Alternative remedies to the Eurozone s crisis: A Gramscian based political economic perspective of its character.

Transcription

1 1 SPERI Conference Nikolaos Markoulakis Alternative remedies to the Eurozone s crisis: A Gramscian based political economic perspective of its character. Introduction The story of the Global Economic Crisis beginnings in , which resulted into the 2008 s global recession and the European sovereign debt crisis, it is a familiarity for a great number of European citizens, their government officials and the European intellectuals and scholarship. It would have been a superfluous attempt to present this story one more time in this paper, which has been presented and analysed with the outmost detail and gravitas. The intellectual response can be seen in the cultural intellectual creation (such as films and literature). A further greater response towards the Crisis can be recorded in scientific intellectualism. It spans from the statistical and theoretical economic evaluation of the European Crisis (see Hodson and Quaglia, 2009; von Hagen, Pisani-Ferry, Gianviti, and Krueger, 2009; Arezki, Candelon, and Sy 2011; Lane, 2012; Caldentey, and Vernengo, 2012; von Hagen, Schuknecht, and Wolswijk, 2011), the social and political dimensions, either as a pan-european perspective, which includes studies on social exclusion, political instability and civil crisis, its international political economic implications (see Hayward, (ed.) 2012; Delanty, 2008; Haine, 2009; Bieling, 2012; Nousios, Overbeek, and Tsolakis, (eds.) 2012; studies within a Greek case specific approach see Hadjimichalis, 2011 and Quadrio Curzio, 2010) as well as its legal perspectives (see Choi, Gulati, and Posner, 2011; Tsoukala, 2013). It includes from approaches that deliver a regional integration analysis that emphases the intergovernmental driving forces of politico-economic consent or the methods of integration and implementation of the European legal framework at the level of states actors and institutions. Adding theoretical labelling, we include approaches, such as, the transnational liberalism, interdependence theory and public choice theory as described by Gill (1991: 20-28; and Gill and Law 1988). Globalization theoretical approaches, i.e. Ricardo Sraffa trade theory with their analytical perspective towards ideas such as outsourcing and fragmentation (Antras and Helpman, 2004) and imperfect competition (Helpman, 1987) focused on the development and impact of the world trade, global financial markets and the transnationalisation of production. Additionally, Critical Political Economy approach addresses the EU-based actors and institutions in the implementation of the governing systems or practices as the main reason of the Crisis (Nousios et. al. 2012: ix). It would have been valid to address all these approaches, which constitute the contemporary scholarship s analysis of the Crisis, analytically and evaluate them dialectically. Unfortunately, though, this endeavour for this paper would have required an almost infinite use of time. Instead, I prefer to offer a concise presentation of several terminological notions, which, in my opinion, are essential for the understanding of a Gramscian theoretical perspective of the currently occurring Crisis. The argumentation is intended as a Gramscian critic towards the neo-liberal capitalist system and the intellectual response of this crisis. At this point, I would like to make the first terminological clarification concerning the term new-liberal: the use of this term throughout this paper differs from the prevailing understanding as political liberalism, commonly regarded as Social Democracy and accordingly addresses the case of the regulatory role of the state towards the

2 2 financial markets for the sole purpose to safeguard social welfare. The term neo-liberal in this paper refers to free market conservatism which opposes most of the state intervention in the economy (Gill and Law 1988: 41). This paper is a contemplation on the current solutions to the Crisis and its affects as is currently depicted in the Greek and European subaltern realities not as a statistical reality but as a variable of humanity. It focuses on a dialectical materialistic examination of these alternative proposals, which belong intellectually to all the economic and politico-economic schools. The paper is addressing the intellectual product of the European political economy as a unified scholarly discipline within the cultural apparatus, which as a utopian and ideological product, is strictly political. Dialectical Concepts: What lies beneath? The most efficient approach towards the dialectical materialistic understanding of the Crisis and the response of intellectuals, in my opinion, is to read the work by Antonio Gramsci ( ). With an extensive and continues growth of Gramscian literature that does not only include Marxist intellectuals (see Althusser, 2005; Poulantzas, 1973; Miliband 1969; Laclau and Mouffe, 1985) but also proponents of Critical Theory (such as Cox, 1983; Gill, 1993; and Femia, 1981 amongst others). Gramsci, therefore, could be considered as one of the most influential Marxist of historical materialism / philosophy of praxis (Nemeth, 1980; Mouffe, 1979). The innumerable use of Gramsci s notes and political writing within diverse theoretical approaches is a result of his writings, which their main body have been composed in the form of notebooks notes of thoughts. Gramsci s ideas would be, as a result, an inspiration for his contemporaries, and it has been used, consequently, within a diversified intellectual manner (see Santucci 2010: ). It is almost analogous with the intellectual use of Socrates ideas by his contemporaries; namely Plato, Aristotle and Xenophon. It would be valid to suggest that Gramsci s thought will endure as an alternative to anti-intellectualism and intellectual transcendentalism. Gramsci s essential concept of civil society resurfaced in 1968 by Norberto Bobbio in his lecture entitled Gramsci and the conception of civil society (in Mouffe (ed.), 1979: 21-47), which with the concept of hegemony addressed important moments in the theory of superstructure (Textier, 1979: 49). The importance of Bobbio s re-examination of Gramsci s intellectualism (in its philosophical sense) is the underline of the significance of the idea of civil society, which shared an equal meaning for Hegel and Marx, as well as of the difference of the concept of hegemony as perceived by Lenin and Gramsci. Bobbio underlined that in Gramsci there are two antitheses in relation to that of the traditional Marxist orthodoxy. The first is the dominion of the ideological superstructure (civil society) over the economic structure (Bobbio, 1979: 33). The second relates to the pre-eminence of the civil society as consensus over the political society as coercion (Bobbio, 1979: 44). What this entitles is the following: that [b]etween the premise (economic structure) and the consequence (political constitution) the relations are anything but simple and direct; and the history of the people is not documented by economic facts alone (SPW-1: 48). Gramsci contemplated Marx without economic determinism and Lenin without authoritarianism. It would be reasonable to say that Gramsci s Marxist philosophy addressed the importance of the variable human and to knowing thyself as a product of the historical process to date which has deposited in you an infinity of traces (SPN: 324). The study, thus, of any political, economic and social crisis requires the application of absolute historicism (see Thomas, 2007: 249), which possibly unveils the reciprocal relation in-between superstructures. Accordingly the relationship of the superstructure

3 3 and the structure is reciprocal, [q]uantity (economic structure) turns into quality [superstructures] because it becomes an instrument for action in men s hands (SPW-1: 48). It is within this relationship that civil society as a primary superstructure, which is equal with the hegemonic apparatus of the ruling class, (see Textier 1979) has a conciliatory role. The connecting force of this relationship of apparatuses requires negotiation (equilibrium) in-between all the spheres of societal, political and cultural strata. Equilibrium is an agonizing undertaking mainly because all civil policies are embedded within the national-popular that necessitates full subordination (SPN: 421). It is, thus, in this negotiation of social class unification (historic bloc) as required by the national-popular in which the intellectuals play a mediate role (SPN: 204-5). Gramsci places the role of the intellectuals as part of the historic bloc s creation. He recognized two distinct forms of intellectuals: the traditional and the organic intellectuals (SPN: 9). These forms provide the availability of multiple approaches to evaluate the connecting links between intellectual creation (cultural and scientific) and social negotiation. Additionally, these notions assisted Gramsci to further analyse the concept of production of knowledge within its historical framework and how it is capable to flexibly provide a base of negotiation for the civil society and the state. Gramsci further suggested that the hegemonic apparatus of the ruling class requires a given scholarly response, which it is the negotiation of civil values (equilibrium), that in times of organic crisis establishes a flexible response and emulates differences between social and political groups (SPN: 216). As a result he formed the notion of cultural hegemony (SPN: 7 8) as a mean of alienation of the proletariat and the safeguard of neo-capitalism as an ideological state apparatus. This follows into a straightforward conclusion which has been stated by the author Lindita Arapi; that [i]ntellectuals always seek to be close to political power. But they don't want to admit that they become servants to those in power (in Bowen, 2012). Henceforth, the question arises, if the established historic bloc, the dominance of the hegemonic apparatus of the ruling class over government apparatus (State) was established; how a crisis can occur? The crisis manifests when the equilibrium, which balances the elements of the historic bloc fails to resolve the intensified requests by all its elements: in reality crisis corresponds to the restriction of critical consciousness [ ] to a small circle, a hegemonic circle, [ ] but a restricted one (PN I: 181). This crisis is not a financial crisis. It can only be described as organic crisis, which it may lead to a crisis of state s authority namely the crisis of hegemony (SPN: 210). This crisis could be translated as a crisis of political legitimacy for the government as well as a crisis of confidence towards the political, civil and legal systems. This crisis could resolve into an economic and financial crisis, however, for Gramsci such crisis of an economic system such as the neo-capitalist is not a crisis which corresponds to either the organic or hegemonic crises. Gramsci notes that an economic crisis based on the new-capitalist system is [ ] is nothing other than the quantitative intensification of certain elements, neither new nor original, but especially the intensification of certain phenomena, while others have been inoperative or have altogether disappeared. In sum, the development of capitalism has been a continues crisis [ ] a very rapid movement of elements which balance and check each other out (FS: 220). Thus, we may translate this statement to include the European Crisis. Accordingly, the economic, financial and debt global crisis, started in 2007 is effectively a systemic function, a condition of growth, a transformational process rather than an externality and or a malfunction of an element and / or elements of the system or an alien cause of disruption.

4 4 The Crisis: What it means? I would like at this point to intentionally mistranslate Gramsci; my purpose is to present the Greek Crisis in his terms. Greece (particular) in fact could have been considered as a case-study for Gramsci dialectical study for the new-capitalism system (universal). Greece has been established via conflict (the War of Independence (1821), the civil wars in and ) and finally unified (a period that spans from ). Greece in these terms has no differentiation from the Gramsci s case study of Italy s Risorgimento, with the exception that the Greek case took longer to be completed. As the establishment of the hegemonic apparatus is confirmed via a historical process of consent and domination of the elite class, the concepts of organic crisis and crisis of hegemony could be visible throughout this historical process as moments of transformation. One of these moments is the current Greek Crisis. The problematic in the current conception, scholarly critique and proposed remedies of the Greek Crisis not as a uniquely Greek but as a European Crisis is connected with the organic intellectual that tends to negotiate the elements of the crisis in economic terms and not as political-ideological. Scholarship and its propositions of resolving the Crisis are deterministic; it avoids looking at the human cost. It also dismisses the subjective use of theoretical approaches and as a result it focuses into a metaphysical and utopian understanding of the new-capitalist system. The economic system is been considered as a self-automated and manifested phenomenon, as an objective natural phenomenon; hence the Crisis should be a metaphysical event, which is alien to this systemic organism. Accordingly, the cause of the Crisis is the other organism which is incompatible with the new-capitalist system. At this point there is a fundamental problem: Economic science corresponds into the conceptual and factual phenomena of the determined market that is the discovery that specific forces have risen historically and their operation manifests itself with a certain automatism that gives individual initiatives a certain degree of predictability and certainty, [thus, it is] determined relation of social forces in a determined structure of the productive apparatus that is guaranteed by a determined juridical superstructure (Q.8 128; PN-III: 308). Correspondently, economic science requires to determine a new type of market with its own automatism and phenomena that manifests itself as something objective comparable of the automatism of the laws of nature (PN III: ). We could only avoid such an invalid perception of the market by addressing the variable of humanity. The reaction by the economic science is to address the human variable as the alien, the other, non-compatible element of new-capitalist system. The state apparatus, which naturally opposes the hegemonic apparatus of the ruling elite is been viewed as the other : Lane (2012), for example, suggest that the initial institutional design of the euro plausibly increased fiscal risks during the precrisis period and once the crisis occurred, these design flaws amplified the fiscal impact of the crisis dynamics as well as the restrictions imposed by monetary union also shape the duration and tempo of the anticipated post-crisis recovery period, along with Europe s chaotic political response and failure to have institutions in place for crisis (Lane 2012: 50; an equally argumentation also by Flassbeck, and Lapavitsas, 2013). Further, Charness et. al. (2012) presents the question [w]hy might groups behave in a more rational manner than individuals? representing the other as the human nature in-itself, hence, the only solution is to predetermine the human natural behaviour so to correspond correctly to the new-capitalist system: we explore three possible reasons: 1) multiple brains are better at seeking answers; 2) multiple brains are better at anticipating the actions of other parties and thus better at coordinating behavior with what other parties are likely to do; and 3) groups may be more likely than individuals to emphasize monetary payoffs over alternative

5 5 concerns, such as fairness or reciprocity towards another player (Charness, and Sutter, 2012: 171). The answer is simply negative: there is no an original institutional flaw of the euro, as itself is a deterministic element of the economic structure. It is no any fiscal or monetary restrictions imposed that the new-capitalist system would have not required for its growth and transformation. There is no a chaotic political response, as it would constitute into a chaotic new-capital system, thus the premise that this system is predictable, automated and objective, thus scientific, would have been invalid. A group of brains would not work more rational than one individual brain: humans are not predetermined to function more or less rationally, because they have no social goal other than the preservation of their own physiological and moral well-being" (SPW I: 49). The Greek Crisis and the European Crisis are mainly an ideological crisis, a crisis of the mystical, nonquantitative, variable of humanity. We could grasp the essence of this crisis via the reaction of the elect intellectual work; films and literature. For example, the film Ayer No Termina Nunca (Yesterday Never Ends), 63rd Berlin film festival (February 2013), by Isabel Coixet, which depicts a futuristic Spain set in 2017 s post-apocalyptic Europe a politico-economic apocalypse, after the Crisis (the Armageddon) where the survival is been presented as self-emancipatory via the realisation of the lost reality which the main characters knew before the apocalyptic event, namely the country that I knew and the the family that I had. Christina Koutsospyrou and Aran Hughes in Στο Λύκο (To The Wolf) approach the subject within an equal dimension. In both films the fundamental question to which the characters require to answer is: how we move forward? The answer is a dialectical emancipatory process, of re-establishing their re-set particularity within a reuniversalised European and national-specific reality: who am I now? It is the essential question that derives through the confusion and insecurity (Q.6 90; PN: 78). As the crisis of the particular settles time is irrelevant, thus the future coexists with the present: the tomorrow will not be any different, as a result the post-apocalyptic utopia is been established. The emotional human reaction of the realisation of this new apocalyptic reality coexists with remorse and blamelessness for the lost past: am I do blame, if not, who s to blame? Η Κόρη (The Daughter) a film by Thanos Anastopoulos and the bestselling novel Η Παιραίοση (The Settlement) by Petros Markaris address the ego defense mechanisms of distress of the individual that is seeking to avoid anxieties within the new reality of the Crisis. To blame the other, as a result, it is the only possible mean of keeping intact the selfschema of a past subjectivised reality. The psychological pressure of the individual does not present itself within the financial difficulties, resulted by the Crisis, but, under the resulted measures to amend the negative effects of the Crisis; namely the austerity measures, which, accordingly, they are viewed as a pressure mechanism from Europe to alter identities (the particular). As a result, for Thanos Anastopoulos and Petros Markaris present this defense mechanism as the blameless-self as the victim of the blamed-other. Finally, Pachnis, a character that depicts a peasant in the isolated impoverished village in the film entitled The Wolf, states in the few first minutes of the movie: Η Ελλάδα πέθανε! Είναι νεκρή!. Pachnis is the villager who prophesied the crisis. The question that needs to be answered is what was there before the crisis that for men like Pachnis the crisis was an expected event? Conclusion: The intellectual response as utopianism How the crisis was an expected event? The Crisis should have been expected. One of the systemic functions of the new-capitalist system is economic crisis. It is then plausible to accept the argument that in a historic bloc which the economic structure ideologically corresponds to the new-liberal

6 6 capitalist system a crisis is always eminent: it will always arrive. However, as it happens with the current Crisis, it arrives mostly unpredictably (Caballero, 2010). This also re-defines the science in economics and effectively the markets are not pre-deterministic, but as any human ideological universality, a utopianism. Utopianism consists [ ] in not being able to conceive of history as a free development, in seeing the future as a pre-fashioned commodity, in believing in pre-established plans (SPW I: 52), meaning that the new-capitalist, new-liberal markets are utopias (utopian in its notion) not because they depict an impossible Ideal, a dream not for this world, but because they misrecognize the way their ideal state is already realized in its basic content (Žižek, 2008 :184). Utopia is the unchallenged reality, which continues indefinitely. Thus, the reactions towards this systemic functionality of the markets and the new-liberal capitalist system are not a re-direction to an alternative reality, but, on the contrary, a mythology which reassures it. If a pure intellectual reaction is possible, the new requires to disaffiliated from the utopian approach this new mode of intellectual praxis will create the new intellectual who [ ] can no longer consist in eloquence, exterior and momentary mover of affections and passions, but in joining actively in practical life, as constructor, organiser, permanently active persuader and not just as a simple orator (but superior to the abstract mathematical spirit); from technique-as-labour one attains to technique-as-science and to the humanistic conception of history, without which one remains specialist and does not become dirigente (specialist and political leader) (Q 12, 3; SPN: 10). Accordingly, the possible alternative is an authentic intellectual form for re-definition of the needs and requirements of the current European, including the Greek, social realities, which it would avoid mythologies, determinisms and ancient paradigms. Bibliography Althusser, L. (2005). For Marx. Verso. Antras, P., and Helpman, E. (2004). Global Sourcing. Journal of Political Economy, 112(3): Arezki, R., Candelon, B., and Sy, A. (2011). Sovereign rating news and financial markets spillovers: Evidence from the European debt crisis. IMF worki ng papers, Bieling, H. J. (2012). EU facing the crisis: social and employment policies in times of tight budgets. Transfer: European Review of Labour and Research, 18(3): Bobbio, N. (1979). Gramsci and the conception of Civil Society. In Mouffe, C. (ed.). Gramsci and Marxist theory. Routledge: Bowen, K. (2012) Literature in times of crisis. DW. Available online at Caballero, R. J. (2010). Macroeconomics after the crisis: Time to deal with the pretense-of-knowledge syndrome (No. w16429). National Bureau of Economic Research. Caldentey, E. P., and Vernengo, M. (2012). The euro imbalances and financial deregulation: a Post- Keynesian interpretation of the European debt crisis. Levy Economics Institute of Bard College Working Paper, (702). Charness, G., and Sutter, M. (2012). Groups make better self-interested decisions. The Journal of Economic Perspectives, 26(3),

7 7 Choi, S. J., Gulati, M., and Posner, E. A. (2011). Pricing terms in sovereign debt contracts: a Greek case study with implications for the European crisis resolution mechanism. Capital Markets Law Journal, 6(2): Cox, R. (1983). Gramsci, Hegemony and International Relations: An Essay in Method, Millennium, Journal of International Studies, 12(2): Delanty, G. (2008). Fear of others: social exclusion and the European crisis of solidarity. Social policy & administration, 42(6): Femia, J.V. (1981). Gramsci s ~Political Thought: Hegemony, Consciousness and Revolutionary Process. Clarendon. Flassbeck, H., & Lapavitsas, C. (2013). The systemic crisis of the euro true causes and effective therapies. STUDIEN. Available online at: Gill, S., and Law, D. (1988). The global political economy: perspectives, problems, and policies. Harvester. Gill. S. (ed.) (1993). Gramsci, Historical Materialism and International Relations. Cambridge University Press. Gramsci, A. (1971). Selection from the Prison Notebooks. (SPN). Trans. and ed. Hoare, Q. and Nowell-Smith, G. New York: International Publishers. Gramsci, A. (1977). Selections from Political Writings, (SPW-I). Hoare, Q. (ed.) and Mathews, J. (trans.). University of Minnesota Press. Gramsci, A. (1978). Selections from Political Writings, (SPW-II). Hoare, Q. (ed.) and (trans.). University of Minnesota Press. Gramsci, A. (1992). Prison Notebooks, Vol. 1 (PN-I). Trans. Buttigieg, J.A. and Callari, A., ed. Buttigieg, J.A. Columbia University Press. Gramsci, A. (1995). Further Selections from the Prison Notebooks. (FS). Trans. and ed. Boothman, D. Minnesota University Press. Gramsci, A. (1996). Prison Notebooks, Vol. 2 (PN-II). Trans. and ed. Buttigieg, J.A. Columbia University Press. Gramsci, A. (2007). Prison Notebooks, Vol. 3 (PN-III). Trans. Buttigieg, J.A., and Callari, A., ed. Buttigieg, J.A. Columbia University Press. Hadjimichalis, C. (2011). Uneven geographical development and socio-spatial justice and solidarity: European regions after the 2009 financial crisis. European Urban and Regional Studies, 18(3): Haine, J. Y. (2009). The European crisis of liberal internationalism. International journal, 64(2):

8 8 Hayward, J. (ed.). (2012). The crisis of representation in Europe. Routledge. Helpman, E. (1987). Imperfect competition and international trade: Evidence from fourteen industrial countries. Journal of the Japanese and international economies, 1(1): Hodson, D., and Quaglia, L. (2009). European perspectives on the global financial crisis: Introduction*. JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies, 47(5): Laclau, E., and Mouffe, C. (1985). Hegemony and Socialist Strategy: Towards a Radical Democratic Politics. Verso. Lane, P. R. (2012). The European sovereign debt crisis. The Journal of Economic Perspectives, 26(3): Miliband, R. (1969). The State in Capitalist Society. Weidenfeld and Nicolson. Mouffe, C. (ed.) (1979). Gramsci and Marxist theory. Routledge. Nemeth, T. (1980). Gramsci's philosophy: a critical study. Harvester. Nousios, P., Overbeek, H., and Tsolakis, A. (Eds.). (2012). Globalisation and European Integration: Critical Approaches to Regional Order and International Relations. Routledge. Poulantzas, N. (1973). Political Power and Social Classes. New Left Books. Quadrio Curzio, A. (2010). The Greek crisis and the European crisis. How to face them. Economia politica, 27(1): 3-8. Santucci, A.A. (2010). Antonio Gramsci. Monthly Review Press. Textier, J. (1979). Gramsci, theoretician of the superstructure. In Mouffe, C. (ed.). Gramsci and Marxist theory. Routledge: Thomas, P. (2007). Historicism, absolute. Historical Materialism, 15(1): Tsoukala, P. (2013). Narratives of the European Crisis and the Future of (Social) Europe. Texas. Int l L.J, 48: von Hagen, J., Pisani-Ferry, J., Gianviti, F., & Krueger, A. O. (2009). A European mechanism for sovereign debt crisis resolution: A proposal. Blueprints. Von Hagen, J., Schuknecht, L., and Wolswijk, G. (2011). Government bond risk premiums in the EU revisited: The impact of the financial crisis. European Journal of Political Economy, 27(1): Žižek, S. (2008). For they know not what they do: enjoyment as a political factor. Verso.