Democratising change

Abstract

In the cases of deep-seated changes in the capitalistic economies, starting from the first Industrial Revolution, we can choose a pessimistic hypothesis such as that of Polanyi (The great transformation. Rinehart, NY, 1944). In other words, a systematic dismantling of the previous structures and the economic and social customs, with the serious social and human crisis, or the slightly more “optimistic” one of Perez (Technological revolutions and financial capital: the dynamic of bubbles and golden ages. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, 2002), for which, in the recurring 50-year cycles of innovation, a 4-phase sequence is realised (irruption, frenzy, synergy and maturity) of which frenzy, i.e. “when financial capital takes over” and there is “a time of speculation, corruption and unashamed (even widely celebrated) love of wealth”, leads, through a turning point, to a new one: “The unsustainable structural tension that builds up in the economy and society” can lead to “a regulation (...) to put order in financial markets and to move towards full market expansion and greater social cohesion”; it should be noted that Perez emphasises that this is a possibility and not a certainty. What is evident for social science is that in periods of deep and revolutionary changes, as to the economic dimension, of capitalistic societies, since the first Industrial Revolution, the economic process of change is more and more unfettered of any social, political, administrative and cultural effective regulation; all the dimensions of everyone’s life, both private and public, are driven by the demands coming from the economic and financial realm; a divorce between economic institutions and society at large that is a lack of legitimatisation and democratic control on their lives by people becomes the rule. It happened in the 1880s, 1920s and 1990s and this is the actual situation of our societies; that is why many researchers and also financial and popular magazines are stricken by an historical comparison such as this one: “It has been a great time to be a capitalist. All around the world, profits have been rising as a percentage of gross domestic product. According to Goldman Sachs, the profit share of US GDP in the first quarter of this year was an all-time high. HSBC says 2005 was the best year for UK profits since records began”. (Financial Times, July 29, July 30, 2006). The journalist is aware of the consequences of the situation and he adds: “High profits and the extreme wealth they usually imply can be extremely unpopular (...). It is easy to assume that the liberalising processes of the past 20 years are irreversible. But such reforms have little bedrock support; they have been effectively imposed on many countries by economic elites.” This is the starting point of this article: the role of economic elites and the crisis of legitimacy of democratic regimes.