Radical debt politics requires expanding debt into a concept of shared social bonds.

Evidence

As Richard Dienst (2011), David Graeber (2011) and affirm, the politics of debt, if they are to be a radical challenge to the financialized empire, cannot simply be a demand for some libertarian fantasy of complete individual freedom. Rather, it must embrace a broader, more capacious concept of the ontological wealth of social bonds that make life possible, that render all of us precariously reliant on one another. In this sense, they, each in their own way, encourage a envisioning of an expanded notion of debt as a grounds for crafting and building common futures. — Max Haiven, Cultures of Financialization, 237

Categorization

• XREF: Connects directly to Graeber’s ‘Debt: The First 5,000 Years’ and its argument that debt is a social relation, not merely a financial one. — connects to: Social bonds now form around shared volatility and precarity — Aris Komporozos-Athanasiou, Speculative Communities: Living With…, 11; Debt politics functions as a morality play shifting blame from banks to the state — Mark Blyth, Austerity: The History of a Dangerous…, 56; Financial liquidity grows by making social relations themselves precarious and liquid. — Max Haiven, Cultures of Financialization, 171 (+2 more)

Broader Connections

• Financial liquidity grows by making social relations themselves precarious and liquid. #complicates (0.78) — Max Haiven, Cultures of Financialization, 171
• Social bonds now form around shared volatility and precarity #qualifies (0.75) — Aris Komporozos-Athanasiou, Speculative Communities, 11
• Financialization drives the rise of precarious labor and dissolves social bonds #complicates (0.72) — Max Haiven, Cultures of Financialization, 141
• Debt politics functions as a morality play shifting blame from banks to the state #complicates (0.70) — Mark Blyth, Austerity, 56