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.
Seems to me he pretty much agrees with Bill Mitchell. There is no solution within the monetary union, which is not run for the people but rather the ruling elite.
"It's very hard to fire workers in Europe," [Mundell] complained. His answer: the euro.
The euro would really do its work when crises hit, Mundell explained. Removing a government's control over currency would prevent nasty little elected officials from using Keynesian monetary and fiscal juice to pull a nation out of recession.
"It puts monetary policy out of the reach of politicians," he said. "[And] without fiscal policy, the only way nations can keep jobs is by the competitive reduction of rules on business."
The monetary union operating as planned and doing what it was designed to do.
The only way out for the people is out. Otherwise, they will be under the boot of the ruling elite as long as they put up with it on their throats.
I agree with him in this respect--Greece needs to get the hell out of the monetary union. I'll bet YF would say the same thing if it's said by he to me with just trees surrounding us.
There are three possibilities. First is maintaining the present system which is leading to economic dysfunction and social revolt.
The second is to leave the euro and go back to the national currency, which has big advantages but getting there would be a huge wrench to both the country and the European economic system.
The third is to modify the system to make it workable. I think that most would like to see this option, but there are a number of ways to do it and different proposals on the table from neoliberal to socialist.
I don't see enough agreement for the third option to be viable.
The first option has shown itself to be unworkable.
That leaves the second option as the most viable as an immediate step to relieve the pressure on societies like Greece that are under the boot.
On the other hand, realization that his is the likely outcome might get more cooperation and eventual agreement on the second option of reforming the monetary union. But it seems to be that Europe is too discordant to do this.
Right now Europe is headed toward either repression or revolt. And now there is also a war going on in the Ukraine, which is shaping up into a proxy war between the US and Russia "to the last Ukrainian." Tinder box not unlike the lead up to WWI and WWII.
I'm not a Golden Dawn supporter but I don't see how their anti EU/immigration stance makes them fascist anymore than Le Pen's politics makes her fascist.
... and just for full disclosures sake I'm a nationalist first and an internationalist second. I don't think the two are mutually exclusive sentiments either.
Golden Dawn is clearly fascist, only not because they would regulate immigration or desire not to be in the EU. That was the point I was getting at initially.
The right wing "fringe" (so far) parties are nationalistic and xenophobic, which means that they want full national sovereignty, which a currency union subverts. They are generally against membership in the EU for the same reasons. They are basically reactionary and some members are fascist.
In terms of European history, of which everyone there is acutely aware, the extreme right is fascist and the extreme left is communist. This simply perpetuates period after WWI, so in this sense, both are reactionary, although fascism is generally considered reactionary and communism radical.
I wouldn't make the mistake that Yves Smith often makes in her anti rightest screeds of equating France's National Front with that of Golden Dawn either. The former is clearly not fascist while the latter largely is.
Much of the left generally only has half the world's historic enemies as a threat to mankind, with fascists as Satan incarnate (which they are). Communists, of course, get a pass--Pas d'ennemi à gauche
The meaning of a term is context-dependent. The same ordinary language term is a tool with many uses, some univocal, some equivocal, and some analogous. Descriptive terms have denotation and also connotation.
Asking what fascism is is really asking how "fascism" is used from the logical POV. There might be an operationally defined meaning in poli sci ,for example, or in a particular work, but that applies only to that context, if, indeed, it is actually used in the same sense throughout.
This is a reason that people can be using the same terminology and talking past each other.
Technical language attempts to surmount this by using formal symbolism and rules, and operationally definition to connect terms with events, for instance.
Well, in this case it is being used as a pejorative.
Dan asked what the author's preferred plan was. Here it is: https://therealmovement.wordpress.com/2015/01/24/greece-is-already-a-failed-state-syriza-must-let-it-die/
I think Ralph would have some choice words for "step 1".
He either doesn't understand currency sovereignty and the policy space it affords or doesn't want to for ideological reasons. He thinks that if the state collapses a communism will (naturally?) replace a fascism = neoliberalism. Utopian thinking. Both the extreme right and extreme left are utopian, in that they believe in a "natural state" that is a non-state in the political sense.
However, currency sovereignty is not sufficient to overcome the problems of Greece, although it is probably a necessity in that the EZ is not about to change enough to accommodate its needs. Far-reaching institutional reform needs to happen and it is not going to rise up out of the ashes in optimal form. It's going to have to be shaped.
20 comments:
Seems to me he pretty much agrees with Bill Mitchell. There is no solution within the monetary union, which is not run for the people but rather the ruling elite.
Recall Greg Palast, Robert Mundell, evil genius of the euro in the Guardian, June, 2012.
"It's very hard to fire workers in Europe," [Mundell] complained. His answer: the euro.
The euro would really do its work when crises hit, Mundell explained. Removing a government's control over currency would prevent nasty little elected officials from using Keynesian monetary and fiscal juice to pull a nation out of recession.
"It puts monetary policy out of the reach of politicians," he said. "[And] without fiscal policy, the only way nations can keep jobs is by the competitive reduction of rules on business."
The monetary union operating as planned and doing what it was designed to do.
The only way out for the people is out. Otherwise, they will be under the boot of the ruling elite as long as they put up with it on their throats.
I agree with him in this respect--Greece needs to get the hell out of the monetary union. I'll bet YF would say the same thing if it's said by he to me with just trees surrounding us.
There are three possibilities. First is maintaining the present system which is leading to economic dysfunction and social revolt.
The second is to leave the euro and go back to the national currency, which has big advantages but getting there would be a huge wrench to both the country and the European economic system.
The third is to modify the system to make it workable. I think that most would like to see this option, but there are a number of ways to do it and different proposals on the table from neoliberal to socialist.
I don't see enough agreement for the third option to be viable.
The first option has shown itself to be unworkable.
That leaves the second option as the most viable as an immediate step to relieve the pressure on societies like Greece that are under the boot.
On the other hand, realization that his is the likely outcome might get more cooperation and eventual agreement on the second option of reforming the monetary union. But it seems to be that Europe is too discordant to do this.
Right now Europe is headed toward either repression or revolt. And now there is also a war going on in the Ukraine, which is shaping up into a proxy war between the US and Russia "to the last Ukrainian." Tinder box not unlike the lead up to WWI and WWII.
I suppose "fascist fantasy" refers to Golden Dawn, who want an exit from the EU and a return to the drachma (by necessity).
I'm not sure I get how wanting to leave the EU makes one a fascist or a radical of any stripe.?
Golden Dawn is described as fascist, for their anti-immigration stance and for the tendency of their supporters to beat up people.
I'm not a Golden Dawn supporter but I don't see how their anti EU/immigration stance makes them fascist anymore than Le Pen's politics makes her fascist.
... and just for full disclosures sake I'm a nationalist first and an internationalist second. I don't think the two are mutually exclusive sentiments either.
I'm guessing the author views Golden Dawn as fascist. I'd have to read more to figure out why he has a bee in his bonnet.
Golden Dawn is clearly fascist, only not because they would regulate immigration or desire not to be in the EU. That was the point I was getting at initially.
The right wing "fringe" (so far) parties are nationalistic and xenophobic, which means that they want full national sovereignty, which a currency union subverts. They are generally against membership in the EU for the same reasons. They are basically reactionary and some members are fascist.
In terms of European history, of which everyone there is acutely aware, the extreme right is fascist and the extreme left is communist. This simply perpetuates period after WWI, so in this sense, both are reactionary, although fascism is generally considered reactionary and communism radical.
Does fascist mean they are anti-democratic?
The author of this blog is using anti-statist rhetoric, typically employed by anarchists of all stripes.
I wouldn't make the mistake that Yves Smith often makes in her anti rightest screeds of equating France's National Front with that of Golden Dawn either. The former is clearly not fascist while the latter largely is.
Fascism is sort of like figuring out what is pornography. To those versed in its rhetoric it's repugnant enough that you'll know it when you see it.
Beating up and killing people isn't an activity exclusive to fascists... but it does make for bad press.
Much of the left generally only has half the world's historic enemies as a threat to mankind, with fascists as Satan incarnate (which they are). Communists, of course, get a pass--Pas d'ennemi à gauche
The meaning of a term is context-dependent. The same ordinary language term is a tool with many uses, some univocal, some equivocal, and some analogous. Descriptive terms have denotation and also connotation.
Asking what fascism is is really asking how "fascism" is used from the logical POV. There might be an operationally defined meaning in poli sci ,for example, or in a particular work, but that applies only to that context, if, indeed, it is actually used in the same sense throughout.
This is a reason that people can be using the same terminology and talking past each other.
Technical language attempts to surmount this by using formal symbolism and rules, and operationally definition to connect terms with events, for instance.
Well, in this case it is being used as a pejorative.
Dan asked what the author's preferred plan was. Here it is:
https://therealmovement.wordpress.com/2015/01/24/greece-is-already-a-failed-state-syriza-must-let-it-die/
I think Ralph would have some choice words for "step 1".
He either doesn't understand currency sovereignty and the policy space it affords or doesn't want to for ideological reasons. He thinks that if the state collapses a communism will (naturally?) replace a fascism = neoliberalism. Utopian thinking. Both the extreme right and extreme left are utopian, in that they believe in a "natural state" that is a non-state in the political sense.
However, currency sovereignty is not sufficient to overcome the problems of Greece, although it is probably a necessity in that the EZ is not about to change enough to accommodate its needs. Far-reaching institutional reform needs to happen and it is not going to rise up out of the ashes in optimal form. It's going to have to be shaped.
Post a Comment