dominated by Britain in mid-nineteenth century but with institutions and doc- trines adjusted to a more complex world economy and to national societies more sensitive to the political repercussions of economic crises. Sometime from the later 1960s through the early 1970s it became evident that this US-based world order was no longer working well.During the uncertain times which followed,three possibilities of structural transformation of world order opened up:a reconstruction of hegemony with a broadening of political management on the lines envisaged by the Trilateral Commission;increased fragmentation of the world economy around big-power-centred economic spheres;and the possible assertion of a Third-World-based counterhegemony with the concerted demand for the New International Economic Order as a forerunner. On the basis of this tentative notation,it would appear that,historically,to become hegemonic,a state would have to found and protect a world order which was universal in conception,i.e.,not an order in which one state directly exploits others but an order which most other states (or at least those within reach of the hegemony)could find compatible with their interests.Such an order would hardly be conceived in inter-state terms alone,for this would likely bring to the fore oppositions of state interests.It would most likely give prominence to op- portunities for the forces of civil society to operate on the world scale (or on the scale of the sphere within which hegemony prevails).The hegemonic concept of world order is founded not only upon the regulation of inter-state conflict but also upon a globally-conceived civil society,i.e.,a mode of production of global extent which brings about links among social classes of the countries en- compassed by it. Historically,hegemonies of this kind are founded by powerful states which have undergone a thorough social and economic revolution.The revolution not only modifies the internal economic and political structures of the state in question but also unleashes energies which expand beyond the state's boundaries. A world hegemony is thus in its beginnings an outward expansion of the internal (national)hegemony established by a dominant social class.The economic and social institutions,the culture,the technology associated with this national hegemony become patterns for emulation abroad.Such an expansive hegemony impinges on the more peripheral countries as a passive revolution.These countries have not undergone the same thorough social revolution,nor have their economies developed in the same way,but they try to incorporate elements from the hegemonic model without disturbing old power structures.While per- ipheral countries may adopt some economic and cultural aspects of the hegem- onic core,they are less well able to adopt its political models.Just as fascism became the form of passive revolution in the Italy of the inter-war period,so various forms of military-bureaucratic regime supervise passive revolution in today's peripheries.In the world-hegemonic model,hegemony is more intense and consistent at the core and more laden with contradictions at the periphery. Hegemony at the international level is thus not merely an order among states. It is an order within a world economy with a dominant mode of production which penetrates into all countries and links into other subordinate modes of production.It is also a complex of international social relationships which con- nect the social classes of the different countries.World hegemony is describable 171 Downloaded from mil.sagepub.com at LIB SHANGHAI JIAOTONG UNIV on October 10,2010Downloaded from mil.sagepub.com at LIB SHANGHAI JIAOTONG UNIV on October 10, 2010