Andreas Antoniades

Epistemic communities, epistemes and the construction of (world) politics

The article combines the argument about the social construction of reality with a power/knowledge approach to social reality. In this context it is argued that epistemic communities, by being an integral part of the knowledge/power equation, and by having an authoritative claim on knowledge, exercise decisive power in the ‘‘interaction game’’ of the construction of (world) politics. In the first two sections of the article the concepts of reality and epistemic communities are defined. In the third section a two-level model of epistemic communities’ action is developed, aiming at illustrating their role in the construction of world politics. The last section addresses the issue of the relationship between the epistemic and the political.

Examining facets of the hegemonic: the globalisation discourse in Greece and Ireland

ABSTRACT This paper attempts to make a contribution to the study and understanding of the phenomenon of globalization and its interplay with national politico-economic systems. How did globalization resonate and/or dominate in different national contexts? What was the role of national political economies and domestic institutions in this process? What role did specific institutional actors played in it? Focusing on the materialization of globalization discourse in Greece and Ireland, the paper presents three main findings: (i) the reproduction of the Greek and Irish politico-economic systems during the 1990s was dominated, to a significant extent, by the same set of meanings and practices, (ii) the way in which this set of meanings and practices emerged in the two countries was fundamentally different: in Greece it defined a new zone of contestation, whereas in Ireland it defined a new zone of fundamental consensus, (iii) after the end of the 1990s, these two different facets of hegemonic globalization seemed to converge. The paper draws on these findings to examine the role of political economy and domestic institutions in the communication of the hegemonic discourse of globalization.

Producing globalisation: the politics of discourse and institutions in Greece and Ireland

The book scrutinises the nature of the interplay between hegemonic discourses and national institutional settings. The focus is on globalisation. How can we study globalisation in a way that transcends the material/ideational rift? How did globalisation resonate and/or dominate in different national contexts? What was the role of national political economies and domestic institutions in this process? What role did specific institutional actors played in it? How are we to explain the nature of the interplay between globalisation and states? To answer these questions, the book focuses on the post-Cold War period and investigates how the hegemonic discourse of globalisation emerged into two different national politico-economic systems, that of Greece and Ireland (a Mediterranean and an Anglo-Saxon political economy respectively). Instead of taking globalisation as granted, the purpose is to explore how political actors produced the phenomenon of globalisation. Thus, the analysis is based on an examination of the discourses, policies and strategies of key, national institutional actors (including political parties, social partners and the press).

At the Eye of the Cyclone: The Greek Crisis in Global Media

Using discourse analysis, this paper offers an in-depth investigation of the discourse of key European and international newspapers on the Greek economic crisis. The aim is to analyse the way in which the issue of Greek economic crisis emerged in the public discourse of different countries and global regions, as well as to assess the impact that this process had on how Greece is viewed ‘from the outside’. The findings point to the generation and consolidation of very negative attitudes towards Greece. During the 14-month period of examination, Greece evolves from an ‘object of critique’ to a ‘negative reference point’. In some sense, Greece is (re)constructed in the international press as the (corrupted) other of the (rational) western society.

Recasting the Power Politics of Debt: structural power, hegemonic stabilisers and change

Abstract The 2007–08 financial crisis exposed and exacerbated the debt pathologies of the West. This paper examines whether the new global debt relations that have been generated by this crisis have transformed global power politics, changing the way in which the global South and the global North interrelate and interact. To do so the paper analyses the G20 advanced and emerging economies, examining a number of key indicators related to debt, indebtedness and financial leverage. This research leads to two main findings. First, the crisis has indeed given rise to new global debt relations. As a result, any reforms in the post-crisis global political economy will take place in an environment that favours the rising powers. Second, the USA maintains its capacity to control the parameters of this new global debt politics and economics, but cannot directly impose the terms of a solution to the existing ‘global/hegemonic imbalances’ on the rising powers.

Global debt dynamics: the elephant in the room

This introduction analyses the nature and characteristics of global debt dynamics in the post global financial crisis (GFC) period. First, we attempt to map the ways in which debt has been moving from sector to sector, and from one group of countries to another within the global economy. By capturing this inter-sectorial, inter-national, inter-regional movements of global debt we aspire to contribute to a more comprehensive understanding of global debt and its mode of operation. Second, we attempt to analyse what is wrong with global debt dynamics, i.e. we examine the broken link between what global debt was supposed to do and what it does. Here, we point to three interrelated dynamics: the accumulation of unproductive debt, growing inequalities of income and wealth, and the increase in privately-created, interest-bearing money. We conclude by discussing how each paper in this special issue contributes to the current state of the art on the analysis of global debt dynamics in emerging and developing economies.

Unbundled debt and economic growth in developed and developing economies: an empirical analysis

We unbundle the effect of debt on economic growth using a new panel dataset sourced from Vague (2014) for 48 countries over the period 1961 to 2015. We distinguish between public, private, household, and non-financial corporation debt. We use the PVAR approach, Granger Causality Tests, and Impulse Response to establish causality. We also test the heterogeneity in the debt growth relationship across developed and developing countries. In our full sample of countries all types of debt appear to be harmful for economic growth. The negative effect of public debt appears to be uniform across developed and developing countries, although the impact is much stronger on developed countries. Household debt appears to be expansionary in developing countries whereas contractionary in developed countries. Non-financial corporation debt appears to have no impact on developing countries but negative impact on developed countries. Finally, total debt (i.e. the sum of public, household and non-financial corporation debt) has a negative impact on growth in developed countries but no impact is detected in the case of developing countries.

Gazing into the abyss of indebted society: the social power of money and debt

Ever larger parts of life and nature are integrated in our socio-economic system as future cash flows, augmenting obscure, unstable and unsustainable debt structures. The larger and deeper these debt structures grow, the larger, more multifaceted and destructive the inequality divide in our societies becomes. It is now normal for people to live indebted, as it is normal for young students to have their future monetised through student loans, the debt implications of which may never escape. What forces normalise these abnormal and unsustainable patterns and our rather admissive/submissive response to them? How our lives and future have been monetised and where have our social consent and agency been in these processes? Is there a way out, before crossing the boundary of social sustainability and environmental collapse? The three books examined here offer refreshing and complementary perspectives on these ‘big questions’ on which our monetised future depends. Di Muzio T and Robbins RH (2016) Debt as Power. Manchester: Manchester University Press. Lazzarato M (2015) Governing by Debt. South Pasadena, CA: Semiotext(e). Soederberg S (2014) Debtfare States and the Poverty Industry: Money, Discipline and the Surplus Population. London: Routledge.

How ‘demos’ met ‘cracy’: debt, inequality, money

ABSTRACT The recurrence of ever more destructive economic crises and patterns of pervasive indebtedness and inequality threaten the social fabric of our societies. Our main responses to these trends have been partial, focusing on symptoms rather than causes, often exacerbating rather than improving the underlying socio-economic dynamics. To reflect on these conditions and on ‘what needs to be done’ this article turns to a similar socio-economic malaise faced by the city-state of Athens in the 6th century BC. Most historical studies dealing with this crisis focus on the comprehensive debt relief policy (seisachteia) implemented by Solon. We argue that this debt relief, although necessary, was the least important of Solon’s reforms. Solon read the problem of debt as a problem of money so he went on to reform the monetary and exchange system. However, he did not think that these reforms alone could restore socioeconomic sustainability. For this, a redefinition of what was counted as valuable economic activity and as income had also to take place. Moreover, for all these to work, citizens had to be involved more in the commons. Far from only achieving socioeconomic sustainability, these reforms gave rise gradually to the demos that we meet in the golden age of Democracy. Such a broad historical horizon may help us grasp better the problems, stakes and challenges of our times.