Political Economy As Viewed Through Theories of Late Capitalism - Essay Example

Q Frieden’s attempt to explain three decades between 1970-1990s is based on the continuous evolution of the global capitalist system that took place specially after the end of World War II. Friden’s analysis of this period is mostly based on arguing for the increased integration of the economies of the world and emergence of globalized world which re-shaped the economic policy making in many countries. Frieden also describe the changes that took place in East Asian countries and the successive explosion of unique economic phenomenon of international integration which allowed massive flow of factors of production across the borders. Resultantly, this era also witnessed a transition from traditional culture to Western culture that prevailed in OECD Countries. Frieden also mention the failure of countries from Sub-Sahara Region to catch up the economic progress that took place. Frieden’s ideas on economic progress that took place during last three decades of 20th Century therefore indicate a radical transition to globalization and emergence of new economic changes that took place mostly in East Asia and OECD countries. Rifkin on the other hand however, is of the view that the last three decades of 20th century witnessed a radical shift into the production process as economic evolution took place during the period. Most importantly, Rifkin defined the relationship between the production process and the firms by arguing that the current period was dominated by the control of ideas and concepts of the employees. The production process which historically dependent on the control of raw materials wherein modern production processes depended on the knowledge based workers. The creation of knowledge based societies therefore were the most instrumental objects which brought the necessary change into the production process. As the labor force became more skilled and knowledgeable, the essential relationship between the labor and production process change fundamentally to accommodate the basic changes that emerge as a result of this shift into the production processes. Thus Rifkin view last three decades as periods of history in which production process and its relationship with other objects changed radically. Harvey, however, views post modernity not as a unique case and consider it as a constant aspect of capitalism and relate it to the phenomenon which is cultural specific. This view is relatively contradictory as compared to the views of Frieden or even Rifikin. Frieden view the last three decades of previous century as a continues evolution. The transition to integrated global world and the resulting social changes that globalization brought are described by Frieden in relatively different manner as compared to Harvey who largely viewed post modernity as unstable and volatile phenomenon. (Harvey). His ideas however, coincide with the ideas of Rifikin because he also views the changes in production system as a flexible accumulation in a way capital and financial markets started to operate during 1970s. Thus his ideas on the post modernity are direct result of how the fixed accumulation of capital took place during the period. Other than that, he also views the space time compression as an important cultural change that took place as a result of transformation from Fordism to flexible accumulation of capital. Naomi Klien however, views this period in entirely different manner by linking it with the shock doctrine wherein disaster capitalism overtook all the form of cultural and social change that took place during this period. Frieden describe the global integration as a phenomenon which emerged during this period however, Klien view this global integration a result of economic suppression caused to poor countries. The dominance of the global capitalism on almost all forms of the social and cultural life is therefore a direct result of how the few get rich at the cost of many. The transition to global integration as well as the resulting changes in the production process, according to Klien, therefore is therefore the efforts made in suppressing the poor to achieve the economic and cultural subjugation of masses. The so called “coercive interrogation” techniques of CIA are basically a new tool of economic suppression in the hands of power which subjugates others to gain concessions against the free will of the persons. (Klein) Klien’s ideas are therefore radical and attempt to define the economic rise of the modern society as a direct result of the systematic suppression of the poor societies. What is also critical about the Shock doctrine is the role of States and Military in achieving the objectives of domination over other societies. The way CIA and other law agencies work are basically part of a larger conspiracy to create favorable situations in States where most powerful States have the economic interests. To me, Klien’s shock doctrine is more attractive because it attempts to outline the manner in which global capitalism basically spread across the globe. The ideas of Frieden, Rifkin and Harvey may only be indicating the results of steps undertaken by most powerful under “shock doctrine”. This is because of the fact that this ideology provides a most comprehensive analysis of the history and supports it with the real life examples wherein Military occupation and War is imposed on the nations without any significant reasons. Q#3 Elements of Philosophy of Rights is one of the most influential work of Hegel in which he attempted to outline his ideas on moral, social as well as political philosophy. He argues that the free will can only be exercised if a society is organized with established social relations, property rights, moral commitments of the individuals, the family life and values as well as the established legal and economic system etc. accordingly a person cannot be free until and unless he can freely participate into the above mentioned activities in a State according to given norms of the society. Metaphysics define universal as something which is common in all things whereas particular is something unique about any aspect of a thing. Hegel define particular and universal in greater detail by first outlining as to what actually are the rights and obligations of the individuals and how these rights and obligations converge into one point. “Hegels conception of Bildung is clearly broader than our usual conception of  "education", which has to do with the activities of  schools and their pupils, teachers or tutors (including parents)  and their students, whether they are children, or adolescents, or adults. Hegel, as we noted at the outset, did express himself  on these topics occasionally, especially while he was engaged in directing a secondary school during the long period in which his university career was interrupted. But we can understand the full import of  his remarks on education in the narrower and more familiar senses of "upbringing" (Erziehung) and "pedagogy" (P„dagogik) only when we see them in light of  his larger theory of modern society and the crucial role of Bildung in achieving  freedom as the actualization of spirit and absolute end of  reason.” (Wood) To Hegel education play a great role in outlining the overall rights and obligations of individuals within the context of universal. According to Hegel, education basically helps an individual to develop his spirit and mind which according to Hegel are universal in nature. However, this only comes through experience and not through just imparting the information in typical class room settings. Further, Hegel consider the role of civil society as an educative role in which though individuals act in their own private interest but they can only achieve this through universal action. Education is universal because it individual experiences of the persons allow accumulation of universal help create a chain link in which private interests are basically universal interests of the society too. Hegel recognize labor as a link through which a man can be recognized among his fellow men and thus division of labor according to Hegel is just a mean of getting a sense of recognition as well as fame within the society. Thus through labor a man becomes universal within the society and becomes comparable with other members of the society as it’s through his labor that a man produces for others also. Thus to Hegel Labor is something pleasurable which provides a sense of pleasure and recognition to the individuals and as such it allows an individual to emancipate himself from the realm of necessity. The ultimate link between the Hegel and the Fukuyama is the fact that both believed that history ended at a particular time period after evolving itself through ages and achieving its epitome of success. Hegel also theorized that through labor, men have achieved what it can achieve and there is no room for further progress as the process of thesis and antithesis and synthesis have culminated themselves into perfection. Fukuyama however, views the end of history as the end of any new form of government as according to him, liberal government is the epitome of the governance and society can only be governed through this. The presence of multi-party system of politics as well as the liberal democracy therefore is a end of history for Fukuyama. His ideas however are mostly a direct influence of Hegel who presented the same type of ideas. 1989 is an end of history for Fukuyama because this was the year when Western ideologies finally prevailed over other alternative ideologies with the break of USSR and end of Cold war. Thus Fukuyama consider this year as the year when only liberal democracy and multi-party political system provide the only solution to the problems of mankind. Fukuyama describes this phenomenon in his essay in following manner: “THE PASSING of Marxism-Leninism first from China and then from the Soviet Union will mean its death as a living ideology of world historical significance. For while there may be some isolated true believers left in places like Managua, Pyongyang, or Cambridge, Massachusetts, the fact that there is not a single large state in which it is a going concern undermines completely its pretensions to being in the vanguard of human history. And the death of this ideology means the growing "Common Marketization" of international relations and the diminution of the likelihood of large-scale conflict between states” (Fukuyama). Fukuyama differs from Hegel in the sense that he views the defeat of alternative ideologies as a proof that the human evoultion through thesis and anti-thesis may not prevail under all circumstances and as such one universal truth may emerge as the single most signfiicant aspect of dealing with the issue of history. The disappearance of large scal conflict between the States is what negates the anti-thesis approach of Hegel wherein peaceful relations between the States means dominance of one form of governance overal almost all other forms of governance. Bibliography 1. Fukuyama, Francis. The End of History. 1989. 30 March 2010 . 2. Harvey, David. The condition of postmodernity: an enquiry into the origins of cultural change. MA: Blackwell Publishing, 1990. 3. Klein, Naomi. The Shock Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Capitalism. Torronto: Random House of Canada, Limited, 2008. 4. Wood, Allen W. "Hegel on Education," Amélie O. Rorty (ed.) Philosophy as Education. . 1998. 30 March 2010 . Read More