Genealogy of Debt

by Lapo Berti

In the last decade, debt has become a trend in academic research and in political debate, as well as the object of many elucubrations and absurd statements. Publications, analyses and, unfortunately, recipes – charlatans’ favorites – have multiplied. This new interest in the subject has been triggered obviously by the US 2007-2008 financial crisis, which originated from private debts and then spread to sovereign debts causing a dramatic downturn. However, as strange as it may seem, economists were not the ones to start the debate and to occupy the center stage. We have discovered that debt is a cross-cutting topic, relevant to all social sciences, from anthropology to ethnology, from economics to politics, to philosophy. The most engaging and stimulating contributions come from the fields of philosophy and anthropology. The common denominator of the majority of relevant studies is to understand  debt as the potential leverage for a new critique of capitalism. They are all limited in their research by this “prejudice”. The conclusions that this debate draws are predictable and trivial. They do not add anything to the understanding of present capitalism’s modus operandi nor to the retracing of the governmentality that comes with it. In most cases, they make it more difficult to understand the nature and the purpose of debt in modern economies. Nonetheless, we cannot avoid to consider these analyses, which often aspire to advance an updated version of Marxian critique.

taken from:

obsoletecapitalism