I've spent some quality time the last
couple of days with Yanis Varoufakis' The Global Minotaur—an
account of our modern economic history as seen by one of the
chipmunks in the path of the great steamroller. It's a refreshing
read, a familiar story told in a somewhat unfamiliar way. It has
many merits and some provokes a few unevadable
reservation—reservations which I may or may not get to in this
post.
The
spine of the book is V's account of global economic policy from
Bretton Woods forward and in particular, how the US came to dominate
world economic policy for a generation in a structure that (surprise)
the US had created. As V shows, it was a structure that depended on
the US continuing to function as a creditor nation—which it
certainly did, resoundingly, for the first few post-war years (for
convenience, call these “phase I”).
His
account of what you might call “phase II”--the years after Nixon
dumped Bretton Woods and OPEC jacked up oil prices—is intriguing
but less universally plausible. A difficulty with his discussion of
both phases—but more urgent in phase II—is the degree to which V
credits his story to calculation, instead of mere chance. Grant that
Bretton Woods was an act of calculation on the part of the US (or
more precisely, on the part of Harry Dexter White). Still it is
hard to believe that anybody could have—or even presumed
to—forecast in detail all of what actually came to pass. As with
the story of any major policy initiative, there seems to be a lot
more of good luck, bad luck, and sheer blind randomness than V seems
willing to credit.
The
concern is more urgent in “phase II” when, in the standard
narrative, the wheels more or less came off the bus. So much of
post-1971 policy seems to be a mix of improvisation, blind flailing
and serendipity. But remarkably, V seems to try to turn this all
into some kind of grand plan. He has resurrected a speech by Paul
Volcker from 1978 in which Volcker said (per V):
[A] controlled disintegration in the world economy is a legitimate objective for the 1980s.
Now, I
don't know what the hell Volcker thought he was saying in this
remark—was it off the cuff? Was there a context? Was it (one is
genuinely tempted to wonder) an attempt at bleak humor, however out
of place for one in such high office? Whatever. The point is that V
seems to treat it as a statement of considered policy—as if the
Wise Men sat around the polished oak conference table in the Treasury
Department situation room and said “it's agreed then—we'll have a
controlled disintegration.”
Well
of course you can't prove a negative and anyway I wasn't there. But
if it is/was considered policy, you'd have to concede that it was one
that achieved its successes (if any) much more by good luck than by
calculation, and in many cases, did not achieve successes at all (one
can just hear Jimmy Carter when he gets news of the helicopters
crashing in the desert saying “Oh good! Controlled
disintegration!").
So,
modified rapture. Still, you'd have to credit V with important
insights you don't often find elsewhere. One, perhaps most
important, is that it gives you some hint of how we got ourselves
into the mess where we are the world's only banker—and, worse,
where we don't do anything else. The point is, we got here because
we made it so. We
created a system in which we are the banker-of-bankers; having done
so, it's a bit rich for us to be surprised to find ourselves where we
are.
There's
more, and actually I haven't yet finished the last few pages where he
discusses the Europe meltdown which might well be the center of his
expertise. And even though I find a lot of this helpful, he does go
off on one particular tangent which has my head reeling. But I think
I'll leave that one for another hour, or day.
1 comment:
Being the world's reserve currency: as Chalmers Johnson framed it, 'The Sorrows of Empire'
Post a Comment