Michael Gurstein on Mon, 23 Jan 2017 09:44:05 +0100 (CET) |
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
<nettime> The Trump Speech |
There has been, in other contexts, an on-going discussion as to whether Trump's evident rejection of the post-war neo-liberal order is sufficient reason to applaud his victory given that Hillary's win would have further entrenched neo-liberalism as the necessary framework for capitalism going forward and as the dominant ideology in all institutions and as the ever more deeply embedded normative framework for this millennium. Others argue that the other elements of Trumpism outweigh these benefits. I think to reconcile the two positions it is necessary to distinguish the neo-liberal project of "globalization" as initially propelled by the Bretton Woods institutions and then (and somewhat independently) by primarily US corporate interests building on technology change in transportation and communications; from the process of "internationalization" (and to a considerable extent decolonization) initiated by the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the UN institutions which formed parallel to the Bretton Woods institutions. The globalization i.e. neo-liberal project was one where US corporate and political dominance was largely hidden behind a veil of ideological positionings re: "Freedom of this and that. This is what Hillary Clinton, Tony Blair and the "Third Way" politicians globally bought into and rode with great political and personal success over the last several decades. Also, this was the basis for the quite legitimate reaction to the marginalization and impoverishment of the traditional working class and industrial sectors that the Third Way politicians have overlooked and which the Third Order populists such as der Trump, Farage etc.etc. have been allowed to steal from the progressive's agenda; thus putting us all at the risk where we find ourselves today. However, the underlying "internationalization" of transportation and communications links, global behavioural and legal norms, certain global institutions, and the global post-WWII political and diplomatic order has to be seen as distinct from this and one which until fairly recently was broadly accepted globally as the basis for geo-political order going forward-interacting with and generally supporting globalization but with distinct features and partial outcomes. The distinction of course has been diminishing recently with the very broad-based "success" of globalization. And now in more recent times there is the development of the "transnational" global networks such as the Internet and global transportation networks and the networks such as global Civil Society which are built on the Internet as independent elements in linking the various parts of the world. This has partially been associated with those few significant resisters to neo-liberalism such as China, Russia and Iran. What is so startling about Trump's "America First" speech is the way in which he disavows not only globalization which he so forcefully (and I think usefully) critiqued in his campaign, but also it appears, the Post-WWII Geo-political internationalization ordering which among other things has been a basic element in cross-partisan political positions in the US and elsewhere globally (particularly for the EU) for several generations (although attacked by the far right and more recently the Tea Party-ers). What remains to be seen and what is perhaps of most direct interest to the Internet community is his position on the Transnational networks and this includes the Internet. Early indications are that Trump (or handlers his Steve Bannon and V. Putin?) are positive towards for example, the transnational network of the far Right through which Russia is exerting influence in Europe and elsewhere. I think that it is quite possible that Trump et al might look to transnationalization as a substitute for both globalization and internationalization although what form that might take is still unclear but a transnational order linking nationalistic resurgencies in the US, Russia, the UK and elsewhere seems quite evident and quite consistent with the nationalization/transnationalization which China has been attempting in its trade policies and more recently in its policies for Internet governance. M # 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://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org # @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject: