Below is a large chunk of my proposal for my book on Neofeudalism. I have to write it still but I've outlined the project. Let me know what you think:
A new term circulates in the
electronic sphere of internet-based communications. That term is
“neofeudalism.” Neofeudalism is used by social critics to describe the global
polarization of wealth and the centralization of power that has become
increasingly evident over the last ten years. The feudal lords have today assumed
the guise of transnational corporations (TNC) and powerful governmental
institutions, which together control the vast majority of global resources,
such as energy inputs and production processes, fresh water, and food. Contemporary
neofeudal entities, like their ancient prototypes, offer some protection for
their bonded workers, even while exploiting their labor. Those individuals
lacking contractual relationships with contemporary neofeudal powers are
literally left to die. Contemporary neofeudal relations are illustrated by U.S.
Gulf area residents sickened by the BP Deepwater Horizon oil spill and
Fukushima citizens left to die in radiation-contaminated zones. These examples dramatize
an evolving social order that fails to protect livelihoods and offers little-to-no
opportunities for the vast majority of the world’s population, despite the
order’s capacities to generate tremendous wealth for elites.
However,
the parallels between neofeudalism and feudalism are more figurative than literal
and this project does not seek to elucidate specific correspondences. Rather, it
aims to describe how late twentieth-century neoliberal economic and social
institutions and governing logics are ceding to a new form of social
organization labeled neofeudalism. The U.S. is the primary focus for analysis
because as the dominant global national actor, the U.S. and U.S. based
corporations have tried to impose a narrow set of governance preferences upon
other nations across the planet, directly and indirectly, in concert with
institutions such as the IMF, the World Bank, and the WTO and through trade
agreements, lending, foreign aid, and outright military action.
U.S.
Government and Western corporate imperialism have been well-documented in the
literature on neoliberalism so this project will not rehearse the record
ranging from the 1980s through 2007.[i] Instead, this project focuses on the
consolidation of wealth and power and the amplification of economic and
political dispossession in the wake of the financial crisis that began in 2007.
Emerging in the aftermath of the
financial crisis is a world order dominated by a few governments and
corporations that have unprecedented control over global resources and appear
to have little-to-no-regard for the welfare of the vast majority of the world’s
populace, even within developed economies, such as the U.S.
Monopoly capitalism is name of the game.
During the height of the great financial crisis, secret Federal Reserve loans
to the biggest banks totaling $7.7 trillion enabled them to reap $13 billion in
profits[ii].
As of 2010, six U.S. banks, held assets in excess of 63 percent of the U.S.
Gross Domestic.[iii]
Monopolies are not restricted to finance: energy and food industries are also
consolidated. For instance, three companies control ninety percent of the
global grain trade (Archer Daniels Midland, Bunge, and Cargill) and Monsanto
monopolizes seventy percent of the transgenic corn market and more than eighty
percent of the transgenic soybean market.[iv] The
consolidation of wealth and power in relatively few corporations is mirrored by
the consolidation of wealth among the wealthiest U.S. citizens. For example,
the top .1% of the U.S. population, about 315,000 individuals, receives half of
all capital gains on the sale of shares or property and these gains constitute
sixty percent of the total income made by the Forbes 400.[v]
While U.S.
corporate profits have reached unprecedented levels, both in absolute dollars
and as a share of the economy, unemployment is at its highest level since the
Great Depression.[vi]
Over one half (fifty-five percent) of
Americans’ wages were affected in the forms of job layoffs, wage and hour cut
backs, and unpaid furloughs during the recession years of 2007 to 2009.
Thirty-two percent of Americans reported unemployment during that period. On average,
U.S. citizens lost twenty percent of their household wealth from 2007 to 2009
(Pew Research Center, 2010).[vii]
Data published in 2011 indicate that fourteen percent, or one in six
Americans, lives below the official poverty threshold.[viii]
The losses of household wealth, wages,
and benefits are ongoing and point to the growing impoverishment of the nation
at the same time that the federal government is proposing widespread cuts in
social spending, particularly in the area of health (but not military spending
or financial bailouts).[ix]
The growing
polarization of wealth and power within the U.S. and across the globe has not
gone unremarked. The International Forum
on Globalization (IFG) issued a report in 2011 describing an evolving
“plutonomy” characterized by corporate power and the unfettered influence of “a
new dangerous class of politically dominant billionaires”:
“Plutonomy.” A newer threat cited for the first time by the
board was the astonishing emergence of a new dangerous class of politically
dominant billionaires. Operating on a global scale, as well as within
countries, these oligarchs are increasingly able to relate to the world nearly
as if it was their own feudal enterprise, generally out of view, and with few controls.
Recognizing the realities of resources limits, many of these individuals now
see their profit opportunities as no longer solely dependent on corporate
economic growth, but equally on systemic control of vital resources, including
food and water.[x]
First use of the term “plutonomy” to
describe the evolving economic distribution was a 2005 Citigroup document dated
October 16, 2005 titled, “Equity Strategy: Plutonomy: Buying Luxury, Explaining
Global Imbalances.” The document describes a world “dividing into two blocs—the
plutonomies, where economic growth is powered by and largely consumed by the
wealthy few, and the rest.”[xi] The
U.S. is a “key” plutonomy characterized by “disruptive technology-driven
productivity gains, creative financial innovation, capitalist-friendly
cooperative governments, an international dimension of immigrants and overseas
conquests invigorating wealth creation, the rule of law, and patenting
inventions.”[xii]
Technology that replaces workers, financial “innovations” capable of accumulating
wealth outside of production (e.g., through securities transactions), and
through overseas colonial exploitation of resources and labor are the
mechanisms whereby wealth is accumulated by the evolving order. Governance by
plutonomy is a characteristic feature of the evolving neofeudal order. However,
rule by a few is but one feature of neofeudalism. Material scarcity is another
feature that will play an important role in the conflicts that will define
neofeudalism.
The book
develops this argument that a new, neofeudal order is arising in three distinct
ways. First, it examines the economic outcomes of the great recession in
relation to the consolidation of wealth and power among a relatively few corporations
and individuals and the lack of opportunity and growing impoverishment for the
majority of the U.S. population. The financialization of the U.S. economy will
be seen as a primary factor in promoting wealth consolidation, but the shift
toward the FIRE paradigm (finance, insurance, and real estate) was itself
encouraged by rising energy prices and monopolistic competition between
corporations in mature markets. Energy availability and costs are addressed in
terms of their economic impact and the monopolistic control of energy
infrastructures, resources, and innovations. Energy, finance, and the
military-industrial complex are the triadic forces that have governed
liberalism and their collective influence is shaping neofeudal trajectories.
If the
power of finance explains the lopsided U.S. governmental response to the
financial crisis, it is the power of energy industries that explains the utter
disregard for human life that is defining the early years of the twenty-first
century. Thus, the second main part of this book provides two very specific
case examples that illustrate the global power of transnational energy companies
and their blatant disregard for the welfare of populations, even when facing
death, using the examples of the BP Gulf oil spill in 2010 and the Fukushima
nuclear disaster in 2011. The argument will be made that the scale of these
crises together eclipse nearly all other human wrought disasters and that they
alone are capable of killing millions. Yet, as will be documented, the response
of governments, especially the U.S. government, has been to deny risks and hide
evidence of contamination threatening the health of the biosphere.
Third, the
book examines the growing climate and water-based vulnerabilities of the
world’s food supply, in conjunction with the deterioration of food security and
nutrition. Food production is becoming less reliable in a context of
increasingly erratic weather brought on by climate change. Furthermore, the
centralization and homogenization of agricultural production create the
conditions of possibility for mass crop failures. Mass-scale industrialization
of farming enables a few transnational corporations to gain control of formerly
locally owned agriculture producing “radical monopolies” of a few, homogeneous
crops (e.g., wheat, palm oil, corn) that offer efficiencies of scale under
ideal operating conditions, but are also subject to mass failures brought upon
by drought, crop diseases, and/or transportation disruptions.[xiii]
Furthermore, the shrinking availability of fertile land and fresh water in
conjunction with land speculation by wealthy individuals, hedge-funds, and
sovereign wealth funds are fueling speculative “land grabs,” particularly in
Africa, that often take land out of local production.[xiv]
Together, these factors suggest that growing, widespread food and water
shortages loom and these will exacerbate authoritarian responses on the part of
governments and fuel interstate conflicts.
The book
concludes by examining increasing authoritarianism in purportedly democratic
societies such as the US and, concomitant, instances of spontaneous resistance
to the emerging new feudal order. Over the last ten years the U.S. instituted a
vast surveillance network[xv],
militarized its domestic policing,[xvi]
and essentially eliminated habeas corpus with the 2011 Defense Authorization
Bill.[xvii]
Authoritarianism breeds resistance and resistance is growing, both within the
U.S. and globally. Yet, resistance movements face authoritarian responses
because widespread discontent is likely to be framed as threats to “state
security.” This chapter examines the opportunities and challenges of organized
resistance to evolving neofeudal order.
This
prospectus introduces neofeudalism as a popular and academic construct before
outlining the proposed chapters. Marketing information is provided at close of
the prospectus.
Neofeudalism: The Idea and Project Development
Neoliberalism
names the contours of the global system that emerged in the early 1980s through
the efforts of western governments, transnational corporations, and
international governance institutions including trade organizations and
conventions (e.g., WTO) and international governmental banks (IMF, World Bank,
Bank of International Settlements). Arguably, the biggest transnational players
responsible for influencing economic trajectories and national industrial
priorities include the financial industry, energy industries (oil and nuclear),
“defense”/weapons industries, and chemical and seed industries (e.g., Monsanto,
Dow). The neoliberal order has been described in greater detail elsewhere, but,
briefly summarized, its homogenizing mantra includes privatization,
de-regulation, “free” trade, unregulated capital flows, and limits on
social-welfare spending. These policies benefit the dominant financial, energy,
and chemical/seed industries based in the U.S. by facilitating their expansion
globally. Resistance to U.S. energy and strategic agendas by developing nations
results in financial and military repercussions, as evidenced by increasing
U.S. military assaults against countries in the Middle East and Africa,
including Syria, Pakistan, and Yemen. Defense contractors have thrived in the
endless wars that commenced with the US assault against Iraq and Afghanistan
after the September 11 attack in 2001.
Although
the neoliberal mantra was never fully implemented and its expressions took many
forms depending upon the unique characteristics of each country, the net result
of neoliberal policies in the developing world was growing impoverishment,
inequality and fewer governmental supports for impoverished populations.[xviii]
Neoliberal policies in the developed economies were not uniformly applied,
particularly in Western Europe by the institutionalized social-welfare state.
The U.S., perhaps more than any other developed economy, incorporated
neoliberal logics and policies by instituting “free trade” in the absence of
labor and environmental protections (e.g., NAFTA), by de-regulating industry
and underfunding regulatory institutions, and by dismantling social-welfare programs
(e.g., Clinton’s welfare reform) vastly expanding the state’s repressive
policing of poor populations while increasingly outsourcing penal operations to
private contractors.
The
neoliberal order produced all manner of cultural dissent in both developed and
developing economies. Trade unionists, artists, activists and academics across
the globe decried the economic instability and insecurity produced by the
neoliberal order, as well as the growing use of force to guarantee it in the
form of private security forces and invading armed forces, particularly those
led by the US after September 11. Within the U.S., leftist critiques of the
neoliberal order have proliferated and circulate on the Internet as engaging
activists, such as Naomi Klein and John Perkins, and gadfly journalists (e.g.,
Matt Taibbi and Max Keiser) offer concise critiques in YouTube videos. Right-leaning,
libertarian heroes, such as Alex Jones, offer slightly more conspiratorial
accounts, but often share the left’s alarm about unfettered corporate power and
growing militarization of US policing and surveillance. Anarchist youtube
videos warn of a sinister “new world order” aimed at producing a one-world
government that would control all critical natural resources while seeking to
depopulate the planet.
The
financial crisis that so surprised U.S. government authorities in the fall of
2007 was not so surprising to the populist critics who had observed two decades
of widespread fraud and corruption in US corporate accounting and financial
services (e.g., Enron, Waste Management, the dot.com crash, etc.). Perhaps what
did surprise observers was the entirely lopsided response on the part of the
U.S. government. The U.S. government spent trillions backstopping the banks and
insurance companies by while only $787 billion was allocated to stimulus
spending, almost none of which was dedicated to relieving the underlying
problem of inflated mortgages and collapsing credit for average Americans.[xix] The U.S. taxpayers’ exposure to the troubled
insurer of credit default swaps, AIG, was $163 billion alone by March of 2009. Goldman
Sachs, which was not part of the FDIC program and therefore ineligible for
government aid, received $70 billion in combined funds from TARP, the Federal
Reserve, AIG, and the FDIC.[xx] In contrast, struggling homeowners received no
government assistance and many continued to lose their homes in the wake of
evidence of widespread foreclosure fraud and evidence that banks that received
bailout funds had deliberately indebted local communities.[xxi]
Government’s
priorities were reflected in the lopsided allocation of funds to banks,
including investment banks that should not have been eligible for relief, and
the unlimited backstopping of AIG’s credit default swaps while average
Americans saw work hours and income collapse. Furthermore, the US government
declined to prosecute those financial agents responsible for the crisis, for
betting against clients, and for profiteering subsequently in rampant foreclosure
fraud.[xxii]
Economist Simon Johnson observed:
"The US increasingly displays characteristics that we have seen many times
in middle-income “emerging markets” – new dimensions of vast inequality, forms
of financial instability that benefit the best connected, and consistently easy
credit for the privileged."[xxiii]
The
collective welfare of the population was clearly not the priority of US policy
makers nor was it the priority of the U.S. based transnational corporations it
succored. The dispossession of the population was confirmed by the events and response
to BP’s Deepwater Horizon disaster in 2010 and then subsequently by the
dispossession of US populations subject to (at the time of this writing) nine
continuous months of Fukushima fallout from the explosion of aging General
Electric reactors in Japan after a large earthquake and tsunami. The welfare of
the population had apparently ceased to exist as an end of the U.S. government.
What
kind of global (dis)order is emerging in the wake of the dislocations of the
global financial crisis and the disaster-amplified environmental apocalypse
affected (primarily) by carbon-based and nuclear-based fuel production and
consumption? This book describes the contours of the emerging global (dis)order
using neofeudalism as its organizing frame. The critical point organizing this
discussion is that neofeudalism rejects the premise that the population is the
primary (or even secondary) source of value.
Therefore, the organizing logics that
are emerging out of the wreckage of the neoliberal global system can no longer
be regarded properly as “liberal,” since liberalism, as an economic and
political philosophy first articulated at the close of the eighteenth century, represented
the welfare of nations in terms of the productive capabilities of populations.
What comes
after neoliberalism is neofeudalism. It is appropriate to examine Wikipedia’s
definition of the concept given that its discourse is primarily electronic:
Neofeudalism literally means "new feudalism" and
implies a contemporary rebirth of policies of governance and economy reminiscent of
those present in many pre-industrial feudal
societies. The concept is one in which government policies are instituted with
the effect (deliberate or otherwise) of systematically increasing the wealth gap between the rich and the poor while increasing the power of the rich and
decreasing the power of the poor (also see wealth condensation). This effect is considered to be similar to the effects
of traditional feudalism.
Wikipedia’s definition emphasizes
economic policies and practices that shift wealth from the majority of the
population to elite groups.
Academic
use of the term has been relatively limited. Harold J. Perkins 1999 book, The Third Revolution: Professional Elites in the Modern World,
described neofeudalism as the concentration of the production of goods and
services in large corporations. Noam Chomsky’s 2003 book Hegemony or Survival doesn’t actually use the phrase neofeudalism, but suggests that the
gradual reduction and planned privatization of social-welfare programs such as
social security and education are “reminiscent of feudalism.” Mark Mirabello’s 2009 Handbook for Rebels and Outlaws briefly
describes neofeudalism as “a system in which an elite of
technocrats, strategists, and corporate barons control the country, with the
rest of the population effectively denied any meaningful decision-making role”[xxiv]
(p. 188). Chris Hedges’ 2010 Death of the
Liberal Class argues that unfettered capitalism is “plunging” society into
a state of “neofeudalism” (p. 156). Hedges uses the term twice in his recent
book but doesn’t elaborate in detail what is meant by neofeudalism. Garrett Johnson’s 2011 essay, “Slouching
Toward Neofeudalism,” published at Huffington
Post, probably offers the most detailed
exegesis of the concept:
Neofeudalism is a concept in which government policies
are designed to systematically increase the wealth gap between rich and poor
while increasing the power of the rich over the poor. It's a party-neutral
idea. There is no cabal pushing the plan, merely the sum effect of pressure
from the wealthy elite… Another manifestation of neofeudalism is the growing
power of corporations, that leave the poor dependent on private interests more
powerful than the government, a situation resembling traditional feudal
society. Currently the top 1% of society own 40% of the nation's wealth.
The lower 50% of the nation have the mean assets worth less than $28,000. The
richest 10% are worth, on average, 143 times that, or $3.976 million.
Neofeudalism emerges across these accounts as an evolving form of social
organization dominated by corporations and elites capable of subordinating both
individuals and the state to their ends.
This book examines the
idea that neofeudalism is emerging as the dominant logic of social
organization. The defining features of neofeudalism to be examined empirically
and theoretically include the following:
Oligarchic transnational corporate control of domestic and international markets
in the critical areas of food and energy
Population’s feudal-like dependence on corporations for sustenance in a
context of job losses and structural adjustment to government education and
anti-poverty programs
Subordination of state purpose to private corporate agendas, as evidenced
by the Deepwater Horizon incident and handling of nuclear regulatory policy and
radioactive fallout in the wake of Fukushima
Militarization of state and society in defense of overseas corporations’
neofeudal pursuits
State dispossession of population as an end of government
Criminalization of poverty
Several
of the bulleted items have been well documented, primarily in economic analyses
and sociological critiques of neoliberalism. However, there has been no
systematic integration of the literature that explicates an emerging form of
social organization fundamentally disconnected from twentieth century liberal,
western capitalism.
In examining the evolving neofeudal order, this book will be among the
first to demonstrate how neoliberal structural adjustment programs formerly
reserved for developing economies are being applied in the U.S. and Europe in
the wake of the disaster capitalism of the financial crisis. This discussion of
structural adjustment is considered in tandem with developments in the state’s
surveillance and repressive apparatuses, including Internet surveillance,
legislative erosion of habeas corpus, and militarization of domestic policing (e.g.,
through the proposed Sections 1031, 1032, and 1036 in S. 1253, the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012). Finally, these developments
are considered in the context of the rising threat of scarcity caused by
depleted fresh water supplies, erratic climate, and looming energy constraints.
The book contends that human resilience and the resilience of the entire
biosphere are threatened by the convergence of austerity and ruthless
exploitation.
[ii] Bob Ivry, Bradley Keoun and Phil Kuntz . Secret Fed Loans Helped Banks Net $13B. Bloomberg.com (2011, November 27):
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-11-28/secret-fed-loans-undisclosed-to-congress-gave-banks-13-billion-in-income.html.
[iii] Bill Moyers, Simon Johnson and James
Kwak Bill Moyers Journal [on-line]
(2010, April 16): http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/04162010/profile.html.
[iv]
National Family Farm Coalition. “Food,
Inc. and Fresh: Facts and Solutions Needed to Fix the Food System.” NFFC.Net (no date): http://www.nffc.net/Learn/Fact%20Sheets/food%20inc%20and%20fresh.pdf.
[v] Robert Lezner. “Capital Gains: Top .1% Earn ½ Capital Gains. Forbes (2011, Nov 20): http://www.forbes.com/sites/robertlenzner/2011/11/20/the-top-0-1-of-the-nation-earn-half-of-all-capital-gains/.
[vi]
Henry Blodget. “Here Are
Four Charts That Explain What The Protesters Are Angry About...”Business Insider (2011, Oct 15): http://www.businessinsider.com/here-are-the-four-charts-that-explain-what-the-protesters-are-angry-about-2011-10?utm_source=twbutton&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=bi#ixzz1b3DqeIBh.
[vii]
Pew Research Center. “The Great
Recession at 30 Months.” Pew Research
Center [on-line] (2010, June 30). Available: http://pewresearch.org/pubs/1643/recession-reactions-at-30-months-extensive-job-loss-new-frugality-lower-expectations.
[viii]
Frances Fox Piven. “The War
Against the Poor.” TomDispatch.Com (2011,
Nov 6): http://www.tomdispatch.com/post/175463/tomgram%3A_frances_fox_piven%2C_the_war_on_the_home_front/#more).
[ix]
McKinnon, J. D. (Deficit
panel stresses spending cuts. The Wall
Street Journal (2010, July 1): A6.
[x] International Forum on Globalization Results
from the IFG Board of Directors Meeting January 28-30, 2011. http://www.ifg.org/pdf/IFG-2011-Strategic-Program-Plan-8pg.pdf
[xi] Citigroup
Equity Strategy: Plutonomy: Buying
Luxury, Explaining Global Imbalances (2005, October 16): 1, http://www.scribd.com/doc/6674234/Citigroup-Oct-16-2005-Plutonomy-Report-Part-1.
[xii] Citigroup, 1-2.
[xiii]
Ivan Illich. Tools for
Conviviality. 1973. Available: http://www.preservenet.com/theory/Illich/IllichTools.html
[xiv]
See J. Vidal, J. (2010, March 7).
How food and water are driving a 21st century African land grab. The Guardian (2010, March 7): http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/mar/07/food-water-africa-land-grab
and World Bank. Rising Global Interest in Farmland. Can it Yield Sustainable
and Equitable Benefits? (2010, September 7): http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTARD/Resources/ESW_Sept7_final_final.pdf.
[xv]
See Dana Priest and William M. Arkin. Top Secret America: The Rise of the
New American Security State. New York: Little Brown and Company, 2011.
[xvi] Arthur Rizer and Joseph Harman. How the War on Terror Militarized the Police. The Atlantic (2011, November 9): http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2011/11/how-the-war-on-terror-has-militarized-the-police/248047/.
[xvii]
ACLU letter to Honorable Patrick
Leahy concerning Detention Authority Provisions in S1253(2011, July 1).
Available: http://www.aclu.org/files/assets/aclu_letter_to_sjc_on_ndaa.pdf.
[xviii]
Mike Davis. Planet of Slums. London: Verso, 2006.
[xix] The May 2009 Atlantic states only $787 billion went
to the stimulus spending (i.e., “American Recovery and Reinvestment Act”)
compared to $3.25 trillion for the bailout “Cash Machine,” 58-59.
[xx] Dylan Ratigan “Goldman Sachs' Black
Magic, Here's How They Did It,” The Huffington Post (2009, October 16):
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dylan-ratigan/goldman-sachs-black-magic_b_324095.html.
[xxi] For instance, Goldman
and J.P. Morgan indebted local municipal entities and school districts by selling interest rate swaps that ended up
exponentially increasing the interest rates these public entities were forced to
pay on their debt, resulting in bankruptcies, raided public pensions, and/or
higher local taxes.[xxi]
Goldman and other investment banks also sold synthetic collateralized debt
obligations to public entities, which they subsequently wagered against See for
example, Janet Tavakoli “Goldman Sachs: Spinning Gold,” Huffington Post (2010, April 7): from
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/janet-tavakoli/goldman-sachs-spinning-go_b_528144.html.
[xxiii] Simon Johnson “Who is Carlos Slim,” Baseline Scenario (2009, October 17): http://baselinescenario.com/2009/10/17/who-is-carlos-slim/.
[xxiv]
p. 188.
Spent all day adding resources to my anti-nuke website.
ReplyDeletePlease check it out, drop a comment.
http://nukepimp.blogspot.com/
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteI finished organizing a new Nuclear and Radiation resource blog.
ReplyDelete18 categorized pages
many links.
Quite a bit of original material I produced myself.
Blog format, with comments
Check it out
http://nukepimp.blogspot.com/
I think your book is going to be great. I can't wait to read it.
ReplyDelete