Category: State capitalism

Sino State Capital and the Strengthening of Serbian Stabilitocracy

imogenliu2 Comments

Chinese labour workers and their team manager laying the tracks on the Belgrade-Stara Pazova section of the Belgrade-Budapest railway. Source: author鈥檚 own.

The Belgrade-Budapest Railway has been lauded as the flagship Belt and Road project of the wider Central and Eastern European (CEE) region, and as such is promoted by Beijing as a successful template for Sino-CEE cooperation concluded via the 17+1 initiative, established in 2012 to foster relations between China and 17 CEE countries. In its host context of Hungary and Serbia, the investment has been politicised from the get-go, wherein criticism has largely focused on the project鈥檚 violation of EU public procurement , which require competitive dialogue and open-tender processes for projects of substantial size.

We would expect the Belgrade-Budapest Railway to be subject to greater scrutiny in both Hungary, as an EU member state, and Serbia, where of the EU is an important cornerstone of regime legitimacy, stemming from broad-based support for EU integration and cooperation. While this has played out in Hungary where there have been protests and where the EU launched against the construction for non-compliance, the Serbian section has proceeded relatively unhindered.

Read More »

Debating 鈥楽tate Capitalism鈥� in Turkey: Beyond False Dichotomies

mehmetermanerol3 Comments

Following the 2016 failed coup attempt, and in the context of increasing mistrust towards the West, Turkey鈥檚 president Erdogan reflected his discontent with the EU and argued that , namely the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) led primarily by China and Russia. Soon after, despite being a NATO member, to buy the S-400 air defence missile system. Taken together with Turkey鈥檚 other 鈥榓dventures鈥� in its region, these developments were perceived as manifestations of a changing political economy of Turkey, and were deeply disturbing to Western powers. After all, since the end of the Second World War, Turkey had been a close ally of the US-led Western capitalist bloc, it continued to be one during the Cold War; and had remained very close to US and EU interests following the end of the Cold War in 1991.

For some accounts[i], these developments are related to the changing world order and global power shifts following the 2008 crisis, as the decline of the 鈥榣iberal international order鈥� and the rise of BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa) marked transformations of the global political economy. Hence, there is a tendency to explain Turkey鈥檚 late political economy in this context. It is argued that, in this 鈥榩ost-liberal international order鈥� where two competing political economies come to the fore, Turkey is moving towards the 鈥楨ast鈥� or 鈥榥on-West鈥� – mainly China and Russia. As such, Turkey鈥檚 engagement with non-Western 鈥榞reat powers鈥� (which are generally characterised by 鈥榓uthoritarian state capitalism鈥� as opposed to the 鈥榥eoliberal political economy鈥�/liberal democracy/鈥檇emocratic capitalism鈥� of the West), shapes Turkey鈥檚 political economy and paves the way for 鈥榓uthoritarianism鈥�, 鈥榠lliberal democracy鈥� and 鈥榮tate capitalism鈥�. Put differently, as the legitimacy crisis of 鈥榃estern neoliberalism鈥� makes it less desirable for countries like Turkey, Turkey is regarded to have deviated from neoliberalism and liberal democracy and moved to state capitalism and authoritarianism.

Read More »

Developmental Agency under the Radar: Developmental States and Coalitions in Dependent Market Economies and Low-Tech Sectors

David KarasLeave a comment

In a co-authored with L谩szl贸 Bruszt and published in a of Review of International Political Economy, we identify a developmental state in the least likely  of times 鈥� the period of hegemonic neoliberalism in the 1990s and early 2000s 鈥�  and the least likely of places, namely the post-socialist Central Eastern European (CEE) economies conventionally described as FDI-dependent (DMEs). 

Read More »

The return of the visible hand: How struggles for economic and political dominance turn state capitalism into authoritarian capitalism

gschnydr2 Comments

budapest-parliament-hungarian-parliament-building-hungary-people-politicians-viktor-orban-hungarianBy and

The state has made a return with a vengeance in economic matters in the past decade or so. Mainly due to the success of the Chinese model and the 鈥� less permanent 鈥� strong economic performance of countries like Brazil and Russia, the erstwhile Washington Consensus of the superiority of markets over states as mechanisms of economic coordination has been put in serious doubt.

Scholars have picked up on this trend by increasingly referring to the term (new) 鈥榮tate capitalism鈥�. consider it an undesirable threat to the existing economic world order, while others show how states can effectively promote development and economic growth.

While the term state capitalism has been useful to into debates in political economy, the term itself is not unproblematic. Indeed, there is a risk that it perpetuates, rather than surpasses, the sterile debate about the state versus the market. Put bluntly: If there is such a thing as state capitalism, what does non-state capitalism look like?Read More »

Separated under the Same Roof: The Revived Relationships of State-Market Institutions.听

Lorena Lombardozzi1 Comment

29436856792_700fa2ef67_o

When looking at the way contemporary global value chains/global production networks (GVCs/GPNs) and the articulations of globalised capital have been studied, it is clearly visible that the hegemonic power of Multinational Corporations (MNCs) has monopolised the empirical and theoretical analysis. Indeed, their ability to maintain control over the technological, financial and commercial flows through private-led governance has impacted most of the industrial development and underdevelopment of the Global South. Such footloose private operations have often caused undesired consequences such as eroded environmental standards, low wages and scrapped social protection rights. Governments have joined in a race to the bottom on fiscal and labour deregulations in order to attract foreign direct investment in exchange for low and semi-skilled jobs, resulting in very low fiscal revenue, low productivity, balance of payment imbalances and poor social outcomes.听

The underpinning theory was that countries should follow their comparative advantages and let the market determine prices of labour (costs) and goods in order to be competitive in the world market and maximise returns. Yet, such losing game has been criticised since the start by who widely denounced how theories and policies of development forgot the role of the state in history and in the present. In other words, public institutions have always played a key role not only in the quantitative making of capitalist accumulation, but also in its qualitative distributional and developmental outcomes.听

Building upon the heritage of such scholarship, and in view of multiple and overwhelming 鈥榤arket failures鈥� in the global South and beyond, a new wave of Marxist-institutionalist inter-disciplinary literature spanning from Geography to International Economics and Finance has been trying to untangle the potential synergies between the public and the private domains by connecting the GVCs/GPNs and Developmental State approach.听

In this debate, it that the state should be seen as a facilitator (i.e. assisting firms in smoothing market transactions); a regulator (combined with distributor to mitigate inequality and negative market externalities); a buyer (i.e. public procurement); a producer (i.e. state-owned enterprises) and a financer as a result of state-capital reconfigurations through sovereign wealth funds and development banks. Therefore, such functions should be foregrounded in analyses of development, because they are key to understanding developmental sources and processes within GVCs.听Read More »

Neoliberalism鈥檚 many deaths and strange non-deaths听

jdcbath1 Comment

neoliberalismBy Jack Copley and Alexis Moraitis

The coronavirus pandemic has required states to take unprecedented steps to backstop the world capitalist economy. This has included enormous liquidity injections into financial markets, guaranteeing the wages of furloughed workers, and temporarily requisitioning and coordinating parts of the private sector. Yet last year a different threat 鈥� not epidemiological but proletarian 鈥� similarly forced states to adopt redistributive policies against their wills, albeit on a smaller scale.听

From the vantage point of the current uprisings against racist police violence, the empty streets of the early 2020 lockdown appear as a brief exception to the broader trend of mass unrest. In , streets, avenues, and squares in different parts of the world flooded with protestors decrying the pro-rich policies of their respective governments. The scale, endurance, and spectacular disruptiveness of these popular explosions pressed governments from Western Asia to Europe to Latin America to abandon so-called neoliberal fiscal rectitude and reluctantly embrace Keynesian stimulus policies.

In Chile, on the eve of the autumn 2019 revolt, billionaire austerian president Sebasti谩n Pi帽era a classic metaphor of neoliberal stoicism to explain how he would resist popular opposition to his painful reform programme: 鈥楿lysses tied himself to a ship鈥檚 mast and put pieces of wax in his ears to avoid falling for the 鈥� siren calls鈥�. Less than one month later, this modern Ulysses had broken free from his tethers, announcing increases in the minimum wage, healthcare benefits, pensions, electricity subsidies, and the reform of Chile鈥檚 very constitution. There are clear with France鈥檚 Emmanuel Macron, a former investment banker who assumed power in 2017 on a platform of market discipline, only to buckle under the weight of the relentless Gilet Jaunes movement and announce a 鈧�17 billion package of concessions.

How are we to grasp the jarring Keynesian U-turns of such cartoonish neoliberal governments in the face of mass protest and pandemic? It is commonly assumed that the neoliberal project represented the shrinking of the state sphere and its replacement by the cold logic of the marketplace. The 2008 bank bailouts appeared to buck this trend, as states were called upon to undertake drastic interventions. But this turned out to be a hiccup in neoliberalism鈥檚 larger narrative arc, as austerity quickly took hold. Yet perhaps this latest accumulation of crises will at last force states to reclaim the territory they had ceded to the market. After its 鈥樷��, is neoliberalism finally dying?Read More »

Financializing state capitalism: Exchanges, financial infrastructures & the active management of capital markets in China

jpetry12 Comments

DCE trading floorThe development of capital markets has been a core focus of financialization research. For Epstein, financialization 鈥�鈥�, while Pike and Pollard define financialization as the 鈥�鈥�. Other scholars also attribute a significant role to capital markets in financialization processes, be it in the , the rise of , or 鈥�鈥�. At the heart of and as a precondition of many aspects of financialization stand capital markets and their development.听

This is not only the case when it comes to financialization in advanced economies, but also with respect to the study of . Financialization processes are not uniform, they are rather variegated and refracted by national institutional settings that lead to . As Lapavitsas and Powell emphasized, 鈥�鈥�. This has also been picked up in debates about the relationship between financialization and the state. Previously, many scholars argued that financialization often results in a and the effects on developing economies are often described as potentially negative with financialization for instance or . But stemming from earlier discussions on , more recent scholarship has highlighted that . It argues that an increasing takes place in which state and (quasi-)state institutions often co-constitute financialization processes.听

Contributing to the growing literatures on variegated financialization and the state, in a paper titled 鈥�鈥� (recently published in ) I argue that states are not only important actors facilitating financialization but can also exercise a considerable degree of control over financialization, thereby shaping its very form. Instead of a financialization process that , what we see in China is a 鈥榝inancialization with Chinese characteristics鈥� where the state actively tries to manage financialization and its social outcomes.听Read More »

The return of State planning

Andr茅 Roncaglia1 Comment

brasilia-2448030_1280Conventional economics is notorious for having created a highly persuasive analytical toolbox. The challenge of this stream of the profession until the 1960s was to prove the logical possibility that the market could not only coordinate the entire economy, but also keep it stable at that single point of optimum equilibrium. In order to boast the wonders of decentralized market exchange, the theory paradoxically invoked the metaphor of a 鈥渂enevolent social planner鈥�.

A growing list of circumstances in which markets fail to generate the optimal societal outcome (externalities, coordination failures, and so on) raised the academic premium for sound justifications for avoiding State interventions in the economy. Government failures – it was, and still is, claimed – could be even worse than those of the market.

The theoretical vilification of the State’s performance matched the emerging political philosophy in the early 1980s. Despite the enormous State apparatus created after the Second World War, from 1980s onwards, government functions were gradually reduced to the subordinate role of supporting the private sector. To paraphrase Keynes: neoliberalism won over the West as the Holy Inquisition conquered Spain. Western society surrendered to market dominance, shrinking State capacity despite the achievements of the three decades of postwar Keynesian policies, which generated the highest world growth rates in modern history.听

One of the blindsides of the drastic downsizing of the State observed after 1980s is severely limiting its capacity to respond whenever needed. The COVID-19 epidemic made this very clear. Countries that fell for the neoliberal spell faced a flagrant difficulty in organizing an efficient response to a looming healthcare crisis, thus rekindling a debate about the way in which the State operates in society.听Read More »