TheMaterialismofBiologicalEncounters 105
imperialism did not, as an observer noted, "annex and directly govern
foreignterritories,butreliesinsteadonmoreindirectkindsofinfluence"
(Robinson 36). The "more indirect kinds of influence," of which "the
global trading system" (38) is but one aspect, are of relevance for the
present inquiry because it is in this broad context where biological
encountersanddiseaseecologiesmightplausiblybesituated.Onalevel
more systematic than necessary here, Michael Hardt and Antonio Negri
havestronglyinsistedonexactlythispoint.
The imperial order is formed not only on the basis of its powers of
accumulation and global extension, but also on the basis of its capacity
to... to extend itself throughout the biopolitical latticework of world
society....InEmpireanditsregimeofbiopower,economicproduction
and political constitution tend increasingly to coincide... (Hardt and
Negri,Empire41)but,Iwouldadd,alsotocollapse,assomeofthefollowingexamples
will show. Any description of the material realities of empire would
therefore be incomplete without reference to the biology of the human
body, but even more curtailed if it did not take into account the
particular interaction between local factors (disease ecologies) and the
translocal processes of infection unleashed by mobility practices. This
interaction does not only influence imperial biopolitics, it has its own
impact on how empire is experienced by its denizens, in the U.S. or at
the Empire's periphery. In the temporal rhythms between the latency of
living connections and the irruption of disease outbreaks, the "living
textures" (Ahuja x) of the burgeoning U.S.-American empire become
visible. They do so intermittently, in different historical constellations,
mostly in moments of emergence and emergency. Not all these
moments,however,followthesamepattern.
alsobyEricW.Robinson,MartinCowardand(fortheinformalaspects)Joseph
Nye.