Suchergebnisse

This paper analyzes key aspects of Marx's theory of money in order to reassert its continued relevance for understanding monetary developments in contemporary capitalism. Unlike theorists who become preoccupied with particular functions and forms of money, Marx develops a comprehensive concept of money integrating its various functions and emphasizing the socio-economic basis of its existence. Money performs different functions including a measure of value, a means of purchase/exchange, a means of payment, and a means of hoarding, which are independent of money's concrete forms. The functions of money as a means of purchase and means of payment relate to each other as money (income) and credit (money), which are fundamentally different. The quantity and availability of credit (money) may be influenced by the activities of the central bank and the private banking system. Credit (money), however, can only become money (income) if and when it enters the domain of social production as an embodiment of the value of social labor and social purchasing power. This inextricable link between money and social production sets natural limits to the ability of monetary policy to influence both monetary and non-monetary developments in contemporary capitalism. An analysis grounded in Marx's theory of money can provide insights into a range of contemporary monetary phenomena including hoarding, the rush to liquidity during financial crises, the scramble for government debt as a source of ultimate liquidity, and the limits to conventional and unconventional monetary policy. JEL Classification: E4, E5, B51, E6

Capitalism as a mode of production and a form of social organization differs from all hitherto existing society in that it does not rely on the preservation of traditional hierarchies or on direct coercion to secure its reproduction. Capitalist society coheres on the basis of exchange which establishes a network of interdependent relations between individuals. Drawing on the work of Alfred Sohn-Rethel, this article engages with the apparent paradox of how the reproduction of class society takes the form of spontaneous exchange transactions between autonomous individuals. The article explores the argument that the conceptual basis of cognition is historically and socially conditioned, and highlights the unique identity between the structure of exchange and the conceptual mode of thinking. Finally, the article demonstrates how the hidden character of social domination and 'the secret identity' of commodity form and thought form serve to systematically obscure the true origins and nature of fundamental social problems. The case in point is the popular topic of rising inequality in the United States, a direct outcome of the reproduction of class relations, the underlying cause of which – the deepening division of intellectual and manual labor – is either conveniently ignored or, worse still, glorified.

This paper challenges prevailing accounts of the financial origins of the Great Recession by engaging two distinct theoretical perspectives originating in Karl Marx and Hyman Minsky. The paper argues that the domestic and global, financial and "real" origins of the crisis are deeply intertwined as the financialization of the U.S. economy and the globalization of production are inextricably linked. Thus, the merits of a Marxian interpretation of the crisis surpass those of the Minskyan for at least two reasons. First, the structural causes of the Great Recession lie not in the U.S. financial sector but in the system of globalized production which reflects the growing unevenness of capital accumulation on a planetary scale, manifested in the global imbalances. Second, the belief that social problems have monetary or financial origins, and could be resolved by tinkering with money and financial institutions, is fundamentally flawed, for the very recurrence of crises attests to the limits of fiscal and monetary policies as means to ensure "balanced" accumulation. [Reprinted by permission of Sage Publications Inc., copyright holder.]

Dieser Beitrag ist mit Zustimmung des Rechteinhabers aufgrund einer (DFG-geförderten) Allianz- bzw. Nationallizenz frei zugänglich. - This publication is with permission of the rights owner freely accessible due to an Alliance licence and a national licence (funded by the DFG, German Research Foundation) respectively.

This paper challenges prevailing accounts of the financial origins of the Great Recession by engaging two distinct theoretical perspectives originating in Karl Marx and Hyman Minsky. The paper argues that the domestic and global, financial and "real" origins of the crisis are deeply intertwined as the financialization of the U.S. economy and the globalization of production are inextricably linked. Thus, the merits of a Marxian interpretation of the crisis surpass those of the Minskyan for at least two reasons. First, the structural causes of the Great Recession lie not in the U.S. financial sector but in the system of globalized production which reflects the growing unevenness of capital accumulation on a planetary scale, manifested in the global imbalances. Second, the belief that social problems have monetary or financial origins, and could be resolved by tinkering with money and financial institutions, is fundamentally flawed, for the very recurrence of crises attests to the limits of fiscal and monetary policies as means to ensure "balanced" accumulation. JEL Codes: E40, E50, E60, F30, F40, F50

This paper examines the historical evolution of housing in the context of US capitalism, highlighting the significance of homeownership as an ideology and social practice for the reproduction of hegemony in the USA. The paper challenges widely held views that identify public policy errors and government regulatory failures as primary causes of the recent housing boom and bust. Its purpose is to show how the subprime solution that triggered the housing collapse organically evolved out of the growth imperative to keep harnessing the socioeconomic benefits of homeownership. The demise of this model signals the failure of the profit-seeking system of privatized housing provision to overcome the limits of production based on capital.

Starting with an inquiry into the socio-material foundations of American-style consumer capitalism as it emerged under Fordism and evolved under neoliberalism, this article seeks to outline the origins of the present economic crisis and the possible implications for the future of consumerism. The article argues that the ongoing crisis in the USA is not a regular cyclical downturn but signifies the end of finance-driven consumer capitalism as an accumulation regime whose key features can be summed up as debt-financed mass consumption of largely offshore produced goods and 'wealth creation' through rapidly appreciating asset values. The crisis qualifies as systemic in that various disproportionalities of the capitalist mode of production have resurfaced at the same time. While debt-driven consumer capitalism seems damaged to the extent of being no longer operable, the contours of a 'post-consumerist' future are not yet in sight.