Читать книгу Capitalism’s Crises - Alfredo Saad-Filho - Страница 10

Part 1 of this volume focuses on contemporary understandings of capitalism’s crises.

In Chapter 1, Vishwas Satgar confronts the limitations of classical Marxist theory for understanding the contemporary capitalist crisis. He offers a reading of Marx to understand how Marx thought about the crisis tendencies of capitalism and examines the different conceptions of crisis present in Marx’s work. In some of his work before Capital, Marx tended to exaggerate the prospects for breakdown or collapse. However, Satgar argues that Marx did not have a single or even a systematic theory of crisis, even at the level of abstract and pure capitalism.

The chapter sets out the limits of Marx’s understanding of the tendencies for capitalist crisis. The aim is not to reject Marx, but to find new openings and ways forward for thinking about contemporary capitalist crises. Although Marx abstracted his categories about the workings of the capitalist mode of production, he was grappling with the historical dynamics of a competitive mid-Victorian industrial capitalism, which is different from contemporary transnationalising techno-financial accumulation. Moreover, given that we are dealing with crises in the plural, at a systemic level and on a world scale, which capitalist historical form is in crisis? This poses a challenge for how we think about periodising historical capitalism. This chapter argues for the periodisation of ‘capitalist civilisation’ not only as the basis to understand its main characteristics, but also to understand the scale at which the systemic crises of capitalism are manifest.

The chapter also looks at how capitalism’s tendencies for systemic crisis are rooted structurally, institutionally and ideologically in US imperial power and transnational class-based practices. The chapter concludes with the challenges confronting left agency today by responding to the question: catastrophism or transformative moment? In answering this question, there is an attempt to identify challenges and requirements for a new type of transformative left agency to sustain life.

In Chapter 2, William K Carroll investigates activist understandings of the crises of capitalism through neo-Gramscian political economy. He asks the following questions: how do movement intellectuals and activist researchers associated with the production and mobilisation of counter-hegemonic knowledge view the crisis? And what can we learn from their reflections? This chapter addresses these questions on the basis of interviews with 91 activist intellectuals in 16 transnational alternative policy groups.

Carroll unpacks Gramsci’s notion of organic crisis in his engagements with movement intellectuals. Many of the reflections shared by them add substance to a dialectical conception of crisis as objective and subjective, as disintegration and re-formation, as passive revolution and anti-passive revolution. There is a translation of Gramsci at work that recognises that contemporary structural contradictions are ‘incurable’, thus shifting relations of force away from neoliberal hegemony towards a new conjuncture while rendering the course of history open. Many movement intellectuals show an acute awareness of radical contingency, of various aspects of organic crisis, and of the fierce challenges they face in building a counter-hegemonic bloc in a non-vanguardist manner. This also means organising in ways that reach beyond problematic currents in contemporary activism.

Part 2 of the volume focuses on capitalist crises in the global North and the Left’s responses to them.

Three years into the crisis that began in 2008, the world’s imagination was suddenly captured by the emergence of Occupy Wall Street (OWS) and the slogan ‘99 per cent versus 1 per cent’. This represented a rupturing in the neoliberal domination of public discourse and asserted the rage of good common sense. In Chapter 3, Leah Hunt-Hendrix and Isham Christie examine the Left’s response to the financial crisis of 2008 in the US, focusing in particular on the emergence of Occupy Wall Street. As participants in the movement, the authors relate their angle on the context and the constraints that shaped the mobilisation. Although not representative of the Left as a whole, Occupy offers insight into some of the dynamics that characterise the Left in the US today, including its antagonism towards the history of dogmatic Marxism, the weakness of current models of organising, and widespread scepticism of the state. By embracing participatory democracy and anti-organisational suspicion, Occupy represents a point in a dialectical movement of left ideology – an orientation that created its own set of conflicts and limitations. In this chapter the authors critically analyse the experience that they were part of, and propose a set of lessons for the Left in the US and more broadly.

Europe is currently haunted by widespread austerity and restructuring. These have been justified in academic and public debates with discussions of ‘peripheral’ European states having not adequately adjusted to the institutional requirements of the Eurozone’s single currency, thereby creating an unsustainable growth of debt and deficits. Chapter 4, by Andreas Bieler and Jamie Jordan, goes beyond the accounts of neo-institutionalism, specifically the Varieties of Capitalism approach, which has various deficiencies, including a reliance on methodological nationalism. Instead, this chapter seeks to explain the onset of the Eurozone debt crisis by analysing the underlying dynamics of uneven and combined capitalist accumulation. Focusing on how the development of production structures and trade and investment patterns created particular political economic hierarchies, the authors provide a more adequate explanation of why a division between core and peripheral European states developed, thereby creating asymmetrical capabilities to deal with the onset of the debt crisis. This also explains the direction Europe is taking in terms of renewing processes of neoliberal restructuring, supported by austerity across public sectors.

In the final section, the chapter looks at the role of labour in the build-up and response to the crisis. The authors reveal that it is not simply Europe’s ‘peripheral’ workers who are under pressure to support particular accumulation strategies, but also those in Europe’s ‘core’. The chapter focuses on the relationship between capital and labour to better explain developments across Europe’s political economy.

Chapter 5, by Hilary Wainwright, explores the question of left agency, in particular the political form, in the context of crisis-ridden Europe. Wainwright argues that the rise of a new Left in the 1960s and 1970s in Europe engendered a transformative approach to power – in other words, a transformative capacity to enable and constitute alternatives from below. This trend has resurfaced with the exhaustion of social-democratic and communist parties in Western Europe, both of which embodied a politics of power as domination, which required state power to assert power over society and citizens. While not rejecting power as domination, Wainwright attempts to find an articulation between both these modes of power and political forms in Western Europe in a way that power as domination is driven by power as transformative capacity.

Wainwright traces moments of experimentation with transformative politics and government in Western Europe. In the context of the current crisis, she highlights the emergence of Syriza in Greece and Podemos in Spain as continuing an experiment with political forms that embraces both logics of power. By reflecting on these experiences, Wainwright poses crucial questions for how a non-formulaic approach to the political instrument can be elaborated by the Left on the terrain of a capitalist crisis. It might just be that transformative politics requires a new way of thinking about the political form, based on political tasks and a political division of labour that is not reducible to a single political instrument or party, but rather a movement or network of organisational forms. At the same time, the author seeks to situate the place of populism in left politics today. She engages critically with a form of left populism that strengthens mass transformative capacities from below to deepen democracy.

Part 3 of the volume looks at manifestations of the crisis in the global South and the Left’s responses to it, particularly in Brazil, India and South Africa.

Chapter 6, by Alfredo Saad-Filho, examines the context and implications of two shifts in Brazil: the political transition from a military regime (1964–1985) to democracy (1985 to the present), and the economic transition from import substitution industrialisation (1930–1980) to neoliberalism (1990 to the present). These transitions have shaped the contemporary Brazilian political economy and the policy choices available to recent federal administrations. The chapter also reviews how neoliberal economic policies were implemented under various democratic administrations. Saad-Filho looks at the role and implications of the ‘neoliberal policy tripod’, namely inflation targeting, large fiscal surpluses and the managed fluctuations of Brazil’s currency, the real. At the same time, important policy shifts were introduced during the second Lula administration through heterodox reforms expressing a neo-developmentalism and inaugurating what became known as the ‘Lula moment’. However, despite positive distributional effects, the ‘Lula moment’ has proven to be an inadequate response to a globalised Brazilian economy caught in the tides of the global crisis. Saad-Filho examines the economic and social policies underpinning the ‘Lula moment’, and the limitations of such policies in the context of the 2008 crisis, the mass street mobilisations in 2013 and the social polarisation exhibited in the 2014 elections. He concludes with a reflection on the challenges facing the Left in Brazil.

In Chapter 7, Sumangala Damodaran debunks the idea of India’s resilience since the onset of the 2008 crisis. She critically engages the ‘decoupling’ hypothesis, which suggests that India’s high growth rates, like China’s, had an economic capacity to withstand the global turbulence or even provide immunity to it. Moreover, it was generally argued that India and China are likely to be the engine rooms to pull the global economy out of the crisis. Situating her analysis in the historical specificity of this crisis, she shows that the immunity argument fails to appreciate the extent to which India’s neoliberal structural reforms since the early 1990s engendered a set of structural features that were implicated in the deceleration of the Indian economy long before the 2008 crisis. At the same time, the impacts of the crisis did not shift the neoliberal consensus but, instead, dominant class and social forces have maintained India’s externalised and financialised trajectory even under the right-wing Hindu fundamentalist government. Damodaran concludes with a reflection on alternatives for genuine decoupling of growth from the international economy both at the macro-level and through participatory and decentralised fiscal planning, as is the case in Kerala, India.

In Chapter 8, Niall Reddy foregrounds the crisis of labour in the context of a crisis-ridden neoliberalised South African economy. The position of workers in post-apartheid South Africa remains hotly contested. Powerful, militant unions and strict regulation are said to buttress a ‘labour aristocracy’, which is blamed for trapping large parts of the population in unemployment and underemployment by driving the price of labour above levels that its productivity justifies. This narrative makes the labour rebellion, which began after the Marikana massacre in 2012, stretching from the peripheries to the heartlands of the economy, very difficult to explain.

Reddy questions the narrative about high wages and the ‘labour aristocracy’ by tackling its core assumptions. He examines decomposed wage data from a cross-section of South Africa’s Labour Force Surveys. The structural roots of the low-wage system in South Africa, grounded in the minerals–energy-complex economy, suggest that a broad political struggle is needed by the working class, in addition to new and more militant forms of shop-floor organisation. Reddy highlights the strategic political defeat of labour, including increasing precariousness in the labour market, as necessary conditions for such a struggle. Realignments among workers in the mining industry, as well as the unravelling of the Tripartite Alliance (led by the African National Congress – ANC) as a result of the metalworkers’ union breakaway from the trade-union federation, Cosatu, seem to portend the direction things are likely to take for the working class.

Finally, in Chapter 9, Mark Heywood provides a reading of the South African constitution that challenges simplistic caricatures of the constitution as an obstacle to struggles for social justice. Premised on a recognition that social crises are deepening in South Africa, including through wanton state violence, Heywood places the constitution centre stage in how we should think about unifying struggles for social justice. With experience in the Treatment Action Campaign, both as an activist and leader, Heywood demonstrates how combining mass mobilisation with human-rights advocacy has been able to secure social justice. He challenges overlapping visions for social change prevalent among various social forces, such as the Economic Freedom Fighters and the newly formed social-movement-driven United Front of the National Union of Metalworkers of South Africa (Numsa). He also highlights four significant constitutional-based strategies that can strengthen democracy and advance transformative politics from below. He emphasises the applicability of the constitution in terms of challenging private power, the importance of socio-economic rights for social justice, the role of South Africa’s Chapter 9 constitutional institutions in empowering citizenship, and the constitutional injunctions that commit the state to be responsive and practise ‘good governance’. In his argument, he clarifies the real meaning of the property clause in the constitution to help put an end to any confusion arising from the clause and the dogmatic railing against it.