaofuniversalindividualrights. Thesenegative rights offirst generationhave been enshrined inthe U.S.Constitution,influentialastheywereonthemajorityofthefoundingfathers. 29Notonlyhasthisuniversalisticidealbeencarriedtotheextreme,aswitnessedamongotherthingsbynotionsofuniversaljurisdictionofU.S.courtsinthevindicationofsuchrights, 30butnegativerights,intheabsenceofthicknotionsofsovereigntyandstatehooddevelopedbytheJacobeans,becameagenuinelimittotheredistributiveactivityoftheAmericanstate. Notions offreedomfromgovernmentintrusionwerebynomeanslimited to

judicial lawmaking in theLochnerera.Astronglimittoanyproactiveactivityofgovernment,exceptinareassuchasdefense,canbeseenastheresultofFrench-inspirednotionsof(economic)rights.

Also,GermanyhastransmittedtotheUnitedStatesoneofitsfundamentalpresent-daycharacteristics:thepresenceofstrong,independentacademicinstitutionsasanothersourceofprofessionalcheckonthepoliticalprocess.Itwasonlybecausethelawwasconsideredasciencethatitwasnaturaltoargueforitsteachinginuniversitycontexts.Otherwiseitcouldwellhaveremainedapracticalbusiness,asitcontinuedtobeinEnglanduntilwellaftertheVictorianage.Americanlawschools(professionalschoolsstaffedwithfacultythatregardthemselvesasacademicscholars)aretheonlyonesintheworldthatofferbasiclegaleducationatthegraduateschoollevel.Consequently,and

paradoxicallyforasystembasedonprofessionalschooling,theaverageAmericanlawyerisexposedtomoreyearsofacademictrainingthatanyothercolleagueintheworld. Moreover, because of this further exaggeration as compared to academicundergraduatelegaleducationinEurope,Americanacademiacanwellbeseentodayas

some time ago. See MIRJAN R. DAMAKA, THE FACES OF JUSTICE AND STATE AUTHORITY: A COMPARATIVEAPPROACHTOTHELEGALPROCESS73-80(1986).Myargumentscarrythepointforward.ThereactivewaycannotbeseenasamerefeatureofAmericanlaw,butisactuallythefundamentalphilosophyofglobalizationthat,asanewlayeroflegalsystemsformsworldwide,pushesforacomplexvarietyofprocessesofprivatizationofthelegalsystem.

28. SeeRachelE.Barkow,MoreSupremethanCourt?TheFallofthePoliticalQuestionDoctrineandtheRiseofJudicialSupremacy ,102COLUM.L.REV.237(2002).SeegenerallyMichaelJ.Klarman,Bushv.GoreThroughtheLensofConstitutionalHistory,89CALL.REV.1721(2001)(providingadiscussionofthedecisioninlightoflegalhistory); 65LAW&CONTEMP.PROBS.1-95(2002)(providingageneraldiscussionbyseveralauthors).

29. See generallyJOSEPHJ.ELLIS,FOUNDINGBROTHERS:THEREVOLUTIONARYGENERATION(2002)(providingarecent,fascinatingdiscussionofthecredoandideologyoftheFoundingFathers).

30. Seethediscussion,infrapt.VII.



11/63

the global lawyers graduate school in the sense thatambitious lawyersworldwide

completetheirundergraduatelegaleducationintheUnitedStates.31

ThereisanotherfundamentalstructureofU.S.lawthat,inmyopinion,makesitbettersuitedtotheframeworkoftheglobalmarket:itshighdegreeofdecentralization.ThisispossiblythemostoriginalaspectofthefundamentalstructureofU.S.law.Nootherlegalsystemintheworldhasdevelopedafull-fledgedfederaljudicialsystemascompleteandsophisticatedastheUnitedStateshas.Theco-existenceofalargenumberoffederalandstatecourtsmadeissuesofjurisdictionandchoiceoflawtheprimaryconcernoftheAmericanlegalprofession.Thesearethesameissuesthatareonthetableofthelawyerapproachingglobalproblems.Americanlawyersalreadyenjoya legalcultureanddiscoursethatisbroaderthanjurisdictionallimits.Inthisscenario,theannexingofonemorejurisdiction,whereverlocated,doesnotparticularlychangethe

U.S.lawyerswayofreasoning.TheverystructureoftheAmericanjudicialprocess,moreover,decentralizespowerandactivity.AlargevarietyofactivitieswithinlitigationwhicharelabeledofficialinEuropean legal systems, such as service of process, discovery, and questioning ofwitnesses,arealreadyprivatemattersinAmericanlaw. 32ThispowerfulcombinationofadaptiveforcesmakesthestructureofAmericanlawsufficientlyfamiliarsoasnottobeexcessivelyfeared,33yetsufficientlyambiguoustobesuccessfulintheinternationallegallandscape.34

AnothercrucialaspectofAmericanhegemonyistheequationbetweendemocracyandelections. Themajorityruleprinciple,quiteuncriticallyembracedin theUnitedStates,appearsnaturalandobviousaslongaswecompareittoitsabsurdopposite,that

oftheminorityrule.ButifwethinktohownumerousandvariouscanbethemeanstogivetoagroupaunitarywillweshouldaskwhetherSumnerMainewasnotrightwhenclaimingthatthemajorityruleisthemostartificialbetweenallthoseavailable.35ThemajorityruleasexpressedbyelectionshasinstitutionalizedintheUnitedStatesthe

31. SeeWolfgangWiegand,TheReceptionofAmericanLawinEurope ,39AM.J.COMP.L.229,233-35(1991).

32. See RUDOLFB.SCHLESINGERETAL.,COMPARATIVELAW428,448(6thed.1998).33. OndiscoveryandfishingexpeditionsasspectacularpracticesresentedinEurope,seethediscussion

infranotes150-51andaccompanyingtext.34. See GLOBALIZATIONS AND SOCIAL MOVEMENTS: CULTURE, POWER, AND THETRANSNATIONAL

PUBLIC SPHERE(JohnA.Guidryetal.eds.,2000); seealsoDuncanKennedy,ThreeGlobalizations(January 2003) (paper delivered at the Harvard Globalization Symposium, forthcoming on SuffolkUniversityLawReview)(discussingpoliticalambiguityasanexplanationforworldwidesuccessofalegalpattern).35.SeeLucianoCanfora,CriticadellaRetoricaDemocratica(2002);SeealsoEDOARDORUFFINI,LARAGIONEDEIPI:RICERCHESULLASTORIADELPRINCIPIOMAGGIORITARIO (1977);H.SUMNERMAINE,ETUDESSURLHISTOIREDESINSTITUTIONSPRIMITIVES(ErnestThorined.,1880).




12/63

notionofamarketforvotesthatcarriesasastructuralconsequenceahighdegreeof

spectacularselectionofleadership,mostlydeterminedbymediacontrolandavailabilityofextensiveeconomicmeans.Itisimportanttothepresentanalysistoobservethewayinwhichthesebasic

EuropeaninstitutionalfactorshavebeencarriedtotheextremeandthusexaggeratedintheUnitedStates.Judgesdevelopasfull-fledgedsupervisorsofthedirectpoliticalprocess.Individualrightsdevelopanunprecedenteduniversaljurisdictionalreach.Lawyersdevelophighlytechnocraticskillsofsocialengineering.Elections,alongwithmediapower,defeatpoliticalpartiesaslaboratoriesofpoliticalconsentandasagenciesleadingtothereductionofclassdifferences.

Asshownintheprevioussection,U.S.lawhasbeenabletobecometheextremeWest of the Western legal tradition36 whose fundamental notions are plainlyand

structurallyincompatiblewithalternativeideassuchas,forexample,SocialistlegalityorIslamicjurisprudence.Countrieswhichembraceorhaveembracedtheseradicallyalternative views have always been located at the periphery of the free world.Interestingly,eventhosecountriessuchasEuropeandemocracies,traditionallylocatedatthecenter,havebeengraduallypushedtotheperipheryinthebuildingprocessofglobalgovernancebyaconstanterosionoftheactivistphilosophiesoftheirsovereignstates.Thelessthanfulldevelopmentofdecentralizedreactiveinstitutionshasbeensingledoutasaproblematicfactor,evenintheEuropeancontext.Thenewperiphery,justasmuchasthetraditionalone,maintainscertainlegalfactorsthatareanirritantforanAmerican-inspiredgloballegalconsciousness.

FromtheveryaftermathofWorldWarII,itbecamequiteapparentthatthenotionof

sovereigntyandstatehooddevelopedinthecivillawwasexposedtoastrongstructuralcritique.Thenotion,enshrinedintheHegelianphilosophicaltradition,thattheStatewasanorganpursuingitsownsovereigninterest,ontologicallydifferentandoccasionallyincompatiblewiththeaggregateoftheindividualrightsofitssubjects,wasinmanyquartersmadeaccountableforthetrashingoftheruleoflawinfascistEurope.AnalternativevisionofsovereigntywasfoundinthenotionthattheStatewasnothingmorethanthegovernmentinoffice(typicalofthepragmaticAnglo-Americantradition),pursuinganinterestthathadtocoincidewiththeaggregateofindividualsinterests,andwhoseactivitywastobelimitedtothisfunctionbytechnocraticchecks.

TherootswereestablishedforthenaturalizationoftheAmericanway,andforitsfundamentalchallengetothehierarchicalrelationshipbetweenthepoliticalprocessand

free(market)activity.Suchprocessofnaturalizationoftheinstitutionalsettingofthefreeworldwas started inAmerica in1952by President EisenhowersconservativepoliticalplatformthatdefeatedPresidentTrumansFairDeal.Reinforcedthroughthe

36. See JEANPHILIPPEMATHY,EXTRMEOCCIDENT:FRENCHINTELLECTUALSANDAMERICA(1993).



13/63

ColdWarasapolemictowardssocialism,thesuspicionofactivistredistributivepolicies

and ofgovernment interventioninmatters otherthan defenseconstantly controlledAmericanpoliticsand,throughitsinfluence,thepresentpostureoftheinternationalfinancialinstitutions.

LocalAmericanscholarlyevolutionsmadetheprestigeofU.S.lawfeltbylegalprofessionalsworldwide,sothattheintellectualleadershipofAmericanlawisnowanundisputablefact.TheyearsoftheColdWarandthedemiseofwesternlegalitythathascharacterizedmostofthecommunistregimesintheU.S.S.R.orbitofinfluencehaveconfirmedtheperceivedbenefitsofthethreefundamentalsymbolsoftheAmericanruleoflaw:spectacularelections(asortofadvertisingspotfordemocracy),independent

judiciary (with highly spectacular interventions in U.S. political life), and free andcreativeacademiccritiqueofthepoliticalandofthejudicialprocess.Noneofthese

tenets was characteristicof the Soviet bloc, so the imposition ofsuchfundamentalcharacteristicsbecametherecipeforchangeintheaftermathofthefalloftheSovietRepublic.

III.HEGEMONYANDTHECONSTRUCTIONOFTHEFOE:THEREPRESSIVEINSTITUTIONOFGLOBALGOVERNANCE

The last ten years of the last century have been crucial to the refinement ofimperialisticandhegemonicaspectsofAmericanlaw.Nobodyhasputitmoreclearly,thoughmoderately,thanleadinginternationallawyerRichardFalk:

Thelogicofhegemonicauthorityextendsbeyondtheimplicationsofunequalpowerandinfluencetoencompasstheratheramorphous,yetsignificant,roleofgloballeadership.Suchahegemonicroleinaneraofmoderatedinternationalconflictispremisedonmilitarypower.Butalso crucially important is a normative reputation as a generallybenevolentpoliticalactorandaprovideroforderbeneficialfortheglobalpublicgood,notjustforthenationalinterestsofthehegemon.37

TheverysamerhetoricoffreedomhasguidedU.S.internationalinterventionsfromWorldWarIItothepresentideologicalconstructionoftheIslamicworld(representedbyKomeini,Saddam,andtheTaliban)asthelivingdenialofthekindofuniversalfreedom,

37. RichardFalk,Re-framingtheLegalAgendaofWorldOrderintheCourseofaTurbulentCentury,inTRANSNATIONALLEGALPROCESSES,supranote1,at355,369.




14/63

basedongenderequalityanduniversalhumanrights,thatisinextricablyconnectedwith

theneo-liberalcapitalistmodelofdevelopment.38

TheninetieswerethedecadeinwhichU.S.power(andconsequently,law)turnedfromleadershiptohegemony.Mostwesterncommunistandsocialistpartieshavestartedamajorself-critique,andleftistintellectualsdiscoveryofthevirtuesofthemarkethasprovidedsomequiteextremeattitudes.39TheendoftheColdWarhasbeendepictedbymanycommentatorsasanendogenousphenomenonwithinthesocialistworld.Thehighly proactive political apparatus of the soviet concentrated spectacle, to useDebordsnotion,40simplycouldnotresistprocessesofinternalcorruptionacceleratedbythesenseoffreedomandbydynamicsofopportunismthatwereprecludedfromanysociallybeneficialspillovereffect.Thisis,however,averysimplisticvisionofthefalloftheSovietEmpire.Avarietyofotherfactorsmustbeconsideredtoo:exogenous

factorssuchastechnologicalcompetition(e.g.theStarWarssystemoftheReaganadministration)thatcreatedanunbearableeconomicpressurefortheSocialistState, 41

andtheundisputablespectacularappealoftheconsumerssociety,madeaccessibletowould-beconsumersbyenhancedmediareach.Whatisimportanttopointoutisthattechnologicalevolutionsweretheprotagonistsofmostoftheseandotherrelevantevents.Andmilitaryaswellasmediatechnologybecame thecreedofthenextstepin thedevelopmentofglobalideology:thesensethattechnologycandefeatdemography.Thisnotionhasdetermined,amongotherthings,thepoliticsandideologyofimmigrationlawthroughtheWest.42

38. SeeSAMUELP.HUNTINGTON,THECLASHOFCIVILIZATIONSANDTHEREMAKINGOFWORLDORDER

(1996)(discussingtheconstructionofanewconfrontation,substitutingIslamismfortheColdWar);cf.MICHELFOUCAULT,POLITICS,PHILOSOPHY,CULTURE,ANDOTHERWRITINGS(1988)(providingasimilarideafromapost-structuralistperspective).

39. Theshiftof leftistparadigmstonotionscompatiblewiththeofficialdogmaofneo-liberalismisusuallyassociatedwithToniBlairsNewLabour.Fortheintellectualrationalizationofthisevolution,seeA.GIDDENS,THETHIRDWAY:THERENEWALOFSOCIALDEMOCRACY(1998).Theconsequencesofrefusaltoadapttothenewpost-ColdWareconomicpolicyarebestappreciatedbyconsideringtheforcedresignation of Chancellor Oskar Lafontaine in 1998, substituted by the new leftist paradigm ofChancellorSchroederforthesameparty.SeeFalk,supranote37,atpage370,footnote51.

40. GUIDEBORD,COMMENTARIALLASOCIETDELLOSPETTACOLO(BALDINI&CASTOLDI1997).Englishtranslation,GuyDebord,CommentsontheSocietyoftheSpectacle,(VersoBooks1998).

41. FactorsofresistanceagainsttheSovietempire,suchasreligioninmanyofitsIslamicprovincesandtheAfghanistanwar,readilyturnedintoaSovietVietnam,alsoaccountforthefinalcollapse.See BRUNOBONGIOVANNI, STORIA DELLA GUERRA FREDDA (2001) (emphasizing notions of terror balance andcontainmentaskeyrealistnotionsinColdWarinternationalrelations).SeegenerallyFROMCOLDWARTOCOLLAPSE:THEORYANDWORLD POLITICSINTHE1980S(MikeBowker&RobinBrowneds.,1993).

42. Seegenerally TheGreatGlobalizationDebate:AnIntroduction,in THEGLOBALTRANSFORMATIONSREADER:ANINTRODUCTIONTOTHEGLOBALIZATIONDEBATE(DavidHeld&AnthonyMcGreweds.,2000)[hereinafterTHEGLOBALTRANSFORMATIONSREADER].



15/63

Withenemynumberonedefeated,itbecamealmostimmediatelyapparentthat

socialismwasnottheonlyradicallyincompatiblealternativetotheWesterninstitutionalsetting.Americanforeignpolicydidnotneedtochangemuch,sinceitstechnologicalpresence43wasstillrequiredbyitsEuropeanallies,whoseinternalpoliticallandscapeconstantlyandincrementallyturnedtotheright. 44Bytheearlynineties,thesocialistshadbeendefeatedinFrance,Italy,Spain,andGreece.InScandinaviancountries,thesocial-democraticexperimentwasfacingatremendousandperhapsirreversiblecrisis.InRussia,thecommunistswereforcedtoacceptaspectacularelectoralconfrontationinwhichtheywouldhavenochancetowin,giventhetechnicalskillsofandtheforeignaidtotheoppositefront.45NotionsofthirdwayorNewLabourwitnessedadramaticconvergenceoftheEuropeanpoliticallandscapewiththeAmericancounterpart.IntheUnitedStates,atleastsincetheGreatSociety,thedifferentialinclassrepresentation

betweentheDemocratsandtheRepublicanswasblurred.PresidentClintonandPrimeMinisterBlairhavebeentheiconsofthepoliticalestablishmentandthelongwaveoftheconservativerevolutionwellbeyondthepoliticalplatformoftheRepublicansandtheTories.

AcultureofexclusionandofassertioncharacterizedWesterndomesticandforeignpolicyintheUnitedStatesand,followingitslead,inEurope.Zerotoleranceforillegalimmigration is now the common slogan of conservative governmentsandof theirinstitutionaloppositionsthroughouttheWest.46Meanwhile,intheinternationalarena,NATOcouldincrementallyanddramaticallychangeitsnature.AttherecentNATOsummitwithPresidentPutin,thebasiswassetforanewstrategicandoffensiveallianceforthefurtherexpansionofthefreeglobalmarket.NATOleadersandtheirformerfoes

nowshareanewcommonenemyandanewcommonagenda.Withinthenotionoffundamentalist Islamic-originated terrorist activity, thereis spaceforsuchdifferentphenomenaastheChecheniaresistance,theMiddleEasternwar,andofcourse,theWaronTerrorsofarcarriedoutagainstAfghanistan,andthreatenedagainstIraq,Iran,Sudan,Yemen,andSomalia.

43. Thismentalframeworkisreflectedbyrealistparadigmsininternationallaw.SeeFalk,supranote37,at357.

44. SeeJohnGray,ThePassingofSocialDemocracy ,in THEGLOBALTRANSFORMATIONREADER,supranote42,at328.

45. CommunistcandidateZiuganovschancesofvictorywereaddressedbyinternationaladvisorsthroughthecreationofanationalistleader,GeneralLebed.

46. SeeLindaBosniak,CriticalReflectionsonCitizenshipasaProgressiveAspiration,in LABOURLAWINANERAOFGLOBALIZATION:TRANSFORMATIVEPRACTICESANDPOSSIBILITIES339,342(JoanneConaghanetal.eds.,2002)(notingthatillegalimmigrantsaretreatedassecondclasscitizens); seealsoC.Joppke,SovereigntyandCitizenshipinaWorldofMigration,in TRANSNATIONALLEGALPROCESSES,supranote1,at259.




16/63

NATOstrikesinBosnia,theGulfWar(DesertStorm),andSomalia(theRestore

Hopemission)and,morerecently,EnduringFreedominAfghanistanhavebeenthemostvisiblerecentinstancesinwhichtherepressiveinstitutionsoftheglobalsocietyhavehadachancetoprovetheirstrengths.Thousandsofinnocentpeoplewerekilledwhilepublicopinionandmediapropagandafocusedontheredressofinternationalhumanrightsthatthestrikeswereguaranteeing. 47SomeinternationallawscholarsnowdefinetheBosniaNATOstrikesasillegal.48TheSomaliexperienceshowsthatareasthatwerenotreachedbytheInternationaleffortoftheU.N.OperationinSomalia(UNOSOM)aretodaywellaheadoftheothersinthepacificationprocess.49TheGeorgeW.Bushadministrationhasintroduceditselftotheworldbyasimilarcampaigntoenforceinternationallaw.ThemorerecentWaronTerrorhasconfirmedtheearlyattitudeoftheincumbentU.S.administration. Interestingly, all these actions have been carried on in contexts

characterizedbyahegemonyofpoliticallawand/ortraditionallawwithinthedeepcharacteristicsofthelegalsystem.50Allsuchinterventionshavebeentargetedtowardssocietiesinwhichprofessionallawhadalwaysremainedeitherabsentorverysuperficialand in which democracy and the rule of law, as products of Westerncivilization/colonization,couldbeseenasdeeplyforeigntolocalconditions.

Islamiclawhasbeenabletoclaimathoroughdegreeoflegitimacybymeansofcircuits of legitimization that are typical of non-western societies.51 In formerYugoslavia,thetraditionalgatebetweenIslamandChristianity,effectivecentralizedsecular institutions were established in Titos time.52 Nevertheless, during thecommunistera,legitimacywasneverbasedonelections,andtheWesternnotionofruleoflawwassubstitutedbyakindofsocialistlegality.Thecircuitsofpowerlegitimacyin

47. See SEAN D.MURPHY, HUMANITARIANINTERVENTION:THEUNITED NATIONSINAN EVOLVINGWORLDORDER182-243(1996).

48. Given that illegalityistheruleratherthantheexception,thetightlanguageoftheU.N.Charteroutlawingaggressivewarhasalwaysbeenconsideredutopianandunrealistic.See,e.g.,WALTERMILLIS&JAMES REAL, THEABOLITIONOF WAR(1963);GRENVILLECLARK&LOUIS B.SOHN, WORLDPEACETHROUGHWORLDLAW(3ded.1966);RICHARDA.FALK,ASTUDYOFFUTUREWORLDS(1975).

49. This is the case in Somaliland and Puntland State (both recently singled out by the Bushadministration,however,as potential targetsfor anti-terrorismstrikes). SeeUgoMattei, PatternsofAfricanConstitutioninthe Making,in TRANSNATIONALLEGALPROCESSES,supranote1,at275,282(regardingthesituationinPuntland).

50. Forataxonomyoflegalsystemsbasedonadistinctionbetweentheruleofprofessionallaw,ruleofpoliticallaw,andruleoftraditionallaw,seeThreePatternsofLaw,supranote24.

51. Islamiclawhasbeenasuccessfulproviderofpublicgoodssuchassecurity,charity,andeducationinmanyplaceswheretheWesternnotionofStatesimplyfailed.SeeUgoMattei,ForeignInspiredCourtsasAgenciesofPeaceinTroubledSocieties:APleaforRealismandforCreativity,2GLOBALJURIST1(2002),athttp://www.bepress.com/gj/topics/vol2/iss1/art1/.

52. See generally GIANNANTONIOA.BENACCHIO,LACIRCOLAZIONEDEIMODELLIGIURIDICITRAGLISLAVIDELSUD:SLOVENI,CROATI,SERBI(1995).



17/63

former Yugoslavia were to be found more in notions of military leadership than

otherwise. The rise of Milosevic to power and the Pan-Serbian dream cannot beexplainedmuchdifferentlythanasanepisodeofskillfulcharismaticleadership.Somalia and Afghanistan have much in common, in addition to their strategic

geographic position around the oil area. They are both traditionally decentralizedsocietiesandhavebothexperiencedprocessesofmorethoroughsocialpenetrationofIslaminrecenttimes.Theyarebothinternallydividedinethnicpolarization,butatthesametime,bothhavestrongnationalidentities.Bothcountriesareveryfarfromanyideaoflegitimacybasedonmajorityrule.TheybothlackaWesternizedlegalelitestrongenough to be an effective professional competitor to traditional and politicallegitimization.Theprincipleofgroupunanimityinlegitimaterulemakingandofwarasalegitimatingfactorofleadershiparestrongandfiercefactorsofresistancetowards

westernnotionsofdemocracy,ruleoflawandindividualhumanrights.53

NotmuchneedstobesaidofIraqtoshowthefundamentalincompatibilityofitssocialstructurewithWesternnotionsoflegalityandWesterninstitutions.Iraqfallsstraightwithinnotionsofleadershipandlegitimacythatareverycommonintheareaandthataredeeplyrooted(althoughattimesmuchchallenged)inIslam.Onceagain,arguingforWesterndemocracyandtheruleoflawinacentralizedIslamicsocietyisonlyadisplayofWestern-centricneo-colonialarrogance.

ThestructureofpowerandthedeepbasesoflegitimacyofthelegalsystemsinthesecountriestargetedbyoperationsofwararesharedbyamajorityofthecountriesonEarth.Itisnoexcessofculturalrelativismtoobservethissimplefact.NorisitforeigntoWesternnotionsofequalityoftreatmentunderthelawtoreflectontheone-sidedwayin

whichinternationallawisenforced.54

Intheglobalworld,therepressiveinstitutionsarethesameastheyhavealwaysbeenthepowerofweaponsistherule.55Thisisnot,ofcourse, the place todiscussandcatalogue the many occasions onwhichrepressiveinternationalinstitutionshavepolicedandenforcedthenewworldorder,bornafterWorldWarIIandaccomplishedafterthesymbolicfalloftheBerlinWall.56Forthepurposesofthisdiscussion,wecanassumethatforce,intheformofinternationalmilitaryenterprisesunderU.S.leadership,isstillthemostimportantinstrumentfor

53.SeegenerallyMattei,supranote51.54. NOAMCHOMSKY,THENEWMILITARYHUMANISM:LESSONSFROMKOSOVO1-80(1999)(critiquing

thisattitude);seealsoFalk,supranote37.Onthedangersofsuchadoublestandardfortheroleofinternationalleadership,see TORBJRNL.KNUTSEN,THERISEANDFALLOFWORLDORDERS(1999).

55. See generallyROBERTHARVEY,THERETURNOFTHESTRONG:THEDRIFTTOGLOBALDISORDER(1995);seealsogenerally JAMESMAYALL,THENEWINTERVENTIONISM1991-1994:UNITEDNATIONSEXPERIENCEIN CAMBODIA,FORMERYUGOSLAVIA,ANDSOMALIA(1996).

56. See A.MARKWEISBURD,USEOFFORCE:THEPRACTICEOFSTATESSINCEWORLDWARII(1997).




18/63

imposingthehegemonyofWesternvalues.57Further,wecanassumethatmuchofthe

hegemonic position of the United States has been achieved by developing andaccomplishingunchallengedprimacyofphysicalstrengths.58

Muchmoreinteresting,forourpurpose,istoreflectonthewaysinwhichpoliticalconsentisreachedaroundsuchuseofforce.Loyaltyseemsmandatoryinthenewglobalorder.59Thediscursivepracticesofthedominantrealistinternationallawculturearetobeconsideredatleastinpartresponsibleforthisphenomenon.60

IV.INTERNATIONALLAWASANIDEOLOGICALAPPARATUSOFGLOBALGOVERNANCE

Thereisnodoubtthatinternationallawhasofferedarhetoriccapableofjustifyingtheuseofforcebytherepressiveapparatusesofglobalgovernance,andthatthereforeit

hasplayedtheroleofanideologicalinstitutionresponsiblefortheideathatviolencetowardsinnocentpeoplecanbelegal,andthatawarofdestructioncanbefair.61

Therhetoricaldeviceusedintheprocessofrepressingdeviancehasbeenagenuinelylegalconcept,thatofinternationalhumanrights. 62Indeed,adoctrineoflimitedsovereigntyintheinterestofinternationalhumanrightshasthreatenedthetraditionalnatureofinternationallawasadecentralizedsystem63basedonterritoriality,andhasadvocatedtheneedforcentralizationinordertomakeinternationallawmoresimilartosystemsofnationallaw.TheInternationalCriminalCourtisthemostadvancedpointofthisshift.Adhoccourts,suchastheonepresentlyusedagainstformerYugoslavianpresidentSlobodanMilosevic,aretheproductofanevenmoreopenuseofinternationallawasanexpostfactolegitimatingfactorofwar.64

57. SeeEdwardN.Luttwak, GiveWaraChance ,78FOREIGNAFF.36(1999)(espousinganextremepositionontheright).

58. Seegenerally JOSEPHS. NYE,BOUNDTO LEAD:THECHANGINGNATUREOFAMERICANPOWER(1990).

59. SeeThomasM.Franck,ClanandSuperclan:Loyalty,IdentityandCommunityinLawandPractice,90AM.J.INTLL.359(1996).

60. SeeFalk,supranote37,at357(discussingtheselfservingacceptancebypolicymakersofsomevariantofrealismasthepropermodeofthoughtpertainingtointernationalrelations).

61. See MICHAEL WALZER, JUST AND UNJUST WARS: A MORAL ARGUMENT WITH HISTORICALILLUSTRATIONS318(1998);seealso HARDCHOICES:MORALDILEMMASINHUMANITARIANINTERVENTION(JonathanMooreed.,1998).

62. See Richard Falk, The Quest for Human Rights in an Era of Globalization, in FUTUREMULTILATERALISM:THEPOLITICALANDSOCIALFRAMEWORK153,157(MichaelG.Schechtered.,1999).

63. See HEDLEYBULL,THEANARCHICALSOCIETY:ASTUDYOFORDERINWORLDPOLITICS(1977).64. SeeM.CHERIFBASSIOUNI&PETERMANIKAS,THELAWOFTHEINTERNATIONALCRIMINALTRIBUNAL

FORTHEFORMERYUGOSLAVIA(1996).



19/63

Today we believe that international law isnotnatural butpositive law, whose

fundamental sources are treaties and customs. Tomorrow, we might believe thatinternationallawisaworldwidelegalsystemgroundedinuniformityandincommonlyshared ideals of law and order.65 International codes, international courts andinternationaljailsarealreadyclaimingtobegenerallyrecognizedandestablished.Manycommentators already approach international politics as if such an internationalcentralizedlegalsystemwereinplace.Withsuchasysteminplace(assumingthatitisinplace),thetransformationofwarintopolicepowerfollowsasamatterofcourse.HencesovereigntycanberoutinelyaddressedasdeviancefromastandardoflegalitygroundedinU.S.-constructedinternationalhumanrights.66

Itisinterestingtoobservethatthisprocessininternationallawisjusttheoppositeofthegeneraltrendinjurisprudence.Scholarsaretodayobservingthetriumphofpluralism

anddecentralizationasaconsequenceofthefailuresofthelegalmonismadvocatedbystate-centricpositivism.Aprocessofde-positivizationinjurisprudenceisveryclear.67

Thiscanbeseenasaculturaldelayofinternationallaw,difficulttoovercomebutindeedintheprocessofbeingaddressedbythebestscholarshipinthefield.68

Butthetoolusedtogainconsensus,thedoctrineofinternationalhumanrights,isindeed very powerful,69andhasinitiatedtheprocessoftransformationoftheveryconceptionofinternationallawdevelopedafterthebirthofthemodernnation-state.SuchflourishingishoweverproblematicbecauseitprovidesaselectivejustificationforinterventionintheinternalpoliticalbusinessofallstatesthatarenotculturallyalignedwithWesternlaw.70

65. See generally RICHARD FALK, LAWINAN EMERGINGGLOBALVILLAGE: APOST-WESTPHALIANPERSPECTIVE(1998).

66. Seegenerally BEYONDWESTPHALIA?STATESOVEREIGNTYANDINTERNATIONALINTERVENTION(GeneM.Lyons&MichaelMastandunoeds.,1995);seealsoSTEPHEND.KRASNER,SOVEREIGNTY:ORGANIZEDHYPOCRISY(1999)(UnitedStates-centriccritiqueofsovereignty);N OAMCHOMSKY,ROGUESTATES :THERULEOFFORCEINWORLDAFFAIRS11,124-55(2000)(discussingthedangersoflookingattheUnitedStatesasanormativeleaderininternationallaw).

67. Thepluralisticframeworkhasbeenrecentlyproposedtoaddressissuesoflegalglobalization.SeeSnyder,supranote1.

68. SeegenerallyFalk,supranote37.69. EvenintheU.S.themovementhasbeenmoreorlessbenevolentlycriticizedfromavarietyof

perspectives.See,e.g.,EllenMesser,AnthropologyandHumanRights,22ANN.REV.ANTHROPOLOGY221 (1993) (surveying the (Anglophone)anthropological literature); see also Celina Romany, StateResponsibilityGoes Private: A Feminist Critique of the Public/PrivateDistinctionin International

HumanRightsLaw,in HUMANRIGHTSOFWOMEN:NATIONALANDINTERNATIONALPERSPECTIVES85(RebeccaJ.Cooked.,1994).

70. See,e.g.,L.AmedeObiora,BridgesandBarricades:RethinkingPolemicsandIntransigenceintheCampaign Against Female Circumcision, 47CASE W. RES. L. REV. 275 (1997). See generally,




20/63

Neo-colonialpracticesintheThirdWorldaretoagreatextentoriginatedbythe

evolutionofadvancedcapitalismintheUnitedStates(whatIhavereferredtoastheneo-Americanmodel)andbyitsdiffusionattheperipherywithinareactivephilosophyofgovernancethat,outsideofeffectivereactiveinstitutionssuchastheonedevelopedintheUnitedStates,pavesthewaytoexploitiveopportunisticbehavior.71Ofcourse,itwouldbethoroughlyinaccuratetoseecolonialismasavehicleofAmericanization.Onlypost-colonialismcanbefairlyseenassuch.72TheunfoldingofU.S.rulehasindeedbeenaphenomenonthatisbettercapturedbythenotionofimperialismthanbythatofoutrightcolonialism.73

Tobeginwith,imperialismisnotlimitedasarelationshipbetweendevelopedanddeveloping,orbetweenacolonizingnation-stateandcolonizedpeoplekeptunderforeignrule.Animperialisticdesireattemptstheglobalimpositionofitsvaluesand

fundamentalstructuresofgovernmentandmodesofthoughtworldwide.Inthissense,itisclearthatcommunismhasbeenanimperialisticattemptaimingatfinalworldwidesuccess.Imperialismrequiresanimperialideal,astrongerideologicalapparatusthatcanbereachedonlybymeansofstrongandwell-developedideologicalinstitutions. 74

Theidealsofaglobalmarket,ofinternationalhumanrights,offreedomthroughouttheworld,andmostnotablyoftheruleoflawperformthisideologicalrole.75Imperialismdoesnotnecessarilyneedtobeaconsciouseffort,76normustitspelloutanimperialisticdoctrine,prescribingstepstowardsafinalconditionofimperialhegemony.77

Therecenttransformationofinternationallawfromadecentralizedsystemofforeignsovereignstoaprogressivelymorecentralizedlegalsystemgovernedbyprofessionalelitesstaffing(international)courtsoflawisamoreorlessconsciousreproductionofthe

reactivephilosophyoftheU.S.governmentbycourts.Assuch,itisreproducingonthe

BOAVENTURADESOUSASANTOS,TOWARDANEWCOMMONSENSE:LAW,SCIENCEANDPOLITICSINTHEPARADIGMATICTRANSITION(1995).

71. See generallyRICHARDFALK, PREDATORYGLOBALIZATION:ACRITIQUE(1999).72. See MARCFERRO,COLONIZATION:AGLOBALHISTORY(1997)73. See generally P. Hirst, and G. Thompson, Globalization and the History of the International

Economy, in THE GLOBALTRANSFORMATION READER, supranote42,at274-86; seealsogenerallyWILLIAMROBINSON,PROMOTINGPOLYARCHYGLOBALIZATION,U.S.INTERVENTIONAND HEGEMONY(1996).

74. See HARDT&NEGRI,supranote10,at17-20;RobertW.Cox,Gramsci,HegemonyandInternationalRelations:AnEssayinMethod,12J.INTLSTUD.162,172(1983).

75. Onideology,aswithfalseconsciousness,theclassic isstillKARL MARX&FRIEDRICHENGELS,LIDEOLOGIATEDESCA(1958).

76. ItmightalsoberhetoricsuchasthatusedinthetitleofNyesbook,BoundtoLead.See NYE,supranote58.Thequestionnaturallyrises:Whoisbindingwhom?

77. SeeMaxwellO.Chibundu,GlobalizingtheRuleofLaw:SomeThoughtsatandonthePeriphery ,7IND.J.GLOBALLEGALSTUD.79(1999).



21/63

worldscaleaprofessionallegalideologyofneutrality,democracy,andruleoflaw,

grantinglegitimacytotheworldwideexerciseoftheUnitedStatessunprecedentedpoliticalstrength.JustasU.S.domesticdoctrinesofseparationofpowers,politicalquestions,andsovereignimmunityallowtheU.S.governmentaquiteextendedandunnoticeddegreeofunrestrictedpower,78similarlyaninternationallawgovernedbycourts of law (on the Nuremberg model), rather than by negotiation betweendecentralizedsovereignStates,shouldproducethefaadeoflegitimacyfortheexerciseofworldwidehegemony. Ofcourse, the fearofcounter-hegemonic use ofsuchaninternationalcentralizedlegalsystemexplainsthereluctanceoftheU.S.governmenttosupporttheInternationalCriminalCourt.79Themomentisripeforintroducing,withinthelegalfieldofinternationallaw,thenotionofcounter-hegemonyasusedinthisarticle.

V.INTERNATIONALINTELLECTUALPROPERTYANDCOUNTER-HEGEMONY

In addition to politics (and economics), technology is also a major source ofinstitutionalchange.80Theninetieswerealsoopenedbytheinventionoftheinternetwwwprotocol.Itisworthnoting,atleastincidentally,thattheinternetoriginatedfromtheneedforspeedyandsecurecommunicationofdatatobeusedformilitarypurposesduringtheColdWaryears.Itisthereforeeasyforconservativeideologytoappraiseitasabeneficialspilloverofmilitaryresearch,andasconvincingevidenceoftheneedforallocationofyetmoreresourcestotherepressiveapparatusesoftheglobalgovernance,suchasstarwarsprojects.81

ItisenoughtobrowsetheinternetoncetoseeitsAmericanculturalimprinting.The

quantitative and qualitative advantage of U.S.-based English language sites is justanotherpieceofevidenceoftheverystrongculturalhegemonyoftheUnitedStates. 82

Theso-calleddigitaldivideisthevirtualepiphanyoftheappallinggrowthofthe

78. See,foradiscussiononthetheoryandpracticeofSovereignImmunity,K.Nelson,SovreignImmunityasadoctrineofPersonalJurisdiction115HarvardLawReview(2002)Issue6

79. SeeHarrisInstituteforGlobalLegalStudies,ShouldtheUnitedStatesRatifytheTreatyEstablishingtheInternationalCriminalCourt? (InternationalDebateSeries,2002)(providingcompetingviewsforandagainstsupportingtheInternationalCriminalCourt).

80. Seegenerally DAVIDS.LANDES, THEUNBOUNDPROMETHEUS:TECHNOLOGICALCHANGEANDINDUSTRIALDEVELOPMENTINWESTERNEUROPEFROM1750TOTHEPRESENT(1969);seealsogenerallyFREDERICKM.ABBOTT&DAVIDJ.GERBER,PUBLICPOLICYANDGLOBALTECHNOLOGICALINTEGRATION(1997).

81. ThereisabundanttalkabouttheAmericancomparativeadvantageintechnologyasalegitimatingstrategy.Forabrilliantcriticaldiscussionwithreferencetomanysuchhegemonicstrategies,seeRuthGanaOkediji,CopyrightandPublicWelfareinGlobalPerspective,7IND.J.GLOBALLEGALSTUD.117,119(1999).

82. See ARJUNAPPADURAI,MODERNITYATLARGE:CULTURALDIMENSIONSOFGLOBALIZATION(1996).




22/63

differencebetweenrichandpoorcountries,createdandstructuredbyanotherideological

apparatusofglobalgovernance:intellectualproperty.83

Informationistodaythemostimportant source of wealth. Intellectual property, rooted in an extreme Westernnaturalisticnotionofpropertylaw,isincompatiblewithfundamentalcommunitarianvaluesofnon-Westernsocieties.WesternintellectualpropertyisexpandedworldwidethroughtheinternetandthroughtheTradeRelatedaspectsofIntellectualPropertyRights(TRIPs).Itformalizesthedisparityofwealthandpowerthattechnologyhasbeenabletoproduce.84 The non-territorialnature ofintellectual property,assymbolizedby theinternetandtheclaimofuniversalityandofobjectivityofitsjustification,isproducingmoreinstitutionalchange.

Globallegitimacyofintellectualpropertyisrootedinthenotionthatindividualcreativitydeservesaprizeandthatexclusivepropertyrightsconstitutesuchaprize.We

arebacktoLockeandtonaturallawjustificationsofindividualisticownership.Nobodywouldfarmwithouttheguaranteeofexclusivepropertyoftheoutcomeofhis/herlabor.Similarly,nobodywouldhaveincentivestocreatewithoutintellectualpropertygrantingamonopolyonhis/hercreativity.Nobodywouldgeneticallymodifyseedswithnoguarantee that the legal system would help to impose such technology on farmersworldwide, forcing them to abandon communitarian practices of seed sharing andswapping.85Ofcourse,sucheighteenth-centuryrhetoric,reinforcedtodaybysimplisticneoclassical legaland economicmodelssuchasthoseusedinmainstream law andeconomicsliterature,86deniesnotionsofalienationandexploitation,andthesimplefactthatintellectualpropertyrightsfreezethestatusquoratherthanpromotinginnovationandchange.87

Thegeneraluniversalisticindividual-centeredphilosophypropagatedbyintellectualpropertyandbytheinstitutionscreatedtoenforceitworldwide(WorldIntellectualPropertyOrganization,TRIPs,andsoforth)88 servesthepurposeofredefiningterritorial

83. See Ngaire Woods, Order, Globalization and Inequality in World Politics, in THE GLOBALTRANSFORMATIONSREADER,supranote42,at387,389.

84. Thisisaphenomenonthatisbynomeansanovelty.Seegenerally DANIELR.HEADRICK,THETOOLSOFEMPIRE:TECHNOLOGYANDEUROPEANIMPERIALISMINTHENINETEENTHCENTURY(1981).

85. SeeKeithAoki,Neocolonialism,AnticommonsProperty,andBiopiracyinthe(Not-So-Brave)NewWorldOrderofInternationalIntellectualPropertyProtection ,6IND.J.GLOBALLEGALSTUD.11(1998).

86. Foracritique,see UGOMATTEI, COMPARATIVE LAWANDECONOMICS(1997).ThehegemonicconsequenceofthisintellectualcastisstressedbyOkediji,supranote81,at147-51(particularlyinrecentyears,thepervasiveideologyofliberalizedorfreetradecastintellectualpropertyprotectionasaprimaryfactorinpenetratingforeignmarketsand(re)establishingU.S.dominanceintheglobaleconomy).

87. SeeWoods,supranote83,at389.SeegenerallyLawrenceLessig,TheArchitectureofInnovation,51DUKEL.J.1783(2002).

88. SeegenerallyMICHAELBLAKENEY,TRADERELATEDASPECTSOFINTELLECTUALPROPERTYRIGHTS:ACONCISEGUIDETOTHETRIPSAGREEMENTS(1996).



23/63

ideasofsovereigntytobemorefunctionaltotheneedsoftheEmpireandofthebig

corporateactors.89

Thehegemonicaspectsoftheintellectualpropertyrevolutionareeasytoperceive,bothintheircomponentofpower(economicandpoliticalpressurestoforcenon-Western countries to accept international intellectual property protectionagreements)andintheirideologicalcomponent,indispensabletoreachingagreement(intellectualpropertyjustifiedasauniversalnaturallawconception).Ofcourse,asinallinstitutionsofhegemony,intellectualpropertyisalsoone-sided,notonlyinitscontentbutalsoinitsactualuse.Sufficeittocomparethegenericanti-AIDSdrugssagainSouthAfrica(where asmany peopledieofAIDSeveryweekasthevictimsoftheSeptember11thevents)withthetreatmentandtherespectthattheintellectualpropertyofthe German-based Bayer pharmaceutical company has been granted by the BushadministrationintheaftermathoftheAnthraxcrisisinthefallof2001.90

Inshiftingfromhegemonytocounter-hegemony,onefindsmoreinterestinglessons.It is indeed by the use of the internet that the counter-hegemonic potential of thechallengetointellectualpropertybecomesapparent.GuiDebordandtheSituationistInternationalemovementdeservetobecreditedwithyetanothertremendouspowerofprediction.TheauthorofTheSocietyoftheSpectacleandSituationistInternationalehavecarriedonamajorattackonthelegitimacyofintellectualpropertyrights,basedonnotionsofcreativityasleisureandself-fulfillment.Debordhasconstructedintellectualpropertyastheveryfundamentaleconomicandpoliticalinstitutionofthespectacle:Thelanguageofthespectacleismadeofthesignsofthedominatingproduction.Suchsignsareatthesametimetheultimateaimofsuchproduction.91Asindispensabledecorationoftheobjectsthatareactuallyproduced,asgeneralclaimoftherationalityof

thesystem,asleadingeconomicsectorthatdirectlyproducesanincreasingvarietyofobjects-images,thespectacleisthemainproductionofpresentsociety.92InDebordstheorythespectaclehascreatedamonopolyonwhatappears.93Byannullinghistorical

89. Forexample,theterritorialnotionsofstatehoodandsovereigntyinKuwait,suchasthoseproclaimedanddefendedforthelasttimeduringthePersianGulfWar(andthosethathavebeenforgottenbyNATOduringtheBosniastrikes),arecertainlyweakenedbytheuniversalistic,non-territorialphilosophythatjustifiesintellectualpropertyasaprize for technologicalcreativity. WhyshouldterritorialGulfandAfricanStatesowntheoilthathappenstobewithintheirterritorialborders?Whyshouldoilworldwidenotbeallocatedasaprizefortheskillsinextractingandusingitasasourceofenergy?Stateterritorialsovereigntyshouldyieldtotheglobalneedsofhumankindasinterpretedbytheglobaleconomy.

90. NoticethatthemajorSouthAfricandefeatofimperialisticnotionsofintellectualpropertyinSouthAfricahappenedwithinagrouporientedculturalmodel,inwhichindividualisticideologyislesscapableofpersuasion.SeeKevinD.Brown,GlobalizationandCulturalConflictinDevelopingCountries:TheSouthAfricanExample,7IND.J.GLOBALLEGALSTUD.225,252(1999).

91. SeeDEBORD,supranote39,atp.55(Chap1n.7ItalianEdition).92. Id.at57.93. Id.at56.




24/63

knowledgeanddevelopingexplanationsbasedonstructuralismasasortofscienceofthe

necessity,ithasincorporatedinitselfeventhemostradicalcritique.94

Critiquebecomesestablishment,falsebecomestrue.Criticalthinking,inordertowakesocietyupfromthepassivestateinwhichthespectaclekeepsit,hasonlyonewaytoactsubvertthedomainoftheoriginalandofthecopy:intheworldreallysubvertedthetruthisamomentofthefalse.95

Suchliberating,subversivetheoryhastobeaccompaniedbyavarietyofpractices.Inthedomainofcultureandintellectualcreativity,themainrevolutionarypracticeiscalleddetournement.Theessenceofsuchpracticeisthedenialandradicalrefutationofanyformofintellectualproperty:Ideasimprove.Thesenseofwordsparticipatedinsuchimprovement.Plagiarismisnecessary.Progressrequiresit.Plagiarismsiezesthephraseofanauthor,usesitsexpressions,cancelsafalseidea,substitutesitwithatrueone...

detournementistheoppositeofthecitation,ofthetheoreticalauthoritywhichisalwaysfalsifiedfortheveryfactofhavingbeencited....96

Asearlyas1967,anticipatingandradicalizingmanyofthepost-modernistthemessuchashybridizationandutilizationoutofthecontextofthelegacyofthepast, 97GuiDebordhaddevelopedatheoreticalandpoliticalchallengeofintellectualpropertyasapoliticalinstitutionoftheglobalsociety.Debordscritiqueofthepoliticalfunctionsofintellectualpropertylawprecedesmostofthecounter-hegemonicthemesoftheso-calledcopyleftmovementbymorethanthirtyyears.

Theideaofcopyleft,likeDebordsdetournemet,playswithwords.Leftisopposedtorightasapoliticalsignal,98butleftalsomeansabandoned,dropped,givenconveyingthesenseoffreerelinquishmentandspreadofideasasopposedtocopyrightedmaterials

severelyandfiercelydefendedasapropertyrightbytheinstitutionsoftheglobalsociety.Thecopyleftmovementcancertainlybeperceivedasacounter-hegemonictrend,madepossiblebythoseverysametechnologicalinnovations(mainlytheinternet)thatfunctionasapowerfulhegemonicforcebehindWestern(andparticularlyU.S.,astheUnitedStatesaloneownsfifty-onepercentofworldspatents)capitalism.Theideaofopen

94. Id.at172.95. Id.at55.96. Id.at74.97. DeleuzeandGuattariplayextensivelywithnotionsofincontextandoutofcontext.Seegenerally

GILLESDELEUZE&FLIXGUATTARI,ANTI-OEDIPUS:CAPITALISM&SCHIZOPHRENIA(RobertHurleyetal.trans.,Univ.ofMinn.Press1983)(1972)(offeringclassicdiscussionsindifferentcontexts)[hereinafterANTI-OEDIPUS];GILLESDELEUZE&FLIXGUATTARI,MILLEPLATEAUX:CAPITALISMETSCHIZOPHRENIE(1980);seealso DAVIDHARVEY,THECONDITIONOFPOSTMODERNITY:ANENQUIRYINTOTHEORIGINSOFCULTURALCHANGE(1989).

98. Thisconceptofplayisanunmistakablydeconstructivegesture.Seegenerally JACQUESDERRIDA,WRITINGANDDIFFERENCE(AlanBasstrans.,Univ.ofChicagoPress1978)(1972);JACQUESDERRIDA,MARGINSOFPHILOSOPHY(AlanBasstrans.,Univ.ofChicagoPress1972).



25/63

sourcedatesbackto1984whentheM.I.T.informaticsscholarRichardStallmancreated

theFreeSoftwareFoundationinordertofacilitatefreeaccesstothecodesourcesthatkeepthesecretsbehindthefunctioningofsoftware.Manyofthepoliticalandsocialconcernsofcopyleftwerealreadybeingdiscussedasearlyas1975withinthemythicalSiliconValleyHomebrewClub,agroupofsociallyconcernedyoungscholarsthatatthedawnofthecomputererawerealreadyworriedaboutthefateoftechnologicalinnovationinthehandsofthebigcorporatebusiness.Nevertheless,itwasonlyintheearly1990sthattheFinnishstudentLinusThovaldslaunchedLinux,themostsuccessfulandthreateningconcurrentofWindows,freelyavailableontheInternetandusedtodayby some eighteen million computers in the world. Linux, constantly and openlyimprovedbyitsusers,whoreciprocatefreeusewithsuggestionsforimprovementandproblemsolving,isbasedonaclearlyanti-copyrightphilosophyandcanbeseenasa

livingdemonstrationoftheideologicalnatureofpro-copyrightrhetoricofinnovation.99

Othermajorexamplesofthecounter-hegemonicuseoftheinternetcanbefoundinprogramssuchasNapsterwhich,althougheventuallyenjoinedbyU.S.courtsoflaw,hasdevelopedwithintheteenagecommunity(andamongmanyartistsfedupwithbeingexploitedbymega-producers)theideathatmusicisandshouldbefreelyavailableontheinternet.OpenColahasrecentlyprovidedanexampleofanopenproductthatisthatcanbecopiedandimproved,inclearantagonismwiththehighlysecretivepracticeofCoca-ColaandPepsi-Colacorporations.Inthedomainofcultureandknowledge,Wikipedia,anopeninternetencyclopedia,allowsanybodytoimproveandaddentries,nowdisplayingsome20,000entriesandconstantlygrowing.FinallyandmostrecentlyistheopenbriefphilosophybehindProfessorLawrenceLessigsattempttochallengethe

excessivedurationofcopyrights(betweenfiftyandseventyyearsaftertheauthorsdeath)inasuitonbehalfoftheonlinepublisherEldritchPress. 100ProfessorLessigisusingthelegalcreativityofU.S.lawstudentsfrommajoruniversitiesinordertoframethebestpossibleargumentsagainsttheexcessivedurationofcopyrightlaw.

VI.HEGEMONYANDCOUNTER-HEGEMONYINLEGALSCHOLARSHIP

Americanlegalhegemonycanbemuchbetterseen(andismuchmoreimportant)asachangeinlegalconsciousnessthanasapatternoftransplantationoflegalrules.Legal

99. SeegenerallyLINUSTORVALDS&DAVIDDIAMOND,JUSTFORFUN:THESTORYOFANACCIDENTALREVOLUTIONARY(2001)(explainingthehistoryofthedevelopmentofLinuxandopensourceplatforms);seealsogenerally GLYNMOODY,REBELCODE:THEINSIDESTORYOFLINUXANDTHEOPENSOURCEREVOLUTION(2001).100. SeeEldredv.Reno,239F.3d372(D.C.Cir.2001),cert.grantedsubnom.Eldredv.Ashcroft,534U.S.1126,122S. Ct.1062(2002).




26/63

reception is a highly creative activity,101 and legal transplants would be severely

misunderstoodintheirnatureiftheywereapproachedonlyasamechanicalimport-exportexercise.102Muchmoreimportantistomonitorthediffusionofprofessionalwaysofthinkingaboutthelawandtoaddresssuchmajorintellectualchangesasresultsoftheideologicalapparatusesofglobalgovernance.103

ItisimportanttodiscussexamplesofAmericanization(andofcounter-hegemony)atadeepfundamentallevelofthelegalsystem.Byfollowingpatternsofchangesbetweensourcesoflawinthelasttwodecades,weshouldbeabletoseewhetherandtowhatextentlegalglobalizationcanbeseenasapatternoflegalAmericanization.WeshouldbeabletoconcludethatAmericanlawincontextsofreceptionissodifferentfromAmericanlawinthecontextofproduction 104thatauniversalnotionofimperiallawisnecessarytocapturethepresentsituationoflawintheglobalcontext.Notionsoflegal

globalizationterritoriallyconnectedwithspecific,state-basedcontextsofproduction(e.g.FrenchLaw,GermanLaw,U.S.law)arelessusefulinperceivingthenatureofthepost-ColdWarlegalorder.Theyaretoomuchconnectedwithterritorialapproachestocomparativelawthatarenowintheprocessofbeingreconsideredasaconsequenceofthepowerfulbirthofinstitutionsoflegalglobalization(suchastheWTO,IMF,EU,andsoforth).105Legalsystemsdonotagreeonwhattheformalsourcesofthelaware.Forcomparativepurposes,nevertheless,thisdisagreementisjustanotherareaofcomparison,whileanagreementhasbeenreachedthattherelevantsourcesoflawforcomparativepurposesarenotnecessarilyformalsourcesoflawwithinthetechnicalmeaningofaspecific legal system.106 I will explore the present phase ofglobalization/Americanizationinthreefundamentalplaces:legalscholarship,caselaw,

andcodification.IfIsucceedinofferingevidenceofadeepandpervasiveimpacton

101. See GRANDE,supranote8; seealsoPierGiuseppeMonateri&F.A.Chiaves,ShiftingFrames:LawandLegalContaminations,inINTRODUCTIONTOITALIANLAW21(JeffreyLena&UgoMatteieds.,2002).102. ConsideringthelawasamechanicalcommoditythatcanbeimportedorexportedlikeatelevisionsetoraLandRoverisalsoastrategyofgovernance.SeeUgoMattei,LegalTransplants,LegalPluralismandEconomicDevelopment,inNEWLAWSFORNEWSTATES(L.Favalietal.eds.,1999);seealso LAURANADER,THELIFEOFTHELAW:ANTHROPOLOGICALPROJECTS(2002).103. SeegenerallyMathiasReimann,Droit positifet culture juridique: Lamricanisationdu droiteuropenparrception ,45ARCHIVESDEPHILOSOPHIEDUDROIT61(2001)(discussingAmericanizationasachangeofmentality).104. ThisimportantnotionisintroducedbyMedina,supranote3.105. See,e.g.,MathiasReimann,TowardsaEuropeanCivilCode:WhyContinentalJuristsShouldConsult Their Transatlantic Colleagues, 73TUL. L.REV. 1337 (1999); see also MARIA ROSARIAFERRARESE,LEISTITUZIONIDELLAGLOBALIZZAZIONE :DIRITTOEDIRITTINELLASOCIETTRANSNAZIONALE(2001)(discussingthelegalinstitutionsofglobalization).106. SeegenerallySacco, supranote23.



27/63

intimateandtraditionallylocalaspectsofthelaw,theideaofimperiallawasthe

outcomeofsuchprocessesshouldbecomeevenmorepersuasive.This section focuses mainly on the impact of Law and Economics, a highlyinfluentialapproachtolawinthecontemporaryprocessofmakingEuropeanprivatelaw,aswellasoneofthemostinfluentialscholarlyapproacheswithintheWorldBankandtheInternationalMonetaryFund.107Thereadershouldkeepinmindthatwhenanewparadigmoflegalscholarshipisabletoseizealeadingposition,itisusuallybymakingpreviousapproacheslookobsoleteandprimitive.AnexampleistheFrenchexegeticmethodology,whichwasconsideredobsoletebythemuchmoreelegantandscientificGerman-Pandectistapproach.TheFranco-German-inspiredsocialapproach,advertisedasastepforwardincivilizationcomparedtothepreviousLochner-Eraindividualism,mayhavealsobecometheleadingpositioninthisway.Thisiscertainlythecasein

presentU.S.hegemony,offeringanexpansiveuniversalisticglobalmodelthatexpressesitselfinEnglish(thenewlinguafranca),thatkeepsadialogueopenwitheconomics(thequeenofsocialsciences),andthatclaimstobethenewnaturallegalorderofthepost-Westphalianstatesocietybasedonimperiallaw.Suchalegalsystem,shortofbeingpoliticallylegitimized,receivesitslegitimacyanddesirabilitybytheintrinsicvirtuesofgeneralaccesstotheglobalcapitalistmarketplace,adreamspelledoutatthefrontdooroftheluxuriousbuildingoftheWorldBankinD.C.:WeDreamofaWorldFreefromPoverty.

Imperiallaw,asshortofbeingamodeofgovernanceinneedoflegitimacyasanyother, becomes the technological backbone of the global marketsomething tobeapproachedapolitically,tobedescribedandmodifiedonlybytechnologicalpractices.

ForthefirsttimeaftertheColdWar,fundingisavailableforscholarswhowishtobethetechnocratsandtheengineersofthisapoliticalsystem.Withintheseassumptions,anyapproach to the law that still considers it as a political institution that cannot beunderstoodanddescribedingraphsandnumbersisdisposedofasobsolete,andanyapproachthatrequiressomethingotherthanareactiveminimalphilosophyofgovernanceisentirelyoutoffashionafterthefalloftheBerlinWall.Lawhastocreateincentivesformarketactors.Theskilledlawyerandpolicymakerisnotappreciatedifhissuggestionsrequireaproactiveandexpensiveactivistpostureofgovernments,letaloneifhearguesforeconomicredistributionbytaxationorotherobsoleteKeynesianmeasures.Thelegalscholarcancountonlyonthenaturalexistenceofmarkets:hisroleistoproduceacorrectsetofmarketincentives.Thequintessentialexampleofthisattitudeisthe

celebratedself-sufficientmodelofcorporatereformproducedbyleadingColumbia

107. Cf.generallyM.W.HESSELINK,THENEWEUROPEANLEGALCULTURE(2001)(discussingchangesincurrentprivatelawthinkinginEurope).SeealsoReimann,supranote103(indicatingamorenuancedposition).




28/63

University scholar Bernard Black (now at Stanford Law School) for the Russian

Federation.108

TheinstitutionalbackgroundofU.S.lawwasthehighlyoriginalcontextinwhichthelegal process, the firstgenuinely originalparadigm ofAmerican legal scholarship,developeditsanalysis.109TheUnitedStatesistheonlygenerallyfederalizedjudicialsystemintheworld.U.S.law,therefore,hastocopewithanumberofuniquepotentialconflictsbetweeninstitutionalactors,somethingthatnaturallymakeslawyersdevelopatremendouslysophisticatedconsciousnessonthepracticalimportance,inlitigation,ofwhodecideswhat.110WithinU.S.legalculture,theunprecedenteddegreeofanti-formalisthegemonyexperiencedbyAmericanlegalrealismcalledforsomereaction.InGermanyandFrance,thetwoleadingexponentsofthecivillawtradition,anti-formalismhasneversuccessfullyreachedbeyondthestatusofacriticalcurrentoflegalthought,

onlymarginallyinfluentialoutsideoflegalscholarship.111

Onthecontrary,intheUnitedStates,legalrealismwasabletoseizetheleadingpostureamonglegalapproachesinacademiaandalso,notmarginally,inthejudiciaryandtheadministrativestate.112

Thereactiontolegalrealism,producedbythelegalprocessschoolmainlyinpubliclawandbytheeconomicanalysisoflawinprivatelaw,hadnoforeignmodelsbywhichtobeinspired.IfseeninthedomesticperspectiveofU.S.law,boththelegalprocessandtheeconomicanalysisoflawshareanambiguousrelationshipwithformalismandrealism.ItwouldbedifficulttoimaginethebirthofthelegalprocessoutsideoftheverypeculiarU.S.federalsystem,while,becauseofthenatureofeconomicreasoning,theeconomicanalysisoflawisauniversalisticparadigm.Asaconsequenceofthisdifferentdegreeoflocalspecificity,onlylawandeconomicshasbeenabletobecomeaworld-

widehegemonicformoflegalconsciousness.

108. SeegenerallyBernardBlack&ReinierKraakman,ASelfEnforcingModelofCorporateLaw,109HARV.L.REV.1911(1996).109. SeegenerallyHENRYM.HART&ALBERTM.SACKS,THELEGALPROCESS(1994)(revivingattentiontothelegalprocessschoolofthought); seealsogenerallyNEILK. KOMESAR,IMPERFECTALTERNATIVES:CHOOSINGINSTITUTIONSINLAW,ECONOMICS,ANDPUBLICPOLICY(1994)(discussingthemergeroflegalprocesstheoryandlawandeconomics).Predatingthelegalprocessschool,therootsofbothlegalformalismandlegalrealismcanbetracedtoEurope.SeeKennedy,supranote34.110. SeegenerallyRICHARDH.FALLONETAL.,THEFEDERALCOURTSANDTHEFEDERALSYSTEM(4thed.1996)(discussingtheotherclassicofthelegalprocessschool);seealsogenerallyAkhilReedAmar,LawStory,102HARV.L.REV.688(1989)(reviewingRICHARDH.FALLONETAL.,THEFEDERALCOURTSANDTHEFEDERALSYSTEM(3rded.1988)).111. SeeCarloAugustoCannata&AntonioGambaro,2LINEAMENTIDISTORIADELLAGIURISPRUDENZAEUROPEA:DALMEDIOEVOALL'EPOCACONTEMPORANEA (4thed.1989).112. See generally GRANT GILMORE, THE AGESOF AMERICAN LAW(1977);BRUCE A.ACKERMAN,RECONSTRUCTINGAMERICANLAW105-10(1984)(appraisingtherealisthegemonyinU.S.law).



29/63

Whileitwouldagrossexaggerationtoclaimthatlawandeconomicstodayenjoys

theleadingroleasanapproachtolegalscholarshipinEuropeancountries,wecannevertheless see that it is the main intellectual vehicle used by American legalconsciousnesstodiffuseitselfandtoimposeitshegemonyinthecenterandperipheryoftheworld.113 Thenotoriouslyexpansionisticanduniversalisticblendofneoclassicaleconomicanalysis,togetherwiththeverythicklayerofideologicalassumptionsthatareimbeddedineconomicreasoningandthatproducethedevelopmentoftheevolutiontowardseconomicefficiencyasasortofsecondnature,areallbehindtheintellectualsuccessofthislineofreasoningaboutthelaw. 114AveryclearbiasinfavoroftheefficiencyofthecommonlawadjudicationprocesspromotesthereactivepostureofthecourtsoflawasthenormativephilosophyofU.S.academicdiscourse.Privatizationsandstructuralreforms,sustainedbytheinternationalinstitutionsofglobalgovernance,

makelawandeconomicsoneofthemostimportantculturalcurrentsthatdiffusetacitassumptionsofU.S.-basedimperiallegalconsciousness.Lawandeconomics,oncetransplantedoutsideofitscontextofproduction,displays

thehighlevelofambiguitythatallowsittoflourish.Conservativescholarsadmireitsintellectualelegance;moreprogressiveandliberalscholarsseeitspotentialinsubvertingthehighlyformalisticandblackletterflavoroflocallaw,andclaimthattheconservativepoliticalbiasissomethingthatcanbeleftontheothersideoftheocean.115ManyEuropeanscholarsareattractedtolawandeconomics,andevenwhenattemptingtouseitcritically,arepavingthewaytoscholarlyAmericanizationandbecomingpartoftheverysameworldphenomenonofhegemonicimpositionthattheywouldliketocriticize.

ThedistinctiveAmericanflavoroflawandeconomicsleavesopenafundamental

question:whatisthelegitimacyofascholarlyparadigmwhenappliedoutsideoftheculturalcontextinwhichithasbeendeveloped?Whatarethepoliticalimplicationsofusinglawandeconomicsoutsideoftheculturalenvironmentinwhichithasdeveloped?Isanewlegitimacynecessaryforthecontextofreception,oristheonecapturedinitsoriginalenvironment alsosufficientfor thenewone? It isurgentthatsuchcriticalquestionsareapproachedwithinabroadhistoricalcontext,inwhichpresenttrendsarenot taken for granted andinwhich local specificities are fully appreciated in theirpoliticalmeaning.Suchacriticalexerciseisevenmoreneedediflawandeconomics

113. UgoMattei&AlbertoMonti,ComparativeLawandEconomics:BorrowingandResistance,in1GLOBALJURISTFRONTIERS(2001),atwww.bepress.com/gj/frontiers/vol1/iss2/art5/.114. SeegenerallyDuncanKennedy,LawandEconomicsfromthePerspectiveofCriticalLegalStudies,in THENEWPALGRAVE,supranote1,at465.115. See generally F. PULITINI, APPUNTI SULL ANALISI ECONOMICA DEL DIRITTO, IN. MERCATOCONCORRENZAEREGOLE(FORTHCOMINGISSUE12003)(criticalappraisalbyanearlyItalianscholaroflawand economics ofthe opportunity toconsider Chicago and otherbrands ofLaw and Economics asmovementssharingenoughcommunalitiestobeapproachedwithinaunitarytaxonomicscheme).




30/63

aims at establishing itself, as discussed in the previous sections, as one of the

fundamentalmethodologiesofthenewimperiallegalorder.Recentscholarship116haspointedoutthatlawandeconomicshasenteredapost-modern,interpretivephaseofdevelopmentinwhichitsnatureofagranddiscourseoverthenatureoflawaimingatobjectivityhasyieldedtoalocalmicro-strategygroundedinpragmatism. Usingsuchstrategy,legalscholarshippursueshegemonyandinfluenceovertheothersourcesofU.S.lawbymeansofaradicallyneo-pragmatistattitude.Suchcriticaldevelopmenthasbeenfosteredbyagenerallossoffaithintheobjectivityofefficiency-baseddiscourses,theverysamefaiththatinprevioustimeshadguaranteedtolawandeconomics,andtoeconomicsingeneral,theirhegemonywithinthepost-realistapproachtolegalscholarshipandwithinothersocialsciences. 117Suchevolutioncanbeseeninallitsfundamentalimportancefromtheperspectiveoflegitimacyofthelegal

discourse,ifonetakesintoconsiderationthatthequestforobjectivityhadalreadybeenattherootsofthelegalprocessschoolinthefifties. 118IntheUnitedStatestoday,lawandeconomicshasbeenfinallyunseatedfromthethroneoflegalobjectivity,sothatitsnormativerecipesneedanewcontingentandlocallegitimizationinordertocompetewiththoseofavarietyofoppositepoliticalstrategies.

Thetraditionalgrandtheoryoflawandeconomicshasbeensuccessfullyreceivedandimplementedbythenewall-powerfulproducersofgloballaw,theprivateandpublicinternationalinstitutionsofglobalgovernance(theWTO,WorldBank,IMF,mega-lawfirms,andsoforth). Inthisinstitutionalscenario,successfullydescribedrecentlyasEmpire119orasPolyarchypromotion,120evenlivelyscholarlydebateshappeningonlyinoneplace(howeverhegemonicsuchastheUnitedStates)cannothelpbutbeparochial

andineffective,particularlyasfarasthevoicesofintellectualresistanceandcritiqueareconcerned.Theemergedfalseoppositionbetweenaglobaldimension,whichisthedomainofthemarketandofefficientinstitutions,andalocaldimensionasthelocationofsolidarityandpoliticsrequiresagenuinelycosmopolitanlegalculturetobeexposedandchallenged.

116. See generallyGARY MINDA, POSTMODERN LEGAL MOVEMENTS: LAWANDJURISPRUDENCEATCENTURYSEND(1995);seealsogenerallySTEPHENM.FELDMAN,AMERICANLEGALTHOUGHTFROMPREMODERNISMTOPOSTMODERNISM:ANINTELLECTUALVOYAGE(2000);NICHOLASMERCURO&STEVENG.MEDEMA,ECONOMICSANDTHELAW:FROMPOSNERTOPOST-MODERNISM(1997).117. SeegenerallyRobertD.Cooter,LawandtheImperialismofEconomics:AnIntroductiontothe

EconomicAnalysisofLawandaReviewoftheMajorBooks,29UCLAL.REV.1260(1982).118. See generallyHerbertWechsler, TowardNeutralPrinciplesofConstitutionalLaw,73HARV.L.REV.1(1959)(advocatingjudicialreviewaftercarefulevaluationofotherpossiblesolutionstotheissueathand).119. See HARDT&NEGRI,supranote10,atxi-xii(definingEmpireasthepoliticalsubjectthatregulatesglobalmarketsandglobalcircuitsofproduction).120. SeeROBINSON,supranote9.



31/63

Aspointed out ina recent essay, traditionalcomparative law isparticularlyill-

equippedtotacklethecriticalanalysisnecessaryinordertostudyandunderstandthenewlegalsystemsofthe global world, those non-territorialsuppliers oflaw thatcharacterizethepresentlandscape(WTO,IMF,andsoforth).121Indeed,traditionalcomparativelawisprisonerofaterritorialnationalparadigmofinquirythatisallbutdeadasatoolforunderstandinglegalglobalization.Thus,inorderforthecomparativisttobecomeaneffectivegloballawyer,itisnecessarytorethinkradicallythemodernideaofborders.Toolsmustbeinventedtocomparenon-territoriallegalsystemsbetweenthemselvesaswellaswithterritorialones.

Thea-criticalreceptionoflawandeconomics,withitsgranddiscursivestrategybasedonefficiencyandobjectivity,thenbecomestheideologicalapparatusofglobalauthority.Alternatively,wheneventually(ifatanypoint)thepost-modernveinofU.S.

law and economics becomes understood, the reception will remain embedded inpostmodernism,thelogicbywhichglobalcapitaloperates.122

IntheUnitedStates,despiteanumberofcontradictorycharacters,postmodernistlegalparadigmshavebeenabletodevelopasaradicalcritiqueofbothformalistandrealistparadigmscompetingwitheachotherforculturalhegemonyinthelegalacademy.. . [by challenging] the American dream, the realist market pragmatism, and thesimplifyingassumptionsoftheleadingparadigmsofresearch. 123Evensettingasideherethedevastatingimpactofeconomicmodernization,carriedonbymeansofwesternconceptionsofthelawinsocietiesthathavefolloweddifferentpathsofdevelopment, 124

itisclearthatoutsideoftheAmericanculturalandinstitutionalcontext,legalphenomenaarequitedifferent.Forexample,intheEuropeanlegallandscape,stillpossessedbythe

self-servingformalistandlocalizedattitudeofthelegaldiscourse,thereisaneedtointroducesomevaluesofmodernityratherthantoentertainpostmodernistcritique.Anumberofpre-modernaspectsofEuropeansocietystillstriketheobserver.Forexample,formalism,avaluesymbolizingclassdivision,hasneverbeenreplacedbyinformalityandopenness.HenceinEurope,postmodernismreinforcesthepre-modernstatusquo,evenata superficiallevelofanalysis.Fromaculturalperspective,itlegitimizesthe

121. SeegenerallyMathiasReimann,BeyondNationalSystems:AComparativeLawfortheInternationalAge, 75TUL.L.REV.1103(2001).122. HARDT &NEGRI,supranote10,at151.123. UgoMattei&AnnadiRobilant,TheArtandScienceofCriticalScholarship:Postmodernismand

InternationalStyleintheLegalArchitectureofEurope,75TUL.L.REV.1053,1085-86(2001).124. SeegenerallyJAMESA.GARDNER,LEGALIMPERIALISM:AMERICANLAWYERSANDFOREIGNAIDINLATINAMERICA(1980)(analyzingandcritiquingAmericanlegalassistanceinthedevelopingworldwithspecialemphasisonLatinAmerica);seealsogenerallyDavidM.Trubek&MarcGalanter,ScholarsinSelf-Estrangement:SomeReflectionsontheCrisisinLawandDevelopmentStudiesintheUnitedStates ,1974WIS.L.REV.1062(1975)(examiningtherelationshipbetweenthelegalsystemandthesocial,economic,andpoliticalchangesoccurringinThirdWorldcountries).




32/63

forcesopposingradicalinstitutionalremodelingoflegislatures,courts,andscholarship

suchasthoseneededinordertocounterbalanceAmericanlegalhegemony.Interestingly,theinfluenceofAmericanscholarlythoughtinthelaw,asappliedtosuchahighlypoliticalexerciseasthebuildingofthenewEuropeanlegallandscape,showsevenmoredivisionandmoreneedtodistinguishdifferencesofattitudeintheprocessofreception.AwidegapbetweennorthernandLatinEuropeancountriesinattitudetowardsthereceptionofAmerican-inspiredmodesofthoughtaboutthelawistooapparenttobeneglected.Northerncountries,includingGermany,Holland,GreatBritain,andtheScandinaviancountries,haveincorporatedmuchofthenewAmericanattitude towards the legaldiscourse assymbolizedby law and economics. In suchcountries,theinternalizationofleadingU.S.modesofthoughtinthelaw,suchasbalancingjurisprudence(includinglawandeconomics),hastremendouslyincreasedin

thelasttenyears.ThenewEuropeanlegalculture,mostlymadebyscholarsbelongingtosuchnortherncountrieswheretheuniversitysystemdoesnotliveinastateofdisarray,and in which

Documents

Mattei, Ugo 2003 'a Theory of Imperial Law-- A Study on U.S. Hegemony and the Latin Resistance' Global Jurist Frontiers, Vol. 3, Issue 2 (61 Pp.)