Mikas blogg

Den från moralen lösgjorda ekonomin

Som ett tilltugg till mediernas frossande i Fortumdirektörernas svinaktiga optionsvinster passar riksdagsman Erkki Pulliainens nya skrift Moraalista irrotettu talous (Ochre Chronicles 2005, 160 sid.). Bokens ämne översatt till svenska är Den från moralen lösgjorda ekonomin. Pulliainen försöker placera in  den pågående globaliseringen, som enligt honom utgör  globaliseringens tredje våg, i ett ekologiskt och världshistoriskt perspektiv. Det är inte alldeles lätt att finna en röd tråd i boken, eller att inte tappa den igen, när man emellanåt tycker sig ha fått fatt i den.

En annan synpunkt på samma ämne, alltså den från moralens band frigjorda ekonomin, ger David Ray Griffin i  inledningen till sin The New Pearl Harbour. Disturbing Questions about the Bush Administration and 9/11 (Olive Branch Press 2004).

Griffin förvånar sig över att vänstern i USA på några undantag när har låtit bli att beakta möjligheten av att regeringen var inblandad ("official complicity") och reflekterar vidare över saken i en fotnot. Jag hade egentligen tänkt översätta denna fotnot, men... dagen är redan släckt och mörkret väckt. Här kommer alltså Griffins tankegång på engelska:

To some extent, this fact [det bristande intresset för regeringens eventuella delaktighet i brottet] reflects a matter of principle — a concern that devoting attention to possible conspiracies is diversionary. Some of the reasons for this wariness are valid. One concern is that a focus on exposing conspiratorial crimes of present office-holders may reflect the naive asssumption that if only we can replace those individuals with better ones, things will be fine. Underlying that worry is the concern that a focus on conspirators can divert attention from the more important issue of the structural problems in the national and global order that need to be overcome. But although those dangers must be guarded against, we should also avoid a too strong dichotomy between structural and conspiratorial analysis. For one thing, although structural analysis is essential for any deep understanding of social processes, structures as such, being abstractions, do not enact themselves. They are influential only insofar as they are embodied in agents — both individual and institutional — who act in terms of them. These agents, furthermore, are not fully determined by the dominant values of their societies. They have degrees of freedom, which they can use to act in ways that are more or less wise, more or less just, and more or less legal. When political leaders enact policies that are egregiously unjust, dangerous, and even illegal, it is important to replace them with leaders who are at least somewhat better. Finally, and most important, the exposure of a conspiracy may, rather than diverting attention from a society's problematic structures, turn attention to them. For example, if it became evident that our national political leaders caused or at least allowed the attacks of 9/11 and that they did so partly because they had deeply embodied certain values pervasive of our society, we might finally decide that a society-wide reorientation is in order.