An economics, investment, trading and policy blog with a focus on Modern Monetary Theory (MMT). We seek the truth, avoid the mainstream and are virulently anti-neoliberalism.
"If four countries, France, Germany, Italy and Spain, who together account for over 75% of the GDP and the population in the eurozone put forward a new treaty based on democracy and fiscal justice, with as a strong measure the adoption of a common tax system for large corporations, then the other countries would be forced to follow them."
The left is showing its true colors. "other countries would be forced to follow them". They all think that countries should be forced to do something because you have 3 % deficit rule and governments are aparted from money issuing, they are forced to do austerity. Left and right are both anti democracy when it comes to economics. That's why Varoufakis is so much against abandoning the euro or Brexit. These are crazy globalists, I can't say they are rational.
Matt, Kristjan: Not to agree (or disagree) with him on other things, but when push came to shove, Varoufakis opted for Greece to leave the Euro, to not disrespect the referendum. His failure was more intellectual and pedagogical, to exaggerate the problems and uncertainties, to not educate Tsipras sufficiently.
Youve never heard the famous quote about Mussolini something like "he could get the trains to run on time..." ... even the metal-loving Nazi's/Fascists were materially competent...
Were talking about material issues here... ie "economics" ...
Calgacus, I think you are wrong about Varoufakis. This is what he saying about Bretton Woods:
"Varoufakis’s book And the Weak Suffer What They Must?, traces the origins of Europe’s crisis to the United States’s decision to pull the plug on the Bretton Woods system in 1971. The system, which had maintained exchange-rate stability since the second World War, had become unsustainable for the US, which unilaterally decided to break the link between the dollar and the price of gold. In the book, Varoufakis suggests Europe might have prevented the collapse of Bretton Woods by trying to reform the system through negotiation."
He is still doing that negotiation.
I give him this much that he is dreaming about democratizing Europe. It is a pipe dream but at least he is not a neoliberal talking about free markets or social democrat talking about living beyond our means.
I agree with Matt that they really hate nationalism and national democracy. That's why he was willing to put millions of Greek people in a tank (Irony is that the referendum in Greece was dominated by nationalism). The differences what the troika demanded and what YV was willing to accept were minor, just to save Syriza's and his face. In a way he got lucky, he is still a hero that provides hope for the clueless left. Worst for him personally would have been if the troika would have agreed to some of his proposals and they would have reached an agreement of some kind without the referendum taking place at all. That would have destroyed the economic genius completely and for good. Now he is playing it out as a victim of the cruel troika that didn't even engage with him at all. He is a con artist who is cashing it in with his books and presentations now. I am not suggesting that he might not have a good cause to con people. May be nationalism is a threat, I don't know but I don't think so. The way I see the nationalism arising, It is a reaction to the ideas like Piketty and Varoufakis have. They won't let go of their dream. Usually the right are seen as anti-democracy but the left is as bad if not worse.
I was referring to his actions around and after his term as finance minister, his votes in parliament, which others have been mistaken about - see this. What he indisputably did then was better than much of what he has said, for he was sufficiently nationalistic to opt for leaving the Euro rather than accepting the renewed austerity. So saying he (or probably Piketty etc) hate nationalism and national democracy is not just.
They are what Lerner called "sentimental internationalists". The amusing thing is that what people think of nowadays as their own coldblooded reason is usually confused sentimentalism, and what people think of as following their own heart is - as coolly rational as Mr. Spock.
Of course nationalism can be a threat. But I think we agree that internationalism can be one too. And that in Europe today, the wrong sort of internationalism is worse than a threat - but a real and active enemy of the people and societies of Europe. I think the most important basis to judge people is what they do against this enemy.
I think "nationalism is bad" is so deeply rooted already in subconscious of most people. It might be bad but at least there is some positive side to it. It is changing the political landscape in US, there is nationalism behind Trump support. He is demonized of course just like the nationalists in Europe are. There you have Bernie Sanders and Ted Cruz also but in Europe it is pretty much the only option you have if you want to get against the establishment. The Pan European movement to democratize Europe exists pretty much in Varoufakis' head. Most Europeans don't know who Juncker is, they don't know what position that is what he holds. They have no idea what our representatives do in European Parliament etc. It has a lot of similarities with Soviet Union. Elections were held in Soviet Union too, usually some collective farm worker was set up in election who nobody knew and who was clueless in politics. You didn't have a choice between multiple candidates, you could only vote yes or no, the elections were a fraud because he or she always had 99% support. He or She was sent to Congress in Moscow and her job was pretty much the same European MPs have. Ok, it was probably worse back then because now they can talk and express their personal opinions. To me they say that this cannot be changed because the Commission does this or that or the treaty doesn't allow that. I am not unemployed poor myself and I am not denying that EU offers good life and even opportunities to a lot of people, so do dictatorships. There are problems in American democracy of course but it is a lot better than Europe now.
"Of course nationalism can be a threat. But I think we agree that internationalism can be one too. And that in Europe today, the wrong sort of internationalism is worse than a threat - but a real and active enemy of the people and societies of Europe. I think the most important basis to judge people is what they do against this enemy."
10 comments:
"If four countries, France, Germany, Italy and Spain, who together account for over 75% of the GDP and the population in the eurozone put forward a new treaty based on democracy and fiscal justice, with as a strong measure the adoption of a common tax system for large corporations, then the other countries would be forced to follow them."
The left is showing its true colors. "other countries would be forced to follow them". They all think that countries should be forced to do something because you have 3 % deficit rule and governments are aparted from money issuing, they are forced to do austerity. Left and right are both anti democracy when it comes to economics. That's why Varoufakis is so much against abandoning the euro or Brexit. These are crazy globalists, I can't say they are rational.
K,
They are anti-nationalists not just anti-democracy...
"and govts are aparted from money issuing..." Exactly...
Any competent administrator knows you have to define/regulate your system boundaries/interfaces...
Rationality aside, they are CERTAINLY NOT COMPETENT people for positions of rule...
Nationalists are best known for being super duper democratic and competent…
Matt, Kristjan: Not to agree (or disagree) with him on other things, but when push came to shove, Varoufakis opted for Greece to leave the Euro, to not disrespect the referendum. His failure was more intellectual and pedagogical, to exaggerate the problems and uncertainties, to not educate Tsipras sufficiently.
Well you cant teach people what you dont know yourself....
Salsa,
Youve never heard the famous quote about Mussolini something like "he could get the trains to run on time..." ... even the metal-loving Nazi's/Fascists were materially competent...
Were talking about material issues here... ie "economics" ...
Calgacus, I think you are wrong about Varoufakis. This is what he saying about Bretton Woods:
"Varoufakis’s book And the Weak Suffer What They Must?, traces the origins of Europe’s crisis to the United States’s decision to pull the plug on the Bretton Woods system in 1971. The system, which had maintained exchange-rate stability since the second World War, had become unsustainable for the US, which unilaterally decided to break the link between the dollar and the price of gold.
In the book, Varoufakis suggests Europe might have prevented the collapse of Bretton Woods by trying to reform the system through negotiation."
He is still doing that negotiation.
I give him this much that he is dreaming about democratizing Europe. It is a pipe dream but at least he is not a neoliberal talking about free markets or social democrat talking about living beyond our means.
I agree with Matt that they really hate nationalism and national democracy. That's why he was willing to put millions of Greek people in a tank (Irony is that the referendum in Greece was dominated by nationalism). The differences what the troika demanded and what YV was willing to accept were minor, just to save Syriza's and his face. In a way he got lucky, he is still a hero that provides hope for the clueless left. Worst for him personally would have been if the troika would have agreed to some of his proposals and they would have reached an agreement of some kind without the referendum taking place at all. That would have destroyed the economic genius completely and for good. Now he is playing it out as a victim of the cruel troika that didn't even engage with him at all. He is a con artist who is cashing it in with his books and presentations now. I am not suggesting that he might not have a good cause to con people. May be nationalism is a threat, I don't know but I don't think so. The way I see the nationalism arising, It is a reaction to the ideas like Piketty and Varoufakis have. They won't let go of their dream. Usually the right are seen as anti-democracy but the left is as bad if not worse.
I was referring to his actions around and after his term as finance minister, his votes in parliament, which others have been mistaken about - see this. What he indisputably did then was better than much of what he has said, for he was sufficiently nationalistic to opt for leaving the Euro rather than accepting the renewed austerity. So saying he (or probably Piketty etc) hate nationalism and national democracy is not just.
They are what Lerner called "sentimental internationalists". The amusing thing is that what people think of nowadays as their own coldblooded reason is usually confused sentimentalism, and what people think of as following their own heart is - as coolly rational as Mr. Spock.
Of course nationalism can be a threat. But I think we agree that internationalism can be one too. And that in Europe today, the wrong sort of internationalism is worse than a threat - but a real and active enemy of the people and societies of Europe. I think the most important basis to judge people is what they do against this enemy.
I think "nationalism is bad" is so deeply rooted already in subconscious of most people. It might be bad but at least there is some positive side to it. It is changing the political landscape in US, there is nationalism behind Trump support. He is demonized of course just like the nationalists in Europe are. There you have Bernie Sanders and Ted Cruz also but in Europe it is pretty much the only option you have if you want to get against the establishment. The Pan European movement to democratize Europe exists pretty much in Varoufakis' head. Most Europeans don't know who Juncker is, they don't know what position that is what he holds. They have no idea what our representatives do in European Parliament etc. It has a lot of similarities with Soviet Union. Elections were held in Soviet Union too, usually some collective farm worker was set up in election who nobody knew and who was clueless in politics. You didn't have a choice between multiple candidates, you could only vote yes or no, the elections were a fraud because he or she always had 99% support. He or She was sent to Congress in Moscow and her job was pretty much the same European MPs have. Ok, it was probably worse back then because now they can talk and express their personal opinions. To me they say that this cannot be changed because the Commission does this or that or the treaty doesn't allow that. I am not unemployed poor myself and I am not denying that EU offers good life and even opportunities to a lot of people, so do dictatorships. There are problems in American democracy of course but it is a lot better than Europe now.
"Of course nationalism can be a threat. But I think we agree that internationalism can be one too. And that in Europe today, the wrong sort of internationalism is worse than a threat - but a real and active enemy of the people and societies of Europe. I think the most important basis to judge people is what they do against this enemy."
Yes, I agree.
"Were talking about material issues here... ie "economics" ... "
So you're sherry picking amongst what you yourself wrote and leave out
"They are anti-nationalists not just anti-democracy..."
Good method…
Post a Comment