agoodwinsmith: (Default)
[personal profile] agoodwinsmith
This article, courtesy of Eric Jarvis on FB, discusses the current collapse of the nation state, due to its inability to control and tax money flow, amongst other reasons:

https://www.theguardian.com/news/2018/apr/05/demise-of-the-nation-state-rana-dasgupta?CMP=share_btn_fb

I have just finished reading it, and digestion is necessary, but the sooner other people read it, the better.

One of the take away quotes for me is this:

"Deregulating human movement is an essential corollary of the deregulation of capital: it is unjust to preserve the freedom to move capital out of a place and simultaneously forbid people from following."

On the one hand "just" is a concept currently underpinned by the authority of the state (it used to be kings and priests, but now it is judges certified by the state), so if the power of the state is failing, expecting justice yet is not realistic.

On another hand - where does this superstructure of global regulation envisioned by Dasgupta leave the low-caste person (me and my family & friends) in terms of coping with the changing rules of the game? There are rumours that Trudeau is considering a form of Emergency Measures Act to facilitate the building of the Kinder Morgan pipeline. This would be *insanely* disruptive to Canadian politics, since, while the other provinces might be happy to feast on the carcass of BC, they would also then be watching their backs and resisting even the teeny-tiniest infringement of Federal over Provincial. If there was a superstructure of regulation over such jurisdictional matters - who would win? The serfs belonging to a pretty figure head in charge of a defunct and penniless system, or the multinational corporation? Ha.

And, on another nother hand - this analysis could also herald the fall of the economic system that underpins both money as we know it and the stock market as we know it. It could fail, and so much for pensions - or guaranteed basic income - ask Venezuela. "During the year 2016, for example, consumer prices rose 800%, the economy contracted by 18.6%,[8] and hunger escalated to the point that the "Venezuela's Living Conditions Survey" (ENCOVI) found nearly 75 percent of the population had lost an average of at least 8.7 kg (19.4 lb) in weight due to a lack of proper nutrition." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crisis_in_Venezuela_(2012%E2%80%93present)

And one may think that if the stock market goes, so does all the wealth of the powerful. But I suspect that just as there are off-shore bank accounts, there is probably an off-shore stock market, too. If we already have a dark net, we probably have a dark finance system.

So.

Date: 2018-04-11 05:01 am (UTC)
ranunculus: (Default)
From: [personal profile] ranunculus
This brings to mind the issues with "States rights". Here in California we are happy to have a state that mandates all kinds of things that the current Federal government isn't interested in pursuing. Cleaner cars, environmental restrictions and social policy among them. We are a really big, wealthy state (something like the 6th biggest economy in the world) so California has a lot of punch. But is it really right for a state to be so out of step with the Federal government? We think so here, but what about Mississippi? Should they have the same flexibility to continue what we see as oppressing many of their citizens?

Profile

agoodwinsmith: (Default)
agoodwinsmith

March 2026

S M T W T F S
12 34567
8 9101112 1314
15161718192021
222324 25 262728
293031    

Most Popular Tags

Page Summary

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Apr. 11th, 2026 11:59 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios