Archive for the ‘Crisis’ Category

Making Use of the Vacuum of Hegemony

Wednesday, March 24th, 2010

transformeuropeAnna Striethorst (Brussels) – “Why Seems the Crisis to Favour Rather the Right than the Left?” In March 2010, the leftist network Transform!Europe invited experts from all over Europe to Palma de Mallorca to discuss strategic options for the left during the crisis.

The debate first of all addressed the question of an analysis as to whether the crisis has in fact strengthened the position of right-wing political forces, as assumed at the outset. A study by the Austrian Barbara Steiner, who had compared the results of the elections in a number of European countries, arrived at no clear conclusion. Many took issue with the thesis of the Czech Jiri Malek that crises always help the rightists: Ruurik Holm from Finland pointed out, for example, that the Finnish economic crisis during the nineties has led to a landslide victory of the left. Other participants argued that the right, too, had been caught unprepared by the crisis and would now have to reconsider its neo-liberal positions. Some even went as far as Richard Detje of the magazine Sozialismus, who noted a vacuum of hegemony, in view of the obsolescence of deregulation and depoliticising. In his opinion, the situation has seldom been as open as now; the left, he said, must make use of this.

(more…)

The Second Great Transformation and the Left

Friday, February 5th, 2010

By Dieter Klein – My point of departure is the question as to the historical locus of the present multidimensional crisis. The difficulty in answering it is that the historical significance of a situation is as a rule difficult to grasp for those living within it. All the greater is the responsibility of intellectuals to address such a question.

My thesis is: the most recent societal crisis, which has not at all ended with the abatement of the financial crisis and the overcoming of the world economic crisis, could be seen as the beginning of a fundamental watershed in global development. Following on “The Great Transformation”, which Karl Polanyi analysed in his work with that title, nothing less than a Second Great Transformation is now entering onto the historical agenda, a transformation which will revolutionise all spheres of societal life on earth.

(more…)

The Global Crisis of Capitalism and New Global Solidarities

Tuesday, November 17th, 2009

fluch2By Barry K. Gills, Newcastle University – The causes of the present global systemic crisis are structural and long term. The origins may be traced to the 1970s and the “capital logic” and global restructuring that expressed the attempt by capital to circumvent the limits to capital accumulation imposed in the old core societies, in order to raise the rate of profit. This took the form of the “globalization of production”, the “financialisation of capital” and the “globalization of finance”, and was accompanied by economic doctrines emphasizing the “self-regulation” of capital and markets.

However, by “solving” one problem, these measures created others, including: intensified global asymmetries, social polarization and inequality; “uneven development” both within and between regions, generating serious structural imbalances such as between deficit and surplus country accounts; a “global underconsumption” tendency (caused by raising the rate of the global exploitation of labour and increasing the ratio of value appropriated by capital on a global basis); and accelerating environmental destruction and the impending global climate change scenario; thus overall greatly increasing the level of systemic instability and the “systemic risk” within the world system as a whole.

(more…)

A German Problem: The Brussels Leadership

Tuesday, September 22nd, 2009

The crisis, so it seems, is not present in Europe – and certainly not in Germany before the elections. The news of job cuts, bankruptcies and the over-indebtedness of public budgets are hidden in the business papers such as the Handelsblatt and the Financial Times, while Mr Steinbrück and Ms Merkel regularly come up with good, meaningless news from Brussels and the G20 meetings.

There is deep silence in Brussels: Yes, a European bank supervisory body is under consideration; yes, a recommendation for the limitation of managers’ salaries is being formulated. And the new Central European member nations, which are in a very difficult situation, in some cases verging on national bankruptcy, will get small subsidies – ridiculously small, considering the magnitude of their problems. But there is no coordinated common strategy against the crisis. When France took an initiative in this direction during its Council Presidency in December 2008, it was briskly reined in by Germany. Oh yes, and at the same time, the heads of governments have, by the way, authorized themselves the suspension of the debt limit in the convergence rules. Renationalisation is in the cards. This is monstrous, in view of the existing economic integration in the EU.

returnAs the great economist Paul Krugman wrote in the preface to the German edition of his book “The Return of Depression Economics and the Crisis of 2008″, Europe needs a massive, coordinated effort. Given the transnationality of major corporations, the integrated national economies of Europe will, he argues, under no circumstances be able to solve their problems nationally. He even refers to a German problem:

“For incomprehensible reasons, Germany’s leading politicians simply seem not to understand the enormous extent of the crisis, or the necessity for a forceful reaction to it.” (Krugman 2009)

In the negotiations with Opel, too, the German government has evidently manoeuvred itself into a corner. Instead of coordinating with the other European countries with GM-owned sites, all our government cares about is the traditional German Opel brand. Meanwhile, Great Britain, Spain and Poland are apparently offering financial support that would not protect only Opel, but also their own GM sites. That could make the attempt to carve only Opel out of the GM group considerably more difficult, however.

At a different level however, the Europeans do stick together: during the UNO conference on the world crisis at the end of June in New York, the OECD nation, led by the USA and the EU, blocked a few effective rules for the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank that would have provided relief for the poorest countries in the world.

Birgit Daiber, RLF Brussels

The Multiple Crisis and Beyond

Tuesday, April 14th, 2009

By Francois Houtart – The issue we face today is a crisis with multiple aspects, for which I would first like to offer an analysis. Beyond that, moreover, I would like to look ahead to an utopia, and to the question: How can a solution to this crisis move us beyond the parameters of capitalism?

1. The Dimensions of Crisis

The crisis is not only a financial one. Of course, attention today is focused on this aspect, but it is much more than that. It is also an economic crisis, which could lead to a world depression, with all the accompanying social ramifications. In addition moreover, we are also experiencing a food crisis, an energy crisis and a climate crisis. Ultimately, an analysis of the overall situation suggests that we are facing a real crisis of civilisation.

Therefore, the major challenge is precisely how to find new parameters for the collective life of humankind. Financial crises are of course a recurrent phenomenon in the history of capitalism; the present one, however, has some particularities. It is linked, as has been true of past crises, with over-production and under-consumption. In the productive sphere, according to liberal theory, that is a healthy phenomenon, since it supposedly eliminates the bad elements of the economic system and creates the conditions for a fresh start. Certainly, it is a mechanism for reducing the cost of production, in particular of commodities and labour. Today, thanks to globalisation, the economic system also has a better tool kit available to it to deal with financial crisis than was the case during the 1929-’30 period, including both a new material base, especially new technologies, but also new instruments for operating the system itself. During the thirties for example, the issue of the quasi-nationalisation of banks did not even arise.

(more…)