[PEN-L:11166] Global Capital and the State

[James Devine <jdevine@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Bill Lear responds to my Sunday sermon: >>... it seems that these
"public" goods must also, critically, include neutralization of the
democratic threat. So far, the beginnings of the state apparatus
that Jim outlines are succeeding splendidly at that necessary task,
as these newer global elements of governance are layered behind
current state hierarchies which are increasingly impervious to
meaningful democratic control.<<

I agree. That's why I put the phrase "public goods" in quotation
marks. The decision about what a "public good" is, how it is
provided, who benefits, etc. is made by a very small group of rich
and powerful capitalists and their "technocrats." ("Technocrats" is
in quotation marks because the word literally means "technicians who
rule." But they don't really.) They should be called "collective
goods," except that there is some benefit to those of us outside the
collective. E.g., because our jobs are dependent on capitalism's
health (measured by the profit rate), both the elite and the
majority lose if there's a world depression. We gain (and they lose)
because it opens up new possibilities for political change, but such
change is far from automatic. (It would be _nice_ if "the worse, the
better" thinking worked in practice, but history shows over and over
again that it doesn't.)

>>... the masters of the universe have other reasons to actively
avoid constructing anything too closely resembling a state. A state
can be dangerous because it can be too obvious; once seen, it could
stimulate an appetite for democratic participation, which would
necessitate construction of yet another layer of elaborate lies (the
farces called elections, etc.) to mollify this hunger, an
undertaking which is far from cost-free to elites.<<

Yes, this is one of the reasons why world government is not on the
agenda right now. Of course, it could be organized like the UN,
which has a democratic general assembly -- but none of the
nation-states represented are run democratically -- and an even less
representative security council.

>>One should add that much of the function of states is being taken
over by private financial markets. The capitalization of everything
not nailed down, material or spiritual is all too apparent... This
is another reason why elites might be loathe to create a global
state --- the market is succeeding rather well at dominating just
about everything ...<<

The problem is that though private financial markets do okay when it
comes to trading shares in denationalized utilities, they do not do
well at avoiding panics and slumps.

I had written >... So far, this [global] competition has served
capital very well. But if it causes a global crisis, we should
expect moves to end the competition. Maybe a global New Deal? Could
the NGOs that harrass the World Bank be the source of the FDRs of
the future?<

>>... perhaps one should nevertheless ask: will these structures of
governance, should the party for the wealthy turn sour, again be the
source of not only the rather more benign FDRs, but also the Hitlers
of our future?<<

Quite possible, though it's even more likely that something within
the spectrum between FDR and AH will prevail. The more that workers
and other oppressed groups are democratically organized at the grass
roots and united internationally for a long-term battle, the more
likely that the global state (if it happens) will be relatively
benign.

Terry M. writes of two strategies: >>... One is Jim D's competitive
austerity of which the U.S. and Britain are the exemplars. [Indeed,
it would not be inaccurate to describe it as the Anglo-Saxon
Strategy.]<<

Maybe it's Anglo-Saxon, but the World Bank imposes such a strategy
on a lot of other countries. It's called a SAP (as in a sock filled
with BBs used to hit you on the back of the neck).

>>The other promotes competitiveness through the control of
monopolized markets, technology and scarce skills. This is the
so-called "high productivity" strategy. The proceeds of a successful
implementation of this strategy are to be divided between capital,
labor and social services. It hopes this income will maintain local
demand. This might be labelled the Continental Strategy. The problem
is not that this strategy cannot work (it's working very well in
Ireland at the moment) but that it requires extraordinary luck to
remain at the cutting edge of technology and skills. Sooner or later
the high productivity economy is overtaken by competition and the
austerity strategy imposed. <<

Also, this strategy is being discouraged by the international powers
that be.


in pen-l solidarity,

Jim Devine   jdevine@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
jim_devine@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Econ. Dept., Loyola Marymount Univ.
7900 Loyola Blvd., Los Angeles, CA 90045-8410 USA
310/338-2948 (daytime, during workweek); FAX: 310/338-1950
"Segui il tuo corso, e lascia dir le genti." (Go your own way
and let people talk.) -- K. Marx, paraphrasing Dante A.