Managing Fear in a Risk Society: Pretrauma and Extreme Future Scenarios in Nathaniel Rich’s Odds Against Tomorrow

An example of near-future climate fiction, Nathaniel Rich’s 2013 novel Odds Against Tomorrow envisions a catastrophic, global warming-related flooding of the New York City area. Despite the novel’s (post)apocalyptic focus, a large part of it can be in fact perceived as preapocalyptic, inasmuch as it explores people’s traumatic responses to potential future disasters, even before they actually happen. The aim of the article is to analyze the novel’s depiction of the culture of fear, which has permeated the modern society as a consequence of it becoming what Ulrich Beck famously termed a “risk society.” In a risk society, human industrial and technological activity produces a series of hazards, including global risks such as anthropogenic climate change. In the novel, Rich shows how financial capitalism commodifies these risks by capitalizing on people’s fears and their need for some degree of risk management. Finally, the paper looks at the text as a cli-fi novel and thus as a literary response to the pretrauma caused by environmental risks.

Strategies of international financial capitalism and the integration of the Spanish electricity system: the Levantine coast

Among the national varieties of investment employed in European electricity development, Spanish studies have focused on the strategies of large electricity companies based in mature electricity markets, such as Catalonia or Madrid, but only in traditional electricity systems, such as the Levantine. The purpose of this article is to answer the following question: What impact did foreign investment have on the configuration of the Levantine/Spanish electricity systems during the interwar period? The article concludes that, compared to the theoretical model of local monopolies applied generically to the Spanish case, the second wave of international investment not only accelerated the process of integration of the Levantine electricity market, but had a significant impact, due to the defensive attitude of the Spanish electricity-financial lobby, on the dynamics (competitive/oligopolistic) of regional electricity systems in Spain.

The Dividual: Digital Practices and Biotechnologies

This article revisits the concept of the dividual, taking as a starting point Deleuze’s diagnosis about the relevance that dividual practices have gained with the advent of biotechnology and digital culture. Although we agree with this diagnosis, we highlight the intersections between the dividual and the individual both in Modernity and in the present time. The contemporary dividual is in tension with the modern individual, but not as a substitution, division or duplication of the individual. Rather, we state a complex dividual-individual composition, focusing on biotechnologies, digital culture and financial capitalism. Following a Foucauldian approach, we understand this composition as a result of technologies of power and the result of certain modes of subjectivation. In dialogue with Simondon’s theory of individuation, we suggest that the dividual takes part in a new mode of subjectivation which can be named a ‘dividuation’ in the context of technologically mediated experiences.

Comments on Michael Hudson: Making Capitalism Great Again? A Critique of the “Rentier Takeover” Thesis

Michael Hudson argues that a new form of financial capitalism has displaced the industrial capitalism of Marx’s day. Unlike earlier capitalists, whose pursuit of lower costs led to improvements in the organization of production, the typical wealth owner today is a passive rentier who, like a feudal landlord, merely claims the surplus from existing production processes. Some form of this vision of financialization is widely held, but, I argue, misleading. It exaggerates the differences between historical and present-day capitalism, and misses the ways in which “finance” and “industry” form complementary parts of a single process. JEL classification: B51, E44, N20

Capturing Finance

Arbitrage—the trading practice that involves buying assets in one market at a cheap price and immediately selling them in another market for a profit—is fundamental to the practice of financial trading and economic understandings of how financial markets function. Because traders complete transactions quickly and use other people's money, arbitrage is considered to be riskless. Yet, despite the rhetoric of riskless trading, the arbitrage in mortgage-backed securities led to the 2008 financial crisis. In Capturing Finance Carolyn Hardin offers a new way of understanding arbitrage as a means for capturing value in financial capitalism. She shows how arbitrage relies on a system of abstract domination built around risk. The commonsense beliefs that taking on debt is necessary for affording everyday life and that investing is necessary to secure retirement income compel individuals to assume risk while financial institutions amass profits. Hardin insists that mitigating financial capitalism's worst consequences, such as perpetuating class and racial inequities, requires challenging the narratives that naturalize risk as a necessary element of financial capitalism as well as social life writ large.

Well-being and Economic Growth: Critical Perspectives

In Democracy in America (1840) , Tocqueville treats the passion for well-being as the consequence of equality. He does not forget to warn of the threats to democratic societies that could arise from the simple pursuit of “small and vulgar pleasures”, but he concludes that no government can be stable unless it satisfies this democratic passion for the “greatest well-being of all” (II, 4, 8). Tocqueville’s vision proved prophetic, and well-being did indeed become a matter of statecraft, with the welfare state emerging in the twentieth century as the indispensable mode of governance to regulate economic growth, protect the citizens and secure their standard of living against the ceaseless crises of capitalism and the vagaries of life. But this consensus on the nature and value of well-being and the economic growth that makes it possible is being increasingly challenged by the unprecedented crisis that we are experiencing, a crisis that simultaneously encompasses representative democracies, financial capitalism and the inequalities it engenders, welfare states and the threats to the environment posed by the race to consume and live well. In these circumstances, the colloquium presented in this introduction revisited the very notion of well-being and took stock of its different conflicting conceptions. Organized by The Tocqueville Society/La Société Tocqueville and The Center for Critical Democracy Studies at The American University of Paris, it was held by videoconference on 21 and 22 October 2020. All the papers in this dossier were presented at the colloquium.

‘Don’t Crunch My Credit’: Member State Governments’ Preferences on Bank Capital Requirements

Across Europe, banks remain, to this day, the main suppliers of finance to the European economy, but also a source of systemic risk. As such, regulating them requires that policymakers find an appropriate balance between restricting their risk-taking behaviour and increasing lending to support economic growth. However, the ‘varieties of financial capitalism’ that characterize national banking sectors in Europe mean that the adoption of harmonised capital requirements has different effects across countries, depending on the country-specific institutional setting through which banks provide lending to the national economy. This article conducts a new analysis of Member State governments’ positions in the post-financial crisis reform of the EU capital requirements legislation, expanding the scope of previous studies on the topic. Here, I examine in detail the positions of Member States on a wider set of issues and for a broader set of countries than the existing literature. Building on the varieties of financial capitalism approach, I explain these positions with regard to structural features of national banking sectors. I find that Member State governments’ positions reveal a general agreement with the proposed increase of bank capital requirements, while seeking targeted exemptions and preferential treatment that they deem necessary to preserve their domestic supply of retail credit.

The New Gnosis and the Denial of Ontological Differences

The current transhumanist or posthumanist movements continue the thesis of the old gnosis devaluing the creation like something imperfect. Its novelty is to believe in the possibility of overcoming the creation thanks to technology (biotechnology and bionics). The ideology of gender partly anticipates this way of thinking by devaluing the somatic difference between male and female. This denial of the differences then applies to those existing between the human and the non-human (on one side the primates, and on the other the computer). Posthumanism and transhumanism believe that technology will not only overcome the ontological differences, which form the human, but also the so-called extreme situations, such as illness, suffering and death itself. In this case, by copying the brain information as software to a hard disk. The intellectual myopia of these movements is clear: they reduce the scope of knowledge to mere genetic or electronic information, denying knowledge and, more importantly, wisdom. Their current success is due to their connection with the central thesis of financial capitalism: the need for total manipulation of the real and indefinite growth. Far from advancing the human being, they create malfunctions.