ABSTRACT

The economic policy reaction to the Covid-19 crisis has been considered from different angles. Here I will remind only the positions by Draghi (looking at this historical conjuncture comparing it to ‘war times’), Tooze (seeing in it the definitive closure of the ‘political economy of inflation’ as well as ‘the first crisis of Anthropocene’), Kregel (proposing ‘central controls for social provisioning’ as the pertinent macroeconomic policy). The pandemic could inaugurate a game change in European economic policy; and even unlikely quarters suggested in the last year a retreat from neoliberalism as we knew it. However, the health crisis is not an exogenous shock: it is inherent in the capitalist social form of production and consumption. The pathological state of affairs that takes our breath away reveals the hidden reality of the society where we work and consume. Confronting the current and future virus outbreaks (as well as climate change) obliges us to go back to the founding themes of macroeconomics, which needs to consider not just the level of employment, but also what employment is for. In this logic, we are forced to radicalise the notion of the ‘socialisation of investment’ into that of a ‘social production economy’: the challenge in front of us is indeed about the ‘how’, ‘what’, ‘how much’ and ‘for whom’ to produce.

摘要

已从不同角度考虑了对 Covid-19 危机的经济政策反应。在这里，我将仅提醒德拉吉（将这一历史时期与“战争时期”进行比较）、图兹（在其中看到“通货膨胀的政治经济”以及“人类世的第一次危机”的最终结束）的立场），Kregel（提议将“社会供给的中央控制”作为相关的宏观经济政策）。这场大流行可能会引发欧洲经济政策的一场游戏变革；甚至不太可能的季度表明，我们所知道的新自由主义在去年有所退却。然而，健康危机并不是外生的冲击：它是资本主义社会生产和消费形式所固有的。令我们叹为观止的病态事态揭示了我们工作和消费的社会隐藏的现实。面对当前和未来的病毒爆发（以及气候变化），我们不得不回到宏观经济学的创始主题，这不仅需要考虑就业水平，还需要考虑就业的目的。在这个逻辑中，我们被迫将“投资社会化”的概念激进化为“社会生产经济”：我们面前的挑战确实是关于“如何”、“什么”、“多少”以及“为谁”生产。