globalization   9999

« earlier    

As the World Cuts Back on Coal, a Growing Appetite in Africa
As the World Cuts Back on Coal, a Growing Appetite in Africa #climate
kenya  energy  africa  climate  china  globalization  teaching-africa 
6 days ago by derickfay
“Neoliberalism” isn’t an empty epithet. It’s a real, powerful set of ideas. - Vox
"It’s hard to think of a term that causes more confusion, yet is more frequently used in political debate, than “neoliberalism.” It’s one thing to argue that the term should be discouraged or retired from public discussions, because it generates heat instead of light, but it is another to say that it doesn’t have any meaning or use. Jonathan Chait makes the second case in New York magazine.

Whenever I find myself reaching for “neoliberalism,” I look for a different phrase, simply because it will better communicate what I’m trying to convey. But if we throw away the term entirely, or ignore what it’s describing, we lose out on an important way of understanding where we are right now, economically speaking.

Neoliberalism, at its core, describes the stage of capitalism that has existed over the past 30 years, one that evolved out of the economic crises of the 1970s. The underpinnings of this stage are buckling under the weight of our own crises, perhaps even collapsing, all of it in ways we don’t yet understand. A careful consideration of the term can help us grasp a lot of what is going on in the world, especially as the Democratic Party looks to change.

Jonathan Chait’s sweeping condemnation of the word “neoliberal”

For Chait, the term neoliberal “now refers to liberals generally” and indiscriminately, regardless of what views they hold. The “basic claim is that, from the New Deal through the Great Society, the Democratic Party espoused a set of values defined by, or at the very least consistent with, social democracy,” but then, starting in the 1970s, “neoliberal elites hijacked the party.” However, the efforts at hijacking that the critics identify “never really took off,” in Chait’s view. As such, to use the term is simply to try “to win [an argument] with an epithet.”

Chait correctly points out that the left has historically been disappointed with the New Deal and Great Society, viewing them as lost opportunities. But he oversteps when he goes further to say that “neoliberal” is not only devoid of meaning, but that there was no essential shift in Democratic identity toward the end of the last century.

The difficulty of the term is that it’s used to described three overlapping but very distinct intellectual developments. In political circles, it’s most commonly used to refer to a successful attempt to move the Democratic Party to the center in the aftermath of conservative victories in the 1980s. Once can look to Bill Galston and Elaine Kamarck’s influential 1989 The Politics of Evasion, in which the authors argued that Democratic “programs must be shaped and defended within an inhospitable ideological climate, and they cannot by themselves remedy the electorate's broader antipathy to contemporary liberalism.”

Galston and Kamarck were calling for a New Deal liberalism that was updated to be made more palatable to a right-leaning public, after Reagan and the ascendancy of conservatism. You might also say that they were calling for “triangulation” between Reaganism and New Deal liberalism — or, at worst, abandoning the FDR-style approach.

In economic circles, however, “neoliberalism” is most identified with an elite response to the economic crises of the 1970s: stagflation, the energy crisis, the near bankruptcy of New York. The response to these crises was conservative in nature, pushing back against the economic management of the midcentury period. It is sometimes known as the “Washington Consensus,” a set of 10 policies that became the new economic common sense.

These policies included reduction of top marginal tax rates, the liberalization of trade, privatization of government services, and deregulation. These became the sensible things for generic people in Washington and other global headquarters to embrace and promote, and the policies were pushed on other countries via global institutions like the International Monetary Fund. This had significant consequences for the power of capital, as the geographer David Harvey writes in his useful Brief Introduction to Neoliberalism. The upshot of such policies, as the historical sociologist Greta Krippner notes, was to shift many aspects of managing the economy from government to Wall Street, and to financiers generally.

Chait summarizes this sense of the term in the following way: It simply “means capitalist, as distinguished from socialist.” But what kind of capitalism? The Washington Consensus represents a particularly laissez-faire approach that changed life in many countries profoundly: To sample its effects, just check out a book like Joseph Stiglitz’s Globalization and its Discontents. The shock therapy of mass privatization applied to Russia after the Soviet collapsed, for example, reduced life expectancy in that country by five years and ensured that Russia was taken over by strongmen and oligarchs.

International pressure forced East Asian countries to liberalize their capital flows, which led to a financial crisis that the IMF subsequently made use of to demand even more painful austerity. The European Union was created to facilitate the austerity that is destroying a generation in such countries as Greece, Portugal, and Spain. (The IMF itself is reexamining its actions over the past several decades; titles it has published, including Neoliberalism, Oversold?, demonstrate the broad usefulness of the term.)

Markets are defining more and more aspects of our lives

The third meaning of “neoliberalism,” most often used in academic circles, encompasses market supremacy — or the extension of markets or market-like logic to more and more spheres of life. This, in turn, has a significant influence on our subjectivity: how we view ourselves, our society, and our roles in it. One insight here is that markets don’t occur naturally but are instead constructed through law and practices, and those practices can be extended into realms well beyond traditional markets.

Another insight is that market exchanges can create an ethos that ends up shaping more and more human behavior; we can increasingly view ourselves as little more than human capital maximizing our market values.

This is a little abstract, but it really does matter for our everyday lives. As the political theorist Wendy Brown notes in her book Undoing the Demos: Neoliberalism’s Stealth Revolution, the Supreme Court case overturning a century of campaign finance law, Citizens United, wasn’t just about viewing corporations as political citizens. Kennedy’s opinion was also about viewing all politics as a form of market activity. The question, as he saw it, was is how to preserve a “political marketplace.” In this market-centric view, democracy, access, voice, and other democratic values are flattened, replaced with a thin veneer of political activity as a type of capital right.

You may not believe in neoliberalism, but neoliberalism believes in you

Why does this matter if you couldn’t care less about either the IMF or subjectivity? The 2016 election brought forward real disagreements in the Democratic Party, disagreements that aren’t reducible to empirical arguments, or arguments about what an achievable political agenda might be. These disagreements will become more important as we move forward, and they can only be answered with an understanding of what the Democratic Party stands for.

One highly salient conflict was the fight over free college during the Democratic primary. It wasn’t about the price tag; it was about the role the government should play in helping to educate the citizenry. Clinton originally argued that a universal program would help people who didn’t need help — why pay for Donald Trump’s kids? This reflects the focus on means-tested programs that dominated Democratic policymaking over the past several decades. (Some of the original people who wanted to reinvent the Democratic Party, such as Charles Peters in his 1983 article “A Neoliberal’s Manifesto,” called for means-testing Social Security so it served only the very poor.)

Bernie Sanders argued instead that education was a right, and it should be guaranteed to all Americans regardless of wealth or income. The two rivals came to a smart compromise after the campaign, concluding that public tuition should be free for all families with income of less than $125,000 — a proposal that is already serving as a base from which activists can build.

This points to a disagreement as we move forward. Should the Democratic Party focus on the most vulnerable, in the language of access and need? Or should it focus on everyone, in the language of rights?

We’ll see a similar fight in health care. The horror movie villain of Republican health care reform has been killed and thrown into the summer camp lake, and we’re all sitting on the beach terrified that the undead body will simply walk right back out. In the meantime, Democrats have to think about whether their health care goals will build on the ACA framework or whether they should more aggressively extend Medicare for more people.

Chait argues that “[t]he Democratic Party has evolved over the last half-century, as any party does over a long period of time. But the basic ideological cast of its economic policy has not changed dramatically since the New Deal.” Whether you believe that’s true hinges on what you think of the relative merits of public and private provisioning of goods. For there was clearly some change in Democratic policymaking — and, arguably, in its “ideological cast” — sometime between 1976 and 1992. It became much more acceptable to let the private market drive outcomes, with government helping through tax credits and various nudges. One influential 1992 book, Reinventing Government, by David Osborne and Ted Gaebler, described a government that should “steer, not row.” (FDR believed government could and should row.)

Another place we can see a break in the Democratic Party … [more]
neoliberalism  capitalism  democrats  history  politics  2017  mikekonczal  jonathanchait  billgalston  elainekamarck  newdeal  liberalism  conservatism  economics  policy  liberalization  privatization  government  governance  josephstiglitz  globalization  markets  berniesanders  ideology  dvidorsborne  tedgaebler  finance  banking  boblitan  jonathanruch  education  corporations  1988  ronaldreagan 
8 days ago by robertogreco
Is Emirates Airline Running Out of Sky? - Bloomberg
Yet as Emirates dictates new standards of technology, luxury, and range, it’s finding that more and more is beyond its mastery. Conceived as a titanic bet on the growth of what development economists call the Global South—the Middle East, Africa, South Asia, and Latin America—the airline is at risk if those emerging markets don’t, in fact, emerge. Emirates in May reported its first-ever annual revenue decline and is cutting some of its plans for growth amid slackening demand from sub-Saharan Africa, Turkey, and Brazil. The slump has industry analysts wondering how Emirates will fill the staggering number of planes it has on order. The company has agreed to buy 50 A380s and 174 Boeing 777s, adding to the 92 and 148, respectively, it currently flies. By comparison, British Airways operates 12 A380s, and American Airlines, Delta, and United have zero.

The bigger threat may lie in the U.S., the world’s most lucrative travel market, where Emirates has been expanding aggressively. It flies to 11 cities, including Orlando, Boston, Seattle, and Dallas. Led by Delta, the U.S. Big Three are intensifying a lobbying campaign against Emirates and its smaller Persian Gulf rivals, Etihad Airways and Qatar Airways, collectively the ME3, seeking to curtail their access to American airports unless “unfair subsidies” are eliminated. Their argument, that deep-pocketed foreigners are threatening American jobs by flooding the market with subsidized capacity, was once seen in business circles as a long shot—but it happens to resonate precisely with President-elect Donald Trump’s stated view of the world. Similar efforts are afoot in Europe.

Those challenges may make the world less hospitable than ever to a company whose marketing projects a sunny globalism. With Trump and his ilk ascendant, one Emirates ad sums up a corporate ethos that feels increasingly at odds with the times: “Tomorrow thinks borders are so yesterday.”
airport  middle.east  globalization  emirates  bloomberg  usa  ***  aeriality 
8 days ago by gpe
Global brands — FT.com
JUNE 29, 2017 by Scheherazade Daneshkhu and Chris Campbell
best_of  rankings  brands  Fortune_500  multinationals  globalization 
11 days ago by jerryking
Twitter
RT : These two Swedish economists foresaw a backlash. In the 1930s
globalization  from twitter
14 days ago by wardell

« earlier    

related tags

***  1988  1999  2016  2017  21st_century  @article  @download  @howto  @reference  a:daniel-knowles  activism  aeriality  africa  agriculture  airport  amazon  anarchism  animalrights  apple  association  authoritarianism  authority  backlash  banking  berniesanders  best_of  billgalston  blog  bloomberg  boblitan  bodies  bongjoon-ho  brands  breakthrough_in_grey_room  brexit  britain  british  brutality  business  capabilities  capitalism  cashless  casteingthelowerclass  china  cindy  cities  citiesurbanism  city-planning  climate  climate_change  climatechange  cloud  collaboration  colonialism  communication  community  complexity  conservatism  containers  corporateconsolidation  corporateindemnity  corporations  cowork  crhesi  cruelty  cultural-silos  culture  d:2017.04.21  defense_spending  deleuze  democracy  democrats  density  derivatives  design  deutschebank  digital  disease  dislocations  distrust  donald_trump  dvidorsborne  earth  ebwhite  ecocriticism  econ  economics  economy  education  elainekamarck  elites  emirates  emoji  energy  environment  environmentalism  ephemeralization  erp  esports  etp_news  europe  european_politics  event  expulsion  facebook  farrell.henry  fashion  fearmongering  feudal  finance  fitness  font  foodsecurity  football  fortune_500  france  french-culture  future  gardening  geopolitics  gillesdeleuze  gillis  global  global_warming  globalgameofthrones  globalism  globalunrest  google  governance  government  governmentincompetence  greeneconomy  hardware  harvard  have_read  health  healthcare  henry_david_thoreau  higher  history  hope  human-behavior  humanity  ideology  illustration  immigrants  immigration  imperialism  industrial-revolution  industrialpolicy  industry  inequality  infographics  infrastructure  injustice  innovation  intellectual_property  intellectualproperty  internet  isp  italian-health  japan  jonathanchait  jonathanruch  josephstiglitz  juergenzimmerer  jutras  kelleydong  kenya  kimhye-ri  knowledgeeconomy  kolonialisierung  korea  labor  land  levy.jacob_t.  liberalism  liberalization  liberalorder  literary_criticism  localism  london  longreads  love  magazines  manufacturing  marketing  markets  material_media  materiality  media  mental-health  messaging  microsoft  middle.east  migration  mikekonczal  military-industrial-complex  mint  modern-society  monocle  multinationals  multipolarworldorder  multispecies  nationalism  nato  nazi:vorgeschichte  neoliberalism  netsuite  network  networks  newdeal  ns:imperium  nyc  nytimes  okj  open_computation  opinion  oracle  organized_crime  ownership  p:capx  paralinguistic  payment  podcast  podcasts  policy  political  political_economy  politics  popularstupidity  populism  postscarcityeconomy  postsocialism  poverty  prejudice  privatization  public-policy  publishing  race  radar  rankings  reading  regionaldata  religion  report  revolution  right-wing_populism  ronaldreagan  rotterdam  saas  saskiasassen  science  security  senses  share  shigetakakurita  shipping  small-town  smartphone  social-commentary  social  socialjustice  society  socio-economic  sociology  soundcloud  sports  standards  stress  studentloans  style  systems  talk  teaching-africa  technology  tedgaebler  the-kinks  theglobalcity  theguardian  thenewrepublic  today  trade  transportation  travel  trump  trumpauthoritarianism  trumpcorruption  trumpincompetence  trumpstupidity  ui  uncategorized  unemployment  unicode  united-nations  united-states  urban  urbanism  urbanization  us-politics  us  usa-stats  usa  user  video  village  violence  visualisation  w:1000  wealth  wealth_distribution  wealthextraction  webdesign  win  worldtrade 

Copy this bookmark:



description:


tags: