兰迪·马丁

IF 1.2 Q2 CULTURAL STUDIES Social Text Pub Date : 2019-12-01 DOI:10.1215/01642472-7794367
R. Meister
{"title":"兰迪·马丁","authors":"R. Meister","doi":"10.1215/01642472-7794367","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The article develops political implications of the late Randy Martin’s idea of “derivative sociality” as the real subsumption of human life under the option form. The option form, beginning with the hedge, allows realized surplus value to be preserved (locked in) and eventually accumulated by securing its convertibility back into money—its “liquidity.” The opposite, financial illiquidity is capital disaccumulation in Marx’s sense. It follows that the acceptability of capital accumulation depends on making financial market illiquidity politically unimaginable. This limitation on political imagination can, however, be largely overcome in the spirit of Marx (and Randy Martin) by using the conceptual resources of options theory itself. In options theory, for example, privately produced financial derivatives are priced as though a component of them is synthetic public debt (“risk-free”). But this can be true only because in crisis scenarios the government guarantees to swap its own debt for synthetic equivalents to it at par. However, such guarantees are themselves options that can be priced. That price in 2008, the “liquidity premium,” has been calculated by leading financial economists to be trillions of dollars. This is equivalent to the premium that a justice-seeking democracy could have extracted for wiping out the cumulative effects of capital accumulation, had doing so been understood as a political option that could be rolled over for a price. The goal of this article is to identify financial market liquidity as a political choke point in today’s capitalism so as to focus political attention on reversing the cumulative effect of capital markets in compounding historical injustices.","PeriodicalId":47701,"journal":{"name":"Social Text","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2019-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Randy Martin\",\"authors\":\"R. Meister\",\"doi\":\"10.1215/01642472-7794367\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The article develops political implications of the late Randy Martin’s idea of “derivative sociality” as the real subsumption of human life under the option form. The option form, beginning with the hedge, allows realized surplus value to be preserved (locked in) and eventually accumulated by securing its convertibility back into money—its “liquidity.” The opposite, financial illiquidity is capital disaccumulation in Marx’s sense. It follows that the acceptability of capital accumulation depends on making financial market illiquidity politically unimaginable. This limitation on political imagination can, however, be largely overcome in the spirit of Marx (and Randy Martin) by using the conceptual resources of options theory itself. In options theory, for example, privately produced financial derivatives are priced as though a component of them is synthetic public debt (“risk-free”). But this can be true only because in crisis scenarios the government guarantees to swap its own debt for synthetic equivalents to it at par. However, such guarantees are themselves options that can be priced. That price in 2008, the “liquidity premium,” has been calculated by leading financial economists to be trillions of dollars. This is equivalent to the premium that a justice-seeking democracy could have extracted for wiping out the cumulative effects of capital accumulation, had doing so been understood as a political option that could be rolled over for a price. The goal of this article is to identify financial market liquidity as a political choke point in today’s capitalism so as to focus political attention on reversing the cumulative effect of capital markets in compounding historical injustices.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47701,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Social Text\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Social Text\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1215/01642472-7794367\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"CULTURAL STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Social Text","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1215/01642472-7794367","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CULTURAL STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

本文将已故的兰迪·马丁的“衍生社会性”思想作为期权形式下人类生命的真实包容,展开其政治意蕴。期权形式,从对冲开始,允许已实现的剩余价值被保留(锁定),并最终通过确保其可兑换回货币而积累——即“流动性”。相反,金融流动性不足是马克思意义上的资本解体。因此,资本积累的可接受性取决于使金融市场缺乏流动性在政治上不可想象。然而,在马克思(和兰迪·马丁)的精神下,通过利用期权理论本身的概念资源,这种对政治想象力的限制在很大程度上是可以克服的。例如,在期权理论中,私人生产的金融衍生品的定价就好像它们的一个组成部分是合成公共债务(“无风险”)。但这可能是正确的,因为在危机情景中,政府担保将自己的债务按面值换成合成的等价物。然而,这种担保本身就是可以定价的期权。2008年的价格,即“流动性溢价”,被主要金融经济学家计算为数万亿美元。这相当于一个寻求正义的民主国家本可以从消除资本积累的累积效应中获得的溢价,如果这样做被理解为一种可以滚动的政治选择,而这种选择是有代价的。本文的目标是将金融市场流动性确定为当今资本主义的政治瓶颈,从而将政治注意力集中在扭转资本市场在加剧历史不公正方面的累积效应上。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Randy Martin
The article develops political implications of the late Randy Martin’s idea of “derivative sociality” as the real subsumption of human life under the option form. The option form, beginning with the hedge, allows realized surplus value to be preserved (locked in) and eventually accumulated by securing its convertibility back into money—its “liquidity.” The opposite, financial illiquidity is capital disaccumulation in Marx’s sense. It follows that the acceptability of capital accumulation depends on making financial market illiquidity politically unimaginable. This limitation on political imagination can, however, be largely overcome in the spirit of Marx (and Randy Martin) by using the conceptual resources of options theory itself. In options theory, for example, privately produced financial derivatives are priced as though a component of them is synthetic public debt (“risk-free”). But this can be true only because in crisis scenarios the government guarantees to swap its own debt for synthetic equivalents to it at par. However, such guarantees are themselves options that can be priced. That price in 2008, the “liquidity premium,” has been calculated by leading financial economists to be trillions of dollars. This is equivalent to the premium that a justice-seeking democracy could have extracted for wiping out the cumulative effects of capital accumulation, had doing so been understood as a political option that could be rolled over for a price. The goal of this article is to identify financial market liquidity as a political choke point in today’s capitalism so as to focus political attention on reversing the cumulative effect of capital markets in compounding historical injustices.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Social Text
Social Text CULTURAL STUDIES-
CiteScore
5.10
自引率
3.00%
发文量
19
期刊最新文献
Fascism's Spatial Imaginary at the Threshold From Image to Flesh in a World Seen from the South Rituals of Survival in Single-Room Occupancy Hotels (In)Security Theater Clay
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1