Globalisation at a critical conjuncture? (original) (raw)
Related papers
The Crisis: a Conjunctural Problem or the Result of the Logic of Global Accumulation?
2009
when focusing on an event of not appreciating the situation in which it lies. Of course, there are enormous risks associated with seeking to understand the complex whole when working with a set of relations, which can be difficult to account for in a coherent manner. Perhaps an attempt to understand the complexity is worth the trouble in order to go beyond the basic analyses that relate the current crisis to just an irrational collapse concentrated in a single market (the North American mortgage market) and not the system as a whole, or to regulatory errors and panic that were able to bring the world to its knees, as if a butterfly beating its wings could cause a hurricane somewhere in the world.
Deconstructing and reconstructing the global financial crisis
2010
Using causal layered analysis, the underlying stories of the global financial crisis (GFC) are explored. The six narratives presented are the GFC as: (1) a mortgage crisis, (2) a global banking crisis, (3) creative destruction, (4) a geopolitical shift, (5) a symptom of the inequity of capitalism, and (6) a window of opportunity to a different, greener more peaceful world. Narrative That Define While many believe the global recession is now over (Kahler 2009, 3), taking a deeper structural view, there are still major challenges ahead. Now that the stimulus option has disappeared, few policy alternatives are left at national levels. Lena Komileva, an economist with British firm, Tullett Prebon, writes "The foundation of the global economy remains unstable even if the cracks have been smoothed over and we are happy to forget what lies beneath the heavy layer of public sector's liquidity insurance” (Kaiser 2010, online). Uncertainty and complexity are ahead of us. This chapter...
Roundtable: The global financial crisis and its history
Renewal , 2019
Adam Tooze's Crashed: How a Decade of Financial Crises Changed the World (2018) is a hugely significant retrospective on the politics and economics of the past decade. Although written from a perspective sympathetic to the left, it centres on two areas-the daily operations of international finance, and the shifting configurations of global geopolitics-that still confuse and alienate socialist thinkers and movements. Crashed will already be familiar to many readers, and it has already attracted a huge range of reviews. Here, we gather three perspectives on the book's central arguments, and how they differ from other dominant analyses of our current moment.
THE GLOBAL ECONOMIC CRISES, 2016
The Capitalist World Economy is experiencing one of its worst crises that have been extensively compared to 1929 Great Depression by many scholars and journalists. Martin Wolff openly declared the end of a modern ideological god, “the free market economy” by stating that: “Another ideological god has failed. The assumptions that ruled policy and politics over three decades suddenly look as outdated as revolutionary socialism.” In the new, globalized world of closely interdependent economies, the crisis affected almost every part of the world, receiving extensive coverage in the international media. “In an Interconnected World, American Homeowner Woes Can Be Felt from Beijing to Rio de Janeiro,” observed the International Herald Tribune at the onset of the crisis. “Chinese Steelmakers Shiver, Indian Miners Catch Flu,” noted the Hindustan Times. “US and China Must Tame Imbalances Together,” suggested YaleGlobal, as the frenzied search for a solution continues around the globe. While few predicted the financial catastrophe, almost everyone has an explanation as to why it happened. To economists, it all seems painfully simple. Too much foreign money was flowing into the US from the Asian countries especially China. The availability of easy credit meant that too many people borrowed to buy properties that they could not afford.
Studying the evolution of dynamics in the international political scenario is incomplete without studying International Political Economy (IPE). Similarly, it is difficult to understand the history and developmental patterns of IPE without focusing on the phenomenon of globalization. Although either referred to as a boon or a bane, globalization has transformed the economies around the world to make them more integrated, inter-dependent while at the same time attempting to secure self-sustainability. The global economy which we now consider ourselves a part of, thus brings us all closer together. It is not a happy story throughout, however. Benefits brought about by the era of globalization also became the reason for several hardships that the common man had to endure. Economic policies changed to accommodate, or rather encourage more of everything – possibly leading to the proverbial excess that leads to one’s downfall. This essay deals with the question “Have the main causes of the global financial crisis been tackled by the countries most affected by it?” The author will attempt to answer this question through several channels of deep exploration into the causes of the crisis, its impacts (both regional and global), responsive action taken by affected countries along with the assistance from relevant international organizations, for which the IMF has been chosen and lastly, a call for reforms in global and local economic policy. The arguments in this essay will be based on historical events as well as empirical evidence of the impact that will lead us to understand the surprise element of the global financial crisis and the lack of preparedness to face it, let alone prevent it from happening. Through our analysis of mitigatory measures taken, it will be argued that although countries have scrambled to take action for damage control, it is difficult to convincingly say that the root causes of the crisis have been satisfactorily addressed. It will be further argued that systemic changes – not short-term measures, will be instrumental in reviving the global economy. To support this central argument, this essay also features the case study of the country that was undoubtedly the focus point of the financial crisis, which had devastating effects on its economy and polity. It is also important to note that for the reader’s best possible understanding of the data and arguments, a brief summary and timeline of important events related to the crisis have been provided at the beginning of the paper.
Chapter 2: The Financial Crisis
2009
The financial turmoil that originated in 2007 and developed into an unprecedented crisis battering financial and real markets is the latest manifestation, on a grand scale and with new attributes, of a welldefined pathology in the process of market liberalization and integration in the post-Bretton Woods era. At the root of the crisis lies a fundamental inconsistency between financial globalisation
‘Financial Globalisation’ and the ‘Crisis’: A Critical Assessment and ‘What is to be Done’?
New Political Economy, 2010
Do we have a genuine global financial system? This article challenges the strong notion that the recent financial crisis was global in scope. It argues the international financial system is quite differentiated, being made up of domestic-national, supranational regional and international aspects. The system is characterised by contagion, however, and the article goes on to consider the role of this in generating spill-overs into the wider economic mechanism. Given this characterisation of the financial system the implications for how to organise a regulatory response are pursued. Here the argument is that the principle of 'distributed preparedness for resilience' should guide this response not a new set of top-down global rules and norms organised once again by the institutions of global economic governance.
Financial Crisis and the Threat to Globalisation (revised article)
This article falls under the remit of international political economy. It focuses on the banking crisis and implications for the international economy, multi-culturalism, and for the dismantling transnational agreements. It considers the uneven nature of the recovery, growth which has excluded large sections of the population leaving them disillusioned with globalisation and at austerity and the scapegoating of migrants blamed for exploiting generous welfare systems. The article considers 'bad trade deals' which leave domestic industries exposed to foreign producers not playing by the rules and at the encroaching cultural and economic isolationism as a threat to the global economy and relations between states.