Re: <nettime> Keynesianism is IN

[Stefan Heidenreich <stefan.heidenreich@rz.hu-berlin.de>]

maybe we should figure out some differences between what Keynes had in 
mind and what happens today.

- Keynes was not aware of the credit money (or as some say: fiat money), 
that we have today - sticking still to some kind of gold standard. so 
generating further credit - and be it via the state - has become 
something entirely different from what it was in the 30s / 40s.

- Keynes could never have imagined the amount of credit given to 
consumers. He regarded the consumer as someone saving. And he saw credit 
as something given to an investor and to be paid back through the return 
on investment.

- Keynes had the idea that an initial push would be sufficient set the 
whole capitalist machinery of production and consumption again into 
maotion and to avoid the "liquidity trap" of money being just kept lazy. 

The huge bubble of finance money stuck in derivtives that we have now, 
he did not think of.

I'm not sure myself what to take from it. But I suspect, that nowadays 
state spending is not as Keynesian as we might think. Because behind all 
the new credit now generated by the state we still have a banking system 
lurking, that nurtures itself by fresh credit. The whole securitization 
pyramid would break down if the total amount of credit would shrink. So 
somebody has to generate it. And as the consumer is turned off ... the 
state is the last source of new credit.

This might still look like Keynesian politics, but it might also just be 
a service to the banking system. And it might finally turn our state 
into a rogue, as Derrida said: an institution generating credit, 
collecting taxes, nurturing a banking system on the brink of collapse, 
and finally putting at risk the state guaranteed money itself.

For german speaking reades: much of that I tried to write in my recent 
book: Ralph Heidenreich / Stefan Heidenreich: Mehr Geld. Merve Verlag. 
Out since 2 weeks.

Stefan


brian schrieb:

> In case you were wondering, here is a fairly convincing sign: it looks 
> like Keynesian spending is IN. Could it be that those who build the best 
> infrastructure over the next 3-5 years will be in the best position over 
> the next fifteen or twenty? But what is the meaning of "best" in this 
> case? Is it a matter of upping the capitalist ante another notch toward 
> the total competition of all against all? Or will the "best" 
> infrastructure prove to be the kind that most helps the citizens to live 
> with each other and on the fragile earth? So many questions! Anyway, 
> have a nice recession, it's gonna be a lot more interesting than what 
> the stock market calls paradise - BH
 <...>


#  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://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l
#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org