Seit Beginn des 21. Jahrhunderts hat die Diskussion über den Zusammenhang von Migration und Entwi... more Seit Beginn des 21. Jahrhunderts hat die Diskussion über den Zusammenhang von Migration und Entwicklung eine neue Richtung bekommen. Wurde die Emigration von Hochqualifizierten aus Entwicklungsländern bislang zumeist als ein abgeschlossener Prozess gesehen, der für die Abgabeländer in einem Humankapitalverlust (brain drain) und für die Aufnahmeländer (meistenteils Industrieländer) in einem Humankapitalgewinn (brain gain) resultiert, so wird Elitenmigration heute mehr und mehr als ein zirkulärer Prozess der Hin- und Her- bzw. Weiterwanderung angesehen (brain circulation), von dem nicht nur Industrieländer, sondern potentiell auch Entwicklungsländer profitieren können. Alle hier veröffentlichten Arbeiten des Politikwissenschaftsseminars "Brain Drain und Brain Gain. Migration und Entwicklung" unter Leitung von Prof. Thränhardt und Dr. Uwe Hunger aus dem Sommersemester 2005 stellen originäre und eigenständige Forschungsarbeiten dar und tragen durch ihre sorgfältige Recherche d...
The EU and USA proposed Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) is a free trade agr... more The EU and USA proposed Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) is a free trade agreement (FTA) whose necessity is argued on the basis that it not only has the potential to cover over 50% of global trade in the near future, but also that it will: revitalize the transatlantic partnership, foster trade, create jobs, increase efficiency due to intensified bi-regional competition, besides start forming a counterweight to the Asian and Pacific rise. Accordingly, our paper aims to shed new light on the TTIP debate by addressing its critical aspects and, in particular, by analyzing the negative effects of its underlying spatial reconfigurations. The application of the Deleuzian concepts of deterritorialization and reterritorialization leads to a series of theoretical considerations that explain how TTIP: 1) creates space through the contractual integration of two regions and/or volitional balancing of others, 2) expands space through legal homogenization and common regulatory standards and 3) limits space through the exchange of surveillance data and heightened institutional control over the internet.
TTIP, which is currently negotiated between the EU and the US, is largely portrayed as a blessing... more TTIP, which is currently negotiated between the EU and the US, is largely portrayed as a blessing and especially on the European side backed by communicational campaigns and econometric impact studies with the aim to appease growing criticism among the wider population. However, both the EU Commission’s constant win-win rhetoric and the overly optimistic and simplistic scientific assessments of (willingly) fail to take into account the multiplicity of potential (negative) consequences on European societies, especially if TTIP is purely conducted in the vested interest of transatlantic elites, as well as the financial and corporate sector. A high price that Europe may have to pay is a rise in the actual and (mis-)perceived level of inequality, which again might put the future of the EU at serious risk (e.g. rise of populism, migration pressures, growing imbalances and so forth). Only if citizens in Europe as well as legitimately elected representatives bethink themselves of the long egalitarian and democratic European tradition and start reclaiming their rights in the name of unity, solidarity, and prosperity could TTIP turn out to be beneficial, instead of turning into an ‘unequal treaty’ with Europe at the losing end.
Support for TTIP is slowly but surely crumbling, making it increasingly unlikely that the largest... more Support for TTIP is slowly but surely crumbling, making it increasingly unlikely that the largest free trade agreement in the world will be concluded any time soon – if at all. Decision-makers on both sides of the Atlantic clearly underestimated the mobilizing capabilities of a digitally connected civil society and are now desperate to appease the critics. Trust has been shattered and bridging seems increasingly unlikely. A thorough reading of John Rawls might have saved negotiators from growing opposition.
In this paper I will critically examine whether it is true or not that the contemporary global tr... more In this paper I will critically examine whether it is true or not that the contemporary global transformation brings forth a transnational state (TNS) which is dominated by a territorially independent transnational capital class (TCC). My central argument will be that, from an Open Marxist/Canadian School of IPE-perspective, Robinson and other supporters of the ‘transnational’ departure overstate the role and abilities of a TCC which leads to a misleading conclusion concerning class relations and state authority in the process of neoliberal globalisation. First of all, I am going to provide some theoretical/terminological background to the (Neo-)Gramscian approach submitted by Cox et al. to establish the base: This includes the important role of agency in the constitution of hegemony and the formation of a historic bloc. Subsequently, I present key arguments of Robinson’s enhanced thesis including his crucial notion that we are currently living in epochal times of a transition from a world economy (nation-state phase) to a global economy (transnational phase). Finally, I am going to contest his precipitated assumptions by providing critical counter-arguments concerning the relation of social forces and the state and by reviewing his rather dissatisfactory methodology.
In this paper I will critically discuss whether it is true or not that Neoliberalism is signified... more In this paper I will critically discuss whether it is true or not that Neoliberalism is signified by a strong state in combination with a free economy. First of all I will give a short illustration of the evolution from the classical liberal approach of Adam Smith to modern Neoliberalism á la Hayek or Friedman and further continue with a distinction between the strong (liberal) state which has the sole power to coerce and the weak (democratic) state which is said to be guided by ‘imprudent’ majority rule rather than law and order. Subsequently, I will argue that the liberal state is mainly dominated by bourgeois interests in setting up ‘equal’ property rights and by undermining democratic processes. Thus, governments function more as an obedient enforcer of the ‘free’ market which finally becomes the playing field of pure efficiency, civil repression and competition instead of being a politically legitimized society/market-balancing institution.
For the past six decades, the US has managed to create and sustain a hegemonic position in the gl... more For the past six decades, the US has managed to create and sustain a hegemonic position in the global financial/monetary order. This is based on three central pillars: 1) institutional power (control over outcomes in the International Monetary Fund), 2) structural power (dollar/Wall-Street dominance, forming an ‘exorbitant privilege’) and 3) ideational power (Neoliberalism as the leading politico-economic ideology - especially since the 1970s). In concerto this has served the countries’ very own interest, whereas other nations have repeatedly been forced to shoulder most of the burdens of adjustment. However, the sovereign debt crisis of 2008ff. (as a critical juncture) not only laid bare the deficiencies of the US-centred order and the increasing vulnerability of the highly indebted and economically stuttering hegemon, but also opened a window of opportunity for its main rival: liquidity-rich and booming China. Accordingly, Beijing is now starting to contest the US by: 1) significantly increasing its influence within the International Monetary Fund, 2) extending the international role and convertibility of the Renminbi and establishing Shanghai as a new global financial center until 2020, and 3) following a Neo-Mercantilist/Listian approach which is signified by gradual financial liberalization and an accumulation of monetary reserves.
The global financial crisis abruptly ended the golden age of neoliberal globalization (1990s-2008... more The global financial crisis abruptly ended the golden age of neoliberal globalization (1990s-2008) for both the EU and the US and caused a relative loss of their economic power. Simultaneously, the BRICS not only continued to catch up with an impressive pace (6% average GDP-growth), but also expanded their influence in multilateral organizations and intensified South-South relations. Now, times seem dire enough for the old transatlantic partners to close the ranks by creating the biggest preferential trade agreement ever. The currently negotiated Transatlantic Free Trade Area (TAFTA) or Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) in between the EU and the US has the potential to become a game changer: 1) TAFTA | TTIP offers a way to set up new rules and norms (first mover advantage) based on EU and US interests that due to the deadlocked Doha Development Round could no longer be carried through within the framework of the WTO (withdrawal from multilateralism), 2) TAFTA | TTIP provides a strategy to contain the rise of China and other emerging powers by manifesting a new trench system of global trade, undermining production networks and diverting the flow of goods. Hence, TAFTA | TTIP is a reactionary move in the global geo-economic game and a warning that our world might become more divided than united.
De- and Re-territorialization in the Making of Neoliberal Globalization: The Spatial Dimensions of TAFTA | TTIP
The EU and USA proposed Transatlantic Free Trade Area (TAFTA) or Transatlantic Trade and Investme... more The EU and USA proposed Transatlantic Free Trade Area (TAFTA) or Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) is a free trade agreement (FTA) whose necessity is argued on the basis that it not only has the potential to cover over 50% of global trade in the near future, but also that it will: revitalize the transatlantic partnership, foster trade, create jobs, increase effciency due to intensifed bi-regional competition, besides start forming a counterweight to the Asian and Pacifc rise.
Accordingly, our paper aims to shed new light on the TAFTA | TTIP debate by addressing its critical aspects and, in particular, by analyzing the negative effects of its underlying spatial reconfgurations. The application of the Deleuzian concepts of deterritorialization and reterritorialization leads to a series of theoretical considerations that explain how TAFTA | TTIP: 1) creates space through the contractual integration of two regions and/or volitional balancing of others, 2) limits space through the exchange of surveillance data and heightened institutional control over the internet, and 3) expands space through legal homogenization and common regulatory standards.
The EU and USA proposed Transatlantic Free Trade Area (TAFTA) or Transatlantic Trade and Investme... more The EU and USA proposed Transatlantic Free Trade Area (TAFTA) or Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) is a free trade agreement (FTA) whose necessity is argued on the basis that it not only has the potential to cover over 50% of global trade in the near future, but also that it will: revitalize the transatlantic partnership, foster trade, create jobs, increase effciency due to intensifed bi-regional competition, besides start forming a counterweight to the Asian and Pacifc rise.
Accordingly, our paper aims to shed new light on the TAFTA | TTIP debate by addressing its critical aspects and, in particular, by analyzing the negative effects of its underlying spatial reconfigurations. The application of the Deleuzian concepts of deterritorialization and reterritorialization leads to a series of theoretical considerations that explain how TAFTA | TTIP: 1) creates space through the contractual integration of two regions and/or volitional balancing of others, 2) limits space through the exchange of surveillance data and heightened institutional control over the internet, and 3) expands space through legal homogenization and common regulatory standards.
Seit Beginn des 21. Jahrhunderts hat die Diskussion über den Zusammenhang von Migration und Entwi... more Seit Beginn des 21. Jahrhunderts hat die Diskussion über den Zusammenhang von Migration und Entwicklung eine neue Richtung bekommen. Wurde die Emigration von Hochqualifizierten aus Entwicklungsländern bislang zumeist als ein abgeschlossener Prozess gesehen, der für die Abgabeländer in einem Humankapitalverlust (brain drain) und für die Aufnahmeländer (meistenteils Industrieländer) in einem Humankapitalgewinn (brain gain) resultiert, so wird Elitenmigration heute mehr und mehr als ein zirkulärer Prozess der Hin- und Her- bzw. Weiterwanderung angesehen (brain circulation), von dem nicht nur Industrieländer, sondern potentiell auch Entwicklungsländer profitieren können. Alle hier veröffentlichten Arbeiten des Politikwissenschaftsseminars "Brain Drain und Brain Gain. Migration und Entwicklung" unter Leitung von Prof. Thränhardt und Dr. Uwe Hunger aus dem Sommersemester 2005 stellen originäre und eigenständige Forschungsarbeiten dar und tragen durch ihre sorgfältige Recherche d...
The EU and USA proposed Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) is a free trade agr... more The EU and USA proposed Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) is a free trade agreement (FTA) whose necessity is argued on the basis that it not only has the potential to cover over 50% of global trade in the near future, but also that it will: revitalize the transatlantic partnership, foster trade, create jobs, increase efficiency due to intensified bi-regional competition, besides start forming a counterweight to the Asian and Pacific rise. Accordingly, our paper aims to shed new light on the TTIP debate by addressing its critical aspects and, in particular, by analyzing the negative effects of its underlying spatial reconfigurations. The application of the Deleuzian concepts of deterritorialization and reterritorialization leads to a series of theoretical considerations that explain how TTIP: 1) creates space through the contractual integration of two regions and/or volitional balancing of others, 2) expands space through legal homogenization and common regulatory standards and 3) limits space through the exchange of surveillance data and heightened institutional control over the internet.
TTIP, which is currently negotiated between the EU and the US, is largely portrayed as a blessing... more TTIP, which is currently negotiated between the EU and the US, is largely portrayed as a blessing and especially on the European side backed by communicational campaigns and econometric impact studies with the aim to appease growing criticism among the wider population. However, both the EU Commission’s constant win-win rhetoric and the overly optimistic and simplistic scientific assessments of (willingly) fail to take into account the multiplicity of potential (negative) consequences on European societies, especially if TTIP is purely conducted in the vested interest of transatlantic elites, as well as the financial and corporate sector. A high price that Europe may have to pay is a rise in the actual and (mis-)perceived level of inequality, which again might put the future of the EU at serious risk (e.g. rise of populism, migration pressures, growing imbalances and so forth). Only if citizens in Europe as well as legitimately elected representatives bethink themselves of the long egalitarian and democratic European tradition and start reclaiming their rights in the name of unity, solidarity, and prosperity could TTIP turn out to be beneficial, instead of turning into an ‘unequal treaty’ with Europe at the losing end.
Support for TTIP is slowly but surely crumbling, making it increasingly unlikely that the largest... more Support for TTIP is slowly but surely crumbling, making it increasingly unlikely that the largest free trade agreement in the world will be concluded any time soon – if at all. Decision-makers on both sides of the Atlantic clearly underestimated the mobilizing capabilities of a digitally connected civil society and are now desperate to appease the critics. Trust has been shattered and bridging seems increasingly unlikely. A thorough reading of John Rawls might have saved negotiators from growing opposition.
In this paper I will critically examine whether it is true or not that the contemporary global tr... more In this paper I will critically examine whether it is true or not that the contemporary global transformation brings forth a transnational state (TNS) which is dominated by a territorially independent transnational capital class (TCC). My central argument will be that, from an Open Marxist/Canadian School of IPE-perspective, Robinson and other supporters of the ‘transnational’ departure overstate the role and abilities of a TCC which leads to a misleading conclusion concerning class relations and state authority in the process of neoliberal globalisation. First of all, I am going to provide some theoretical/terminological background to the (Neo-)Gramscian approach submitted by Cox et al. to establish the base: This includes the important role of agency in the constitution of hegemony and the formation of a historic bloc. Subsequently, I present key arguments of Robinson’s enhanced thesis including his crucial notion that we are currently living in epochal times of a transition from a world economy (nation-state phase) to a global economy (transnational phase). Finally, I am going to contest his precipitated assumptions by providing critical counter-arguments concerning the relation of social forces and the state and by reviewing his rather dissatisfactory methodology.
In this paper I will critically discuss whether it is true or not that Neoliberalism is signified... more In this paper I will critically discuss whether it is true or not that Neoliberalism is signified by a strong state in combination with a free economy. First of all I will give a short illustration of the evolution from the classical liberal approach of Adam Smith to modern Neoliberalism á la Hayek or Friedman and further continue with a distinction between the strong (liberal) state which has the sole power to coerce and the weak (democratic) state which is said to be guided by ‘imprudent’ majority rule rather than law and order. Subsequently, I will argue that the liberal state is mainly dominated by bourgeois interests in setting up ‘equal’ property rights and by undermining democratic processes. Thus, governments function more as an obedient enforcer of the ‘free’ market which finally becomes the playing field of pure efficiency, civil repression and competition instead of being a politically legitimized society/market-balancing institution.
For the past six decades, the US has managed to create and sustain a hegemonic position in the gl... more For the past six decades, the US has managed to create and sustain a hegemonic position in the global financial/monetary order. This is based on three central pillars: 1) institutional power (control over outcomes in the International Monetary Fund), 2) structural power (dollar/Wall-Street dominance, forming an ‘exorbitant privilege’) and 3) ideational power (Neoliberalism as the leading politico-economic ideology - especially since the 1970s). In concerto this has served the countries’ very own interest, whereas other nations have repeatedly been forced to shoulder most of the burdens of adjustment. However, the sovereign debt crisis of 2008ff. (as a critical juncture) not only laid bare the deficiencies of the US-centred order and the increasing vulnerability of the highly indebted and economically stuttering hegemon, but also opened a window of opportunity for its main rival: liquidity-rich and booming China. Accordingly, Beijing is now starting to contest the US by: 1) significantly increasing its influence within the International Monetary Fund, 2) extending the international role and convertibility of the Renminbi and establishing Shanghai as a new global financial center until 2020, and 3) following a Neo-Mercantilist/Listian approach which is signified by gradual financial liberalization and an accumulation of monetary reserves.
The global financial crisis abruptly ended the golden age of neoliberal globalization (1990s-2008... more The global financial crisis abruptly ended the golden age of neoliberal globalization (1990s-2008) for both the EU and the US and caused a relative loss of their economic power. Simultaneously, the BRICS not only continued to catch up with an impressive pace (6% average GDP-growth), but also expanded their influence in multilateral organizations and intensified South-South relations. Now, times seem dire enough for the old transatlantic partners to close the ranks by creating the biggest preferential trade agreement ever. The currently negotiated Transatlantic Free Trade Area (TAFTA) or Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) in between the EU and the US has the potential to become a game changer: 1) TAFTA | TTIP offers a way to set up new rules and norms (first mover advantage) based on EU and US interests that due to the deadlocked Doha Development Round could no longer be carried through within the framework of the WTO (withdrawal from multilateralism), 2) TAFTA | TTIP provides a strategy to contain the rise of China and other emerging powers by manifesting a new trench system of global trade, undermining production networks and diverting the flow of goods. Hence, TAFTA | TTIP is a reactionary move in the global geo-economic game and a warning that our world might become more divided than united.
De- and Re-territorialization in the Making of Neoliberal Globalization: The Spatial Dimensions of TAFTA | TTIP
The EU and USA proposed Transatlantic Free Trade Area (TAFTA) or Transatlantic Trade and Investme... more The EU and USA proposed Transatlantic Free Trade Area (TAFTA) or Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) is a free trade agreement (FTA) whose necessity is argued on the basis that it not only has the potential to cover over 50% of global trade in the near future, but also that it will: revitalize the transatlantic partnership, foster trade, create jobs, increase effciency due to intensifed bi-regional competition, besides start forming a counterweight to the Asian and Pacifc rise.
Accordingly, our paper aims to shed new light on the TAFTA | TTIP debate by addressing its critical aspects and, in particular, by analyzing the negative effects of its underlying spatial reconfgurations. The application of the Deleuzian concepts of deterritorialization and reterritorialization leads to a series of theoretical considerations that explain how TAFTA | TTIP: 1) creates space through the contractual integration of two regions and/or volitional balancing of others, 2) limits space through the exchange of surveillance data and heightened institutional control over the internet, and 3) expands space through legal homogenization and common regulatory standards.
The EU and USA proposed Transatlantic Free Trade Area (TAFTA) or Transatlantic Trade and Investme... more The EU and USA proposed Transatlantic Free Trade Area (TAFTA) or Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) is a free trade agreement (FTA) whose necessity is argued on the basis that it not only has the potential to cover over 50% of global trade in the near future, but also that it will: revitalize the transatlantic partnership, foster trade, create jobs, increase effciency due to intensifed bi-regional competition, besides start forming a counterweight to the Asian and Pacifc rise.
Accordingly, our paper aims to shed new light on the TAFTA | TTIP debate by addressing its critical aspects and, in particular, by analyzing the negative effects of its underlying spatial reconfigurations. The application of the Deleuzian concepts of deterritorialization and reterritorialization leads to a series of theoretical considerations that explain how TAFTA | TTIP: 1) creates space through the contractual integration of two regions and/or volitional balancing of others, 2) limits space through the exchange of surveillance data and heightened institutional control over the internet, and 3) expands space through legal homogenization and common regulatory standards.
Uploads
Papers
Forthcoming Papers
Accordingly, our paper aims to shed new light on the TAFTA | TTIP debate by addressing its critical aspects and, in particular, by analyzing the negative effects of its underlying spatial reconfgurations. The application of the Deleuzian concepts of deterritorialization and reterritorialization leads to a series of theoretical considerations that explain how TAFTA | TTIP: 1) creates space through the contractual integration of two regions and/or volitional balancing of others, 2) limits space through the exchange of surveillance data and heightened institutional control over the internet, and 3) expands space through legal homogenization and common regulatory standards.
Books
Conference Presentations
Accordingly, our paper aims to shed new light on the TAFTA | TTIP debate by addressing its critical aspects and, in particular, by analyzing the negative effects of its underlying spatial reconfigurations. The application of the Deleuzian concepts of deterritorialization and reterritorialization leads to a series of theoretical considerations that explain how TAFTA | TTIP: 1) creates space through the contractual integration of two regions and/or volitional balancing of others, 2) limits space through the exchange of surveillance data and heightened institutional control over the internet, and 3) expands space through legal homogenization and common regulatory standards.
Publications
Accordingly, our paper aims to shed new light on the TAFTA | TTIP debate by addressing its critical aspects and, in particular, by analyzing the negative effects of its underlying spatial reconfgurations. The application of the Deleuzian concepts of deterritorialization and reterritorialization leads to a series of theoretical considerations that explain how TAFTA | TTIP: 1) creates space through the contractual integration of two regions and/or volitional balancing of others, 2) limits space through the exchange of surveillance data and heightened institutional control over the internet, and 3) expands space through legal homogenization and common regulatory standards.
Accordingly, our paper aims to shed new light on the TAFTA | TTIP debate by addressing its critical aspects and, in particular, by analyzing the negative effects of its underlying spatial reconfigurations. The application of the Deleuzian concepts of deterritorialization and reterritorialization leads to a series of theoretical considerations that explain how TAFTA | TTIP: 1) creates space through the contractual integration of two regions and/or volitional balancing of others, 2) limits space through the exchange of surveillance data and heightened institutional control over the internet, and 3) expands space through legal homogenization and common regulatory standards.