Nettime mailing list archives

Re: <nettime> Fwd: Re: Forms of decisionism
Alex Foti on Wed, 20 Jul 2016 18:36:47 +0200 (CEST)

[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: <nettime> Fwd: Re: Forms of decisionism

   well this is about falsificationism in social theory - and it pretty
   much applies to any theory in social science - be it modernization
   functionalism underdevelopment etc
   in my view a good social theory must at least explain the basic facts
   of the present and the recent past (historical realism) and have some
   predictive power, or at least give grounds to understand where the
   system is heading and what could be the measures and countermeasures.
   arguably régulation coupled with long waves enabled the prediction a
   Great Recession would strike advanced capitalism (wrote so in 2003-2004
   on rekombinant and then in 2007-2008 here) and it actually did. In
   general, I've been persuaded since the early 90s neoliberalism would
   end like laissez faire in the 1920s - in a deflationary, structural
   crisis, the problem of course was when.. i confess i thought the dotcom
   crash was it, but eventually the house of cards fell.
   so it was (is) a good crisis theory. lemme first point out inflection
   points of advanced capitalism in XX-XXI centuries (Mason gets them
   wrong, for instance) - basically it is 1890-1913 belle epoque stability
   and growth (last spell of European hegemony) - 1917-1929 revolution,
   inflationary crisis and early Fordist boom - 1932-1947 Great Depression
   and World War - 1950-1973 Keynesian prosperity and Cold War (mature
   fordist growth regime) - 1979-2008 Great Moderation and Globalization
   (neoliberal growth regime under informationalism) - 2011-201? Great
   Recession and Global War (or Reaction vs Revolution).�   As it was rightly said, there is no teleology, since in a major crisis
   of effective demand it's ideology that counts, ideas about the future:
   for instance what should be done to solve the Great Recession by
   equalizing income and opportunities. Like in the interwar period a
   rabidly reactionary alternative is counterposed to a reformist
   alternative. I think anti-oligarchy movements that have been successful
   since the start of the crisis have adopted this pragmatic mission of
   doing something against escalating inequality. What needs to emerge is
   a reformist compact that can rally all diverse components of what used
   to be called the left in all regional blocs (in fact, globalization is
   leaving ground to regionalism as mode to organize international trade
   and politics) - shouldn't we discuss here a synthesis that can gain
   acceptance within movements and defeat cryptofascism and nationalism in
   Europe, America, Asia?
   Ecopopulism probably has a chance to become a viable progressive path
   out of the crisis against national populism. Climate and Social Justice
   these are twin priorities. A schumpeterian state that redistributes
   innovation opportunities in a democratic, transgender polity where
   citizens are not disenfranchised by social exclusion could be a way to
   go. I have yet to read Benkler's latest, but subsidizing a veritable
   not-for-profit sharing economy via basic income could be a way to boost
   the non-private/non-public sector and go beyond passivizing and
   stigmatizing beveridge-style welfare states, by designing social
   transfers to emancipate individuals rather than social categories, by
   providing incentives to go beyond fossil capitalism.
   Anyway, pace Popper, large-scale social theories give a sense of
   historical change and the directions collective agency might take. So
   we need them bad, especially now that liberalism (that enemy of grand
   theorizing) has lost all its bearings.
   Neoliberalism is passé, even the Economist says so. So what comes
   best ciaos,

   On Sun, Jul 17, 2016 at 9:42 PM, Morlock Elloi <morlockelloi {AT} gmail.com> wrote:

     The problem with global social theories that deal with long time
     constants is that they are next to impossible to prove, unless one
     has access to parallel universes (even assuming that existence of
     correct theory is possible, which may not be true due to the
     underlining complexity which at some point may connect to quantum
     noise and Heisenberg.)

#  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://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l
#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org
#   {AT} nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject: