Contradictions of Economic Globalization
In: Nature, society, and thought: NST ; a journal of dialectical and historical materialism, Band 15, Heft 3, S. 317-320
ISSN: 0890-6130
27892 Ergebnisse
Sortierung:
In: Nature, society, and thought: NST ; a journal of dialectical and historical materialism, Band 15, Heft 3, S. 317-320
ISSN: 0890-6130
In: Political Economy in a Globalized World, S. 107-204
International audience ; For mercantilism, the main objective of economic action is to increase the power of the Prince (Machiavelli). With the rise of capitalism and the market economy, liberal economists strongly criticized state management of the national economy. The centralization of political power was often seen as a major brake on the market economy and thus on economic development. Since 1990, the history of capitalism seems to have stopped being written within national borders. We are moving from the wealth of nations to the wealth of the world. However, despite the existence of the World Trade Organization, there is in fact no supranational authority capable of imposing rules on multinational markets, which are often speculative and interested mainly in short-term profit, thus threatening the sovereignty of nations. Yet market system generalization is often perceived as a factor of democracy. This statement is debatable. As states have lost most of their economic power, the electorate is the victim of a democratic illusion comparable to Keynes' monetary illusion. The risk is the progressive establishment of international plutocratic systems which, within each state, will defend private interests, sometimes in competition from state to state. War and economic war are not over. ; Pour le mercantilisme, l'objectif principal de l'action économique est d'accroître le pouvoir du Prince (Machiavel). Avec l'essor du capitalisme et de l'économie de marché, les économistes libéraux ont fortement critiqué la gestion étatique de l'économie nationale. La centralisation du pouvoir politique était souvent considérée comme un frein majeur à l'économie de marché et donc au développement économique. Depuis 1990, l'histoire du capitalisme semble avoir cessé de s'écrire à l'intérieur des frontières nationales. On passe de la richesse des nations à la richesse du monde. Cependant, malgré l'existence de l'Organisation mondiale du commerce, il n'existe en fait aucune autoritésupranationale capable d'imposer des règles aux ...
BASE
International audience ; For mercantilism, the main objective of economic action is to increase the power of the Prince (Machiavelli). With the rise of capitalism and the market economy, liberal economists strongly criticized state management of the national economy. The centralization of political power was often seen as a major brake on the market economy and thus on economic development. Since 1990, the history of capitalism seems to have stopped being written within national borders. We are moving from the wealth of nations to the wealth of the world. However, despite the existence of the World Trade Organization, there is in fact no supranational authority capable of imposing rules on multinational markets, which are often speculative and interested mainly in short-term profit, thus threatening the sovereignty of nations. Yet market system generalization is often perceived as a factor of democracy. This statement is debatable. As states have lost most of their economic power, the electorate is the victim of a democratic illusion comparable to Keynes' monetary illusion. The risk is the progressive establishment of international plutocratic systems which, within each state, will defend private interests, sometimes in competition from state to state. War and economic war are not over. ; Pour le mercantilisme, l'objectif principal de l'action économique est d'accroître le pouvoir du Prince (Machiavel). Avec l'essor du capitalisme et de l'économie de marché, les économistes libéraux ont fortement critiqué la gestion étatique de l'économie nationale. La centralisation du pouvoir politique était souvent considérée comme un frein majeur à l'économie de marché et donc au développement économique. Depuis 1990, l'histoire du capitalisme semble avoir cessé de s'écrire à l'intérieur des frontières nationales. On passe de la richesse des nations à la richesse du monde. Cependant, malgré l'existence de l'Organisation mondiale du commerce, il n'existe en fait aucune autoritésupranationale capable d'imposer des règles aux ...
BASE
International audience ; For mercantilism, the main objective of economic action is to increase the power of the Prince (Machiavelli). With the rise of capitalism and the market economy, liberal economists strongly criticized state management of the national economy. The centralization of political power was often seen as a major brake on the market economy and thus on economic development. Since 1990, the history of capitalism seems to have stopped being written within national borders. We are moving from the wealth of nations to the wealth of the world. However, despite the existence of the World Trade Organization, there is in fact no supranational authority capable of imposing rules on multinational markets, which are often speculative and interested mainly in short-term profit, thus threatening the sovereignty of nations. Yet market system generalization is often perceived as a factor of democracy. This statement is debatable. As states have lost most of their economic power, the electorate is the victim of a democratic illusion comparable to Keynes' monetary illusion. The risk is the progressive establishment of international plutocratic systems which, within each state, will defend private interests, sometimes in competition from state to state. War and economic war are not over. ; Pour le mercantilisme, l'objectif principal de l'action économique est d'accroître le pouvoir du Prince (Machiavel). Avec l'essor du capitalisme et de l'économie de marché, les économistes libéraux ont fortement critiqué la gestion étatique de l'économie nationale. La centralisation du pouvoir politique était souvent considérée comme un frein majeur à l'économie de marché et donc au développement économique. Depuis 1990, l'histoire du capitalisme semble avoir cessé de s'écrire à l'intérieur des frontières nationales. On passe de la richesse des nations à la richesse du monde. Cependant, malgré l'existence de l'Organisation mondiale du commerce, il n'existe en fait aucune autoritésupranationale capable d'imposer des règles aux ...
BASE
In: International studies quarterly: the journal of the International Studies Association, Band 54, Heft 4, S. 1099-1122
ISSN: 0020-8833, 1079-1760
In: On Global Order, S. 194-215
In: The journal of politics: JOP, Band 67, Heft 4, S. 1228-1247
ISSN: 1468-2508
In: Annual Review of Political Science, Band 12, S. 163-181
SSRN
In: Annual Review of Political Science, Band 12
SSRN
In: Annual review of political science, Band 12, S. 163-182
ISSN: 1094-2939
In: International studies quarterly: the journal of the International Studies Association, Band 51, Heft 4, S. 855-876
ISSN: 1468-2478
In: International affairs: a Russian journal of world politics, diplomacy and international relations, Band 56, Heft 3, S. 231-239
ISSN: 0130-9641
The article reviews V. S. Pan'kov's "Globalizatsiia ekonomiki: sushchnost, proiaveleniia, vyzovy i vozmozhnosti dlia Rossii" ["Globalization of the Economy: Essence, Manifestations, Challenges, and Opportunities for Russia"]. The study under review is oriented toward the comprehensive resolution of problems relating to the evolution of Russia as a subject, and not only an object, of globalization. The value of the monograph largely lies in its use of sources from a variety of different countries, including Russia. Pan'kov avoids conventional and superficial definitions of economic globalization. While stressing the generally progressive character of economic globalization, the author at the same time reveals the contradictions and negative aspects of the current liberal (neo-liberal) model that are highlighted by anti-globalists and alter-globalists. K. Cargill
In: Party politics: an international journal for the study of political parties and political organizations, Band 16, Heft 1, S. 5-27
ISSN: 1460-3683
Do parties adjust their economic policy positions in response to the international economy? I explore how international economic conditions affect Western Europe's welfare states by quantitatively analysing parties' ideological dynamics over time. Considering the convergence-divergence argument of the globalization literature, I evaluate the hypothesis that economic openness motivates parties to adjust their economic policies. My empirical analyses reveal that both left-wing and right-wing parties do indeed systematically adjust their positions in response to economic changes associated with globalization. However, the results contradict the neoliberal convergence argument, as parties shift in varying directions in response to different indicators of openness. Importantly, the differences between left-wing and right-wing parties' responses are not statistically significant, pointing to the importance of including right-wing parties in the globalization literature. [Reprinted by permission of Sage Publications Ltd., copyright holder.]