Neoliberalism and Globalization

Following our previous discussions of different aspects of consumption, this week's readings focus on neoliberalism and globalization, which are helpful in terms of conceptualizing the current contexts of production and consumption.

In his survey of possible scenarios for the future of neoliberalism, Clarke points out to the connections between neoliberalism and globalization discourses. Clarke (2010) argues that the effects of more recent global economic crisis and the responses against it were national (p. 387). He also mentions that faith in markets and financial institutions is declining (p. 390). Occupy protests and anti-globalization movement preceding these protests provide examples for that loss of faith. While it is not possible to ignore national responses and nation-states' involvement, it is important to say that even the anti-globalization movement was global in a sense since the critics stood against global corporate capitalism without being confined by their own national or regional identities.

Here, the link between neoliberalism and globalization discourse becomes more visible. The global corporations' operations have heavily relied on neoliberal policies, which were backed up by the institutions like IMF and the World Bank. Harvey (2005) traces this institutional groundwork for neoliberalization back to the Bretton Woods Agreement (p. 10). The Chicago Boys' involvement in Chile's economic and political construction during Pinochet rule provides further information about the role of experts and academics in this institutionalization (p.8). Unsurprisingly, the varying capabilities to influence this process depict the unequal power relations mirroring the colonial and imperial pasts. In that context, Harvey maps the rise of neoliberalism out of elites' need to preserve their power and gives the Latin American examples, where neoliberalism benefited local elites and foreign investors under oppressive military regimes (p. 16).

While Babenco's film Kiss of the Spider Woman, which is based on Argentinian author Manuel Puig's novel, doesn't elaborate much on the context, it provides an example for the ways in which those oppressive regimes functioned. As Harvey also discusses, the institutionalization of neoliberalism that legitimized itself via a freedom based rhetoric did not respect everybody's freedoms and freedom became a token for “free enterprise” (p. 37). Also contradicting the ultimate aim of deregulation, this neoliberal system was made only possible by national and global institutions.

The reactions against this capitalistic vein of neoliberalism are inherent in the critiques of globalization that target global corporations. The intricate relationship between neoliberalism and the globalization discourse is very important since the critics underline how this capitalistic vein blurs the boundaries between neoliberalism and globalization. While there is no consensus on the definitions of neoliberalism and globalization, Clarke's survey of neoliberalism is a good starting point. After surveying the different approaches to neoliberalism, he argues:

First, both political economy and governmentality approaches point to significant changes in the place, scope and character of the‘economic’. Second, what the economic means in these two approaches is radically different where the former designates a real and fundamental economy composed of specific forces, relations and practices, the latter treats the economic as a modality of governing (p. 385).

Then, he states that the current crisis is the crisis of neoliberalism in the political economy sense (p. 386). Clarke's categorization is problematic in a sense that he isolates the governmentality aspect from the political economy aspect. The institutionalization of neoliberalism, as Harvey's survey and Babenco's film show, depicts how governmentality is related to political economy in a complex manner. Clarke's distinction of two approaches via their take on “economic” also veils the artificiality of definitions of “economy,” “economics” and “markets.”

Adding onto the problems of the politics vs. economic distinction (or prioritization of one over the other in terms of determination), cultural studies' take on globalization brings another component into discussion. Hartley's (2004) call for focusing on consumption to bridge “creative economy and its social and cultural impact” while studying globalization is interesting (p. 5). However, this approach also takes the distinctions mentioned above for granted.

A possible direction to avoid these distinctions might be conceptualizing the studies of neoliberalism and globalization around power, which can be utilized for political, economic, and cultural frameworks if necessary.