Nazioarteko erakundeak eta gobernuaz jabetzea

Hasiera, ikus Globalizazioa eta neoliberalismoa eta Globalizazioa eta moneta antolamenduak.

Segida:

Bill Mitchell-en artikulua: The co-option of government by transnational organisations1.

Afera globalizazioari eta nazio estatuaren ahalmenei dagokie: alde batetik, merkatu libreko liberalak eta efikazia globala. Bestetik, marxisten egoeraren analisia: nazio estatua gero eta beharrezkoagoa zen nazioarteko kapitalaren beharrizanetarako2.

Nazioarteko erakundea eta nazio-estatua3:

1950eko urteetan, erakunde supranazionalak (GATT, NATO, …).

1960ko urteetan nazioarteko korporazioak.

Merkatu libreko zaleak: kasu Raymon Vernon 1971n, mundu efikazia eta merkatu liberalismoa dira nagusi4.

Aurkako jarrerak: korporazio multinazionalak salatuz5.

Hortaz, gatazka berri bat azaldu zen6. Merkatu libreko zaleak eta marxistak ziren bi aldekoak7.

Kapitalaren izaera, alta, aldatuz zihoan: neoliberalismoa azaldu zen8.

Lehengo errenta nazionalaren birbanaketatik9 pribatizazio prozesu batera10 igaro zen.

Prozesu horiek itzulgarriak dira, ez dira itzulezinak11.

Nazio-estatuak ez du galdu bere izaera12.


1 Ikus http://bilbo.economicoutlook.net/blog/?p=32776.

2 Ingelesez: “… in the sense that governments could provide essential stability to reduce the risk of transnational operations.

3 Ingelesez: “Since the end of the Second World War, a common narrative has been that the nation-state is becoming increasingly restricted by the creation of supranational (multilateral) institutions and the accelerating growth of international capitalism.”

4 Ingelesez: “Free-market proponents (such as Raymond Vernon, 1971) argue that these developments override national political interests because they reflect market-driven processes, which create ‘world efficiency’ and maximise ‘world welfare’ by using all available real resources in their most productive way.

Market liberalism on a global scale thus becomes the model for economic development for all nations and narrow national interests give way to a larger frame.”

5 Ingelesez: “Opponents of this emerging free-market rhetoric, counted by saying that the multinational corporation was just a manifestation of the dominant capitalist class pursuing its own interests at the expense of the productive class (that is, the workers).”

6 Ingelesez: “So a new conflict emerged as capitalism became increasingly global because, on the one hand, the transnational corporations needed strong nation-states to protect their capital, but, on the other hand, these same corporations sought to undermine the regulative and tax structures that day were subject to in their head office locations.

7 Ingelesez: “Here we encounter a divergence in the literature between the conception provided by the free-market liberals of globalisation (for example, Vernon, 1971) and the Marxist argument.

The former considered that the power of the global market would see the state wither away.

Whereas, the latter, clearly understood that the spread of transnational capitalism required the role of the state to change from one of mediating the class conflict to one of supporting the interests of capital more closely.”

8 Ingelesez: “What the early literature didn’t really discuss and, perhaps didn’t grasp, was that the nature of international capital flows by the 1970s was quite different to the early speculative type attacks on currencies that brought the fixed-exchange rate system down. (…)

… the ways in which they attempted to co-opt national sovereignty, included this direct lobbying influence on the home nation-state.

That influence was also exerted by large companies, in general, irrespective of their transnational reach. (…)

It was no surprise that in the 1970s there was a major push by corporations (both transnational and national) to undermine the capacity of trade unions in the advanced nation. The attack on so-called ‘trade union power’ was well-organised and well-funded. (…)

So we see the beginnings of neo-liberalism in its modern-day form arising from the need of capital to divert government policy away from generalised welfare improvement towards the advancement of the more narrow interests of capital.”

9 Ingelesez: “The social democratic governments of the Post Second World War period up until the 1970s had clearly mediated class struggle and the workers were successful in forcing the polity to act in their interests by creating full employment and the Welfare State. This era clearly meant that the distribution of national income was such that real wages could grow more or less in proportion with productivity growth, which provided significant material improvement to the living standards of the population including reductions in poverty rates.”

10 Ingelesez: “The processes or changes (…) are the product of legislation within a nation-state. The process of privatisation clearly transferred resources from the public sector to the private sector and reduced the public bureaucratic control of the organisations in question.”

11 Ingelesez: “Those processes are reversible. If we want a demonstration of that reversibility, then we need not look further than what happened to the banking sector in the early days of the GFC when many national governments effectively socialised the losses from the failed corporate strategies, protected depositors and nationalised the organisations.”

12 Ingelesez: There was no hint then that the nation-state had lost its power or discretion to act to advance the national interest and largely disregard the interests of the private shareholders of these large transnational, financial entities. (…)

There can be no doubt that the former corporations cannot be relied on to serve national interests and in that sense need to be regulated. But, inasmuch as their decentralised, bureaucratic nature is, in one way or another, inherently national (their legal form has to be located somewhere) and they have to bring resources across national boundaries, then they become subject to legislative intent should the relevant sovereign government have the required will.

In the case of the supranational bodies, these are all voluntary constructs of nation-states…”

Utzi erantzuna

Zure e-posta helbidea ez da argitaratuko. Beharrezko eremuak * markatuta daude