Globalisation, Market Civilisation, and Disciplinary Neoliberalism

power and production: rethinking china’s global economic role

“…68 For Gill, the desire to attract and retain investment has a disciplining impact on policymakers, as they adjust policy to meet the needs of this mobile capital. 69 Thus, as Cox has argued, the hegemony of neoliberalism as an economic model results in state actors playing the role of adjusting the domestic political economy to the requirements of mobile transnational capital -although this often coincides with attempts to protect vulnerable domestic groups -to moderate neoliberal globalisation. 70 State policy, in China and elsewhere, both reflects and facilitates the economic power of non-state actors.…”

Heterarchial Networks for Global Corporations: Emerging Unstructured Complexity in Regulatory Landscape

“…240À241). However, often taking their cue from the rich work of Gramsci (1971) or Polanyi (1944) (Birchfield, 1999), there have been a number of useful attempts to specify the authority of the market, for example, the 'new constitutionalism', 'disciplinary neo-liberalism' (Gill, 1995), the 'embedded financial orthodoxy' (Cerny, 1994). In this shift towards embedding the new constitutionalism it is vitally important to identify the agents implied within this process (Baker et al, 2005).…”

Understanding Financial Globalization in International Political Economy

“…Three main approaches in the existing political economy literature to explaining financial globalization may be identified: technological determinism (Strange 1998;Garrett 2000), hegemonic power approaches (Gilpin 2001;Gill 1995), and rationalist interest group approaches (Frieden 1991;Frieden and Rogowski 1996). Technological determinism explains financial globalization as the product of technological changes that are gradually sweeping aside the barriers to the integration of national financial markets.…”

“…] Other ideational accounts emphasize a greater separation between the interests of the hegemonic state and those of the private financial sector. At the extreme, the hegemonic project becomes less that of the hegemonic (US) government and more that of 'haute finance' itself (Gill 1995;Polanyi 1944). Here, the dominant hegemonic interests are more class than state-based, even though the dominant state may be seen as having been captured by private financial interests (as in the 'Wall Street-Treasury complex').…”