One policy/information gathering goal—a Left policy ask—is building a better measure of grassroots economic status (liberated from GDP, stock exchanges, and other statistics serving neoliberal ends). Like Brian and collaborators’ geography of alternative energy, we need a census of skills and work/labor/socially reproductive experiences. This type of mass professional interviewing has historically only been carried out by national militaries as part of “total war” mobilizations, but a better mobilization has to facilitate collectivized provisioning. A global Left can then organize a redistribution of material and technological capacity, identifying “material demand” where skilled/experienced workers are democratically commissioned by constituent consumers in their local community. A more egalitarian economy also locates “skill demand” where underdevelopment persists and democracies commission improvements in quality of life practices/routines/technologies (“me too” culture miming or probing experimentally *neo-modernism?) opposing austerity through money by fiat is important for liberating more popular economic flows, but the Left must define the *what we want* in fairly granular terms as well as generalized (culture building/affirming) terms to compete with the too big to fail elites who will gladly continue to monopolize a more generous fiscal policy.
On Tue, Jan 19, 2021 at 1:30 PM Brian Holmes <bhcontinentaldr...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, Jan 19, 2021 at 6:51 AM Jean-Noël Montagné <j...@autistici.org> > wrote: > >> >> I don't see the end of the neoliberal period in the maelstrom which >> gathers populists/Trump/Qanon activists. They still behave in a >> conservative way: guns, religion, free-market capitalism, climate change >> denial, covid harshness denial, cult of the leader, economical >> colonialism, etc. >> > > Jean, if we simply define neoliberalism as capitalism, then nothing has > changed. And if we measure the Zeitgeist by the side that just lost, well, > they don't even think they lost... > > It's different if you look at it in political-economy terms. From that > angle, neoliberalism as a specific doctrine - formerly called "the > Washington Consensus" - began its decline in 2008, and that decline > continues. Continuous reduction of trade tariffs, strong currencies bought > at the price of fiscal austerity, multilateral negotiation on all > international issues and international military collaboration brought to > its height by the first Gulf War and patched up in Afghanistan later on - > these are some of the key traits. All of those have ceased to function as > they did at their peak. Crucially, the central banks of all major powers > started to print money after 2008 (Europe finally accepted to do this > rather recently) and now, in the US, the new administration in the voice of > the country's most official ever economist, Larry Summers, has declared > that rising debt does not cause inflation and therefore that essentially > unlimited money can and will be spent. Goodbye, Washington Consensus! This > approach will inevitably be taken by all the other countries and blocs > (which have mostly already started down that road) and the result will be, > in my best projection, at least as great a sea change in the global economy > as was experienced in the early 1980s, when the policy package and business > model of neoliberalism was invented. > > The groundswell that Trump rode to power was nationalist and > anti-neoliberal. As president, Trump stoked the nationalist demand while > continuing to carry out the neoliberal program through tax cuts, > deregulation and curtailment of social services. However this contradiction > at the heart of his presidency is now tearing the Republican party apart, > and the damage that neoliberalism has done makes further neoliberalization > impossible for the Democrats, even though they are the ones who brought > that policy package to its culmination under Clinton (remember the > Clinton/Shroeder/Blair era). This is not just about the US, but it might be > safe to say that the decline in US power and prestige is itself a facet of > the global retreat from neoliberalism. The rising prestige of China, with > its controlled currency and state-guided economy, is another one (which is > in the process of becoming a real nightmare under Xi). As yet, no new > consensus model has appeared, but that may begin happening this year, so be > alert! > > How all this unfolds is not only something to observe, but something to > fight for. Particularly important is how the financial markets evolve. At > the outset of the pandemic, as after 2008, the US Treasury made large > amounts of US dollars available to around fifteen major countries, so they > could maintain their dollar reserves despite their citizens trying to buy > all the dollars they could. This was a deliberate effort to preserve > neoliberal globalization and surely those efforts are not over, so the > trend lines I am pointing to could still be reversed. So far, one of the > outstanding contradictions of the new regime is that socialized national > money props up a thoroughly privatized, stateless circulation system > accessible only to elites. In short, the battle over the future of the > money-form is underway. > >> >> As a nettime reader, interested by net and digital culture, I have >> studied the power of social networks algorithms on the sudden emergence >> of Gilets Jaunes in France. Gilets Jaunes movement is almost identically >> composed by the same items we see in US, apart from some national >> cultural particularities: distrust of the political class, feeling of >> social downgrading, feeling of territorial abandonment, decline in >> purchasing power, specially for working class and low/middle class, >> ideas mixed with all fake news and comploting theories. >> >> This is totally interesting and I would like to know more. I share your > analysis, except for me it's just an opinion, a feeling. I also have the > impression that there is a lot more intermixing between the Gilets Jaunes > and the far left/anarchist sectors than here, but anyway, it's all a result > of the plunder that elites and the upper middle classes have carried out > over the last four decades, no wonder the people revolt. Europeans really > need to understand these similarities. Merkel is holding the lid on the pot > in Germany... > > >> The first struggle to build in my opinion, is the struggle against >> social networks, and at the same time, the promotion of the use and >> build of other alternatives ( existing or to by built) for press, local >> direct democracy, information and education. >> > > I am certain everyone agrees with you about GAFAM, another entirely > characteristic neoliberal phenomenon whose contradictions have just > exploded in our faces over here. Democracy as collective self-governance > basically works - to the extent it ever does work - when different groups > of people achieve consensus and even some degree of common purpose by > peaceful, procedural deliberation. As that ideal breaks down, all social > media can do is enflame passions, and then feed parasitically off the > attention-storm. There is no chance for an individual or small group to > find out what he/she/they believe - instead their hot button is pushed. > It's a formula for civil war and it has gotten close to delivering that. > Meantime Jack Dorsey regrets banning Trump (I think the employees forced > him) and he dreams of stateless currency and freedom without > responsibility. I think the reason that we all remain on nettime is that > occasionally we can have a real debate here. At the same time, the McAlevey > position is right as far as I can see, and yours is too. Without more > cross-class local involvement at the neighborhood and institutional levels, > one ends up stuck in an electronic echo-chamber. I think that kind of > involvement has to climb the ladder of civil society, working through the > NGOs and levels of government as all successful activism does. No country > is ever governed by popular power alone, because it takes specialized > political and pundit classes just to perceive what is happening in a large > country, and it takes specialization to carry out all advanced technical > operations. Nonetheless, democratic or egalitarian change has to start with > the formation of political demands at the grassroots. In Chicago if you are > not connected to a neighborhood org you are nothing. It's a terrifying > city, but the political activism is very impressive. > > all the best, Brian > # distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission > # <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, > # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets > # more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l > # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nett...@kein.org > # @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject: -- *G. Vincent Gaulin* 211 Keese St. Pendleton, SC m. 864-247-8207
# distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission # <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets # more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nett...@kein.org # @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:
