No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the author.
The Capital Order. How Economists Invented Austerity and Paved the Way to Fascism.: By Clara E. Mattei. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 2022.
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any citations for this publication.
This article examines the role of ideological mechanisms in support of long-term economic liberalisation. Specifically we examine the ideological roles of comparative advantage and debt reduction as precursors to austerity policy imposition. Austerity policies, as episodic mechanisms designed to deepen neoliberalisation, are examined in the comparative historical context of Africa and Latin America.
Austerity in the twenty-first century is different, compared both with the past, and across locations. This analysis explores the different role played by households in policies designed to maintain financial market liquidity in the context of aspirations of state deficit reduction. While in Europe there is austerity as popularly depicted, in the United States, where mortgage-backed securities have become central to monetary policy, the agenda is to keep households meeting their debt obligations. These differences are explained in terms of different conceptions of monetary policy and evolving conceptions of money itself. The evidence portends a changing role for households and their financial payments in anchoring the money system.
Conservatives in America have succeeded in casting government spending as useless profligacy that has made their economy worse, centering the policy debate in the wake of the financial crisis on draconian budget cuts. Americans are told that they need to live in an age of austerity since they have all lived beyond their means and now need to tighten their belts. This view conveniently forgets where all that debt came from. Not from an orgy of government spending, but as the direct result of bailing out, recapitalizing, and adding liquidity to the broken banking system. Through these actions private debt was rechristened as government debt while those responsible for generating it walked away scot free, placing the blame on the state, and the burden on the taxpayer. That burden now takes the form of a global turn to austerity, the policy of reducing domestic wages and prices to restore competitiveness and balance the budget. The problem, according to political economist Mark Blyth, is that austerity is a very dangerous idea. First of all, it doesn't work. As the past two years of trying and countless other historical examples show, while it makes sense for any one state to try and cut its way to growth, it simply cannot work when all states try it simultaneously: all that happens is a shrinking economy. Second, it relies upon those who didn't make the mess to clean it up, which is always bad politics. Third, it rests upon a tenuous and thin body of evidence and argumentation that acts more to prop up dead economic ideas and preserve astonishingly skewed income and wealth distributions than to restore prosperity for all. In Austerity: The History of a Dangerous Idea, Blyth demolishes the conventional wisdom, marshaling an army of facts to demand that we recognize austerity for what it is, and what it costs us.
Why Austerity Persists
- J Shefner
- C Blad
- Shefner J.
“Socialism’s Biggest Hero is a Bourgeois British Capitalist.”
- G Mann
- Mann G.