Tracing the Transformation of the US’s Hegemonic Paradigm in the Historical Process: From Embedded Liberalism to Disembedded Financial Liberalism

Betül Sarı Aksakal

doi:10.17494/ogusbd.1200653

EN TR

Tracing the Transformation of the US’s Hegemonic Paradigm in the Historical Process: From Embedded Liberalism to Disembedded Financial Liberalism

Öz

The emergence of the United States (US) as the worldwide dominant power is an affair that needs to be investigated in light of some historical experiences. Afterward the Second World War, the US reestablished the world’s deteriorating international monetary and financial system. Embedded liberalism reinforced and stabilized the US hegemony (as the form of economic, political, and institutional organization) by generating the requirements for consolidating the global economy in which the US takes a leading role. From the mid-1970s, after integrating the world economy into an accumulation regime characterized by finance capital-as, a natural consequence of the transition to neoliberal policies-it was understood that fragmented financial liberalism began to show its effect as a new strategy that would ensure the continuity of the US hegemony. The study has departed from the problematic of elucidating the change in the hegemonic strategy of the US from its birth to the present day. In this problematic context, the shift of the US hegemonic strategy from embedded liberalism to disembedded financial liberalism and the central dynamics determining this shift is examined in the axis of historical perspective.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Embedded liberalism, US hegemony, Cold War, disembedded financial liberalism, financial crises.

ABD Hegemonik Paradigmasının Dönüşümünün Tarihsel Süreçteki İzini Sürmek: Gömülü Liberalizmden Parçalanmış Finansal Liberalizme

Öz

Amerika’nın İkinci Dünya Savaşı’ndan bu yana dünya çapında hakim bir güç olarak ortaya çıkışı, bazı tarihsel tecrübeler ışığında incelenmesi gereken bir konudur. İkinci Dünya Savaşı’nın ardından ABD dünyanın çöken uluslararası para ve finans sistemini yeniden kurmuş, böylelikle lider pozisyonda olacağı uluslararası kapitalist sistemi oluşturmuştur. Gömülü liberalizm, ekonomik, politik ve kurumsal bir örgütlenme stratejisi olarak ABD hegemonyasını sağlamlaştırarak istikrarlı bir hale getirmiş, uluslararası sistemde ABD’nin başrol oynadığı bir küresel ekonominin somutlaşmasının koşullarını yaratmıştır. 1970'lerin ortalarından itibaren ise-neoliberal politikalara geçişin doğal bir sonucu olarak, dünya ekonomisinin finans kapital ile karakterize bir birikim rejimine entegrasyonunun ardından, parçalanmış finansal liberalizmin ABD hegemonyasının devamlılığını sağlayacak yeni bir strateji olarak etkisini göstermeye başladığı anlaşılmıştır. Çalışma, ABD hegemonyasının ortaya çıkışından günümüze kadar uzanan zaman diliminde, ABD’nin hegemonik stratejisinde meydana gelen değişimi açıklama sorunsalından hareket etmiştir. Bu sorunsal bağlamında, ABD hegemonik stratejisinin gömülü liberalizmden parçalanmış finansal liberalizme kayışı ve bu kayışı belirleyen temel dinamikler tarihsel perspektif ekseninde irdelenmiştir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Amerikan hegemonyası, gömülü liberalizm, Soğuk Savaş, parçalanmış finansal liberalizm, finansal krizler.

Teşekkür

Bu çalışma Hacettepe Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü İngilizce İktisat Anabilim Dalı’nda Doç. Dr. Muammer KAYMAK danışmanlığında Betül SARI AKSAKAL tarafından “Financialization and the US Hegemony: A Critical Approach to Contemporary Debates” başlığı devam etmekte olan –Doktora tezinden türetilmiştir. Hocama emekleri ve bana sunduğu katkılardan dolayı çok teşekkür ederim.

Kaynakça

Akdağ, Y. (2014). Kapitalizm ve sınıf mücadelesi. İstanbul: Evrensel.
Alvarez-Cuadrado, F. (2008). The Marshall Plan. The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics, 1(1), 1-6.
Amin, S. (2008). Market economy or Oligopoly-finance capitalism? Monthly Review, 59 (11), 51–61.
Amin, S. (2019), Liberal virüs, sürekli savaş ve dünyanın Amerikanlaştırılması. İstanbul: Yordam. (Trs. F. Başkaya).
Baca, G. (2021). Neoliberalism’s prologue: Keynesianism, myths of class compromises and the restoration of class power. Anthropological Theory, 21(4), 520-540.
Badkar, M. and Greeley, B. (2020). New data shows vast scale of US economic breakdown. Financial Times. URL: https://www.ft.com/content/6361247d-a1df-4a50-b0aa-59395801b3f3 (31/10/2022).
Baran, P. (1968). The political economy of growth. New York: Monthly Review.
BBC (2020). Coronavirus: Pandemic sends US jobless rate to 14.7 %. URL: https://www.bbc.com/news/business-52591262 (18/10/2022).
Bernburg, J. G. (2002). Anomie, social change, and crime: A Theoretical examination of institutional-anomie theory. The British Journal of Criminology, 42(4), 729–742.
Best, J. (2003). From the Top–Down: The new financial architecture and the re-embedding of global finance. New Political Economy, 8(3), 363-384.

Bieler, A. and Morton, D. (2004). A critical theory route to Hegemony, world order and historical change: Neo-Gramscian perspectives in International Relations. Capital & Class, 28(1), 85-113.
Bimay, M. and Kaypak, Ş. (2019). Küreselleşme sürecinde kamu politikalarinda yaşanan değişimler. Assam, 6(15), 24-40.
Blum, W. (2013). Emperyalizmin en ölümcül silahı: Demokrasi yalanı. İstanbul: Say. (Trs. Ekin Duru).
Bond, P. (2004). Bankrupt Africa: Imperialism, sub-imperialism and the politics of finance. Historical Materialism, 12(4), 145-172.
Bonefeld, W. (2010). Free economy and the strong state: Some notes on the state. Capital & Class, 34(1), 15-24.
Boylan, B. M., McBeath, J. and Wang, B. (2021). US–China relations: Nationalism, the trade war, and COVID-19. Fudan Journal of the Humanities and Social Sciences, 14, 23-40.
Bray, M. (2015). Rearticulating contemporary populism: Class, state, and neoliberal society. Historical Materialism, 23(3): 27-64.
Brown, W. (2015). Undoing the demos: Neoliberalism’s stealth revolution. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Brzezinski, Z. (1997). A geostrategy for Eurasia. Foreign Affairs. September/October. https://www. foreignaffairs.com/articles/asia/1997-09-01/geostrategy-eurasia. Accessed 30 January 2023.
Caffentzis, G. (1973). The work/energy crisis and the Apocalypse. Midnight Oil: Work, Energy, War, 1992, 215-271.
Chang, H-J. and Grabel, I. (2004). Reclaiming development from the Washington Consensus. Journal of Post Keynesian Economics, 27(2), 273-291.
Cohen, B. (2007). The Transatlantic Divide: Why are American and British IPE so Different? Review of International Political Economy, 14(2), 197-219.
Corbridge, S. (1994). Bretton Woods revisited: Hegemony, stability, and territory. Environment and Planning A, 26(12), 1829-1859.
Cox, R. (1977). Labor and hegemony. International Organization, 31(3), 385-424.
Cox, R. (1981). Social forces, states, and world orders: Beyond International Relations Theory. Millennium, 10(2), 126-155.
Cox, R. (1983). Gramsci, hegemony and International Relations: An Essay In Method. Millennium, 12(2), 162-175.
Cox, M. (2017). The Rise of populism and the crisis of globalization: Brexit, Trump and beyond. Irish Studies in International Affairs 28, 9–17.
Dowd, D. (2006). Kapitalizm ve kapitalizmin iktisadı: Eleştirel bir tarih. İstanbul: Yordam. (Trs. C. Gerçek).
Eichengreen, B. and Uzan, M. (1992). The Marshall Plan: Economic effects and implications for Eastern Europe and the Former USSR. Economic Policy, 7(14), 13-75.
Epstein, G. (2005). Financialization and the world economy. US: Edward Elgar Publishing.
Fayyaz, S. and Malik, S. (2020). Question of US Hegemony and COVID-19 Pandemic. Global Political Review, 1(1), 72-83.
Foster, J. B. (2008). The financialization of capital and the crisis. Monthly Review, 59(11), 1-19.
Foster, J. B. (2011), Tekelci Finans Sermayesi. (İstanbul: Kalkedon) (Trs. Barış Baysal, Onur Ayretli and Selim Sezer).
Frank, A. G. (1967). Capitalism and underdevelopment in Latin America. NYU Press.
Frank, A. G. (1970). Latin America and underdevelopment. NYU Press.
Frieden, J. (2006). Global Capitalism: Its fall and rise in the Twentieth Century. New York: WW Norton and Company.
Gamble, A. (1994). The free economy and the strong state: The politics of Thatcherism. London: Macmillan.
Gauttam, P., Singh, B. and Kaur, J. (2020). COVID-19 and Chinese global health diplomacy: Geopolitical opportunity for China’s hegemony?. Millennial Asia, 11(3), 318-340.
Gemici, K. (2008). Karl Polanyi and the antinomies of embeddedness. Socioeconomic Review, 6(1), 5-33. Gindin, S. and Panitch, L. (2012). The making of global capitalism: The political economy of the American Empire. London: Verso Books.
Gough, I. (1979). The political economy of the welfare state. Palgrave: Macmillan.
Gough, I. (2011). “From Financial Crisis to Fiscal Crisis,” Farnsworth, K. and Irving, Z. (Eds.), Social Policy and Economic Crisis, London: Policy Press, pp. 49– 50.
Gramsci, A. (1971). Selections from the Prison Notebooks (Q. Hoare & G. Nowell Smith, Ed. and Trans.). New York: International.
Harvey, D. (2005). A brief history of neoliberalism. New York: Oxford University Press.
Harvey, D. (2019). Yeni emperyalizm. İstanbul: Sel. (Trs: Nüvit Bingöl).
Helleiner, E. (1994). The world of money: The political economy of international capital mobility. Policy Sciences, 27(4), 295-298.
Helleiner, E. (2006). Reinterpreting Bretton Woods: International development and the neglected origins of embedded liberalism. Development and Change, 37(5), 943-967.
Helleiner, E. (2019). The life and times of embedded liberalism: Legacies and innovations since Bretton Woods. Review of International Political Economy, 26(6), 1112-1135.
Hindery, L. (2020). Distorted jobs numbers are misguiding stimulus policy. The Financial Times. URL: https://ftalphaville.ft.com/2020/09/17/1600360453000/Distortedjobs-numbers-are-misguiding-stimulus-policy. (19/10/2022).
Hobson, J. (1898). Free trade and foreign policy. The Contemporary Review, 74, 167-180.
Ingram, A. (2017). Geopolitical events and fascist machines: Trump, Brexit and the deterritorialization of the West. Political Geography, 57, 91-93.
Itoh, M. and Lapavitsas, C. (1998). The political economy of money and finance. New York: Springer.
Ivanova, M. (2007). Why there was no ‘Marshall Plan for Eastern Europe and why this still matters. Journal of Contemporary European Studies, 15(3), 345-376.
Jones, L. and Hameiri, S. (2022). COVID-19 and the failure of the neoliberal regulatory state. Review of International Political Economy, 29(4), 1027-1052.
Kiely, R. (2005). Empire in the age of globalization: US hegemony and neoliberal disorder. London: Pluto.
Kirshner, J. (1999). Keynes, capital mobility, and the crisis of embedded liberalism. Review of International Political Economy, 6(3), 313-337.
Krugman, P. (2011). The profession and the crisis, Eastern Economic Journal, 37(3), 307-312.
Lacher, H. (1999). Embedded liberalism, disembedded markets: Reconceptualizing the Pax Americana. New Political Economy, 4(3), 343-360.
Lapavitsas, C. (2009). Financialised Capitalism: Crisis and financial expropriation. Historical Materialism, 17(2), 114-148.
Lau, L. J. (2020). The Impacts of the Trade War and the COVID-19 Epidemic on China-US Economic Relations. China Review, 20(4), 1-38.
Lie, J. (1991). Embedding Polanyi’s market society. Sociological Perspectives, 34(2), 219-235.
Lilly, A., Tetlow, G. Oliver Davies, and Pope, T. (2020). The Cost of Covid-19. Institute for Government, URL: https://tinyurl.com/2yzy5mse (1/11/2022).
Maddison, A. (2008). Shares of the rich and the rest in the world economy: Income divergence between nations 1820–2030. Asian Economic Policy Review, 3(1), 67-82.
Magdoff, H. (1997). Emperyalizm çağı. İstanbul: Sosyalist (Trs: Doğan Şafak).
Mah-Hui, L. and Siam-Heng, M. H. (2021). COVID-19 and the structural crises of our time. ISEAS-Yusof Ishak Institute.
Maier, C. (1977). The politics of productivity: Foundations of American international economic policy after World War II. International Organization, 31(4), 607-633.
Marglin, S. and Schor, J. (Eds.) (1991). The Golden age of capitalism: Reinterpreting the Postwar experience. (Oxford University Press).
Marx, K. (1894). Capital. A critique of political economy. Volume 3. (Chicago: Charles H. Kerr, 1909). (First published in 1894).
McCormick, T. (1995). America’s Half-century: United States foreign Policy in the Cold War and after. Baltimore: John Hopkins University Press.
McKinnon, R. (1973). Money and capital in economic development. Washington DC: The Brookings Institution.
Munck, R. (2005). Neoliberalism and politics, and the politics of neoliberalism. A. Saad-Filho and D. Johnston (Eds.), Neoliberalism – A Critical Reader. London: Pluto Press, pp. 60-69.
Norrlöf, C. (2020). Is COVID-19 the end of US hegemony? Public bads, leadership failures and monetary hegemony. International Affairs, 96(5), 1281-1303.
Orhangazi, Ö. (2008). Financialization and the US economy. Edward Elgar Publishing.
Palan, R. (2000). A world of their making: an evaluation of the constructivist critique in International Relations. Review of International Studies, 26(4), 575-598.
Panitch, L. and Konings, M. (Eds.). (2008). American empire and the political economy of global finance. New York: Springer.
Petras, J. and Weltmeyer, H. (2001). Globalization unmasked: Imperialism in the 21st century. London: Zed Books.
Philips, K. (2002). Wealth and democracy: A political history of the American rich. New York: Broadway.
Polanyi, K. (1944/2001). The great transformation: The political and economic origins of our time. Boston, MA: Beacon Press.
Polanyi, K. (1957). The great transformation the political and economic origins of our time. Boston: Beacon Press.
Polanyi-Levitt, K. (2013). From the great transformation to the great financialization on Karl Polanyi and other essays. London: Zed Books.
Portes, A. and Hoffman, K. (2003). Latin American class structures: Their composition and change during the neoliberal era. Latin American Research Review, 38(1), 41-82.
Ross, S. (2015). Strategic bombing by the United States in World War II: The myths and the facts. US: McFarland.
Ruggie, J. (1982). International regimes, transactions, and change: Embedded Liberalism in the postwar economic order. International Organization, 36(2), 379-415.
Saad-Filho, A. (2010). Neoliberalism in crisis: A Marxist analysis. Marxism, 21, 235-257.
Samuelson, P. A. (1980). İktisat. İstanbul: Menteş.
Sarıöz Gökten, Y. (2013). Hegemonya ilişkilerinin dünü, bugünü ve geleceği neo-gramscici bir bakış. Ankara: Nota Bene.
Saull, R. (2012). Rethinking hegemony: Uneven development, historical blocs, and the world economic crisis. International Studies Quarterly, 56(2), 323-338.
Savran, S. (2013). Üçüncü büyük depresyon: Kapitalizmin alacakaranlığı. Ankara: Yordam.
Schmidt, I. (2011). There were alternatives: Lessons from efforts to advance beyond Keynesian and neoliberal economic policies in the 1970s. Working USA, 14(4), 473-498.
Shaikh, A. and Tonak, A. (2012). Milletlerin Zenginliğinin Ölçülmesi: Ulusal Hesapların Ekonomi Politiği. Ankara: Yordam.
Soederberg, S. (2004). The politics of the new international financial architecture: Reimposing neoliberal domination in the Global South. London: Zed Books.
Stiglitz, J. (2009). The current economic crisis and lessons for economic theory. Eastern Economic Journal, 35(3), 281-296.
Strange, S. (1994). States and markets. London and New York: Pinter Pub.
Strange, S. (1999). The West-failure system. Review of International Studies, 25(3), 345-354.
Šumonja, M. (2021). Neoliberalism is not dead–On political implications of Covid-19. Capital & Class, 45(2), 215-227.
Thatcher, M. (1987). Interview for Woman’s Own. URL: http://www.margaretthatcher.org/document/106689. (1/11/2022).
Türel, O. (2017). Küresel tarihçe, 1945-79. Ankara: Yordam Kitap.
Van der Pijl, K. (1984). The making of an Atlantic ruling class. London: Verso.
Vormann, B. and Lammert, C. (2019). Assembling the smart economy: A typology of state intervention patterns. In Contours of the Illiberal State, B. Vormann, and C. Lammert (Eds.), Frankfurt a.M./Chicago, IL: Campus/The University of Chicago Press, pp. 11–35.
Wade, R. (1998). The Asian debt-and-development crisis of 1997? Causes and consequences. World Development, 26(8), 1535-1553.
Wallerstein, I. (1974). The modern world-system I: Capitalist agriculture and the origins of the European world-economy in the sixteenth century. University of California Press.
Wallerstein, I. (1976a). A world-system perspective on the social sciences. The British Journal of Sociology, 27(3), 343-352.
Wallerstein, I. (1976b). Semi-peripheral countries and the contemporary world crisis. Theory and society, 3(4), 461-483.
Wright, E. and Rogers, J. (2015). American society: How it really works? W. W. Norton &Company: London.
Yuan, N. (2020). Reflections on China–US relations after the COVID-19 pandemic. China International Strategy Review, 2(1), 14-23.

Ayrıntılar

Birincil Dil

İngilizce

Konular

-

Bölüm

Araştırma Makalesi

Yazarlar

Betül Sarı Aksakal ^*
0000-0003-2668-364X
Türkiye

Yayımlanma Tarihi

29 Mart 2023

Gönderilme Tarihi

7 Kasım 2022

Kabul Tarihi

16 Şubat 2023

Yayımlandığı Sayı

Yıl 2023 Cilt: 24 Sayı: 1

DOI

https://doi.org/10.17494/ogusbd.1200653

IZ

https://izlik.org/JA38CF57GH

APA

Sarı Aksakal, B. (2023). Tracing the Transformation of the US’s Hegemonic Paradigm in the Historical Process: From Embedded Liberalism to Disembedded Financial Liberalism. Eskişehir Osmangazi Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 24(1), 17-40. https://doi.org/10.17494/ogusbd.1200653

AMA

1.Sarı Aksakal B. Tracing the Transformation of the US’s Hegemonic Paradigm in the Historical Process: From Embedded Liberalism to Disembedded Financial Liberalism. Eskişehir Osmangazi Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi. 2023;24(1):17-40. doi:10.17494/ogusbd.1200653

Chicago

Sarı Aksakal, Betül. 2023. “Tracing the Transformation of the US’s Hegemonic Paradigm in the Historical Process: From Embedded Liberalism to Disembedded Financial Liberalism”. Eskişehir Osmangazi Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi 24 (1): 17-40. https://doi.org/10.17494/ogusbd.1200653.

EndNote

Sarı Aksakal B (01 Mart 2023) Tracing the Transformation of the US’s Hegemonic Paradigm in the Historical Process: From Embedded Liberalism to Disembedded Financial Liberalism. Eskişehir Osmangazi Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi 24 1 17–40.

IEEE

[1]B. Sarı Aksakal, “Tracing the Transformation of the US’s Hegemonic Paradigm in the Historical Process: From Embedded Liberalism to Disembedded Financial Liberalism”, Eskişehir Osmangazi Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, c. 24, sy 1, ss. 17–40, Mar. 2023, doi: 10.17494/ogusbd.1200653.

ISNAD

Sarı Aksakal, Betül. “Tracing the Transformation of the US’s Hegemonic Paradigm in the Historical Process: From Embedded Liberalism to Disembedded Financial Liberalism”. Eskişehir Osmangazi Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi 24/1 (01 Mart 2023): 17-40. https://doi.org/10.17494/ogusbd.1200653.

JAMA

1.Sarı Aksakal B. Tracing the Transformation of the US’s Hegemonic Paradigm in the Historical Process: From Embedded Liberalism to Disembedded Financial Liberalism. Eskişehir Osmangazi Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi. 2023;24:17–40.

MLA

Sarı Aksakal, Betül. “Tracing the Transformation of the US’s Hegemonic Paradigm in the Historical Process: From Embedded Liberalism to Disembedded Financial Liberalism”. Eskişehir Osmangazi Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, c. 24, sy 1, Mart 2023, ss. 17-40, doi:10.17494/ogusbd.1200653.

Vancouver

1.Betül Sarı Aksakal. Tracing the Transformation of the US’s Hegemonic Paradigm in the Historical Process: From Embedded Liberalism to Disembedded Financial Liberalism. Eskişehir Osmangazi Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi. 01 Mart 2023;24(1):17-40. doi:10.17494/ogusbd.1200653

Tracing the Transformation of the US’s Hegemonic Paradigm in the Historical Process: From Embedded Liberalism to Disembedded Financial Liberalism

Öz

Anahtar Kelimeler

ABD Hegemonik Paradigmasının Dönüşümünün Tarihsel Süreçteki İzini Sürmek: Gömülü Liberalizmden Parçalanmış Finansal Liberalizme

Öz

Anahtar Kelimeler

Teşekkür

Kaynakça

Ayrıntılar

Birincil Dil

Konular

Bölüm

Yazarlar

Yayımlanma Tarihi

Gönderilme Tarihi

Kabul Tarihi

Yayımlandığı Sayı

DOI

IZ

Kaynak Göster