Hayek, Marx, and socialism -- Hayek's postmodern economics -- Hayek's theory of the common good: social evolution, law, and justice -- Recasting Hayek's good society: the non-neutrality of the law and the market -- Social justice and Hayekian knowledge problems -- Socialist appropriative justice and the labor-managed firm -- Socialist distributive justice and the stakeholder society -- Socialism after Hayek
Zugriffsoptionen:
Die folgenden Links führen aus den jeweiligen lokalen Bibliotheken zum Volltext:
In: Rethinking marxism: RM ; a journal of economics, culture, and society ; official journal of the Association for Economic and Social Analysis, Band 34, Heft 2, S. 212-217
In: Rethinking marxism: RM ; a journal of economics, culture, and society ; official journal of the Association for Economic and Social Analysis, Band 22, Heft 4, S. 518-523
In: Rethinking marxism: RM ; a journal of economics, culture, and society ; official journal of the Association for Economic and Social Analysis, Band 16, Heft 2, S. 207-209
In: Rethinking marxism: RM ; a journal of economics, culture, and society ; official journal of the Association for Economic and Social Analysis, Band 16, Heft 2, S. 207-209
This paper offers a comment on George DeMartino's insightful paper that proposes a tripartite notion of class justice. For DeMartino, class justice involves productive justice, appropriative justice, & distributive justice. The paper argues for a strong definition of appropriative justice, which would limit appropriation to productive workers, as would exist in the case of worker-owned firms. It argues against a weak definition of appropriative justice, which would permit appropriation by the entire community, because of its association with the widely discredited model of central planning. 5 References. Adapted from the source document.
In: Rethinking marxism: RM ; a journal of economics, culture, and society ; official journal of the Association for Economic and Social Analysis, Band 10, Heft 2, S. 96-105
Responds to Stephen Cullenberg's, David L. Prychitko's, & Peter Boettke's (all, 1998) comments on Burczak's "Socialism after Hayek" (1996/97), concentrating on recurrent themes they raised, among them the value of abolishing the wage-for-labor time contract as a central path for abolishing capitalist exploitation. In contrast to the commentators, it is insisted that this contract must be dismantled if workers are to appropriate the surplus-labor & -value they formerly sold to firms. Austrian commentators raise this issue, but situate it in the context of notions of consent, entrepreneurship, & the limits of human responsibility for the production process. From this perspective, the suggestion that socialization of firms must be accompanied by a welfare state to provide for basic needs is unproductive because it cannot ensure social justice. In contrast to the Austrian view, it is argued that justice is less a matter of aggregating individual preferences, than of objective relationships between individuals in the context of a given form of economic relations. 11 References. D. Ryfe
In: Rethinking marxism: RM ; a journal of economics, culture, and society ; official journal of the Association for Economic and Social Analysis, Band 9, Heft 3, S. 1-18