9/22/2017

Neoliberal Separatism. The catalan case

 


Catalan Flag after  1-O

Neoliberal Separatism , the catalan case



Natalie Sabanadze in hes book Globalization and Nationalism: The Cases of Georgia and the Basque Country, unlike the conventional explanation that argues that globalization and nationalisme are opposing and conflicting positions, argues that, at present, globalization and nationalism tend to become allied forces.


She recognizes that nationalism reacts against growing globalization and represents a form of resistance to globalizing influences, but when studying specific cases such as the cases of Georgia and the Basque Country, there is an apparent paradox. In the case of Georgia as well as in the Basque Country, there is little evidence to suggest the existence of strong politically organized nationalist opposition to globalization if not on the contrary, it is the nationalists who are most dazzled by globalization. These are pro-globalization nationalisms, which leads she to conclude that globalization and nationalism are complementary and non-contradictory forces.

Sabanadze's error is that although she recognize two kinds of nationalism, one anti-globalization and another pro-globalization, she is not capable of solving the apparent paradox since she does not go deeper into the analysis of the functionality of the second type.

In fact Sabanadze's approach is veiled because she does not thoroughly analyze the mechanism of capitalist globalization.

Capitalism needs nation-states, a precise institutional legal framework that strictly protects their property rights and regulates their markets. But this framework can turn against it as long as the power of the state falls into inadequate hands.

A democratic state, in which 99% of the losers of monopoly globalization can vote, is dangerous for multinationals, the more so the greater the state. Several big centralized nation-states can sign agreements to harmonize financial, industrial, fiscal, environmental, health, social, labor, etc. policies. which are detrimental to their interests.

To shield the interests of the 1%, a legion of economists (Friedrick von Hayek, Milton Friedman, Stephen Gills, James Buchanan, Barry Weingast, etc.) have for decades been designing strategies to neutralize democracy by subordinating political order to economic neoliberal order.

Globalizers design various types of strategies to discipline states and empty them of economic governance.

Monopolization and the "free" international mobility of capital (through liberalized financial markets and free trade enhance the disciplinary effect on democracies, and thus constitute the key element of neoliberal globalization. Capital momobility force states to practice democratic dumping to compete for transnational monopoly capital, providing the kind of neoliberal policies that investors and multinational corporations demand.

Globalizing strategies from above: International organizations and treaties



In order to ensure the submission of States and the international mobility of capital, supranational mechanisms such as the International Monetary Fund (liberalization of the capital market are a condition of membership), the World Trade Organization (WTO) , the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), the Single European Act, etc., have been created, all with specific clauses that ensure the free mobility of transnational direct investment.

Other examples of mechanisms to block the intervention of States are the provisions on intellectual property rights of investors contained in various trade agreements. The WTO Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property (TRIPS) and Chapter 11 of NAFTA are just two examples of provisions to set States on the bench where multinational corporations consider that government policies have violated their rights. The TPP and the TTIP would abound exponentially in this line.

Globalizing strategies from below: Federalism and neoliberal nationalism



Neoliberalism is perfecting two below strategies designed  to neutralize the capacity of government intervention in the economy and its possible anti-globalization reaction:  neoliberal federalism and neoliberal separatism.

Neoliberal Federalism, the USAID Handbook



Adam Hanieh: "Neoliberalism promotes decentralization to displace the resistance that the states can offer under the pressure of their citizens."

A Google search 'market-preserving federalism' and you have a long list of articles defending federalism as the best political weapon for the defense of the neoliberal monopoly market in the face of possible democratic reaction of the states. Wikipedia define "market preserving federalism" federalism as "federalism to preserve the market," it proposes to decentralize authority to formulate economic policies, this federalism reduces the ability of the central government to act arbitrarily (it has renounced these powers) and subnational governments face competition among them for scarce capital and labor. "

USAID (the leading agency in the promotion of global neoliberalism) has edited a manual titled Decentralization and Democratic Local Governance Programming (May 2000), which serves as a detailed recipe to promote decentralization in a variety of different national contexts where there may be resistance to neoliberal reforms.

A central theme of this manual is the shifting of responsibility for the provision of public services from the state to local governments. The manual provides for a situation where: "Local governments must do more than simply clean up the streets; they must assume a variety of responsibilities for non-traditional services such as securing primary health care, basic education, security public, public services, environmental protection, and building regulation."

In order to provide these services, local governments will be forced to increase their own incomes, and enter into competition to privatize, and borrow money on international capital markets. "They may employ new or innovative approaches, including public-private partnerships, proactive participation in development programs with national government or donors, and outsourcing of services."

"Build subnational administrative capacities to develop transparent and accountable budgets under the law of effectiveness and carry out local economic development .... and strengthen the capacity of local authorities to participate in discussions on appropriate devolution of responsibility at local levels of government. "

To ensure market discipline in the context of a country, a type of federalism is promoted where sub-national governments compete to attract capital in the context of a national economy.

Hayek argues that "the ideal outcome would be the transformation of local and even regional governments into quasi-commercial corporations competing with each other to attract investors."

The mobility of capital creates a kind of "market" for government policies in which firms demand to locate in those jurisdictions that offer them the most favorable mix of taxes and services.

The federal states (or the autonomies as in the case of Spain), for their part, will have a primary regulatory responsibility for the economy (fiscal, social, labor, health, environment, etc.) so that they should flexibilizar their political jurisdictions to compete among themselves, in a race to the bottom, in order to attract the elusive and capricious capital. The greater the degree of federalism or autonomy of the states (Spain, Germany, USA), better the respond  to the interests of the large neo-liberal monopolist groups.

It also promotes the autonomy and competition between "local communities" in terms of pro-globalization policies as well as a mechanism to compensate for market failures. This is another area in which cities or regions urban areas become important in the neoliberal project, since they are the main sites of the citizens' initiative, and where economic and social tensions are accumulated as a result of neoliberal projects.

Neo-liberal separatism


In 1992 the Dutch entrepreneur Freddy Heineken proposed a US of Europe. The book, Eurotopia,
proposed breaking the larger European countries into a number of smaller, more ethnically and linguistically homogeneous states.




Map of Europe proposed by Heineken / Van den Doel / Wesseling (1992)


Heineken with the advice of historians Henk Wesseling and Wim van den Doel designed a Europe composed of states with approximately 5 to 10 million citizens according to the map attached. Under the motto of the small is beautiful (evidently not referring to its brewing emporium), the administration in the mini states could be more efficient.
A more ambitious neoliberal option is the promotion of separatism. The large state entities (France, England, Spain, Italy, Germany, etc.) represent a danger to the advance of globalization since they are susceptible of deviation for the left or economic nationalism in the face of the neoliberal monopolistic multipolar crisis. Better than federated states or autonomous communities, why not small independent states competing to death each other to attract the investments of the elusive monopoly capital? The Scottish tiger, the Gaelic tiger, the Catalan tiger, the Piedmon tiger, etc. all ready to tear the skin off anyone who dares to confront neo-liberal monopolistic globalization. (The request of the Bavarian party for a secessionist referendum was rejected by the Federal Constitutional Court of Germany in January 2017)

The previous trials took place in Eastern Europe with the dismemberment of the USSR and the shredding of Yugoslavia and Czechoslovakia. All the new independent states came to compete with each other by privatizing their state assets and bursting their labor and social legislation to attract investment, thinking that neoliberal globalization would improve their lives. Today the most absolute failure of this dream is evident and a nationalist anti-globalization reaction is taking place in many of them (Hungary, Slovakia, Serbia, Poland, Czech Republic, etc.)

Catalan neoliberal separatism (catalexit)


The most paradigmatic and exemplary case of separatism promoted by globalized capital is that of Catalan separatism of the 21st century. Catalan wealthy classes have seen the possibility of enriching themselves on a global scale, separating the autonomous region from the rest of Spain with international support in face of the threat of a leftist escalation after 11M. From the outset they hope to quickly reintegrate the new independent state into the international agencies, mechanisms and forums of globalized capitalism.

Monopoly neoliberal system caught a death scare in 2011 when it burst the 15 M. The squares of Madrid and Barcelona full to brim with indignants against the system.

 Madrid and Barcelona 15M

Not a Spanish flag, no catalanista flag, and new budding political formations with ability to pass over corrupt Spanish and Catalan pro-business politics.

From then on, Catalan independence began to find support in neoliberal forums, especially Anglo-Saxon, while the EU mercilessly smashed the aspirations of the Greek nation, set in Syriza. It was necessary to replace the indignados against the system by separatist nationalists indignant with Spain.

The mechanism for the catalexit is of the purest neoliberal design. It takes advantage of a first "autonomous" phase in which the disaffected Catalan autonomous community takes advantage of all decentralized mechanisms and resources (autonomous government and parliament, autonomous legislation, assets and public companies, ceded taxes, press, radio and autonomic public television, police , etc.) to meticulously prepare for secession.

The experience of other "revolutionaryt" nationalist attempts, promoted, supported and often financed directly by globalized monopoly capital (Soros, and company), calls for the intervention of disenfranchised "leftists" (CUPs and elements from other leftist parties) as a nationalist clash force.

They convert the autonomic elections of September 27, 2015 to a supposedly "plebiscitarian" votation, uniting all the nationalist forces  in a unique candidacy denominated "Junts pel si" (All together  for the Yes"). The coalition, in spite of a lying campaign worthy of Goebbels (they control the TV3, the public autonomic TV), only got 48% of the votes thanks to the unexpected massive participation. However, the separatists, thanks to a favorable electoral law, gained more parlament seats and finally formed autonomic government thanks to the support of the CUP.

Changed foot timing


From then on all the autonomic machinery was readjusted to prepare the secession. The 2015 campaign was amplified over the next two years. The TV3 (Catalan public TV), became a kind of permanent selfie of the virtual reality of the separatist process.

But the accumulation of reality manipulation and/or information lies seems to have affected the heads of the process of secession more than the whole population, so that they began to set concrete dates, a rigid and inflexible strategy  with no other exit than the victimism before the predictable reaction of the Spanish state.

 

But the independence timing  do not corresponded with the neoliberal timing. All the promises of neoliberal forums and media vanished. Scotish separatism inducing brexit, defeated Syriza, Podemos in free fall and Rajoy as the best European adalit of drastic neoliberal reforms, the moment chosen for independence could not be worse.

Economic consequences of catalexit



Given the high specialization of Catalonia in the sale of products to the rest of Spain, it is estimated that in the middle scenario catalexit would mean a 44% drop in bilateral trade. Thus, Catalan GDP would fall by 14% and unemployment would increase by 16%.

The United Kingdom occupies the 9th position in the world ranking of competitiveness, Spain occupies the position 35º. By regions London ranks third in the ranking of competitiveness in European regions. Catalonia 142 (the most competitive is the Community of Madrid, which occupies the 57th position).

Should the secession succeed (without violence), the immediate expulsion of the EU would entail putting itself in the line of readmission with the sure threat of the Spanish veto. This long transition would lead to the departure of the European Monetary Union and the Single Mechanism of Financial Supervision.

For Catalonia, the euro would become a foreign currency whose use, if adopted as currency, could increase its exports and dangerously reduce its competitiveness. Outside the Monetary Union, it would be disconnected from the ECB, so that financial institutions domiciled in Catalan territory would lose access to their cheap financing lines.

European subsidies would also disappear from the Structural Funds (the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF), the European Social Fund (ESF), the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) and the European Maritime Fund. (FEMP).

Insecurity would lead to the risk premium at unassuming levels, as it no longer has the protection network of the Spanish State and the finance of the new republic would inevitably sink.

Outside Europe and Spain, exports to these areas are subject to tariffs, as they would no longer benefit from the advantages of belonging to an economic zone with free movement of goods. The payment of these extra costs would make Catalan exports much less competitive.

The separatist "process", if materialized, would reduce the rights, well-being and future of the majority of the Catalans to ashes. The economic impact, even excluding the terrible consequences of a more than possible violent drift of the secessionist processes (it does not seem that the Spaniards are going to let them leave), would be enormous and devastating.

Hence the misrepresentation, lying and systematic manipulation of information (amplified by the work of the public media in their hands: TV3, Radio, regional press, etc.) that are forced by the separatist leaders to hide the reality of the consequences on the population majority.

However, for the global interests of monopoly neoliberalism, the disaster for the majority of the Catalan population would be, as is often the case, a simple collateral effect (as in the case of Ukraine and many other picturesque neoliberal "revolutions").

For the globalized capital, the emergence of the new Catalan republic would mean the end of an ever-latent threat to its interests of a populist, leftist, or simply economic nationalism (such as the English or French case) of the Spanish nation that could drag other great european  nations. The separatists hope to reach a privileged position in the ladder of neoliberal globalization, erecting themselves as a strong bulwarks of globalization.

No wonder the Wall Street Journal controlled by Rupert Murdoch, the Washington Post owned by Jeffry Bezos of Amazon or the Financial Times, fervently applauds the ravages of the increasingly thundering Catalan fury.

Catelexit, a Win Win process for neoliberal monopoly capitalism



For the neoliberal monopoly capital, the secessionist strategy in Europe, and in particular in Spain, is proving beneficial in every way. The separatist threat in Spain, although it may prove to be a failure, is favoring the recovery of the corrupt and asocial neoliberal political class (PP - PSOE) to the detriment of the left, unable to understand the neoliberal character of the new separatism of the 21st century. (CUP) or defending it with more or less nuances (Podemos and their regional variants), which is losing a good part of the possible electoral base.

The neoliberal Macron would be delighted with a secessionist movement of French Catalonia to be able to strain his neoliberal labor reform in the path of Rajoy's. In fact, his predecessor, F. Holande, already initiated in 2014 an express reform of the French territorial scheme * in favor of a greater territorial "economic autonomy".


* The neoliberal pressure was already noted in France with the Constitutional Reform of 17 March 2003, with respect to Title XII of the Constitution, "Of territorial collectivities." The reform seeks to reduce state unitarism by deepening administrative decentralization. The reform enshrines in article 72.2 the financial autonomy of territorial communities, recognizing them in consequence the possibility of fixing the quota of certain taxes, as well as of setting the tax base. But the 2003 reform, although it represents a first step in breaking the classical unity principle of the French unitary state, found strong unitarian opposition and is far from being a political decentralization for the regions compared to the regional model adopted by Spain in the Second Republic (1931) and in 1978, and by Italy in the Constitution of 1947. In these countries the adopted model is the "political" region, that is based on the application of the elective principle to the holders of the governing bodies, the constitutional attribution of legislative powers to regional councils and assemblies, and economic power to the regional executive (participation in national taxes and regulation of certain tax matters). In practice, the Spanish Autonomous Communities have a political power very similar to that of the states in a federal organization, their differences are reduced to the degree of political decentralization.

 Anti-neoliberal Referendums


Bloomberg Businessweek 11-2017: Colombians Yank The Welcome Mat:

Small towns are exercising their constitutional right to block oil and mining projects. Coffee and fruit growers in the mountains around Arbeláez, a small farming town 35 miles from Bogotá, may have a significant amount of oil wealth under their feet. In July they defied the government and foreign investors and voted to leave it there.

In Arbeláez, Colombia, residents voted 4,312 to 38 against allowing Toronto-listed Canacol Energy Ltd. to carry out seismic testing or drill exploratory oil wells. Residents were concerned that the drilling could impact the water supply and would not provide jobs for local residents. The area produces tomatos, peas, blackberries, and other food for larger cities.

The chief executive officer of Canacol said “The worst investment signal for a foreign investor is to invest in a country where there’s no contractual stability”.

Local referendums are increasingly being used to block oil an mining projects, causing alarm among companies. More than 40 such votes are planned, threatening to paralyze exploration across the Andean nation.

There have been more than 40 similar referendums, or popular consultations, in Colombia. As this level of local democracy is enshrined in the national constitution, there is little the federal government can do, even though it could use the foreign direct investment and export earnings. While existing oil and mining operations can not be stopped, any new projects can rejected by local residents. This uncertainty whether a project will or will not go ahead increases the risk for foreign firms interested in investing in Colombia.

Finance Minister Mauricio Cárdenas has said the rules need to change to keep small communities from vetoing projects. But since Colombia’s grants citizens the right to hold these types of referendums and a simple law wouldn’t be sufficient. It is necessary to change the constitution.

In all five of the popular consultations held this year, locals voted overwhelmingly against letting oil and mining companies intro their communities.