(päivitetty 6.4.2009)
Kapitalismi ’09 jatkaa vuonna 2008 aloitettua kapitalismin nykytilaa käsittelevien kansainvälisten tapahtumien sarjaa. Helsingissä Vanhalla ylioppilastalolla (Mannerheimintie 3) torstaina, 23.4. klo 11-16 järjestettävässä tilaisuudessa luonnostellaan kapitalistiselle talousjärjestelmälle vaihtoehtoja. Tilaisuus on englanninkielinen ja sinne on vapaa pääsy. Keskustelua jatketaan illalla Café Mascotissa (Neljäs linja 2) Maailmanpoliittisissa rockiltamissa musiikin ja poliittisten debattien merkeissä. Iltamissa esiintyvät Maria Gasolina ja Porvarihallitus. Liput iltamiin maksavat 7/5 euroa.
Kriisi on avannut historiallisen mahdollisuuden muutokseen. On esitettävä vaihtoehtoja, jotka lisäävät ihmisten todellista päätösvaltaa ja vaikutusmahdollisuuksia omaan elämäänsä. Kapitalismi ’09 ottaa kunnianhimoiseksi tavoitteekseen näiden vaihtoehtojen luonnostelemisen.
Puhujina ovat muun muassa globaalin kapitalismin poliittista ja lainopillista pohjaa sekä uusia poliittisen toimijuuden muotoja tutkiva Stephen Gill (Yorkin yliopisto), joka aloittaa elokuussa Helsingin yliopiston tutkijakollegiumin ajankohtaisen yhteiskuntatutkimuksen professorina, globaalin talous- ja sukupuolijärjestelmän välisiä suhteita tutkiva Isabella Bakker (Yorkin yliopisto), ilmastonmuutoksen ja kapitalismin suhdetta käsittelevä aktivisti ja tutkija Tadzio Müller (Kasselin yliopisto), Transnational Instituten uuden politiikan ohjelman tutkimusjohtaja ja Red Pepper -lehden päätoimittaja Hilary Wainwright, kansanedustaja Oras Tynkkynen sekä muita kansainvälisiä ja kotimaisia vieraita. (Lisätietoja puhujista alla)
Stephen Gill: Political Reflections on the Global Financial and Economic Crisis
Klo 12.30
Capitalism and climate change
Oras Tynkkynen: Can growth be green? The case for a green economy
Tadzio Müller: Green New Deal: ’accumulate, accumulate, accumulate, that is Moses and the prophets!’
Klo 14
Reclaiming everyday life from the intrusion of capitalism
Isabella Bakker:The Financial Crisis, Risk and Social Reproduction
Hilary Wainwright: Rethinking the public in the face of the crisis of the market
(klo 19-02, Cafe Mascot, 4 linja 2, Hki – liput 7/5 euroa ovelta)
klo 19.30 Postcapitalist finance?
Stephen Gill and Markus Jäntti; with Otto Bruun
klo 20.30 Postcapitalist Europe?
Hilary Wainwright (Red Pepper), Tadzio Müller (turbulence.org.uk) and Petter Nilsson (Centrum för marxistiska samhällsstudier); with Emilia Palonen
klo 21.30 Porvarihallitus (kilpailukyky-undergroundia)
klo 22.30 Maria Gasolina (Drum’n’Bossaa)
Tapahtumien pääjärjestäjiä ovat Vasemmistofoorumi ja Helsingin yliopiston Attac. Tapahtuma järjestetään yhteistyössä Helsingin yliopiston maailmanpolitiikan oppituolin, Kansan Sivistystyön Liiton, Työväen Sivistysliiton , Rakennusliiton , Transform! Europen , Le Monde Diplomatique Suomen , Ydin-lehden ja Demokratiafoorumi Vasudhaiva Kutumbakamin kanssa.
Stephen Gill toimii Yorkin yliopistossa Torontossa valtio-opin professorina. Hänet tunnetaan erityisesti globaalin poliittisen talouden tutkijana. Gill aloittaa elokuussa Helsingin yliopiston tutkijakollegiumin ajankohtaisen yhteiskuntatutkimuksen professorina. Hänen tutkimusintressejään ovat muun muassa globaalin kapitalismin poliittisen ja lainopillisen pohjan tutkiminen sekä uudet poliittisen toimijuuden muodot.
– Power and Resistance in the New World Order. Palgrave Macmillan, 2003, second edition 2008.
– Power, Production and Social Reproduction: Human Insecurity in the Global Political Economy. Palgrave Macmillan, 2004, with Isabella Bakker.
– Innovation and Transformation in International Studies. Cambridge UP, 1997, With James Mittelman
– Globalization, Democratization and Multilateralism. Macmillan, 1997.
– Gramsci, Historical Materialism and International Relations. Cambridge UP, 1993.
– Atlantic Relations: Beyond the Reagan Era. St Martin’s, 1989.
– The Global Political Economy: perspectives, problems and policies. Johns Hopkins UP, 1988.
The financial and economic crisis — which appears to be simply a crisis that is internal to the functioning of global capitalism — is in reality part of a much wider and deeper global crisis. In this state of economic emergency, those mainly responsible for the policies that led to the financial collapse have claimed the right to produce the solutions ˆ with relatively little significant challenge from the progressive lefts. What is needed however is a new way to think through global challenges in ways that go beyond the confines of narrow solutions that simply favour capital. In my lecture I will therefore outline some principles and policies for the progressive lefts to consider: in fiscal policy, on lifestyles and sustainability, on public services, on the ageing society and in education and culture.
verojärjestelmien, ja sukupuolikysymysten välisiin yhteyksiin. Hän tutkii lisäksi talouden vaikutuksia elämän edellytyksiin globaalissa Pohjoisessa ja Etelässä. Bakker on sukupuolisensitiivisen budjetoinnin asiantuntija ja hän on toiminut näiden kysymysten parissa muun muassa YK:n, UNIFEMin, UNDP:n ja OECD:n palveluksessa.
I will argue that the financial crisis and the response to it underscores the privatization of risk for the majority and also the gendered nature of economic systems. Three brief examples will illustrate this point. The first concerns the various stimulus packages that are being set into motion in many of the G8 countries. The second concerns the health and knock-on effects of the crisis both in the Third World and in Eastern Europe, and my final example refers to the way in which the costs of social reproduction are borne unequally by women across the social spectrum in both global North and the global South. Finally, I will outline some alternative political responses that progressives should argue for that take into account social reproduction – addressing the care debt; creating new values and ideas of social solidarity and socializing risk.
Tadzio Müller asuu Berliinissä, jossa hän toimii
ilmastotoimintaliikkeessä ja opettaa valtio-oppia Kasselin
yliopistossa. Hän on yksi Turbulence-lehden toimittajista. Müller on
vihreän kapitalismin kriitikko ja hän on kirjoittanut muun muassa "20 teesiä vihreää kapitalismia vastaan":
Social movement debates about climate change are increasingly framed in tired clichés: wild-eyed radicals pushing for a rejection of established climate policy (emissions trading, carbon offsets, other techno-social fixes) against reasonable moderates with tropes such as "the problem is too urgent to wait for the revolution".
However, there has been only one process in the last twenty years that has led to a significant reduction of greenhouse gas emissions: the collapse of the Eastern European economies in the early 1990s; and one that promises to have a similar effect, namely the current world economic crisis, which has reduced demand for fossil fuels. What do these processes have in common? Drastic reductions in economic growth rates. Allthewhile there have been two processes at the international level that have not led to significant emissions reductions: the market mechanisms of governmental climate politics, and attempts to increase the proportion of renewable energies in the energy mix. Is it maybe the ’anticapitalist radicals’ that have realism on their side, while it is the moderates whose position is just wishful thinking? Do we maybe have to achieve more than a mere ’greening’ of growth – do we maybe have to tackle our addiction to economic growth itself?
kansanedustaja ja kaupunginvaltuutettu. Hän on eduskunnan ympäristövaliokunnan jäsen. Vihreässä
eduskuntaryhmässä Tynkkynen vastaa ilmasto- ja energiapolitiikasta. Toukokuusta 2007 alkaen hän on toiminut valtioneuvoston ilmastopoliittisena asiantuntijana.
The world is facing an ecological crisis. A radical increase in eco-efficiency is required to meet people’s legitimate needs while dramatically reducing environmental impacts.
There is reason to believe that the economy can grow while rapidly cutting pollution, waste and resource consumption. However, this will require a paradigm shift in economic policies.
Market-based mechanisms can have a significant role in recreating a green economy. Neglecting or even actively opposing economic measures would only serve continued overexploitation of the environment.
HILARY WAINWRIGHT
We face the implosion of the institutions of the profit-maximising market without adequate institutions to maximise public benefit.
I speak from the experience of the UK , the hot-house of neo-liberalism but unfortunately the fungus bred in that hot-house spread to become the dominant economic paradigm of the past twenty years or so. And so thoughts from the UK about how to break decisively from that paradigm are, I think, relevant.The contribution I want to make to this task is around the question of the public sector.
In the immediate post-war years in the British context as elsewhere, public services, public housing and the public industries represented a strong recognition, in practice and in political culture, of the importance of institutions working in the public interest. A problem which began to become apparent by the late 1960’s was that the institutional forms through which the public interest was identified and expressed in these years were in fact inadequately accountable to the actual living public. They were very paternalistic – a legacy perhaps of the war.
The movements of the 60’s and the 70’s (students, feminists, tenants, claimants, teachers and so on) were the first attempt to remedy this, demanding greater control over and democratic participation in running of public institutions. Looking back one might say that the weakness of these movements was that we did n’t produce sufficiently resilient new institutions. But whatever theie failings or however we explain their weaknesses, their attempts to experiment with more responsive, genuinely public, institutions were swept aside by the rampant individualism of Thatcher’s neo-liberalism.
The public sector really has no place in neo-liberalism. Governments guided by this pernicious creed – Conservative and New Labour – have in practice and in ideology systematic eroded the legitimacy and viability of the public sector.
In practice all too many state institutions that were originally founded to promote the public interest have been fragmented and deskilled or remodelled on a market driven model. Ideologically and culturally, public service values have been devalued
and public servants persistently attacked.
The result – of both the incomplete process of reform of the 60’s and 70’s and the neo-liberal onslaught of the last twenty years and more – is that just when institutions are needed to pursue public interests in relation to financial markets, to counter recession and genuinely to green the economy, public institutions are weak and lacking in confidence and capacity. Moreover politicians hold to a self-fulling prophecy that they have no legitimacy; they are not prepared to risk rebuilding such legitimacy. The public are in a state of confusion. And uncertainty
In this context the rethinking of the public in theory and in pratice is urgent.
In many ways practice is at this time ahead of theory. Though there are insights from the late 60’s and 70’s on which we can draw in thinking about the practice of today.
