Suchergebnisse

Tranzicijski put koji je počeo raspadom jugoslavenskog socijalističkog sustava i prijelazom na demokratski sustav, i danas usporava razvoj hrvatskog društva. Za objašnjenje tog makro-sociološkog društvenog procesa koristi se alat analitičke sociologije: kauzalni mehanizam. Kauzalni mehanizam omogućuje plauzibilno objašnjenje makro-sociološkog odnosa pomoću mikro-sociološke dimenzije. Spuštanjem na razinu aktera dobivamo uvid u mehanizme koji su pomogli stvaranju ortačkog kapitalizma. Tako je situacija, u kojoj su se našli članovi HDZ-a nakon uvjerljive pobjede na izborima, gdje su dobili pristup državnim resursima i direktan utjecaj na proces privatizacije, stvorila kod drugih aktera vjerovanje da se članstvom u HDZ-u može profitirati. To vjerovanje otvorilo je prostor za nepotizam i korupciju, jer se suradnja s vladajućima u tom trenutku činila optimalnom (brza materijalna korist). Kada se takav način djelovanja usustavio, dogodila se transformacija u sustav ortačkog kapitalizma. ; The transitional path began with the decomposition of a socialistic system of Yugoslavia and with the transition to a democratic system. That transitional path is still slowing down the development of Croatia. To explain that macro-sociological phenomena we will use the casual mechanism which is used in analytical sociology. Casual mechanism will give us the plausible explanation of macro-sociological relation by observing micro-sociological dimension. Observing the agent enables us to see the mechanisms that helped to create crony capitalism. The situation, where members of HDZ have won the election, and have taken the control of government and its resources, where they have had a big influence on the process of privatization. That situation helped to create the belief that cooperation with HDZ will benefit agents that wanted to participate in the process of privatization. That belief enabled nepotism and corruption, because agents believed that they will benefit from cooperation with HDZ. When such an agency becomes a pattern, ...

The paper deals with the protection of the private and public spheres in surveillance capitalism. Predictions on consumer behaviour or the so-called behavioural surpluses are extracted from the set of collected (big) data of users/consumers from the so-called digital footprints, which become intelligence data, commodities on the data market. In addition to predicting user behaviour, various behavioural techniques push, or nudge users in a particular desired consumer or political direction or action, or dark nudge techniques when it comes to unauthorized data collection on users in the digital sphere. Surveiling and nudging users is done in the range from caring for their health, well-being and benefits, as well as general and public well-being, to encouraging expenditure, desired behaviour or voting in the desired direction of subjects who create such incentives (corporations, political parties, governments, etc.). The subject of the paper is based on behavioural economics which has introduced behavioural techniques in the field of public policy. The author proposes conceptual model of protective and active approach in the era of surveillance capitalism in the private and public spheres. An overview of the current digital regulation in the EU is given, and the need for further development of the legislative framework that will regulate the issues of supervision and protection of privacy and user data is pointed out. ; Rad se bavi zaštitom privatne i javne sfere u nadzirućem kapitalizmu. Iz skupa prikupljenih (big data) podataka korisnika/potrošača iz tzv. digitalnih otisaka ekstrahiraju se predviđanja o ponašanju korisnika ili tzv. bihevioralni višak koja postaju izvjesnice (intelligence podaci), roba na tržištu podataka. Osim predviđanja ponašanja korisnika, različitim se bihevioralnim tehnikama korisnike "gura" ili "potiče" (nudge) u određenom željenom potrošačkom ili političkom smjeru ili djelovanju, a kada je riječ o neovlaštenom prikupljanju podataka o korisnicima u digitalnoj sferi, radi se o dark nudge ...

Austerity has in recent years become established as the European response to crisis. The necessity of fiscal consolidation is often expressed with a vocabulary evocative of guilt and imagined pleasure. It should therefore not surprise us that austerity recently became subject to Lacanian psychoanalysis, building on Todd McGowan's thesis on the transition from the society of prohibition to the society of commanded enjoyment. The current literature recognizes the dichotomy of spirits of capitalism: the first, ascetic and thrifty spirit demanding private sacrifice and the second, consumer spirit demanding specifically private enjoyment in the name of social duty. These spirits of capitalism are strategies for dealing with the loss of jouissance necessitated by the acceptance of symbolic order through socialization. The Phallic fantasy of full, uncastrated enjoyment is channelled through the strategy of deferral, aiming for full enjoyment in undetermined future (first spirit) or the repetitive attempt of immediate fulfilment (second spirit). Author supplements the existing argument in two crucial ways. Firstly, he traces the ways in which spirits of capitalism are mirrored in the changing positions of the political-economic mainstream. Secondly, using Arrighi's analysis of systemic cycles of accumulation, the author offers an additional structural component to the spirits of capitalism pendulum. Adapted from the source document.

The author's starting point in this article is a presupposition that the laissez faire tradition in economy and politics is legitimate. Still, the globalization processes point out the weaknesses of that presupposition. The author shows that the politicians (and theorists) of the most powerful countries have joined the antiglobalization camp. They no longer hold to the spirit of unity and humanity, and they spread capitalism with unpopular means: political and military might. In that sense the author points out to evidence that leads to a conclusion that the chances for a liberal political and economic philosophy are very weak. In fact, it is only an ideal. That is the sad result of the globalization process to date after the promise of Fukuyama's 'End of History'. Still, the author believes that not everything is lost. Adapted from the source document.

The author's starting point in this article is a presupposition that the laissez faire tradition in economy and politics is legitimate. Still, the globalization processes point out the weaknesses of that presupposition. The author shows that the politicians (and theorists) of the most powerful countries have joined the antiglobalization camp. They no longer hold to the spirit of unity and humanity, and they spread capitalism with unpopular means: political and military might. In that sense the author points out to evidence that leads to a conclusion that the chances for a liberal political and economic philosophy are very weak. In fact, it is only an ideal. That is the sad result of the globalization process to date after the promise of Fukuyama's 'End of History'. Still, the author believes that not everything is lost. Adapted from the source document.

The work General Theory of Modernity prompts us to reflect on & understand modernity as a fusion of two constitutive moments: the declarative moment, as an affirmation of the right to emancipation which is capable of constant revolutionary extension, & capitalism, which is simultaneously dynamic & revolutionary, a system both destructive & exploitative. There are two wrong ways of understanding this fusion. According to the liberal understanding, the declarative moment is accomplished in capitalism. According to the vulgar Marxist understanding, the emancipatory moment is a mere ideological illusion. Bidet's concept of "metastructure" offers a possibility of a more adequate understanding of the fusion. In Bidet's understanding of the metastructure of modernity, which is based on a specific reading & reconstruction of Marx's Capital, the metastructure designates a general matrix of possibilities of combining market & organization, as basic structural characteristics of modern society. The author critically disproves such an approach. It is better to start from the structure, from an analysis of capitalism, & show that capitalism also opens up emancipatory horizons which make it possible to refute capitalism. An adequate understanding of modernity requires an adequate theory of capitalism rather than a general theory of modernity. Such an approach does not reduce the normative discourse to some sort of super-structural epiphenomenon. It is logically quite possible to assert that certain principles & ideals emerge in a concrete historical context, but one can also assert that the contents of those principles & ideals transcend that context. Adapted from the source document.

This paper gives an overview of the development of comparative political economy from its early & theoretically unarticulated attempts to the higher precision of comparison achieved more recently. Comparative political economy refers mostly to the comparison of developed capitalist countries, especially rich Western democracies. The main contributions to the field are described & critically analyzed in light of different opinions. The final part poses some questions regarding the future advancement of the discipline. References. Adapted from the source document.

The analysis is focused on punctual examination of the analytical potential of theory as regards the empirical sphere. For this purpose, the author opted for theoretical theses regarding the internationalization of capitalism and the case of Croatia. Unlike the usual scientific practice, in which the theoretical framework is perceived as a pre-formalised and static element of the research design, it is postulated in this paper that a different understanding of the theoretical perspective is possible and analytically useful. Such an understanding is based on dynamisation, flexibilisation and opening up of the theoretical horizon with a view of reflecting the particularities of the empirical sphere. Here the potential of theoretical insights is examined simultaneously with the conducting of empirical analysis. In this approach, which partly relies on the Grounded Theory and symbolic interactionism, the reexamination of the potential of theory is not limited to the research design stage. No, it is perceived as a process the course of which is intense even while the empirical analysis is conducted. Accordingly, it is assumed that the usual way does not make possible a sufficient reflection of the particular traits and surprises in the empirical field, for the following reasons: a) the character of the theoretical theses determined in advance is too general, and/or b) the theses are extrapolated from socially and historically different, or, at best, somewhat similar empirical cases. Furthermore, every pre-determined theoretical focusing simultaneously implies a reduction of perspective which should be avoided through recognition of empirical circumstances. In addition to putting forward a methodology of examination, the demonstrated approach to examining the potential of theoretical theses is oriented toward identification of the possibilities and limits of the chosen theoretical apparatus. The examination of possibilities and limits is understood as the basis of theoretisation, with the aim of generating theoretical fragments of concepts which would be able to reflect the peculiar and new empirical circumstances. Adapted from the source document.

The author demonstrates the non-existence of a consistent theory of market and of the modern capitalist system. Only a conceptual analysis is possible which is more revealing of the methodologies of various theoretical trajectories and a comparative analysis of different viewpoints and theoretical contradictions in relation to historical reality. The fundamental theoretical accomplishment of Strpic's analysis is that it offers a fertile core of clarification of market society and capitalism. The search for modern political economy opens up three aspects of the crisis of capitalism and of its economic theory. The political strategy of laissez faire in the beginning of the 20th century brought about the Great Depression (1929-1933), and the theoretical and political turn to Keynesianism (1936). In the 1970s the great stagflation (1971-1980) cleared the path for the neo-liberal theoretical counterrevolution (1972). In the period of the Great Recession (2007-2012) the necessity is imposed on us of a new theoretical turn in the direction of anti-neo-liberalism. Market economy and its invisible hand cannot be simply suppressed into closed out theoretical systems; the economists overlooked precisely this simplification and abstraction from real relations. Strpic's theoretical project of the Modern Normal and matrix-capitalism makes it possible to read in a new way the incommensurability of theoretical paradigms, not as a unified theory but as a developmental project which is prerequisite for explaining the character of the present crisis and the dynamic development of the modern transformation of capitalism. Adapted from the source document.

The cleavages at the EU level can be defined by means of two dimensions: the first dimension is the left-right conflict & the second is the national-supranational conflict. Between the left & the supranational dimension there are political actors who advocate the policy of regulated capitalism while along the right-national dimension there are the partisans of the neoliberal approach. While the first think that the strengthening of the EU institutions is justified (the supranational level) & they champion the legislation that emphasizes the social-democratic dimension, the neoliberals promote the deregulation of economic activities at the EU level & the strengthening of the roles of national governments. Ideologically, the sympathizers of the regulated capitalism are represented by social-democratic & socialist parties, while the neoliberal model enjoyers the support of a wide array of populist, Christian-democrat, liberal & conservative political parties. Since the 1988 reform, the EU regional policy has been increasingly seen as a vehicle of the supporters of the regulated capitalism. At the same time, the regional policy facilitates a number of interactions based on the cooperation of the supranational, national & regional bodies. Figures, References. Adapted from the source document.

The author reminds us that only after the Second Vatican Council did Catholicism change its reserved stance regarding contemporary politics & economy by starting to advocate a more positive political involvement of Catholic laity. However, it can be said that the political activism of Catholics confined to Christian-Democratic parties came to grief. This has been not solely the consequence of the ethical decadence of Christian Democratic politicians but also of increased secularization, which calls for a variety of forms of political activism on the part of Christians. Regarding the structuring of economy, the author goes along with the widespread belief in the superiority of capitalism over a totalitarian communist economy. At the same time, however, Christianity cannot accept "rampant capitalism" nor accept profit as the sole measure of good economic management, but must voice its views for social & humanistic correctives. Adapted from the source document.

This contribution to the discussion about Dag Strpic's book Karl Marx and the Political Economy of Modernity focuses on the author's assessment that the weakening of US economic hegemony is questionable, especially with regard to the future prospects of capitalism (and its development), and prefers to speak of a "redesign" thereof. Accordingly, this article analyses in detail three aspects of capitalism redesign: the causal, the contingent and the functional aspects. Regarding causality, the partial redistribution of leading roles in world economy is caused by the introduction of new methods, from industrial and media technology to financial speculations and new wars -- which make profit-making possible. Regarding contingency, the shift in the centre provides opportunity for a small number of countries, such as China, India and Brazil, which are endowed with capitalist "talent" (in the sense of combining the policy of resource mobilization with elements of positive evaluation of labour in the local culture), to climb the ladder of successful development. The functional aspects indicate the favourable effects of the shift in the centre not only for newcomers to the club of the most developed, but also to the USA. The financialization of (primarily American) economy, along with giving over leadership to other industrial powers in many branches of industrial production, and in the rate of economic growth -- i.e. with a "new division of labour" in the centre -- gives to the US some sort of "aristocratic" status in the world of capitalism. Such a status is not incompatible with the cyclic process of capitalism development. Instead of a dialectical leap toward socialism, it rather aspires to a partial restoration of feudalism, as a global order of strong states in the centre and weak or apparent states on the margins. This, however, is not the worst possible ending of modern history. If a much more pronounced decline of US economic power in favour of the newcomers were to occur, this would probably strengthen the brutality of capitalism rather than weaken it. Provided that, in the EU, the trend of further decomposition of the welfare state is stopped, and the indispensable balance between the requirements of economic growth and of social solidarity and general well-being is restored, only a genuine and comprehensive "Europeanization" of the capitalist system could make possible the emergence of a global capitalism with a human face, and probably also of a world state which would provide for a balanced development of all parts of the world. Adapted from the source document.

The author is deconstructing the logics and the consequences of 'structural adaptation' to the laws of the market and profit in Serbia from the 1960s until today. The paper consists of three systematic parts. The first one is a description of the period from 1965 to 1991. It is shown that the roots of capitalist restoration can be found in economical reforms undertaken within nominal socialism, which opened the way for a more free action of the market mechanisms. The second part of the paper is dedicated to the so-called 'Milosevic period' (1991 - 2001) during which, under the auspices of degenerated political capitalism and in a blocked context, the process of structural adaptation continues, in favour of the continuative nomenclature of the former collective owners, or the new class of lumpenbourgeoisie information. The third part is an analysis of the neoliberal period after the 'democratic' changes in 2001 and the character of its own comprador political capitalism, which enters the final phase of the structural adaptation and redistribution of wealth towards the higher classes. Based on the results of the analysis, the author concludes that the process of a decade of destruction of Serbian society was conditioned by an agenda, i.e. it was conditioned by class interests. Adapted from the source document.