Virtue, Fortune, and Faith: A Genealogy of Finance

6. Repoliticizing Financial Practices

145 6 Repoliticizing฀Financial฀Practices There฀is฀no฀single฀locus฀of฀great฀Refusal,฀no฀soul฀of฀revolt,฀source฀of฀all฀ rebellions,฀or฀pure฀law฀of฀the฀revolutionary.฀Instead฀there฀is฀a฀plurality฀ of฀resistances,฀each฀of฀them฀a฀special฀case:฀resistances฀that฀are฀possible,฀ necessary,฀ improbable;฀ others฀ that฀ are฀ spontaneous,฀ savage,฀ solitary,฀ concerted,฀rampant฀or฀violent;฀still฀others฀that฀are฀quick฀to฀compromise,฀ interested,฀or฀sacrificial;฀by฀definition,฀they฀can฀only฀exist฀in฀the฀strategic฀ field฀of฀power฀relations. michel฀foucault,฀฀฀฀ A฀PLURALIT Y฀OF฀RESISTANCES The purpose of this final chapter is to discuss how resisting a linear and frictionless history of finance opens up possibilities for political dissent and alternatively imagined financial futures. I have argued that financial practices exist as exclusionary discourses—which, historically and continually, exclude that which is deemed external to the financial domain. Thus it has become possible, as discussed in chapter 1, to formulate authoritative measures of economic wellbeing that praise Britain for its economic efficiency while one in five British children live in poverty. William Connolly points to the wider implications of such exclusionary practices for the conditions of democracy. “Equality must be viewed not simply as an end in itself,” writes Connolly, “but also as a condition of democratic pluralization . . . economic equalization is a pre-requisite to effective 146฀ ฀ ·฀ ฀ repoliticizing฀financial฀practices democracy, but effective democracy is also a pre-requisite to equalisation . Each must be fostered for the other to occur” (1995, 80 –82). Connolly points not just to the barriers of democratic participation experienced by those without entitlements, but also to the deliberate withdrawal of the wealthy from participation in social life through commissioning private facilities, including health and education, and private security in the form of, for instance, gated communities (80 –85; see also Davis 1990). The connections between contemporary economic rationality and the proliferation of private security are not incidental, according to Connolly, but indispensable: “New forms of discipline, regulation, and surveillance are introduced to promote economic growth under difficult conditions of realization and to control or neutralize those populations excluded from its benefits” (84). Hence, argues Connolly, the attachment of “the legitimations of disciplinary society” to “the hegemony of the growth imperative” (25) that defines contemporary economic discourse.1 Addressing the economic inequality fostered by contemporary financial practices coincides with the preoccupations of many authors in the field of political economy. However, in contrast to some of the literature in political economy, this chapter will argue that “global finance” as a sphere of thought and action is never secure and stable, but is subject to continuous articulation, affirmation, and rearticulation by financial practitioners. It is precisely in these spaces of (re)articulation that financial practices are vulnerable to criticism and change. This chapter commences by discussing the differences in modes of resistance identified within some political economy literature and those identifiable through a Foucauldian framework. It then goes on to observe and encourage a plurality of resistances that are taking shape in the era of liberalized finance: from the challenge to the logic of modern debt and credit posed by Jubilee, to the existence of multiple measures and multiple moneys in daily life and in art that invite reflection on the meaning and morality of money, to an alternative imagination of the secure financial future through the values of Fortuna. THE฀CONSTRUCTION฀OF฀“GLOBAL฀FINANCE”฀ AND฀THE฀POLITICS฀OF฀RESISTANCE Recent approaches in political economy have understood finance as a uniquely mastering force, or “a Phoenix risen from the ashes” (Cohen repoliticizing฀financial฀practices฀ ฀ ·฀ ฀ 147 1996, 2000). Global finance is thus constructed as a powerful monolith, directing and constraining the policy choices of national governments. In response to the risen Phoenix of global finance, many authors have proposed the reregulation of the financial sphere and have emphasized (concerted) state action as the way to submit and control the activity of financial institutions. Cohen articulates a core question: “If states were so pivotal in the globalization process, could they also turn back the clock if they wish?” (1996, 276). By comparison, Cerny argues in favor of “new, authoritative marketconstraining measures to prevent both old and new kinds of market failure, i.e. to control and counteract perverse, unintended consequences that may have been caused by the original deregulation” (1995, 241). The platform on which reregulation of financial markets should take place, Cerny goes on to say, “must become more internationalized and/or transnationalized” (242–43...