ARTICLES restructuring;a concept of control centered on an idealized notion of the market,'in which progress is defined in terms of the subordination of labor to capital,and the state role is limited to a Lockean night watch'(p. 30).Neo-liberalism was first applied in Pinochet's Chile,and then in the United States,through Volcker's Federal Reserve Bank,and then in the rest of the world (p.30).Both Keynesianism and neo-liberalism con- structed a general interest our of the particular interest of the more innovative and rapidly expanding fractions of capital-money capital in the case of neo-liberalism(p.30).Both reflect a political dynamic centered on structurally cognizant global elites. Much like the crisis of the postwar order brought Braudel's interest in the longue duree('a l'abris des accidents,des conjonctures,des ruptures (1969:72])to the forefront of historical analysis,s the juncture of restruc- turing in the 1980s has increased the relevance of open Marxism's preoccupation with the world economy as a planned and organized process(Gill,1986:215),and of its attempt to discover universal norms shaping civil society on behalf of dominant fractions of capital(Cox, 1983:172).Institutionally oriented modes of analysis have not uncovered any coherence in the ruins of the postwar order,and propose little more than a reinvention of acquired concepts(speaking of post-Fordism,post- Cold War and post-Bretton Woods).Open Marxism,more fluid and more critically preoccupied with power,as it is constituted differently in different historical periods,and therefore better able to move beyond the understanding of class politics as a strictly national phenomenon(Wal- lerstein,1980:61),has been able to rise above the disorder of the moment of restructuring to capture the transnational nature of the contemporary recomposition of political power.When Paul Volcker spoke of 'an excep- tionally clear recognition [that]we are going to have to move to much closer coordination and cooperation'(quoted in Gill,1990a:121),and the BIS noted retrospectively that[in]many countries,explaining monetary policy decisions in terms of external constraints has been helpful in securing public acceptance',(BIS,Annual Report 1992:124),open Marx- ism was well equipped to look beyond the mandatory expression of solidarity at the closing of a G7meeting,and the BIS's self-laudation,and discern in this discourse indications of a real shift in power relationships. Furthermore,the sense of purpose of open Marxism,and its supple, somewhat craftsman-like,approach to historical research has allowed it to garner insights from a wide assortment of sources(published docu- ments of public and private international organizations,political dis- courses,interviews,daily newspapers,specialized journals),and to put a remarkable variety of intellectual traditions(critical sociology,liberal economics,social history)to the task of conceptualizing transnational power.Stephen Gill's claim that'the Gramscian approach can be said to be more comprehensive since it allows for a more consistent theorization 110 This content downloaded from 202.120.14.129 on Mon,01 Feb 2016 23:51:55 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and ConditionsARTICLES restructuring; a concept of control centered on an idealized notion of the market, 'in which progress is defined in terms of the subordination of labor to capital, and the state role is limited to a Lockean night watch' (p. 30). Neo-liberalism was first applied in Pinochet's Chile, and then in the United States, through Volcker's Federal Reserve Bank, and then in the rest of the world (p. 30). Both Keynesianism and neo-liberalism con￾structed a general interest our of the particular interest of the more innovative and rapidly expanding fractions of capital - money capital in the case of neo-liberalism (p. 30). Both reflect a political dynamic centered on structurally cognizant global elites. Much like the crisis of the postwar order brought Braudel's interest in the longue duree ('a l'abris des accidents, des conjonctures, des ruptures' [1969:72]) to the forefront of historical analysis,6 the juncture of restruc￾turing in the 1980s has increased the relevance of open Marxism's preoccupation with the world economy as a planned and organized process (Gill, 1986: 215), and of its attempt to discover universal norms shaping civil society on behalf of dominant fractions of capital (Cox, 1983: 172). Institutionally oriented modes of analysis have not uncovered any coherence in the ruins of the postwar order, and propose little more than a reinvention of acquired concepts (speaking of post-Fordism, post￾Cold War and post-Bretton Woods). Open Marxism, more fluid and more critically preoccupied with power, as it is constituted differently in different historical periods, and therefore better able to move beyond the understanding of class politics as a strictly national phenomenon (Wal￾lerstein, 1980: 61), has been able to rise above the disorder of the moment of restructuring to capture the transnational nature of the contemporary recomposition of political power. When Paul Volcker spoke of 'an excep￾tionally clear recognition [that] we are going to have to move to much closer coordination and cooperation' (quoted in Gill, 1990a: 121), and the BIS noted retrospectively that '[in] many countries, explaining monetary policy decisions in terms of external constraints has been helpful in securing public acceptance', (BIS, Annual Report 1992: 124), open Marx￾ism was well equipped to look beyond the mandatory expression of solidarity at the closing of a G7 meeting, and the BIS's self-laudation, and discern in this discourse indications of a real shift in power relationships. Furthermore, the sense of purpose of open Marxism, and its supple, somewhat craftsman-like, approach to historical research has allowed it to garner insights from a wide assortment of sources (published docu￾ments of public and private international organizations, political dis￾courses, interviews, daily newspapers, specialized journals), and to put a remarkable variety of intellectual traditions (critical sociology, liberal economics, social history) to the task of conceptualizing transnational power. Stephen Gill's claim that 'the Gramscian approach can be said to be more comprehensive since it allows for a more consistent theorization 110 This content downloaded from 202.120.14.129 on Mon, 01 Feb 2016 23:51:55 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions