|
there are a few problems with that, comrade (keep in mind that all this is on the fly, so there are trailing-off points, things which are left dangling etc....)
a. the present--um--"problems" are not simply american--look at how this crisis is spread, look at which institutions are affected---it's involved much of western europe, russia, asian stock markets--the chinese stock market has lost about 70% of its value over the past few months, and the government this morning started buying up shares....traffic in these curious "devices" or "objects" has been transnational---they are an element within the new system of capital flows (new since the 1990s made real-time coupling of markets possible, so since the development of the communications system that allows us to play around here)...
b. capital flows exceed the power of any given nation-state to contain. to the extent that these flows are *The* center of globalizing capitalism, it's most elaborate construction project, decoupling is probably impossible. and given the aggression with which this neoliberal order has colonized much of the planet, it seems this is a problem for all kinds of people, in all kinds of places, and not just for the holders of capital and their speculative courtiers.
c. if nation-states are incapable of managing this order of crisis, then you'd expect the transnational institutions that have been the enforcers of "market discipline" to be operating here, wouldn't you? where's the imf?
what's becoming obvious through the absence of, say, the imf in this context is that "globalization" really is a new form of neo-colonialism, and just as folk are saying, there's one game for the wealthy and the institutions that are symmetrical with that class position and an entirely different one for the rest of us, so it is that there are two types of neoliberalism, one for the metropole and one for everywhere else. this is why i think it correct to think in terms of american empire, though it's a passive-aggressive sort of empire, one that spins out of the older neo-colonial order rather than out of more paleolithic forms of domination.
d. absent an institution on the order of the imf--that is a transnational institution (and the imf is not in fact this, but obviously an arm of american policy, an expression of american interests--which is only a surprise if you live in the american media and cultural bubbles), and given that the derivatives marketplace was spread horizontally (transnationally) more than it was spread vertically (not all banks for example played this game), it follows that concentration would be the outcome of this.
whether that is allowed to stand is a legislative/legal problem---so far things have been happening in a way that has totally bypassed congress, for example--the "imperial presidency" in it's "state of exception" mode has been lurching from crisis to crisis, acting in an entirely reactive manner, making shit worse when it was supposed to make shit better, etc etc etc....but this isn't over and it's possible that quite deep changes will comes about as the damage done not only by the crises but also by the attempts to limit the damage caused by the crises unfold.
this puts nation-states in an odd position.
it seems to militate for the formation of transnational regulatory bodies with actual enforcement powers and huge sums of capital.
__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear
it make you sick.
-kamau brathwaite
|