I.
A brief analysis of international shipping routes through global geospatial positioning maps constructed in the year 2012 shows several interesting facts in real time. The first and most obvious is that bulk cargo shipments, that would include agricultural products, rarely ship into US ports, but are more commonly shipped out. 2012 was the year of physiocracy-lite, or our first experiment into Foucauldian physiocracy, and so it has relevance to the current system; what you can see is that the export-import regime is well in line with the proposed plan from the physiocrats as conveyed through Foucault. The corollary to this is that what seems to matter as a fact of analysis is, - once you can track the positions of ships themselves, that is -, the ships, and not the ports or the port records. Some of those ships certainly have American crews and many are carrying American produce on their manifests. Certainly, also, the classic bottlenecks in the shipping patterns are still relevant: the strait of Hormuz, the Straits of Malacca, and, you can see where cargo ships were still shipping grain through the Black Sea and the Bosporus from Ukrainian ports. But what's important about all this is that you can see what economic regimes are internal, and external, to each region of the world, by the process of elimination. What I mean by this, is pretty much: if you look at dry bulk, which is where grain would often be shipped in/under, and where grain is being predominantly shipped in vs. shipped out, using dry bulk as a proxy to look at grain shipments in 2012, you can see how certain regions have constructed their resource economies, either around agricultural exports or around non-agricultural exports. Agricultural exports pre-dominating over imports would suggest physiocracy, as opposed to mercantilism, per Foucault's analysis; and under predominantly free governments, would suggest freer economies for the lower classes and farmers, and a better State. However, the legacies of imperialism alter the analysis of various ways. For instance, South America's large quantity of exports to Europe would suggest the impact of the legacies of colonialism, and not necessarily strong and free political economy structures there. But there are more quirks of this map that show deep political economy trends. For instance, India imports more dry bulk cargo than it exports; despite the physiocratic element of its liberation struggle, imperialism still has its legacy in that region's political economy. This you can see in the map. Also, the Middle East imports much more dry bulk - this is common sense. Australia, as well, imports much more dry bulk, than it exports, and this points to a deep structural element of its political economy and its extractivist resource regime. The legacy of the British Crown is active there too.
In conclusion, it is impossible to speak conclusively about international shipping without addressing the legacies of imperialism and colonialism; although you can determine the state of political economy as a fact, it is as a fact agnostic to history. There is no political economy without politics. And without knowledge of imperialist histories, or rather history of imperialism told by the subaltern and oppressed, there is no geopolitics. The value of value-neutral artifacts of knowledge is explicit only in context, but the nature of the artifacts themselves, is only clear through a first level of logical discernment. Without discernment and knowledge of the meta-historical narrative, there is no such thing as intellect.
II.
The legacies of imperialism and colonialism have also had counterintuitive effects on the agricultural export regime of various formally colonized regions; for instance, Africa, with some of the richest soils in the world, barely exports any dry bulk that might include agricultural commodities, and this can be attributed to the ravages of colonialism on the region. History is an important overlay on top of the ordinary perception of such a map. Unfortunately, history in its truest facts is the most problematic subject in education to the wealthy, conservative, and bad-faith actors that exert control over our political economy. So, in conclusion, it requires a discerning mind and a knowledge of the histories of imperialism to do any good-faith, global economic analysis at all. This is why most economic analysis is a puppet tool of the wealthy elite, and yet economics when properly done is of the utmost importance to a true understanding of society, and global human history, still - even though most of it is bunk. The fieldwork of responsible economics should be history. The methodological innovation of this sort of reasoning, from data to conclusions of fact, and then to history, is to go from an effect to the necessary corollary to its cause.
Is A causes Y, Y is present, and B is a necessary corollary to A, then is Y is present, B must be true. But the historical layer of analysis consists of a dynamic chronological analysis. If a certain failed policy causes a certain state of being such that it takes time to dig oneself out of it, then, if that time and effort has not elapsed, the state of being caused by the policy is still the best explanation of any affect seen. To continue the logical method above, if E causes a state of F, that requires X amount of time and effort to remove, then, if E has occurred, the state of F must be assumed, and if X amount has not elapsed, then, even if Y is present, then E and not A is the best explanation of it, B can't be assumed to be true, and E is the best causal explanation.
The reasoning, that A -> Y; A -> B; Y -> B, is always true, but the historical analysis of E -> F; -F -> X; -X -> F -> E, takes primacy over the original syllogism, is always foremost when its conditions are met, and is, therefore, in those cases the best explanation. Global analysis of imperialism, that is, issues of war and peace, always supersede simple economic analysis. To put this to a concrete example, South America exports more dry bulk than it imports-dry bulk (including agricultural commodities) therefore physiocracy could be assumed its guiding philosophy; however, a state of imperialism and colonialism has occurred there, therefore, a state of current global subalternity must be assumed, until enough time and effort, toward decolonization has elapsed; since that amount hasn't elapsed, it must be assumed that imperialism and global subalternity is a better explanation for its resource flows until decolonization has been significantly achieved.
The map can be seen at shipmap.org.
No comments:
Post a Comment