Governments Are Key Players in Globalization

Labour unions, and not states, are the real victims of globalization. States play a key role in making globalization happen. Social democratic and labour parties are increasingly trying to adapt to the process of globalization.York's Knowledge Mobilization Unit provides services and funding for faculty, graduate students, and community organizations seeking to maximize the impact of academic research and expertise on public policy, social programming, and professional practice. It is supported by SSHRC and CIHR grants, and by the Office of the Vice-President Research & Innovation. [email protected] www.researchimpact.c

Building on William Morris' News from Nowhere

to be adde

American Empire, Capitalist Crisis and the Global South

American Empire, Capitalist Crisis and the Global Sout

Global finance in crisis

This essay examines the questions raised by the present financial crisis through an enquiry into the institutional foundations of American finance. We view with some skepticism strong claims concerning the disastrous outcome for the structural dynamism of the global financial system and America's position in it. Many critical political economists tend to take the system of global financial markets as their point of departure and then locate the US in this system. Such approaches, however, generally fail to do justice to the decades-long build up of US financial power and do not capture many of the organic institutional linkages through which the American state is connected to the world of global finance and which are responsible for its imperial sprawl. In many ways, financial globalization is not best understood as the re-emergence of international finance but rather as a process through which the expansionary dynamics of American finance took on global dimensions. Because the present system of global finance has been shaped so profoundly by specifically American institutions and practices, it will not do to evaluate the changes and transformations of this system on the basis of either an abstract, generic model of capitalism or mere extrapolations from conjunctural crises. Crisis and instability are part and parcel of the dynamics of imperial finance and so are the managerial capacities developed by the US state. The most important questions that should occupy critical political economists therefore have to do not with what appear to be external challenges to US financial power (or the putative opportunities for progressive change opened up by them), but rather relate to the ways in which the imperial network of intricate, complex and often opaque institutional linkages between the US state and global finance is managed and reproduced.This essay examines the questions raised by the present financial crisis through an enquiry into the institutional foundations of American finance. We view with some skepticism strong claims concerning the disastrous outcome for the structural dynamism of the global financial system and America's position in it. Many critical political economists tend to take the system of global financial markets as their point of departure and then locate the US in this system. Such approaches, however, generally fail to do justice to the decades-long build up of US financial power and do not capture many of the organic institutional linkages through which the American state is connected to the world of global finance and which are responsible for its imperial sprawl. In many ways, financial globalization is not best understood as the re-emergence of international finance but rather as a process through which the expansionary dynamics of American finance took on global dimensions. Because the present system of global finance has been shaped so profoundly by specifically American institutions and practices, it will not do to evaluate the changes and transformations of this system on the basis of either an abstract, generic model of capitalism or mere extrapolations from conjunctural crises. Crisis and instability are part and parcel of the dynamics of imperial finance and so are the managerial capacities developed by the US state. The most important questions that should occupy critical political economists therefore have to do not with what appear to be external challenges to US financial power (or the putative opportunities for progressive change opened up by them), but rather relate to the ways in which the imperial network of intricate, complex and often opaque institutional linkages between the US state and global finance is managed and reproduced

Repensando o Marxismo e o Imperialismo para o século XXI

The American Empire, responsible for the reproduction of capitalism on a world scale, with the strong support of foreign ruling classes had their imperialist responsibilities extended with the integration of States in the global south into the capitalist system. It is in this context that exports and capital flows from China must be understood, not read off as real challenges to American hegemony. As the 2007-8 crisis shows, the salient conflicts at present are, above all, within States including the U.S., rather than conflicts between them.O império americano, responsável pela reprodução do capitalismo em escala mundial, com forte apoio das classes dominantes estrangeiras, teve seus encargos imperialistas ampliados com a integração de Estados do hemisfério Sul ao sistema capitalista. É nesse contexto que exportações e fluxos de capital vindos da China devem ser compreendidos, não significando reais desafios à hegemonia estadunidense. Como a crise de 2007-8 mostra, os conflitos relevantes na atualidade são, sobretudo, intraestatais, até mesmo nos EUA, ao invés de conflitos interestatais

American empire and the relative autonomy of European capitalism

Abstract This article examines the relationship between European states and the informal American empire following the Second World War. Building on neo-Marxist theory, it argues that any attempt to understand the political response to the ongoing euro crisis has to consider the deeper determinations of the trajectories of the states of North America and Western Europe through the course of the making of global capitalism since 1945. This involves, in particular, taking seriously the leading responsibility that the American state has had, and still has, for securing the conditions for capital accumulation internationally, even while other capitalist states retain their 'relative autonomy' within the informal American empire

In the dedicated pursuit of dedicated capital: restoring an indigenous investment ethic to British capitalism

Tony Blair’s landslide electoral victory on May 1 (New Labour Day?) presents the party in power with a rare, perhaps even unprecedented, opportunity to revitalise and modernise Britain’s ailing and antiquated manufacturing economy.* If it is to do so, it must remain true to its long-standing (indeed, historic) commitment to restore an indigenous investment ethic to British capitalism. In this paper we argue that this in turn requires that the party reject the very neo-liberal orthodoxies which it offered to the electorate as evidence of its competence, moderation and ‘modernisation’, which is has internalised, and which it apparently now views as circumscribing the parameters of the politically and economically possible