John Young on Sun, 7 Mar 2010 23:25:18 +0100 (CET) |
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
Re: <nettime> A scenario for World War III |
The writings and lectures of Robert Mundell are relevant to this. Mundell, Economic Nobelist, provided the intellectual framework for the Euro and is now a prime advisor to the Peoples Republic of China -- which has established an ecomomics institute to train in and advance his philosophy. A Canadian by birth, long in the United States, educated in the Chicago School and distinguished professor at Columbia Univeristy, Mundell is usually associated with supply siders and conservatives but is considerably more subtle and complex than these terms suggest. His work with the Euro and the PRC indicate a multi-nationalism favored by market-driven globalists who much prefer mutually beneficial economic persuasion over wasteful war. The short-term benefits of war for the national security industry may lift a nation or a coaltion out of depression or recession but paying the very expensive bills for profligate warmaking and its corollary standing militaries is contrary to comprehensive economic health. Better to foster markets and consumers than slaughter and tending the wounded (which reduces the number of consumers, fear and anxiety diminishes their buying confidence, and increased taxation drains their spending capability). What needs sustained examination is the form of multi-national government Mundell advances against the unilateral big power of the US and formerly the USSR and always the bugaboo of less powerful nations so useful in keeping their inhabitants fearfully obedient. Europe might aspire to big power status except the cost of a military to undergird that wasteful if politically seductive conceit is far from economically rational, the ancient nations know the terrible cost of war best of all, and even capitalists can see that national threats are a confidence game to inflate the role of criminally inefficient, irresponsbile governments. The few capitalist industries which benefit from national security ideology during spasms of induced crisis also disrupt orderly markets with spikes in profits and disturbance of happy customers not to say dreadful scenes of flag-draped coffins and carnage in the media which so aggrieves smiley-faced advertisers and cheers pulpiteer doomsayers. It may be fanciful to imagine war could be avoided by relieving grievance with economic benefits, spreading the wealth, distributing resources more equitably. Still, economists are sufficiently conceited to believe they can offer an alternative to the ancient legacy of warmaking which inevitably distorts the fair sharing of benefits among the poplulace, indeed generates a cariacature of friendly capitalism with piggish profiteers and bloody-toothed ideologues. More fanciful is to imagine economists, particularly political economists, teaching, preaching and advising against their short-term profits so easily marketed to short-term marketeers and lobby-drunk electees. The fees for flattering the powerful are irresistable, prizes and prestige are not given for going against the giant egos, not really, although pretending to be a critical contrarian master of the op-ed is pretty lucrative and shrewdly realistically dirty as well. # distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission # <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets # more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org