Suchergebnisse

Introduction PART I: CAPITALIST BARRIERS TO GROWTH 1. The Origin of the Problem. A General Outline of the Work 2. The Russian Dispute Over Markets. From the Narodniks to Lenin 3. Aggregate Demand and the Accumulation of Capital 4. The Unsuccessful Attempt to Complete Marx's Scheme or Reproduction 5. The Misunderstanding Around the Role of Money in the Process of Capital Accumulation 6. Appendix I: The Theoretical-analytical Significance of the Reproduction Schemes 7. Appendix II: Critics and Heirs of Rosa Luxemburg PART II: THE THEORY OF ACCUMULATION IN RELATION TO IMPERIALISM 8. The Historic Conditions of Capital Accumulation 9. Militarism and Economic Growth 10. Imperialism and the Process of Capitalist Decline 11. Rudolf Hilferding's Theory of Finance Capital 12. V.I. Lenin on Imperialism and the Accumulation of Capital

In the 1980s and 90s, renowned Polish economist Tadeusz Kowalik played a leading role in the Solidarity movement, struggling alongside workers for an alternative to "really-existing socialism" that was cooperative and controlled by the workers themselves. In the ensuing two decades, "really-existing" socialism has collapsed, capitalism has been restored, and Poland is now among the most unequal countries in the world. Kowalik asks, how could this happen in a country that once had the largest and most militant labor movement in Europe? This book takes readers inside the debates within Solidar

Professor Tadeusz Kowalik (1926-2012) was the most outstanding Polish economist of social-democratic convictions in the post-1989 period. In the very first issue of WFES [vol. 1, no 1 (1)] we published his significant paper pertaining to the relation between economy and sociology (Is Cooperation of Sociologists and Economists Possible and if so When?). In the preface to the previous issue [vol. 3, no 1 (5)] we announced an article containing a synthetic presentation of Professor Kowaliks most essential views on political economy featured in selected works published in his final years. In this issue of WFES we hold our word and deliver the article as promised.

There is already a rich literature on property transformations in Poland. However, in this literature, works considering them from the point of view of respecting principles of social justice if we leave out of consideration the calming statement that prii>atisation by its very nature could not be fair. These are rarely considered from the point of view that would seem obvious — of observing the principles of social justice. An exception here would be the appeasing statement, frequently expressed especially during the first years of transformation, that privatisation by its very nature could not have been fair. Indeed, perhaps it could not have been fully fair. But did it have to be so blatantly unfair? Taking up this theme, it is worth departing from a bipolar view (just or unjust) in favour of the concept of graded justice. Let's try to look at some of the most promising (even programmatic) threads of privatisation in Poland (even if only provided by the programme) through the prism of the principles of social justice which are after all part of the Constitution. Analysing the problem of the relation between ownership transformation and the idea of social justice, the author examines in turn: ignoring of the idea of "democratic ownership" by the economic and political elites which had a direct impact on the processes of privatisation, the problem of employee-owned companies, the idea of mass privatisation programme implemented in the National Investment Fund Programme, the Pact on State-owned Enterprise (as interpreted by Jacek Kuroń). Finally, the author proposes a thesis that Polish privatisation is of an elitist character and large groups of society are excluded from participating in it.

The article investigates number of areas that could attract interest of both economists and sociologists. The 'Variety of Capitalism' concept is employed as the point of departure for the discussion on diversity of national economic models within the European Union (EU) with the particular emphasis on the trajectory of Poland's economic development since 1989. Acknowledging the fact that there are mixed economies in the modern world, is the key to opening a new field of debate and research. Th e author argues that the issues discussed in his article should be the subject of multi-angled approach exercised by scholars representing various branches of social science.

Reflects on the outcome of the Polish revolution in the 1990s as a revolution of epigones. This revolution is considered a pale imitation of the earlier bourgeois revolution in two senses: workers lost the first revolution at the political rather than social level, & gained a measure of labor protection in the form of higher wages & shorter work hours. In contemporary Poland, a primitive form of 19th-century capitalism is ascendant, while workers' rights have been forsaken. The result has been unemployment, impoverishment, & growing class inequalities. This situation is explained as a consequence of missteps within Solidarity, a group that rose to power so quickly that it was incapable of forming a coherent response to the new conditions of the postrevolutionary era. It is conceded that the rapid marketization of the economy might have been rational in the context of increasing European integration & internationalization. However, this context has yet to emerge, & Solidarity has remained committed to supporting antilabor legislative initiatives. It is concluded that, if Solidarity does not change its political stance, it risks becoming further weakened. D. M. Ryfe

In the post-communist countries (PCC) several phenomena reminiscent of primitive capital accumulation (mass and permanent unemployment, impoverishment of the majority of people, growing criminality) have emerged. The PCC have to "tread the tortuous road" of a primitive accumulation of capital, well known since eighteenth-century England and other Western countries. Such a point of view has been expounded earlier by Bauman in the IPSR. He based his view on two assumptions: that these countries have backward, pre-industrial economies and that the transition to a market economy must be correlated with growing income disparities as a precondition of rapid economic growth. Hence, an impoverishment or at least a delay in gratification of the large social groups is inevitable. The argument in this article is that both assumptions are false.