From the point of view of MMT, as far as we can tell to date, the largest potential for the state to afford its citizens a maximum of benefits is associated with a monetarily sovereign society.
By this I mean a society whose government is (a) the monopoly issuer of its own currency, while at the same time being (b) subject to effective democratic control.
Being the monopoly issuer of its own currency removes any financial constraint from government, leaving it to foster economic growth and make use of (some part of) society's economic resources for its own purposes up to the point where these resources are exhausted/fully employed, given the level of productivity etc at the time.
Being subject to democratic control increases the likelihood that government's material resources, its economic policies, and legal determinations do not egregiously deviate from the public purpose, as perceived by a pluralistic public.
By this I mean a society whose government is (a) the monopoly issuer of its own currency, while at the same time being (b) subject to effective democratic control.
Being the monopoly issuer of its own currency removes any financial constraint from government, leaving it to foster economic growth and make use of (some part of) society's economic resources for its own purposes up to the point where these resources are exhausted/fully employed, given the level of productivity etc at the time.
Being subject to democratic control increases the likelihood that government's material resources, its economic policies, and legal determinations do not egregiously deviate from the public purpose, as perceived by a pluralistic public.
Interestingly this twinning of exceptional power and effective political constraint is closely related to the early proto-liberal (even pre-liberal) insight, first and most copiously espoused by Jean Bodin (1529-1596), whereby the stronger and more effective state is the one that binds itself (is made to bind itself) to severe constraints. The most powerful and socially useful government is the one that is governed by rules that possess preeminence over its unconstrained volition.
Put differently: to approximate the most powerful and socially useful form of societal governance, two fundamental requirements need to be fulfilled: monetary sovereignty and effective democratic control, implying strong political competition and the presence of a variant of the rule of law that sustains political, economic, and scientific pluralism.
In the absence of effective pluralism and democratic control, the policy space afforded by monetary sovereignty is likely to be exploited by particular interests at the expense of the demos.
In the absence of monetary sovereignty, (public) "goods" such as full employment, crisis-free economic growth and its attendant beneficial welfare effects will not be attained or only to a lesser degree—MMT offering the economic theory that explains why this is so.
This marks the social democratic conflux of socialistic and liberal demands, the former insisting on an active role of the modern state in promoting public welfare (as opposed to a magical belief in the comprehensive self-healing powers of free markets—I do not doubt the self-healing capacity of markets, but I do doubt their comprehensiveness), the latter being adamant about the need to constrain the absolute power of the state and provide adequate protections for the individual and private enterprises of all kinds.
This marks the social democratic conflux of socialistic and liberal demands, the former insisting on an active role of the modern state in promoting public welfare (as opposed to a magical belief in the comprehensive self-healing powers of free markets—I do not doubt the self-healing capacity of markets, but I do doubt their comprehensiveness), the latter being adamant about the need to constrain the absolute power of the state and provide adequate protections for the individual and private enterprises of all kinds.
No comments:
Post a Comment