Welcome!

The New School Economics Society and Goldsmiths Political Economy Research Centre would like to thank you for coming to today’s event. We’re really excited to present today’s schedule with some fantastic speakers, and hope to engage everyone in some stimulating discussion. The theme of today’s conference was conceptualised by the need for economics to embrace a broader political discourse, beyond the technocratic language of mainstream economic thought. In line with the ethos of Rethinking Economics, today’s event offers a pluralist perspective to economics, through a trans-disciplinary look at the theme of “post-truth”. As a probing political topic in recent months, we reflected on what “post-truth” meant beyond the traditional realm of politics, and found it to resonate with how hegemonic economic discourses dominate our understanding of the “economy” today. We are bombarded with economic language that often feels detached from the political framework with which it exists within, whether it be the abstractness of financial instruments, to the ambiguous declarations of Theresa May’s “strong and stable” economy, “Post-truth” frames a new political era, exposing the failures of economics to offer a new and relevant rhetoric, and one which is applicable to the unpredictable political climates of Brexit and Trump.

New School Economics Goldsmiths Team & William Davies, Co-Director of PERC

Schedule 9:30 - 9:35 Welcome and introduction to the conference Ian Gulland Lecture Theatre

09.35 - 10.20 Massimilliano Mollona –What can Economics Learn from

Anthropology? Ian Gulland Lecture Theatre

How can we understand economics as a living practice rather than as a set of dis-embedded and abstract theories? How can we assess the real impact of economic policies for example de-industrialisation, urban regeneration or austerity? How can we name or discuss “the economy’ in inclusive and non-prescriptive way? In this presentation I discuss the contribution of anthropology, intended as a theoretical body, a utopian form of imagination and a methodology of research intervention, to human-centered and plural economic theories and practices focusing on my experience of film-based research interventions.

10.25 - 11.30 Brexit Panel – Speakers: Will Davies, Aeron Davis, Joe Earle and Jack Mosse. Q&A facilitated by Samiah Anderson. Ian Gulland Lecture Theatre

The three major political parties in the UK, think tanks and the discourse in mainstream academia argued to remain in the European Union, citing statistics, evidence based facts and figures, of what they perceived as sound economic truths. The British people, however, voted against this established set of economic reasoning: Loss of sovereignty, unfair distribution of income and wealth from the gains of trade, and the lack of control of immigration were popular underlying factors moving against the technocrats. How do we steer through this post-truth political landscape at a time where economic development must be rethought to confront Brexit and the emergent inequality that has polarised the nation?

How does each speaker interpret the rise in claims that post-truth narratives are misleading people in politics and approaches to economic policy?

11.35 - 12.05 Maria Ivanova - The Limits to Unconventional Monetary Policy Ian Gulland Lecture Theatre

Dr Maria N Ivanova's research interests include social theory and political economy, theories of money and finance, crisis theories, international and comparative political economy, political economy of the United States (social transformation and economic history, housing, consumerism, the international role of the US Dollar, the global imbalances), history of the economic thought and intellectual history (Marx, Veblen, Mach, Hayek, Keynes, Minsky, Post Keynesian theories of money and finance).

12.10 - 13.15 Deconstructing Finance - Speakers: Johnna Montgomerie (PERC), Anastasia Nesvetailova (PERC), Clea Bourne and Daniela Gabor. Ian Gulland Lecture Theatre

Deconstructing Finance – Deregulation of Finance as contributing factor to Post-Truth Narrative: Johnna Montgomerie (PERC), Anastasia Nesvetailova (PERC), Clea Bourne and Daniela Gabor. Debt has become the engine of our growth. The rise and profitability of international capital markets and financial instruments has driven up levels of public and private debt, restructuring the global economy, resulting in political transformations through the resistance of those who “have been left behind” by this economy. The pouring of capital into finance, business and service industries unshackles itself from the traditionally politicised manufacturing sectors and skill sets of developed nations, whilst loans replace social welfare provisions and university grants. This fuels the casino economy of globalisation, financial deregulation, asset price speculation, collateralised debt obligations, credit default swaps, etc. How do we begin framing alternatives for a sustainable system of credit and debt? How can we rethink economics in this context?

13.15 - 14:00 Lunch Break

14:00 - 15:15 (Parallel session) Alternative Political Economy Panel: Reinvigorating Forgotten Perspectives - Speakers: Paul Gunn, Jamie Morgan, Sara Stevano and

Marissa Conway. Ian Gulland Lecture Theatre

“Post-Truth” could also be seen to reflect upon or deflect debates around alternative economic visions, namely feminist theory and environmental sustainability. In the friction between the self-interested “true” principles, statistics, facts and figures which currently point growth towards benefiting the wealthy patriarchal few, contrasted with alternative sustainable energy models which are rooted within the limitations of the planet's resources. Development Economics engages in discussions of environmental and societal degradation, intersecting with how alternative narratives in feminist theory are neglected in mainstream economic discussion. This panel will pose the question of how these alternatives can help deconstruct the hegemonic discourses within Economics.

14:00 - 15:15 (Parallel session) Platform Cooperative Workshop - Jack Thorp Professor Stuart Hall (PSH) 326

Why do we have huge monolithic technology companies? How powerful are they? Do we even know what they do anymore? Should we be worried? What do we want the future of cyberspace to look like? What is co-operation? What could the synthesis of co-operation and digital platforms look like? Do we want it? How could we get there? Who is trying? Can the web and modern technology solve challenges of participation and representation that have historically plagued large co-operative enterprises? Are we asking the right questions?This session is an open invitation to anyone who wants to share knowledge and ideas about digital platforms, co-operatives, start ups, tech, online rights & privacy, governance, democracy, distributed technology and more!

15:30 - 16:45 (Parallel session) Alternative Policies to Take Vast Inequalities - Özlem Onaran Professor Stuart Hall (PSH) LG02

How do we construct alternative solutions to tackle vast inequality that isn’t rooted in mainstream economic claims? Professor Onaran’s work is empirically grounded and tests alternative theories by synthesising post Keynesian, Marxian, feminist, institutionalist theories and rejects the predictions of neoclassical economics in explaining the causes of inequality and hence proposing new and exciting policies.

15:30 - 16:45 (Parallel Session) Global Capitalism and Finance - Tony Norfield Ian Gulland Lecture Theatre

Tony Norfield worked for nearly 20 years in the dealing rooms of banks in the City of London, completing his role as Executive Director and Global Head of FX Strategy for ABN AMRO. In April 2016, his book, The City: London and the Global Power of Finance, was published in which he argues that London’s leading role in foreign exchange trading, derivatives and overseas lending is an extension of its imperialist past. Creating complex financial products and charging for them has enabled the sector to requisition for the UK and London — and, of course, bankers themselves — a disproportionate share of the benefits of global trade.

15:30 - 16:45 (Parallel Session) Democratising Economics with www.ecnmy.org Professor Stuart Hall (PSH) 326

Workshop Economic arguments are often the central feature of political campaigns - from promises to 'cut the deficit' to pledges to 'increase productivity'. However, research has shown that public understanding of the subject of economics is incredibly low, and these arguments only loosely understood. Even the word 'economics' is off-putting for many. This workshop looks at Economy's approach to tackling this issue, and also asks participants to explore why this lack of understanding is a problem, where the blame lies for this democratic deficit, and most importantly, how do we democratise economics?

17:00 - 18:00 What does the Future of Money Actually Look Like? - Brett Scott Ian Gulland Lecture Theatre

What does the ‘Future of money’ actually look like? The phrase 'future of money' is frequently used by the financial industry to refer to cosmetic changes to the user-experience layer of finance. The future is supposed to be a world of endless digital convenience and customisability, with seamless interfaces and gadgets that allow you to interact with banks at greater speed and with more ease. The vision, however, seldom includes any political critique of finance and seldom imagines possibilities beyond the existing cartels of banks and payments intermediaries. In this talk Brett Scott will explore the deeper changes we can make to money and banking systems, the different groups pursuing those changes, and the differing visions that accompany their initiatives.

18:00 Closing Plenary

Speakers List

Dr Clea Bourne Clea Bourne is a lecturer in the Media and Communications department at Goldsmiths, specialising in financial markets and how they are mediated in global and global discourses.

Marissa Conway Marissa Conway is the founding director of A Feminist Foreign Policy, a collection of critiques, analyses, and imaginings from across the globe which employ feminism as a means to interrupt mainstream foreign policy ideas.

Professor Aeron Davis Aaron Davis is a professor of Political Communication and co-director of PERC at Goldsmiths. His research includes economic sociology, cultural economy, financialisation and financial markets.

Dr Will Davis Will Davis a senior lecturer in Politics and co-director of PERC at Goldsmiths University. He is also the convenor of the PPE degree and his research includes neoliberalism, history of economics and economic sociology.

Joe Earle Joe Earle is one of the founders of the Post-Crash Economics Society at Manchester University and co-author of ‘The Econocracy’

Professor Daniela Gabor Daniela Gabor is an associate professor in Economics at the University of the West of England, her research specialises in central banking in crisis, governance of local banks, the IMF, shadow banking and repo markets.

Dr Paul Gunn Paul Gunn is a lecturer in the Politics department at Goldsmiths, specialising in Political Economy and the Environment.

Dr Maria N Ivanova Maria Ivanova is a lecturer in Economics at Goldsmiths, specialising in Heterodox Economics and Political Economy.

Dr Massimiliano Mollona Maximiliano Mollona is a writer, filmmaker and senior lecturer in Anthropology at Goldsmiths, with his work specialising in art and political economy.

Dr Johnna Montgomerie Johnna Montgomerie is the deputy director of PERC and senior lecturer in Political Economy. Her work specialises in household debt, austerity, the never-ending crisis and creative methodologies for investigating the political economy of everyday life.

Dr Jamie Morgan Jamie Morgan is a senior lecturer in the School of Economics, Analytics and International Business at Leeds Beckett University. Jamie works on contemporary problems and their socio-economic context, most recently: political transition (Brexit, Trump), corporate tax avoidance, climate change, financialisation, artificial intelligence and social change, and modern forms of slavery.

Speakers List

Dr Clea Bourne Clea Bourne is a lecturer in the Media and Communications department at Goldsmiths, specialising in financial markets and how they are mediated in global and global discourses.

Marissa Conway Marissa Conway is the founding director of A Feminist Foreign Policy, a collection of critiques, analyses, and imaginings from across the globe which employ feminism as a means to interrupt mainstream foreign policy ideas.

Professor Aeron Davis Aaron Davis is a professor of Political Communication and co-director of PERC at Goldsmiths. His research includes economic sociology, cultural economy, financialisation and financial markets.

Dr Will Davis Will Davis a senior lecturer in Politics and co-director of PERC at Goldsmiths University. He is also the convenor of the PPE degree and his research includes neoliberalism, history of economics and economic sociology.

Joe Earle Joe Earle is one of the founders of the Post-Crash Economics Society at Manchester University and co-author of ‘The Econocracy’

Professor Daniela Gabor Daniela Gabor is an associate professor in Economics at the University of the West of England, her research specialises in central banking in crisis, governance of local banks, the IMF, shadow banking and repo markets.

Dr Paul Gunn Paul Gunn is a lecturer in the Politics department at Goldsmiths, specialising in Political Economy and the Environment.

Dr Maria N Ivanova Maria Ivanova is a lecturer in Economics at Goldsmiths, specialising in Heterodox Economics and Political Economy.

Dr Massimiliano Mollona Maximiliano Mollona is a writer, filmmaker and senior lecturer in Anthropology at Goldsmiths, with his work specialising in art and political economy.

Dr Johnna Montgomerie Johnna Montgomerie is the deputy director of PERC and senior lecturer in Political Economy. Her work specialises in household debt, austerity, the never-ending crisis and creative methodologies for investigating the political economy of everyday life.

Dr Jamie Morgan Jamie Morgan is a senior lecturer in the School of Economics, Analytics and International Business at Leeds Beckett University. Jamie works on contemporary problems and their socio-economic context, most recently: political transition (Brexit, Trump), corporate tax avoidance, climate change, financialisation, artificial intelligence and social change, and modern forms of slavery.

Jack Mosse Jack Mosse is a PhD Candidate in the Media and Communications department at Goldsmiths. His work uses qualitative anthropological methods and the concept of the economic imaginary to explore different visions, narratives, claims to knowledge and discourses around the economy in the UK.

Professor Anastasia Nesvetailova Anastasia Nesvetailova is Director of City Political Economy Research Centre, City University of London. Her main research and teaching interests lie in the area of international political economy, finance and financial crises, regulation and governance.

Dr Tony Norfield With 20 years experience in the City of London as the Executive Director and Global Head of FX Strategy for ABN AMRO, in 2016 Tony Norfield published ‘The City: London and the Global Power of Finance’ after attaining a PHD at SOAS on British imperialism and finance.

Özlem Onaran Özlem Onaran is the Director of the Political Economy Research Centre, University of Greenwich. She has done extensive research on issues of inequality, wage-led growth, employment, globalisation, gender, and crises.

Jack Thorp Jack Thorp is a computer scientist and founder of fairmondo UK - a user controlled marketplace innovating to find better ways of fair and sustainable consumption online. Interested in governance, (self)-organisation processes, technology and all things co-operative.

Brett Scott Brett Scott is a journalist, campaigner and former derivatives broker. He is the author of ‘The Heretic’s Guide to Global Finance: Hacking the Future of Money’ and has worked on multiple campaigns for ethical banking reforms.

Sara Stevano Sara Stevano is a development economist with research interests in the political economy of food and nutrition, labour markets, and feminist political economy. Her work focuses on sub-Saharan Africa, with specific research expertise on Mozambique and Ghana.

The econmy.org team Antonia Jennings is Head of Engagement at ecnmy. leads the outreach and engagement strategy with stakeholders, partners, trusts & foundations and philanthropists. In between making economics fun and putting a stop to climate change, Antonia enjoys music, her bike and cooking – not at the same time.

The Weaponisation of Economics

What is an Economic Fact? Jeremy Bentham in his ‘The Principles of Morals and Legislation’ once warned us, “the more abstract the proposition is, the more liable it is to involve a fallacy.” According to Bentham, this is primarily because politics and law is afflicted by the “tyranny of sounds.”

Words don’t refer to anything real. Words do not connect exactly to things, yet numbers connect exactly to what they refer to. Numerical information bears an exactness and inevitably a correctness, according to Bentham. This is what makes them so powerful in the political rhetoric. They reinforce the sense that the speaker is precise and tells the truth.

Well, it’s 2017 and this proposition doesn’t seem to stand. Brexit, and climate change denial are only few examples of where “economic facts” have been used as a weapon to mislead the masses. During the British EU referendum, the Leave campaign made slapdash claims that Britain pays £350 million towards the EU each week and promised if Britain left the EU, this money could be spent on the NHS. *Donald Trump voice* Wrong. Despite challenges from the Office for National Statistics, the Brexiteers continued to use this fictitious ‘fact’ in their electoral campaigns.

In a Western Democracy, facts are supposed to uphold public faith in ‘objectivity’. It is crucial for officials, because objectivity is the source of their rhetorical authority. Now, numbers are more a tool of influence. Post-truth connotes to “objective facts being less influential in shaping public opinion than appeals to emotion and personal belief.” Technically, politicians are not legally obliged to tell the truth, but the seemingly whimsical nature of self-interested politicians actively lying, which is built into their political strategy epitomises Post-truth. It is anti-factual, but asserts itself as truth and now it is a force threatening the authority of numbers and an alarming example of how the population has become alienated from economic discussion.

Samiah Anderson BA Philosophy, Politics & Economics (Goldsmiths 2017)

The Weaponisation of Economics

What is an Economic Fact? Jeremy Bentham in his ‘The Principles of Morals and Legislation’ once warned us, “the more abstract the proposition is, the more liable it is to involve a fallacy.” According to Bentham, this is primarily because politics and law is afflicted by the “tyranny of sounds.”

Words don’t refer to anything real. Words do not connect exactly to things, yet numbers connect exactly to what they refer to. Numerical information bears an exactness and inevitably a correctness, according to Bentham. This is what makes them so powerful in the political rhetoric. They reinforce the sense that the speaker is precise and tells the truth.

Well, it’s 2017 and this proposition doesn’t seem to stand. Brexit, and climate change denial are only few examples of where “economic facts” have been used as a weapon to mislead the masses. During the British EU referendum, the Leave campaign made slapdash claims that Britain pays £350 million towards the EU each week and promised if Britain left the EU, this money could be spent on the NHS. *Donald Trump voice* Wrong. Despite challenges from the Office for National Statistics, the Brexiteers continued to use this fictitious ‘fact’ in their electoral campaigns.

In a Western Democracy, facts are supposed to uphold public faith in ‘objectivity’. It is crucial for officials, because objectivity is the source of their rhetorical authority. Now, numbers are more a tool of influence. Post-truth connotes to “objective facts being less influential in shaping public opinion than appeals to emotion and personal belief.” Technically, politicians are not legally obliged to tell the truth, but the seemingly whimsical nature of self-interested politicians actively lying, which is built into their political strategy epitomises Post-truth. It is anti-factual, but asserts itself as truth and now it is a force threatening the authority of numbers and an alarming example of how the population has become alienated from economic discussion.

Samiah Anderson BA Philosophy, Politics & Economics (Goldsmiths 2017)

We have Never been Truthful

The emergence of a post-truth world sounds truly like the last call for rethinking economics. We can have one last round of discussion, one last chance to get things straight, before there will be nothing left but a steep tab to settle and a hell of a hangover to live through. Post-truth for economics is the apocalypse, in the original meaning of the word: it is economics uncovered. For a post-truthful world, one in which pseudo-facts are peddled for the sake of shifting the political landscape and legitimising power of those who are in position to be the loudest, has always been the native world of economics. Don’t get me wrong, I’m not trying to say that all economists have always been mouthpieces to hire by the highest bidder. Some were and still are, but my guess is that the majority are doing their honest best to make a living and simply abiding by the rules of the game. But – as one expert post-truth practitioner likes to repeat - the game is rigged. The playing field is not level, university curricula usually give voice solely to the neoclassical doctrine, while institutional and financial support is available mostly for those who don’t question the status quo.

But let us not be naïve. The problem with economics lies deeper than university hallways. Three centuries ago humankind broke away from the Malthusian trap and got its hands on the evermore productive economic machine, and since then economics could never be free from political entanglements. Even if your thinking is honest and free from obvious corruption, the career of your ideas will rest not on their merit, but on the political needs of people who will strive to use them instrumentally to achieve their goals.

Whoever has read Adam Smith knows that the puppet that wears his name today has nothing to do with the moral philosopher who in his times was attacked as a radical friend of the poor. Likewise, the depiction of the ways in which the practice of Soviet socialism diverged from Karl Marx’s ideas is a popular pastime for the Marxist left. It’s also easy to argue, that Keynesian economics got hold only after Keynes himself died which made it possible to bend and twist his ideas into what’s now officially known as bastard Keynesianism. One can say that underneath all these betrayals of different economic theories, lies the truth about political economy itself, which is that political processes have a tendency to hijack even the most revolutionary ideas and use them to reinforce structures of privilege and domination.

Hence, the goal of rethinking economics is not to replace once and for all some “corrupted mainstream economics” with “new and honest economics” (we have had already too many such “revolutions”). The goal is to engage in a never-ending movement in the search of better ways to understand economy, with readiness to leave your findings behind, as soon as they become accepted as mainstream. Because this is the moment when your truths will become post-truths, yielding to the logic of power. Being an economist in this world is like being a theologian in an authoritarian theocracy, so the task must be to become a perpetual heretic.

Jędrzej Malko (Goldsmiths 2011) & author of ‘Economics and its Discontents’

Miyoko Yamashita BA Fine Art Graduate (Goldsmiths 2017)

At the time of Brexit, I painted scenes of British people enjoying themselves on a package beach holiday in Europe.

While feeling the vibrant energy and happiness there, I felt the complex political and social questions that lie beneath such a scene.

At this point of my learning, I have adopted traditional Japanese woodblock print and scroll compositions and a collage of images and sizes. I have embraced elements of the comic style which is often used by artists with interests in social and political issues like Philip Gaston, who introduced this painting style while Abstract Expressionism was popular, to make the paintings to be understood by a wide set of viewers. I used this approach as a starting point of my exploration.

Miyoko Yamashita BA Fine Art Graduate (Goldsmiths 2017)

At the time of Brexit, I painted scenes of British people enjoying themselves on a package beach holiday in Europe.

While feeling the vibrant energy and happiness there, I felt the complex political and social questions that lie beneath such a scene.

At this point of my learning, I have adopted traditional Japanese woodblock print and scroll compositions and a collage of images and sizes. I have embraced elements of the comic style which is often used by artists with interests in social and political issues like Philip Gaston, who introduced this painting style while Abstract Expressionism was popular, to make the paintings to be understood by a wide set of viewers. I used this approach as a starting point of my exploration.

The Treaties of Web-phalia: New Borders of the Online Commons

In a recent article for The Guardian, Tim Berners-Lee described how he imagined the worldwide web to be an ‘open platform that would allow everyone, everywhere to share information, access opportunities, and collaborate across geographic and cultural boundaries’ . Many of us will 1

recognise this as how the internet operates, providing endless opportunities to connect to a vast array of people from all walks of life, living all over the world. However, there is something malignant occurring behind the scenes, something ominous lurking in the shadow cast by the bright lights of the pixels. The commons of the internet is being politicised, carved up to be marketised by the ‘silicon set’ to the point that the big players are now able to manipulate and control vast swathes of the online space. Between companies such as Google, Amazon and Facebook, the web is being commodified in order to turn a profit, and we, as users, are complicit in this, commodifying ourselves so as to have access to the wider world.

In an odd paradox, interconnectivity is flourishing. Families, friends, work colleagues, and strangers can communicate freely at any time. However, contrary to this representing a vision of freedom, these conversations are recorded, stored and privatised, the content sold to the advertising industry and government agents. Privacy and freedoms are being eroded, and we are witnessing the removal of essential boundaries which separate individual autonomy and state control. In their place, are being constructed new online borders. The freedoms of the online space are diminishing. To explore this idea further we can turn to Gilles Deleuze and the Postscript on the Societies of Control. Deleuze offers us an overview of the Foucauldian notion of disciplinary societies, the enclosures through which we pass during our lives, from family to school, to the factory, or hospital, or prison, ‘the preeminent instance of the enclosed environment’ .2

The internet is now taking on these very qualities, becoming a closed environment through which we must pass, rather than the free and open space once envisioned. Not only are individuals tracked and traced, monitored at every turn, but it is becoming increasingly difficult to avoid using such technologies, consequently self-commodifying. But why is it that we allow ourselves to be monitored so completely? It is due to the wider reaching nature of capitalism and the normalisation thereof? The acceptance of a global capitalist agenda is now so deeply embedded that it appears that there is little else to do but to continue to accept it. We are the ‘social agents’ of Bourdieu and Wacquant, ‘knowing agents who, even when they are subjected to determinisms, contribute to producing the efficacy of that which determines them’ . We willingly 3

become object, commodity and profit, which we experience as, in the words of Mark Fisher, a ‘deeper, more pervasive sense of exhaustion’, a ‘cultural and political sterility’ , and it is high time 4

to consider how we begin to reverse this.

Max Gibson BA Philosophy, Politics & Economics (Goldsmiths 2017)

Berners-Lee, T. (2017). I Invented the Web. Here are Three Things We Need to Change to Save It. [online] The 1

Guardian. Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/mar/11/tim-berners-lee-web-inventor-save-internet]

Deleuze, G. (1992). Postscript on the Societies of Control. JSTOR, [online] 59(Winter), pp.3-4. Available at: http://2

links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0162-2870%28199224%2959%3C3%3APOTSOC%3E2.0.CO%3B2-T.

Bourdieu, P. and Wacquant, L. (2011). Symbolic Violence. In: N. Scheper-Huges and P. Bourgois, ed., Violence in War 3

and Peace: An Anthology. Oxfprd: Blackwell, p.272.

Fisher, M. (2010). Capitalist realism. 1st ed. Winchester, UK: Zero Books.4

The Treaties of Web-phalia: New Borders of the Online Commons

In a recent article for The Guardian, Tim Berners-Lee described how he imagined the worldwide web to be an ‘open platform that would allow everyone, everywhere to share information, access opportunities, and collaborate across geographic and cultural boundaries’ . Many of us will 1

recognise this as how the internet operates, providing endless opportunities to connect to a vast array of people from all walks of life, living all over the world. However, there is something malignant occurring behind the scenes, something ominous lurking in the shadow cast by the bright lights of the pixels. The commons of the internet is being politicised, carved up to be marketised by the ‘silicon set’ to the point that the big players are now able to manipulate and control vast swathes of the online space. Between companies such as Google, Amazon and Facebook, the web is being commodified in order to turn a profit, and we, as users, are complicit in this, commodifying ourselves so as to have access to the wider world.

In an odd paradox, interconnectivity is flourishing. Families, friends, work colleagues, and strangers can communicate freely at any time. However, contrary to this representing a vision of freedom, these conversations are recorded, stored and privatised, the content sold to the advertising industry and government agents. Privacy and freedoms are being eroded, and we are witnessing the removal of essential boundaries which separate individual autonomy and state control. In their place, are being constructed new online borders. The freedoms of the online space are diminishing. To explore this idea further we can turn to Gilles Deleuze and the Postscript on the Societies of Control. Deleuze offers us an overview of the Foucauldian notion of disciplinary societies, the enclosures through which we pass during our lives, from family to school, to the factory, or hospital, or prison, ‘the preeminent instance of the enclosed environment’ .2

The internet is now taking on these very qualities, becoming a closed environment through which we must pass, rather than the free and open space once envisioned. Not only are individuals tracked and traced, monitored at every turn, but it is becoming increasingly difficult to avoid using such technologies, consequently self-commodifying. But why is it that we allow ourselves to be monitored so completely? It is due to the wider reaching nature of capitalism and the normalisation thereof? The acceptance of a global capitalist agenda is now so deeply embedded that it appears that there is little else to do but to continue to accept it. We are the ‘social agents’ of Bourdieu and Wacquant, ‘knowing agents who, even when they are subjected to determinisms, contribute to producing the efficacy of that which determines them’ . We willingly 3

become object, commodity and profit, which we experience as, in the words of Mark Fisher, a ‘deeper, more pervasive sense of exhaustion’, a ‘cultural and political sterility’ , and it is high time 4

to consider how we begin to reverse this.

Max Gibson BA Philosophy, Politics & Economics (Goldsmiths 2017)

Berners-Lee, T. (2017). I Invented the Web. Here are Three Things We Need to Change to Save It. [online] The 1

Guardian. Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/mar/11/tim-berners-lee-web-inventor-save-internet]

Deleuze, G. (1992). Postscript on the Societies of Control. JSTOR, [online] 59(Winter), pp.3-4. Available at: http://2

links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0162-2870%28199224%2959%3C3%3APOTSOC%3E2.0.CO%3B2-T.

Bourdieu, P. and Wacquant, L. (2011). Symbolic Violence. In: N. Scheper-Huges and P. Bourgois, ed., Violence in War 3

and Peace: An Anthology. Oxfprd: Blackwell, p.272.

Fisher, M. (2010). Capitalist realism. 1st ed. Winchester, UK: Zero Books.4

“Anyone who is only an economist is unlikely to be a good one.”

-Friedrich Hayek

Dr Constantinos Repapis on the new BA Economics degree at Goldsmiths

The BA (Hons) Economics at Goldsmiths, University of London is designed to offer students a novel perspective on economics and the economy. The degree is built on two principles: plurality and interdisciplinary. By plurality we mean an understanding and exploration of the different schools of economic thought that arose within the discipline itself. Thus, from the first year we introduce students not only to Neoclassical economic theory, but also to Austrian, Classical, Marxist and Post-Keynesian perspectives of the economy. We also focus on the social and historical context of economic ideas and policies. This is because we believe that economic theory and discourse arose as a response to specific social needs and problems, and therefore should be understood in relation to the social conditions that framed its development.

At the same time students are encouraged to explore inter-disciplinary links between economics and the other social sciences. This is achieved by another feature of this degree which is that students have a choice of modules from five streams from which to choose from and follow throughout their three years. These are:

I: Communication and Technology

II: Markets and Organisations

III: Human Behaviour and Choice

IV: The Creative Impulse

V: Concepts, Ideas and Perspectives

These interdisciplinary streams allow students to see how these topics are viewed from different disciplines, making the topic the focus of enquiry instead of the disciplinary viewpoint.

Both of these features help students develop in ways that degrees focused only on mainstream economics do not foster. Students are asked to see different viewpoints and understand that economic theory is not value free, and that these different approaches (both within and from outside the discipline) represent different world visions. This allows students to develop their critical faculties, debate and discuss economic theory, and form their own voice as an economist. This view of education as informing and liberating instead of being conformist and doctrinaire is one of the enduring principles of the Goldsmiths academic community. And it is for this that this degree could only take root here.

Dr Constantinos Repapis on the new BA Economics degree at Goldsmiths

The BA (Hons) Economics at Goldsmiths, University of London is designed to offer students a novel perspective on economics and the economy. The degree is built on two principles: plurality and interdisciplinary. By plurality we mean an understanding and exploration of the different schools of economic thought that arose within the discipline itself. Thus, from the first year we introduce students not only to Neoclassical economic theory, but also to Austrian, Classical, Marxist and Post-Keynesian perspectives of the economy. We also focus on the social and historical context of economic ideas and policies. This is because we believe that economic theory and discourse arose as a response to specific social needs and problems, and therefore should be understood in relation to the social conditions that framed its development.

At the same time students are encouraged to explore inter-disciplinary links between economics and the other social sciences. This is achieved by another feature of this degree which is that students have a choice of modules from five streams from which to choose from and follow throughout their three years. These are:

I: Communication and Technology

II: Markets and Organisations

III: Human Behaviour and Choice

IV: The Creative Impulse

V: Concepts, Ideas and Perspectives

These interdisciplinary streams allow students to see how these topics are viewed from different disciplines, making the topic the focus of enquiry instead of the disciplinary viewpoint.

Both of these features help students develop in ways that degrees focused only on mainstream economics do not foster. Students are asked to see different viewpoints and understand that economic theory is not value free, and that these different approaches (both within and from outside the discipline) represent different world visions. This allows students to develop their critical faculties, debate and discuss economic theory, and form their own voice as an economist. This view of education as informing and liberating instead of being conformist and doctrinaire is one of the enduring principles of the Goldsmiths academic community. And it is for this that this degree could only take root here.

Goldsmiths UNIVERSITY OF LONDON

lRethinkijng !Economk�s