AbstractThis article aims to incorporate the essential features of capitalism in an operational definition that identifies capitalism per se (pure laissez‐faire capitalism), and clearly excludes variations such as welfare capitalism and crony capitalism. By concisely highlighting the fundamental structures and mechanisms of capitalism, this essential definition facilitates defences of it that are more robust than those ordinarily offered. It also clarifies the relation between capitalism and phenomena with which it is frequently associated, and suggests a straightforward way of identifying and measuring the extent of capitalism in mixed economies.
"This book examines the dynamic ways in which millions of ethnic Chinese in East and Southeast Asian economies organize their economic activities. It analyses how Chinese capitalism has changed under conditions of contemporary globalization and anticipates what the future holds for it. The book challenges the conventional notion of Chinese capitalism as 'crony capitalism' based around kinship networks and untouched by globalization. Yeung argues rather that key actors are capable of taking advantage of their participation in globlization processes to significantly transform the nature and organization of Chinese capitalism in East and Southeast Asia. He concludes that the system that is emerging is neither distinctively Chinese nor converging towards the Anglo-American form of capitalism, but a hybrid of both."--Half title page
Cover -- Half Title -- Title Page -- Copyright Page -- Dedication -- Table of Contents -- Preface -- 1 Noncomparative justifications -- Marginal product as contribution -- Capitalist contribution as entrepreneurial activity -- Interest as time preference -- Interest as reward for waiting -- Profit as reward for risk -- Capitalism as just because it is just -- 2 Terms of comparison -- Capitalism: Laissez Faire -- Socialism: Economic Democracy -- 3 Capitalism or socialism?: efficiency -- The efficiency strengths of Laissez Faire -- How efficient is Economic Democracy? -- A comparison: X-efficiency -- Trouble for Laissez Faire: unemployment -- More trouble: the sales effort -- 4 Capitalism or socialism?: growth -- Innovation, risk, and reward: the entrepreneurial spirit -- What kind of growth? -- How fast to grow? -- Instability -- 5 Capitalism or socialism?: liberty, equality, democracy, autonomy -- Liberty -- Equality -- Democracy -- Meaningful work -- 6 Modern liberalism -- Keynesian-liberal "Fair Capitalism" -- Post-Keynesian "New Liberalism" -- 7 Transitions -- From advanced capitalism -- From command socialism -- From neocolonial underdevelopment -- 8 Other socialisms -- Command socialism -- Technocratic market socialism -- Marketless participatory socialism -- 9 Marxian reflections -- Communism -- Marxian paradoxes, Marxian hope -- Bibliography -- Index -- About the Book and Author
Zugriffsoptionen:
Die folgenden Links führen aus den jeweiligen lokalen Bibliotheken zum Volltext:
Coercive capitalism is development based on the use of force to dispossess either land or labor. Early macrosociologists, both functionalist and conflict-oriented, believed that feudal systems were based on the use of force but that capitalism is based on coercion-free free markets. Wallerstein argued that coercive capitalism exists in the periphery of world systems. We argue that coercion is endemic to all capitalism. Much of the land on which capitalism is based, including all of the Western Hemisphere, was seized from aboriginal populations. Land seizure was common in historic Europe. Forced labor existed until very recently in both bound apprenticeships and prison work crews. Coercion is used extensively in land acquisition for contemporary capitalism. It can take the form of legal sanctions exerted against the defenseless, or the use of paramilitaries and gangsters to exert pressure on the landholding poor.
Capitalism, what went wrong? -- Economics: a very concise history -- Adam Smith, morality, money, and markets -- Karl Marx, a critique of capitalism -- Max Weber, the Protestant ethic and the spirit of capitalism -- Postmodern capitalism -- Utopia or redemption? -- God and Mammon, a biblical perspective -- Theology and economics -- Common grace, wisdom, and virtue -- Faith, hope, and love, reclaiming the theological virtues -- Redeeming capitalism from the bottom up -- Redeeming capitalism from the top down
Global free enterprise must become more inclusive. Current development strategies are largely indifferent to ownership patterns, focusing instead on the flow of financial capital with no concern for who owns the capital. The only sensible way forward is broad-based indigenous ownership, including ownership by key stakeholders. Without a policy mix that results in more participative ownership patterning, development will be jeopardized & social stability endangered. 6 References. Adapted from the source document.
This PhD thesis is mainly based on a book published in 2006, Liberalism against capitalism (Paris, Fayard), which a revised and updated version is also included. The main aim is first to examine the contradictions between liberalism as defined in Adam Smith's Wealth of Nations and current economic practice: work without accounting value, antiliberal capital, capitalist state. It results from this that the widely shared synonymy between "liberalism" and "capitalism" is ideologically, and can be identified with totalitarianism in reference to Hannah Arendt's work, in this case a "soft totalitarianism". A distinction is made in the economic sphere between practices, norms (that shape practices), theories (that are supposed to reflect practices) and wording (which take the form of ideology). This distinction opens a way to think the economy in a radically different perspective, but in different way from John Rawls' Theory of Justice. In line with Ludwig Wittgenstein's analysis of language games, the aim here is to frame a new definition of economic actors and of the nature of their language (accounting language in particular). ; Cette thèse sur travaux s'appuie pour l'essentiel sur un ouvrage publié en 2006, Le libéralisme contre le capitalisme (Paris, Fayard), dont il est également proposé une version augmentée et mise à jour. Le propos consiste d'abord à examiner les contradictions entre le libéralisme tel qu'il est défini dans la Richesse des nations d'Adam Smith et la pratique économique contemporaine : travail sans valeur comptable, capital antilibéral, État capitaliste. Il en ressort que la synonymie largement partagée entre « libéralisme » et « capitalisme » relève de l'idéologie, idéologie que l'on peut qualifier de totalitarisme en référence au travail d'Hannah Arendt, en l'espèce de « totalitarisme mou ». Il est ainsi opéré dans la sphère économique une distinction entre les pratiques, les normes qui les façonnent, les théories censées rendre compte des pratiques, et les discours, pouvant prendre la forme ...
This PhD thesis is mainly based on a book published in 2006, Liberalism against capitalism (Paris, Fayard), which a revised and updated version is also included. The main aim is first to examine the contradictions between liberalism as defined in Adam Smith's Wealth of Nations and current economic practice: work without accounting value, antiliberal capital, capitalist state. It results from this that the widely shared synonymy between "liberalism" and "capitalism" is ideologically, and can be identified with totalitarianism in reference to Hannah Arendt's work, in this case a "soft totalitarianism". A distinction is made in the economic sphere between practices, norms (that shape practices), theories (that are supposed to reflect practices) and wording (which take the form of ideology). This distinction opens a way to think the economy in a radically different perspective, but in different way from John Rawls' Theory of Justice. In line with Ludwig Wittgenstein's analysis of language games, the aim here is to frame a new definition of economic actors and of the nature of their language (accounting language in particular). ; Cette thèse sur travaux s'appuie pour l'essentiel sur un ouvrage publié en 2006, Le libéralisme contre le capitalisme (Paris, Fayard), dont il est également proposé une version augmentée et mise à jour. Le propos consiste d'abord à examiner les contradictions entre le libéralisme tel qu'il est défini dans la Richesse des nations d'Adam Smith et la pratique économique contemporaine : travail sans valeur comptable, capital antilibéral, État capitaliste. Il en ressort que la synonymie largement partagée entre « libéralisme » et « capitalisme » relève de l'idéologie, idéologie que l'on peut qualifier de totalitarisme en référence au travail d'Hannah Arendt, en l'espèce de « totalitarisme mou ». Il est ainsi opéré dans la sphère économique une distinction entre les pratiques, les normes qui les façonnent, les théories censées rendre compte des pratiques, et les discours, pouvant prendre la forme ...
This PhD thesis is mainly based on a book published in 2006, Liberalism against capitalism (Paris, Fayard), which a revised and updated version is also included. The main aim is first to examine the contradictions between liberalism as defined in Adam Smith's Wealth of Nations and current economic practice: work without accounting value, antiliberal capital, capitalist state. It results from this that the widely shared synonymy between "liberalism" and "capitalism" is ideologically, and can be identified with totalitarianism in reference to Hannah Arendt's work, in this case a "soft totalitarianism". A distinction is made in the economic sphere between practices, norms (that shape practices), theories (that are supposed to reflect practices) and wording (which take the form of ideology). This distinction opens a way to think the economy in a radically different perspective, but in different way from John Rawls' Theory of Justice. In line with Ludwig Wittgenstein's analysis of language games, the aim here is to frame a new definition of economic actors and of the nature of their language (accounting language in particular). ; Cette thèse sur travaux s'appuie pour l'essentiel sur un ouvrage publié en 2006, Le libéralisme contre le capitalisme (Paris, Fayard), dont il est également proposé une version augmentée et mise à jour. Le propos consiste d'abord à examiner les contradictions entre le libéralisme tel qu'il est défini dans la Richesse des nations d'Adam Smith et la pratique économique contemporaine : travail sans valeur comptable, capital antilibéral, État capitaliste. Il en ressort que la synonymie largement partagée entre « libéralisme » et « capitalisme » relève de l'idéologie, idéologie que l'on peut qualifier de totalitarisme en référence au travail d'Hannah Arendt, en l'espèce de « totalitarisme mou ». Il est ainsi opéré dans la sphère économique une distinction entre les pratiques, les normes qui les façonnent, les théories censées rendre compte des pratiques, et les discours, pouvant prendre la forme ...
