Um die anderen Arten von Veröffentlichungen zu diesem Thema anzuzeigen, folgen Sie diesem Link: Capitalism critique.
Zeitschriftenartikel zum Thema „Capitalism critique“
Geben Sie eine Quelle nach APA, MLA, Chicago, Harvard und anderen Zitierweisen an
Machen Sie sich mit Top-50 Zeitschriftenartikel für die Forschung zum Thema "Capitalism critique" bekannt.
Neben jedem Werk im Literaturverzeichnis ist die Option "Zur Bibliographie hinzufügen" verfügbar. Nutzen Sie sie, wird Ihre bibliographische Angabe des gewählten Werkes nach der nötigen Zitierweise (APA, MLA, Harvard, Chicago, Vancouver usw.) automatisch gestaltet.
Sie können auch den vollen Text der wissenschaftlichen Publikation im PDF-Format herunterladen und eine Online-Annotation der Arbeit lesen, wenn die relevanten Parameter in den Metadaten verfügbar sind.
Sehen Sie die Zeitschriftenartikel für verschiedene Spezialgebieten durch und erstellen Sie Ihre Bibliographie auf korrekte Weise.
1
Gallas, Alexander. „The silent treatment of class domination: ‘Critical’ comparative capitalisms scholarship and the British state“. Capital & Class 38, Nr. 1 (Februar 2014): 225–37. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0309816813514817.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
This article is a meta-critique, from an Althusserian and Poulantzasian perspective, of critical accounts of the British state. It is based on a ‘symptomatic reading’ of key texts written by Andrew Gamble, Colin Hay and Chris Howell, which demonstrates that they misconstrue the dynamics of capitalism and the effects of state interventions and class conflict. Against this backdrop, the article outlines an approach to state analysis based on the concept of ‘capitalist class domination’, which avoids the tendency of both critical political science and comparative capitalisms scholarship to substitute the study of specific aspects of capitalism for the analysis of capitalism as a structured whole.
2
Curty, Gaël. „Rethinking Capitalism, Crisis, and Critique: An Interview With Nancy Fraser“. Critical Sociology 46, Nr. 7-8 (27.04.2020): 1327–37. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0896920520918506.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
Nancy Fraser is internationally recognized as one of the most prominent critical theorists of our time and is highly regarded for her work on feminism and capitalism. In this interview, she sets out the new conceptions of capitalism, crisis, and critique that she has been developing since her 2014 article “Behind Marx’s Hidden Abode.” She begins by presenting an original conception of capitalism as an “institutionalized social order,” which includes not only its economic features, but also its social, ecological, and political background conditions of possibility. After defining the normative foundations of capitalism and the corresponding boundary struggles to which it gives rise, she then explores the multiple crises it is currently experiencing. Inspired by Marx’s tripartite critique, she concludes by proposing a new multi-stranded critique of capitalism, which combines a functionalist critique of capitalism’s tendencies to crisis with a normative critique of domination and a political critique of unfreedom.
3
O'Kane, Chris. „Critical Theory and the Critique of Capitalism: An Immanent Critique of Nancy Fraser's “Systematic” “Crisis-Critique” of Capitalism as an “Institutionalized Social Order”“. Science & Society 85, Nr. 2 (April 2021): 207–35. http://dx.doi.org/10.1521/siso.2021.85.2.207.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
The predominant approach to contemporary critical theory lacks a critical theory of capitalist society. Nancy Fraser has endeavored to provide such a critical theory in her “systematic” “crisis–critique” of capitalism as an “institutionalized social order.” Yet Fraser's “systematic” theory is not systematic, but fragmentary and internally inconsistent. The Marxian premises of Fraser's theory are at odds with its ensuing Habermasian notions of capitalism, contradiction, crises, and emancipation, and her theory consequently lacks a robust explication of these dynamics. This raises the alternative possibility of developing a contemporary critical theory of the crisis–ridden reproduction of the negative totality of capitalist society that brings Adorno and Horkheimer's critical theory together with the subterranean strand of contemporary critical theory: the New Reading of the critique of political economy as a critical social theory.
4
Tarlow, Sarah. „Capitalism and critique“. Antiquity 73, Nr. 280 (Juni 1999): 467–70. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0003598x0008844x.
Der volle Inhalt der Quelle
5
Seybold, Peter. „Sociology, Capitalism, Critique“. Socialism and Democracy 30, Nr. 1 (02.01.2016): 208–11. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08854300.2016.1143658.
Der volle Inhalt der Quelle
6
Osorio, Jaime. „SOBRE SUPEREXPLORAÇÃO E CAPITALISMO DEPENDENTE“. Caderno CRH 31, Nr. 84 (28.03.2019): 483. http://dx.doi.org/10.9771/ccrh.v31i84.26139.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
<p>Este artigo é uma crítica às teses que sustentam que Marx não teria deixado dúvidas de que a força de trabalho de nosso tempo é paga por seu valor, o que exigiria abandonar a categoria de superexploração. Aqui, procuramos mostrar que a violação do valor da força de trabalho é um problema inscrito na teoria marxista e presente em O Capital. Por outro lado, argumentamos sobre a relevância da noção de capitalismo dependente e seu significado para entender as particularidades desse capitalismo, que o separa das trajetórias e objetivos do capitalismo desenvolvido.</p><p><span>ABOUT SUPER- EXPLOITATION AND DEPENDENT CAPITALISM</span></p><div class="trans-abstract"><p>This article is a critique of the theories that sustain that Marx affirms that the labor force is paid for its value. Here we try to show that a violation of the value of the labor force is a problem inscribed in Marxist theory and present in <em>O Capital</em>. On the other hand, it argues about the importance of the notion of dependent capitalism and its meaning to understand its particularities that separate it from the traits and objectives of capitalism developed.</p><p><strong>Key words: </strong>Superexplotation; Dependent capitalism; Capitalism patterns</p></div><div class="trans-abstract"><p class="sec"><span>SUR SUPEREXPLOTATION ET CAPITALISME DÉPENDANT</span></p><p>Cet article est une critique des théories qui soutiennent que Marx affirme que la force de travail est payée pour sa valeur. Nous essayons ici de montrer qu’uneviolation de la valeur de la force de travail est unproblèm einscrit dans la théorie marxiste et présent dans <em>O Capital</em>. D’autre part, il argumente sur l’importance de la notion de capitalisme dépendant et sa signification pour comprendre ses particularités qui le séparent des traits et des objectifs du capitalisme développé.</p><p><strong>Key words: </strong>Superexplotation; Capitalisme dépendant; Modèles de capitalisme</p></div>
7
Collard, Rosemary-Claire, und Jessica Dempsey. „Two icebergs: Difference in feminist political economy“. Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space 52, Nr. 1 (09.10.2019): 237–47. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0308518x19877887.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
In economic geography and beyond, a call for attention to difference or multiplicity – of logics, subjects, geographies – within capitalist and economic relations is often interpreted as a critique in the vein of JK Gibson-Graham: a call to explore capitalism’s alternatives, weaknesses – ‘cracks and fissures’. But there are feminist political economists for whom the multiplicity within and outside capitalism is a source of capitalism’s power; capitalism functions, accumulates and reproduces itself through heterogeneity. In this commentary, we focus on a particular underused theorist who exemplifies such an approach: Maria Mies. We put Mies in conversation with the much better-known Gibson-Graham via each of their depictions of economic relations as an iceberg. We consider each iceberg (and the understanding of capitalism they represent) in relation to capitalist natures scholarship in particular, drawing on our research on the production of emaciated caribou natures in Canada as a mini ‘field test’ for where the icebergs direct our analytical attention. We present these icebergs as a small step towards opening up a broader terrain of feminist theorisations of capitalism and difference than is sometimes recognised in economic geography and political ecology.
8
Kivotidis, Dimitrios. „Break or Continuity? Friedrich Engels and the Critique of Digital Surveillance“. tripleC: Communication, Capitalism & Critique. Open Access Journal for a Global Sustainable Information Society 19, Nr. 1 (27.11.2020): 97–112. http://dx.doi.org/10.31269/triplec.v19i1.1213.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
This paper is a contribution to the argument that Engels’s work remains topical and may provide us with the analytical tools necessary to approach contemporary manifestations of capitalist contradictions. Based on Engels’s work on political economy (with emphasis on his contribution to the labour theory of value and the articulation of the law on the tendency of the rate of profit to fall) it will critically review the concept of “surveillance capitalism” as developed by Shoshana Zuboff, in order to explain central aspects of the process of digital surveillance. In particular, it will criticise the view expressed by Zuboff that surveillance capitalism constitutes a break with capitalism’s past and can be tamed through an enhancement of democratic accountability and regulation. Marxist contributions to the critique of digital surveillance have already approached this phenomenon in a many-sided manner. This paper builds upon these contributions and suggests that the exponential growth of digital platforms can be explained as a direct result of the development of capitalist contradictions, especially the contradiction between productive forces and relations of production as expressed in the law of the falling rate of profit.
9
Haque, Ziaul. „Krishna Bharadwaj and Sudipta Kaviraj (eels) Perspectives on Capitalism - Marx, Keynes, Schumpeter and Weber. New Delhi. Sage Publications. 1989. pp.265 + Index. Price: Rs 190.00 (Hardbound) and Rs 90.00 (paperbound).“ Pakistan Development Review 29, Nr. 2 (01.06.1990): 175–83. http://dx.doi.org/10.30541/v29i2pp.175-183.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
As a socio-economic world system, capitalism has undergone various historical changes from its early competitive market phase to late monopo~y capitalism. In its early phase, it largely constituted a process of transition gradually emerging from the feudal mode of production, which laid heavy restrictions on the new class of rising industrialists, businessmen, and merchants. Classical economists were the ideological champions of these progressive social classes; progressive as compared to the erstwhile feudal and monarchical classes. Karl Marx's critique of capitalism was an explanation of how capitalism as a growing socio-economic organism evolved from the pre-capitalist feudal order and was leading towards higher socio-economic formations. In this analysis of the capitalist economic system, Marx laid bare its internal contradictions and its crisis-ridden anarchic production, which in his view would inevitably yield place to socialism. His thesis was confirmed by the social revolutions which occurred after his death in 1883. He was witness to a period of capitalism which produced misery and pauperization of the working classes on a large scale, and wealth and prosperity for a tiny but powerful class of capitalists of various categories.
10
Wagner, Peter. „Modernity, Capitalism and Critique“. Thesis Eleven 66, Nr. 1 (August 2001): 1–31. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0725513601066000002.
Der volle Inhalt der Quelle
11
Budolfson, Mark. „Arguments for Well-Regulated Capitalism, and Implications for Global Ethics, Food, Environment, Climate Change, and Beyond“. Ethics & International Affairs 35, Nr. 1 (2021): 83–98. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0892679421000083.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
AbstractDiscourse on food ethics often advocates the anti-capitalist idea that we need less capitalism, less growth, and less globalization if we want to make the world a better and more equitable place. This idea is also familiar from much discourse in global ethics, environment, and political theory, more generally. However, many experts argue that this anti-capitalist idea is not supported by reason and argument, and is actually wrong. As part of the roundtable, “Ethics and the Future of the Global Food System,” the main contribution of this essay is to explain the structure of the leading arguments against this anti-capitalist idea, and in favor of well-regulated capitalism. I initially focus on general arguments for and against globalized capitalism. I then turn to implications for the food, environment, climate change, and beyond. Finally, I clarify the important kernel of truth in the critique of neoliberalism familiar from food ethics, political theory, and beyond—as well as the limitations of that critique.
12
Charitsis, Vassilis, Detlev Zwick und Alan Bradshaw. „Creating Worlds that Create Audiences: Theorising Personal Data Markets in the Age of Communicative Capitalism“. tripleC: Communication, Capitalism & Critique. Open Access Journal for a Global Sustainable Information Society 16, Nr. 2 (30.09.2018): 820–34. http://dx.doi.org/10.31269/triplec.v16i2.1041.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
In this article, we draw on theories of biopolitical marketing to explore claims that personal data markets are contextualised by what Shoshana Zuboff calls “surveillance capitalism” and Jodi Dean calls “communicative capitalism”. Surveillance and communicative capitalism are characterised by a logic of accumulation based on networked captures of life that enable complex and incomprehensive processes of extraction, commodification, and control. Echoing recent theorisations of data (as) derivatives, Zuboff’s key claim about surveillance capitalism is that data representations open up opportunities for the enhanced market control of life through the algorithmic monitoring, prediction and modification of human behaviour. A Marxist critique, focusing largely on the exploitative nature of corporate data capitalism, has already been articulated. In this article, we focus on the increasingly popular market-libertarian critique that proposes individual control, ownership, and ability to commodify one’s personal data as an answer to corporate data extraction, derivation and exploitation schemes. We critique the claims that personal data markets counterbalance corporate digital capitalism on two grounds. First, these markets do not work economically and therefore are unable to address the exploitative aspect of surveillance capitalism. Second, the notion of personal data markets functions ideologically because it reduces the critique of surveillance capitalism to the exploitation of consumers and conceals the real objective of data capitalists such as Google, Facebook, Amazon and Apple to not (just) exploit audiences but to create worlds that create audiences.
13
Fisher, Eran, und Ben Fisher. „Shifting Capitalist Critiques: The Discourse about Unionisation in the Hi-Tech Sector“. tripleC: Communication, Capitalism & Critique. Open Access Journal for a Global Sustainable Information Society 17, Nr. 2 (17.12.2019): 308–26. http://dx.doi.org/10.31269/triplec.v17i2.1107.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
Drawing on Luc Boltanski's work on capitalist transformations we argue that recent hi-tech unionising features a new model of critique which combines tenets from both the social and the artistic critique. Hi-tech workers – cultured in the ethos and achievements of the artistic critique that protests the inhibition of creativity, and the lack of personal expression and authenticity prevalent in capitalism – seek to resurrect the social critique that protests the inequality, poverty, and egoism that capitalism entails. This creates an interesting dynamic of protest discourse since the social critique partly stands in contradiction to the artistic critique: responding to one entails ignoring the other. The analysis of interviews with leaders of unionisation efforts in global hi-tech firms elucidates the tension between the two clusters of critique and the attempts to overcome it. It also allows us to engage theoretically with Boltanski by highlighting the particular characteristics of the agents voicing the critique.
14
Hudis, Peter. „New Perspectives on Rosa Luxemburg’s Critique of Global Capitalism“. Perspectives on Global Development and Technology 11, Nr. 1 (2012): 27–37. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/156914912x620716.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
AbstractThe global economic-financial downturn has given new impetus to a re-examination of Rosa Luxemburg’s writings on capitalist accumulation and economic crisis, which pinpointed the central contradiction of capitalism in its drive for global expansion. In this article I critically engage Luxemburg’s theory of capital accumulation and crisis by evaluating it in comparison with the central categories of Volumes One and Two of Marx’sCapitalon the one hand, and the quest for an alternative to capitalism in the twenty-first century on the other. I argue that Marx’s procedure in Volume Two ofCapital, in which he abstracts from realization crises and foreign trade in order to discern the “law of motion” of capital freed from secondary and tertiary considerations, captures the internal dynamic of capitalist development and crises far better than its Keynesian and neo-Keynesian alternatives.
15
Cubo, Oscar. „Los límites exteriores del capitalismo en la «crítica de la economía política» de Marx. Sobre la interpretación de César Ruiz Sanjuán de la articulación de historia y sistema en Marx“. Quaderns de Filosofia 6, Nr. 2 (26.11.2019): 131. http://dx.doi.org/10.7203/qfia.6.2.16056.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
The Outer Limits of Capitalism in Marx's «Critique of Political Economy». On César Ruiz Sanjuán's Interpretation of the Articulation of History and System in Marx.
Resumen: Se ha publicado recientemente en castellano una investigación rigurosa y pionera acerca de la compleja articulación que mantienen la historia y la exposición del sistema capitalista en el proyecto de una «crítica de la economía política» de Marx. Este trabajo pretende exponer y discutir las aportaciones interpretativas abiertas por el libro deCésar Ruiz Sanjuán: Historia y sistema en Marx. Hacia una teoría crítica del capitalismo, publicado en 2019 en la editorial Siglo XXI España. Al final de nuestra exposición profundizamos en esta articulación entre historia y sistema con vistas a presentar el proyecto político del Marx maduro como un desarrollo consecuente de su «crítica de la economía política».
Palabras clave: Historia, sistema y crítica de la economía política.
Abstract: A groundbreaking and rigorous research has recently been published in Spanish on the complex articulation between history and the exposure of capitalist system in Marx's project of a «Critique of Political Economy». This work aims to present and discuss the interpretative contributions opened by César Ruiz Sanjuán's book Historia y sistema en Marx. Hacia una teoría crítica del capitalismo, published in 2019 by Siglo XXI España. At the conclusion of this paper, we delve into this articulation between history and system in order to present Marx's mature political project as a consequent development of his «Critique of Political Economy».
Keywords: History, system and critique of political economy.
16
Curty, Gaël. „Capitalism, Critique and Social Freedom: An Interview With Axel Honneth on Freedom’s Right“. Critical Sociology 46, Nr. 7-8 (28.04.2020): 1339–49. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0896920520918505.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
Axel Honneth is internationally renowned as one of the leading critical theorists of our time and is highly regarded for his development of the theory of recognition. In these two interviews, Axel Honneth sets out the formal modalities, normative contents, and normative justifications of the critique of capitalism that he has developed in his book Freedom’s Right. After briefly defining his conception of capitalist market society, he presents his method of normative reconstruction and the formal modalities of his critique of capitalism. He then sets out his critical diagnosis and solutions to the normative misdevelopments produced by capitalism and concludes, finally, with a discussion and justification of the normative ideal of social freedom at the core of his theory.
17
Marques, Sylvia Ferreira. „Systemic Reconfiguration of Capitalism: Applying Ruggie’s Critique of Waltz in Economics“. Contexto Internacional 43, Nr. 2 (August 2021): 283–303. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/s0102-8529.2019430200003.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
Abstract This paper identifies changes in the center-periphery structure due to transformations in capitalism since 1970. In its new configuration, capitalism not only altered center-periphery relations but also exerted impact upon peripheral units that affect the system structure itself. This paper aims to apply Ruggie’s famous critique of Waltz in International Relations to analyse global capitalism and show how the changes in the center-periphery cleavage is affecting its systemic reconfiguration in the 21st century. This research identifies the boomerang effect as a new systemic element, that is, as a byproduct of the interaction of units of the global capitalist system in the 21st century.
18
Sperber, Nathan. „The many lives of state capitalism: From classical Marxism to free-market advocacy“. History of the Human Sciences 32, Nr. 3 (Juli 2019): 100–124. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0952695118815553.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
State capitalism has recently come to the fore as a transversal research object in the social sciences. Renewed interest in the notion is evident across several disciplines, in scholarship addressing government interventionism in economic life in major developing countries. This emergent field of study on state capitalism, however, consistently bypasses the remarkable conceptual trajectory of the notion from the end of the 19th century to the present. This article proposes an intellectual-historical survey of state capitalism’s many lives across different ensembles of writing: early Marxist pronouncements on state capitalism at the time of the Second International; theories of state capitalism evolved in the first half of the 20th century in response to the European experience of war and fascism; dissident portrayals of the Soviet Union as state-capitalist; post-Second World War theories of state-monopoly capitalism in the Western Bloc; examinations of state capitalism as a development strategy in ‘Third World’ nations in the 1970s and 1980s; and finally, today’s scholarship on new patterns of state capitalism in emerging economies. Having contextualized each of these strands of writing, the article goes on to interrogate definitional and conceptual boundaries of state capitalism. It then maps out essential institutional features of state-capitalist configurations as construed in the literature. In sharp contrast to 20th-century theories of state capitalism, present-day scholarship on the topic tends to retreat from the integrated critique of political economy, shifting its problematics of state-market relations to meso- and micro-levels of analysis.
19
Blake, Jenna. „Feminist Critique of Joseph Stiglitz’s Approach to the Problems of Global Capitalism“. Stance: an international undergraduate philosophy journal 7, Nr. 1 (18.04.2014): 89–96. http://dx.doi.org/10.33043/s.7.1.89-96.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
In his book Making Globalization Work, Joseph Stiglitz proposes reforms to address problems arising from the global spread of capitalism, problems that he asserts are not inherent to globalization or capitalism but are due to the way those systems have been “managed.” Conversely, postcolonial feminist theorist Chanda Talpade Mohanty’s analysis of those same systems demonstrates that capitalism is not compatible with global justice. In this essay I use Mohanty’s analysis to argue that Stiglitz’s proposed reforms would not achieve his stated goals and that the global capitalist system must be dismantled if global justice is to be achieved.
20
Reynolds, Paul. „Sexual Capitalism: Marxist Reflections on Sexual Politics, Culture and Economy in the 21st Century“. tripleC: Communication, Capitalism & Critique. Open Access Journal for a Global Sustainable Information Society 16, Nr. 2 (04.05.2018): 696–706. http://dx.doi.org/10.31269/triplec.v16i2.995.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
From an apparent impasse and crisis in the 1970s and 1980s – politically and intellectually – Marxism has recovered to offer critical insights into contemporary changes and developments in late capitalist societies. Sexuality has been one area where Marxist critiques of commodification and consumption, reification, cultural production and its hegemonic effects and the structures of feeling and meaning-making that compose contemporary subjectivities have been of significant value in decoding legal, political and cultural changes in the regulation, prohibition and propagation of forms of sex and sexuality. This discussion will draw from some of the most important contributions to Marxist critiques of sexuality, contemporary and historical, to outline the contours of a critique of contemporary sexuality in society, notably Peter Drucker, Holly Lewis, Rosemary Hennessy, David Evans, and Keith Floyd. The Marxist critique of contemporary sexual politics and rights claims both recognises the importance of these struggles and provides a materialist critique that demonstrates both the contemporary power of Marxist analysis and a critical engagement with queer and constructionist “orthodoxies”. Marxism has become a central and important ground for exploring the vagaries of sexuality under capitalism in all its objectifying, commodifying, alienating and exploitative forms.
21
Skouras, George. „Modernity, the Commons and Capitalism“. British Journal of American Legal Studies 9, Nr. 2 (04.08.2020): 367–86. http://dx.doi.org/10.2478/bjals-2020-0012.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
AbstractThe modern way of life and reflected in modern political philosophy is directed by capitalist activity of both commodities and persons. Entities that do not have commodity value are worthless to the capitalist enterprise, regardless of any intrinsic value in themselves. Modernity is capitalist modernity. Modernity has given preference for objects/commodities over persons. This paper will argue for opening-up the landscape for alternative experiences to capitalism, as an attempt to move away from the capitalist enterprise. That is, be able to provide open space for people to use other than the buying and selling of commodities---where the commodification process breaks down and opens-up spaces for alternative experiences besides the capitalist experience. In other words, this work will attempt to serve as critique of Enlightenment philosophical discourse---that is, serve as a critique of the Age of Enlightenment serving as the foundational head of modernism---a plea for the rebellion against the quantification and mathematization of reality under modernist and industrial societies. It will use the modern landscape as the first effort to break free from the capitalist enterprise.
22
Coates, David. „Studying comparative capitalisms by going left and by going deeper“. Capital & Class 38, Nr. 1 (Februar 2014): 18–30. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0309816813510372.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
The article charts the continuing attempt to breathe fresh life into the original Hall and Soskice distinction between liberal market economies (LMEs) and coordinated market economies (CMEs). It surveys the critique of that original formulation from within the dominant ‘varieties of capitalism’ paradigm, and the recent attempt by Wolfgang Streeck to replace the LME-CME focus with a new institutionalist understanding of capitalism and its varieties. That move ‘to bring capitalism back in’ is welcome but inadequate, acting only as a beachhead out of which we now need to break, armed with a revitalised sense of the importance of Marxism as a theoretical framework with which to understand capitalist dynamics, capitalist institutional variations and capitalist contradictions.
23
Leach, Nicole. „Transitions to Capitalism“. Historical Materialism 24, Nr. 2 (30.06.2016): 111–37. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/1569206x-12341475.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
This paper assesses the work of Robert Brenner alongside the insights developed within social-reproduction feminism to reassess discussions on the origins of capitalism. The focus on the internal relation between social production and social reproduction allows social-reproduction feminism to theorise the construction of gendered capitalist social relations that previous accounts of the transition to capitalism have thus far been unable to provide. It argues that a revised political Marxism has the potential to set up a non-teleological and historically specific account of the origins of capitalism. This paper seeks to redress the theoretical shortcomings of political Marxism that allow it to fail to account for the differentiated yet internally related process involved in the constitution and reconstitution of gendered capitalist social relations. This critique contributes to a social-reproduction feminism project of exploring processes of social production and social reproduction in their historical development and contemporary particularities.
24
Knoche, Manfred. „Capitalisation of the Media Industry From a Political Economy Perspective“. tripleC: Communication, Capitalism & Critique. Open Access Journal for a Global Sustainable Information Society 19, Nr. 2 (19.08.2021): 325–42. http://dx.doi.org/10.31269/triplec.v19i2.1283.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
Approaches to the critique of the political economy of communication in society belong to the “forgotten theories” in media and communication studies. But in view of the unmistakable structural change of a media industry “unleashed” by deregulation, privatisation, digitalisation, concentration, globalisation, etc., it seems from an academic perspective necessary to analyse the development of the media industry in close connection with the equally unmistakable general development of an “unleashed” capitalism. This article therefore shows that the analysis of the development processes of capitalism as the undoubtedly globally dominant economic and social system from a political economy perspective makes it possible to analyse, explain, and partly forecast the economisation or commercialisation process in the media industry in an academically appropriate way with regard to its causes, forms, consequences, and further development. Theoretical explanations are offered by the further developments of the analysis and critique of contemporary capitalism based on Marx’s critique of the political economy as a historical-materialist analysis of society. In doing so, the permanent fundamental characteristics, modes of functioning and “regularities” of the capitalist mode of production and the capitalist formation of society are analysed in connection with the particularities of the current capitalisation process in the media industry.
25
Iley-Williamson, Dan. „Why Capitalism?“ Political Studies Review 15, Nr. 3 (20.10.2016): 415–22. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1478929916652149.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
An endorsement of capitalism is often thought to be a concession to human selfishness. The thought often runs that while some other socioeconomic system – socialism, perhaps – would be morally preferable, we cannot live up to those high ideals. Jason Brennan has recently attempted to show that this widespread view is mistaken. Even in terms of ideal theory, Brennan argues, capitalism is morally superior to its rival. To make this case, Brennan critiques the work of the late socialist political philosopher, GA Cohen. Brennan argues that Cohen’s justification of socialism is ill-conceived, and in fact, Cohen’s failure helps to reveal that capitalism is morally superior to socialism. In this review article, I argue that Brennan’s critique and attempted counter-claim are unsuccessful. Among other failings, Brennan leaves us with no adequate answer to the question, why capitalism? Cohen GA (2009) Why Not Socialism? Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Brennan J (2014) Why Not Capitalism? New York: Routledge.
26
Bloom, Peter. „We are all monsters now!“ Equality, Diversity and Inclusion: An International Journal 33, Nr. 7 (15.09.2014): 662–80. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/edi-03-2012-0025.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to investigate how Marxist accounts of capitalism and capitalists as “vampiric” and “cannibalistic” can challenge the exploitation underlying “monstrosity” of the diverse “liberal organization”. Design/methodology/approach – To bear out this argument, it will critically turn to Marx's original description of capitalism as “vampire” like. It will do so by examining a range of theoretical and existing empirical research related themes of contemporary diversity. Findings – The paper argues that in order to avoid becoming capitalist monsters it is imperative to adopt an explicitly anti-capitalist Marxist perspective centring on themes of a “monstrous” capitalism. Capitalist organizations, not only “suck the blood of workers” but turns them into exploiting vampires, feeding on others for own profit and promotion. Yet it also expands on such readings by emphasizing the liberating possibilities that a more contemporary view of “monsters” stressing radical diversity and difference can make to this Marxist critique. Originality/value – To this end, it illuminates how a perspective uniting these ideals, termed here as a “revolutionary monstrous humanism”, can effectively challenge the dehumanization of managerial control and market ideologies while also fighting for the right of individuals to express their heterogeneous and always evolving unique cultural identities.
27
Fast, Travis William. „Varieties of Capitalism: A Critique“. Articles 71, Nr. 1 (29.03.2016): 133–55. http://dx.doi.org/10.7202/1035905ar.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
The Varieties of Capitalism (VoC) has become the dominant approach in comparative political economy and enjoys wide application and attention in disciplines outside of political science and sociology. Indeed the VoC approach has enjoyed much attention in comparative industrial/employment relations (IR). This article undertakes a critical evaluation of the importation of the VoC paradigm into comparative IR. Inter alia, it is argued that the VoC approach, as it is presently configured, may have little to teach IR scholars because its basic theoretical concepts and methodological priors militate against accounting for change. This article begins with a summary of the routine problems researchers in comparative political economy and comparative IR have encountered when attempting to account for change within the constraints of the VoC paradigm. Here the focus is on the limitations imposed when privileging the national scale and the problems engendered by a heavy reliance on comparative statics methodology infused with the concepts of equilibrium and exogenous shocks. The article then goes beyond these routinely recognized limitations and argues that the importation of terminology from neoclassical economic theory, of which the original VoC statement makes foundational reference, further serves to constrain and add confusion to the comparative enterprise; namely, comparative advantage, Oliver Williamson’s neoclassical theory of the firm, the use of the distinction made between (im)perfect market competition in neoclassical economics and the fuzzy distinction made between firms, markets and networks. In the concluding section we argue that the VoC’s narrow focus on the firm and its coordination problems serve to legitimate IRs traditional narrow focus on labour management relations and the pride of place that HRM now enjoys in the remaining IR departments. Ultimately, however, the embrace of the VoC paradigm by comparative IR is a net negative normative move.
28
Ross, Nathan. „Hegel’s Logical Critique of Capitalism“. Proceedings of the Hegel Society of America 22 (2015): 163–79. http://dx.doi.org/10.5840/hsaproceedings20152312.
Der volle Inhalt der Quelle
29
White, Stuart. „The Republican critique of capitalism“. Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy 14, Nr. 5 (Dezember 2011): 561–79. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13698230.2011.617119.
Der volle Inhalt der Quelle
30
Mulaj, Jeta. „‘Stabilising the Balkans’“. Historical Materialism 25, Nr. 4 (14.02.2017): 215–29. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/1569206x-12341545.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
Abstract This review essay discusses Welcome to the Desert of Post-Socialism: Radical Politics After Yugoslavia. This volume, edited by Srećko Horvat and Igor Štiks, critiques a reductive neoliberal narrative regarding the Balkans in relation to Western Europe by examining the disastrous consequences of the transition of post-socialist countries to capitalism. The volume provides a critical engagement with socialist Yugoslavia and an affirmation of the possibilities of radical anti-capitalist struggles. This review examines the critique of transition politics by focusing on concepts of stability, racism and questions of temporality.
31
Smith, Tony. „Marx’s Hegelian Critique of Hegel“. Philosophica: International Journal for the History of Philosophy 27, Nr. 54 (2019): 11–32. http://dx.doi.org/10.5840/philosophica2019275417.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
Hegel conceptualized the capitalist economy as a system of needs, with commodities and money serving as means to human ends. While anticipating Marx’s criticisms of certain tendencies in capitalism, Hegel insisted that higher-order institutions, especially those of the modern state, could put them out of play and establish a reconciliation of universality, particularity, and individuality warranting rational affirmation. Hegel, however, failed to comprehend the emergence of capital as a dominant subject, subordinating human ends under its end (“valorization”). The structural coercion, domination, and exploitation inherent in the capital/wage labor relationship illustrate that point, as does the depoliticization of inherently political matters in capitalist market societies. The reconciliation of universality, particularity, and individuality Hegel endorsed requires a form of socialism incorporating deliberative democracy in local workplaces and communities, conjoined with representative bodies on regional, national, and ultimately global levels.
32
Weiss, Oliver. „Economic surplus and capitalist diversity“. Capital & Class 38, Nr. 1 (Februar 2014): 157–70. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0309816813514209.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
This paper develops a theoretical critique of the varieties of capitalism (VoC) approach from the perspective of ideas sourced from Marxian political economy. In particular, the concept of economic surplus as formulated by Paul Baran is used to question the social ontology implicit in VoC, which, it is argued, is severely constrained by its imprecise definitions of both capitalism itself and capitalist diversity as a specific phenomenon. The result of these two failures is that VoC’s theoretical apparatus is unable to perceive the true significance of capitalist diversity, and is thus likewise incapable of telling us anything new about capitalism itself. In this way, key aspects of the institutionalist take on capitalist diversity are questioned, and an alternative analytical approach based on the labour theory of value is put forward.
33
Gray, Kevin W. „Capitalism’s revenge: critique, response and the third wave of capitalism“. Distinktion: Journal of Social Theory 21, Nr. 3 (01.09.2020): 350–66. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1600910x.2020.1816557.
Der volle Inhalt der Quelle
34
Toscano, Alberto. „Capitalism without Capitalism“. Res Publica. Revista de Historia de las Ideas Políticas 23, Nr. 3 (13.10.2020): 365–71. http://dx.doi.org/10.5209/rpub.71030.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
This article explores the theorisation of fascism across Žižek’s oeuvre, from the 1980s to the present. It situates his Lacanian response to the problematic category of ‘totalitarianism’ in its original Yugoslav context, foregrounding the critical function of the aesthetic praxis of over-identification, embodied by the Neue Slowenische Kunst and Laibach, in Žižek’s reflections. The article explores the manner in which Žižek provides distinctive answers to the classic topoi of critical theory’s confrontation with fascism: the typology and taxonomy of fascisms; the nature of fascist fantasy; the perverted utopian content and popular impact of fascism. Above all, it investigates the central place that the theorisation of fascism has in Žižek’s reformation of ideology-critique, especially in terms of the lessons it harbours about the functioning of the social law and the unconscious under capitalism.
35
Jappe, Anselm. „Sohn-Rethel and the Origin of ‘Real Abstraction’: A Critique of Production or a Critique of Circulation?“ Historical Materialism 21, Nr. 1 (2013): 3–14. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/1569206x-12341283.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
AbstractAlfred Sohn-Rethel did not just elaborate a materialist theory of knowledge, he also introduced the term ‘real abstraction’ into Marxist debate. However, he locates the origin of commodity abstraction solely in the sphere of circulation, conceiving of production itself as a mere metabolism with nature. This conception, in which the critique of capitalism aims exclusively at distribution, and which rejects the Marxian concept of ‘abstract labour’, remains widespread. It is our express intention here to undertake a critique of such a conception for the benefit of a critique of the very mode of capitalist production.
36
Gardiner, Michael E. „Critique of Accelerationism“. Theory, Culture & Society 34, Nr. 1 (28.07.2016): 29–52. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0263276416656760.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
The global financial crisis beginning in 2008 has encouraged the revitalization of a wide spectrum of leftist theorizing, but arguably the most audacious is that of ‘accelerationism’. Left-accelerationism sees the intensification of certain tendencies in late capitalist society as a way to escape its gravitational orbit and ‘repurpose’ the very material infrastructure of capitalism itself, to universally emancipatory ends. The central task here is to engage accelerationism with a thinker of the post-Autonomist tradition, Franco ‘Bifo’ Berardi. Contrary to Williams and Srnicek, co-authors of the #Accelerate manifesto, Bifo asserts that acceleration per se only augments the power and dynamism of capital, and posits instead a ‘post-politics’ of ironic detachment, aesthetic cultivation, and ‘therapy’. Contrasting Bifo and accelerationism clarifies each of their assumptions and core arguments, and points the way to a more nuanced perspective on these issues, in a contemporaneous moment marked in equal measure by inestimable threat and liberatory promise.
37
Rodríguez, Juan Pablo. „Neoliberalismo: críticas y resistencias. Entrevista a Juan Pablo Rodríguez“. Castalia - Revista de Psicología de la Academia, Nr. 34 (31.07.2020): 145–56. http://dx.doi.org/10.25074/07198051.34.1759.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
La siguiente entrevista aborda algunas de las principales motivaciones, ideas y conclusiones que dan forma a la investigación contenida en el libro Resisting neoliberal capitalism in Chile: the possibility of social critique (2020) de Juan Pablo Rodríguez. Se aborda, en primer lugar, su examen de distintas teorías críticas del neoliberalismo contemporáneo; a continuación, su análisis de las prácticas de crítica situada que llevan a cabo los movimientos sociales en Chile, en especial a partir de los casos del movimiento estudiantil y el movimiento de pobladores.
----
In this interview with Juan Pablo Rodríguez, author of Resisting neoliberal capitalism in Chile: the possibility of social critique (2020), we address the main ideas and motivations behind the book and the research on which the book is based. We first explore the analysis the author makes of different theoretical critiques of contemporary neoliberal capitalism, and then we talk about the practices of embodied critiques carried out by social movements in Chile, focusing on the cases of the student and the pobladores movements.
38
Robinson, William. „The Pitfalls of Realist Analysis of Global Capitalism: A Critique of Ellen Meiksins Wood's Empire of Capital“. Historical Materialism 15, Nr. 3 (2007): 71–93. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/156920607x225889.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
AbstractThe dynamics of the emerging transnational stage in world capitalism cannot be understood through the blinkers of nation-state-centric thinking. In her study Empire of Capital, Ellen Meiksins Wood exhibits the reification and outdated nation-state-centric thinking that plagues much recent work on world capitalism and US intervention, expressed in the confusing notion of a 'new imperialism'. The overarching problems in Wood's study – and, by extension, in much of the 'new-imperialism' literature – is a reified notion of imperialism, a refusal to draw out the analytical, theoretical, methodological, and epistemological implications of capitalist globalisation, and an incessant reification of the state. Instead of a 'new US empire', the current epoch is best understood as a new transnational phase in the ongoing evolution of world capitalism, characterised in particular by the rise of truly transnational capital, globalised circuits of accumulation, and transnational state apparatuses. 'US imperialism' refers to the use by tansnational élites of the US state apparatus to continue to attempt to expand, defend and stabilise the global capitalist system. US militarisation and intervention are best understood as a response to the intractable contradictions of global capitalism.
39
Alami, Ilias, und Adam D. Dixon. „State capitalism(s) redux? Theories, tensions, controversies“. Competition & Change 24, Nr. 1 (14.10.2019): 70–94. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1024529419881949.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
This article interrogates the notion of state capitalism, exploring the contributions and limits of the concept as a means of theorizing the more visible role of the state across the world capitalist economy. We critically synthesize the key arguments, outlining commonly cited properties and practices of state capitalism, in three bodies of literature: strategic management, comparative capitalism and global political economy. We find that the term not only lacks a unified definition, but actually refers to an extremely wide array of policy instruments, strategic objectives, institutional forms and networks, that involve the state to different degrees. For this proliferation of competing usages to be productive and not lead to analytical impasses, we argue that there is a need for a heightened level of reflexive scrutiny of state capitalism as a category of analysis. In that spirit, we identify three issues that the literature must further grapple with for the term to be analytically meaningful, that is, capable of rendering (state)capitalist diversity amenable to analysis and critique: (1) the ‘missing link’ of a theory of the capitalist state, (2) the time horizons of state capitalism, or the question of ‘periodization’, (3) territorial considerations or the question of ‘locating’ state capitalism.
40
Smith, Patrick Brian. „Documenting Extractive and Indigenous Futurities“. Afterimage 47, Nr. 4 (Dezember 2020): 50–68. http://dx.doi.org/10.1525/aft.2020.47.4.50.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
The aim of this article is to examine how different modes of moving image practice can expose and critique the impacts of extractive capitalism and settler colonialism on Indigenous communities in northern Canada. The article focuses on the work of two contemporary artist-filmmakers, Thirza Cuthand and Thomas Kneubühler. Their work has consistently engaged with the impacts of late capitalist violence and power within the context of settler-colonial Canada. The article argues that these filmmakers’ engagements and critiques of such formations of power are built around radically different framings and conceptualizations of futurity—as both a dominant logic within the exploitative rationale of extractive capitalist speculation and projection (Kneubühler), but also as a potential catalyst for Indigenous decolonization and self-determination (Cuthand).
41
Fraser, Ian. „Sen, Marx and justice: a critique“. International Journal of Social Economics 43, Nr. 12 (05.12.2016): 1194–206. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/ijse-08-2015-0202.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
Purpose The purpose of this paper is to offer a critique of Sen’s utilisation of aspects of Marx’s thought that inform his idea of justice. Marx’s ideas appear in four main areas of discussion: Sen’s positioning of Marx in relation to the other thinkers in his approach to justice; Marx’s fluid notion of identity and its relation to social choice; the problem of going beyond a subjective perspective to consider objective concerns by considering the impact of what Sen calls “objective illusion”; and the issue of just redistribution. Design/methodology/approach The author utilises a Marxian framework of analysis that engages in immanent critique of Sen’s use of Marx in relation to his theory of justice. This is accomplished through textual analysis and by critical assessment of the analytical Marxist tradition that Sen can be seen as using in his own theories with all their inherent weaknesses. Findings Sen’s attempt to use Marx’s ideas to inform his theory of justice founder because: he groups Marx with thinkers that would not accept his desire for the abolition of capitalism and a more just society beyond it. He reduces Marx to the analytical tradition with all its inherent weaknesses. He resorts to a methodological individualist approach of choice that Marx rejects. His search for positional objectivity is undermined by the power of capitalist ideology and ruling class interest. His discussion of just redistribution ignores how Marx’s approach can overcome the arbitrariness that Sen thinks is inevitable when making just decisions. Research limitations/implications Theoretically, the paper suggests that, based on immanent critique and textual analysis, Sen’s use of Marx’s idea of justice is problematic most notably because Sen keeps his analysis within the framework of capitalism that Marx would reject. The implication for further research is the development of Marx’s own arguments on what constitutes a just society. Practical implications Practically, the paper raises questions about the capacity for justice to be achieved within the capitalist system for the reasons discussed in relation to Sen. Social implications Socially, the paper implies that far greater measures to tackle the injustices of the world are necessary than seem to be admitted to by justice theorists such as Sen. Originality/value The author shows that the use of Marx’s theories to inform Sen’s notion of justice, while to be welcomed, lose their efficacious power to expose the full injustice of capitalism and the need for its transcendence.
42
Bohrer, Ashley. „Intersectionality and Marxism: A Critical Historiography“. Historical Materialism 26, Nr. 2 (30.07.2018): 46–74. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/1569206x-00001617.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
AbstractIn recent years, there has been renewed interest in conceptualising the relationship between oppression and capitalism as well as intense debate over the precise nature of this relationship. No doubt spurred on by the financial crisis, it has become increasingly clear that capitalism, both historically and in the twenty-first century, has had particularly devastating effects for women and people of colour. Intersectionality, which emerged in the late twentieth century as a way of addressing the relationship between race, gender, sexuality and class, has submitted orthodox Marxism to critique for its inattention to the complex dynamics of various social locations; in turn Marxist thinkers in the twenty-first century have engaged with intersectionality, calling attention to the impoverished notion of class and capitalism on which it relies. As intersectionality constitutes perhaps the most common way that contemporary activists and theorists on the left conceive of identity politics, an analysis of intersectionality’s relationship to Marxism is absolutely crucial for historical materialists to understand and consider. This paper looks at the history of intersectionality’s and Marxism’s critiques of one another in order to ground a synthesis of the two frameworks. It argues that in the twenty-first century, we need a robust, Marxist analysis of capitalism, and that the only robust account of capitalism is one articulated intersectionally, one which treats class, race, gender and sexuality as fundamental to capitalist accumulation.
43
YAMADA, Shinichi. „Critique of Postfordism's Understanding of Capitalism“. Japanese Sociological Review 46, Nr. 4 (1996): 402–16. http://dx.doi.org/10.4057/jsr.46.402.
Der volle Inhalt der Quelle
44
Blackledge, Paul. „‘Anti-Leninist’ anti-capitalism: a critique“. Contemporary Politics 11, Nr. 2-3 (Juni 2005): 99–116. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13569770500275114.
Der volle Inhalt der Quelle
45
Van Dyke, Harry. „KUYPER’S EARLY CRITIQUE OF UNCHECKED CAPITALISM“. Philosophia Reformata 78, Nr. 2 (17.11.2013): 115–23. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/22116117-90000547.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
It was in the days when European society was in the throes of expanding industrial capitalism that Abraham Kuyper formulated his basic ideas about the pitfalls of the free enterprise system and the need for a structural make-over of society. Already two decades before his mature address of 1891 on the social question, he urged the church to concern herself seriously with the plight of the working classes. In 1874 he railed against “fictitious trade” and mere “paper assets.” In an extensive commentary on his political party’s program (1878/79) he repeated his fundamental objection to the “fictitious expansion of capital”, calling for legislation to curb such excesses and to create a better balance in incomes between the different classes making up society. He argued for equity and justice rather than charity and philanthropy, and for wages and salaries proportional to effort, skill and education. Yet while the gap between rich and poor cried out to heaven, the first step toward solving the social question, according to the youthful Kuyper, was not to focus on the poor but to provide employment opportunities so that the able and willing working man could earn a living wage. He proposed raising import duties and protective tariffs, replacing taxes on necessaries with taxes on luxuries, abolishing government-run lotteries, and lifting the ban on organizing trade-unions. To achieve these reforms, it was essential that the lower classes be given greater representation in parliament and that selfish greed make way for neighbourly love and mutual solidarity.
46
Muller, Jerry Z. „Justus Möser and the Conservative Critique of Early Modern Capitalism“. Central European History 23, Nr. 2-3 (Juni 1990): 153–78. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0008938900021336.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
As Albert Hirschman has recently observed, critics and advocates of a capitalist, market economy are forever reinventing the wheel, repeating arguments made by their forebears decades and sometimes centuries ago. Take the following observations of a social critic—let his name, for the moment, remain a mystery—as he casts his gaze upon the cultural influence of the market. New forms of capitalist economic organization, he observes, have led to the disappearance of the link between ownership of property and civic responsibility. Men are so involved in acquisition, he laments, that they no longer have time for political concerns and public life. He sees an eclipse of civic virtue, a diminishing willingness to sacrifice private concerns for the public good. Changes in social structure brought about by capitalist development are no less worrisome. The process of the market is leading to the replacement of once-independent producers by men who are mere specialized cogs in a productive machine. The cultural consequences of capitalism are cause for despair. The ever-shifting, international fashions on which the market thrives are destroying authentic, indigenous culture. New forms of capitalist merchandising prosper by arousing novel desires, creating tastes for consumer goods which people do not really need, and leading to excessive expenditure which is bankrupting the economy. Most pernicious are unprecedented marketing techniques which undermine the steadying influence of the family by invading the household itself.
47
Post, Charles. „The Use and Misuse of Uneven and Combined Development: A Critique of Anievas and Nişancıoğlu“. Historical Materialism 26, Nr. 3 (25.09.2018): 79–98. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/1569206x-00001528.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
AbstractAneivas and Nişancıoğlu’s provocative book,How the West Came to Rule, attempts to provide an alternative account of the origins of capitalism to both ‘Political Marxism’ and ‘World-Systems Theory’. By making uneven and combined development a universal dynamic of human history and by utilising a flawed concept of ‘Eurocentrism’, however, they introduce a high degree of causal pluralism into their analysis. Despite important insights into the specific dynamics of different pre-capitalist forms of social labour, their account of the origins of capitalism inHow the West Came to Rulesuffers from causal indeterminacy and historical inaccuracies.
48
Nepper Larsen, Steen. „Compulsory Creativity: A Critique of Cognitive Capitalism“. Culture Unbound 6, Nr. 1 (20.02.2014): 159–77. http://dx.doi.org/10.3384/cu.2000.1525.146159.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
Contemporary capitalism can be labelled cognitive capitalism. In this dynamic, demanding and extremely transformative mode of production, knowledge becomes a strategic force of production and an important commodity, while concepts and ideas become items. This article sheds light on some of the implications of the emergence of a cognitive capitalism. In response to modern oxymorons, such as compulsory creativity and mandatory originality, this article offers various attempts to interpret and criticise how human inventiveness and a whole range of externalities get attuned to economic and market strategies, depriving them their natural, social and individual qualities. The aim of this article is to renew and sharpen a critique of the new type of capitalism and to foster some normative bricks that might be able to inspire alternative ways of thinking and living.
49
Billing, Andrew Geoffry. „Rousseau’s critique of market society: Property and possessive individualism in the Discours sur l’inégalité“. Journal of European Studies 48, Nr. 1 (26.01.2018): 3–19. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0047244117744090.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
Recent studies have drawn welcome attention to Rousseau’s often neglected economic ideas and his analysis of market society, property and exchange. However, they usually attempt to reconcile Rousseau’s distrust of market capitalism with his proposals for ‘autarchic’ model domestic and political economies. This critical quest for a synthesis risks obscuring the contemporary salience of Rousseau’s critique of market society and its institutions, centring on the material and social forces that conspire to produce what C. B. Macpherson termed the ‘possessive individual’. I argue that when evaluated independently of his utopian model communities, Rousseau’s critique of market capitalism comes into sharp focus as a broadly compelling account of the psychological investments that lead individuals in market economies to consent to market systems, despite the presence of substantial inequality, disparities of opportunity and outcome, and other negative externalities. Rousseau’s critique speaks to contemporary concerns over rises in inequality and the concentration of wealth in advanced capitalist economies, as well as to the relative political complacency that has accompanied these changes.
50
Erik Kristensen, Jens. „Kapitalismens nye ånd og økonomiske hamskifte - Boltanski og Chiapello og tesen om den kognitive kapitalisme“. Dansk Sociologi 19, Nr. 2 (21.04.2008): 87–108. http://dx.doi.org/10.22439/dansoc.v19i2.2555.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
Boltanski og Chiapellos må krediteres for at have rehabiliteret kapitalismekategorien og kapitalismekritikken i en sociologisk og postmarxistisk sammenhæng. Le Nouvel Esprit du capitalisme føjer sig imidlertid til andre forsøg på at forstå de aktuelle transformationer af økonomien og kapitalismen. Med deres fokus på kapitalismens nye ånd ser Boltanski og Chiapello delvist bort fra de økonomiske transformationer af kapitalismen som akkumulationsregime. Tesen er, at deres analyse derfor med held kan komplementeres med indsigterne fra et andet ambitiøst forsøg på at forstå den nye form for kapitalisme – nemlig teserne om den såkaldte kognitive kapitalisme.
ENGELSK ABSTRACT:
Jens Erik Kristensen: The New Spirit of Capitalism and the Shedding of the Economic
Boltanski and Chiapello must be credited for rehabilitating the category of ca-pitalism and capitalism critique in a sociological and post-Marxist context. However Le nouvel ésprit du capitalisme follows other attempts to understand the current transformations of the economy and of capitalism itself. In their focus on the new spirit of capitalism Boltanski and Chiapello ignore in part the eco-nomic transformations of capitalism as a regime of accumulation. The thesis of this article, therefore, is that their analysis can be complemented with insights from another ambitious attempt to understand the new forms of capitalism – namely the theses on the so-called cognitive capitalism.
Key words: New spirit of capitalism, cognitive capitalism, knowledge economy, the immaterial, exploitation, network.