The Experts below are selected from a list of 174573 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
David Lane - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
russia s asymmetric Capitalism in comparative perspective
2008Co-Authors: David LaneAbstract:The disintegration of the state socialist system in Central and Eastern Europe after 1989 led the new leaders in these societies in alliance with those in the hegemonic capitalist world to create, on the ashes of state socialism, a social system having a capitalist market economy, a polyarchic polity and a pluralist civil society. These were the intentions of the political leaders thrust into power after 1989. What type of society has emerged is a matter of intellectual debate. In this chapter I shall consider only one aspect of the transformation: the type of Capitalism that has developed in the postcommunist countries, and particularly Russia. Prior to the discussion of ‘what type’ of Capitalism is the definition of Capitalism itself. This is of significance because many commentators dispute whether Capitalism has been introduced in some of the postcommunist countries.
-
post state socialism a diversity of Capitalisms
2007Co-Authors: David LaneAbstract:The disintegration of the state socialist societies in the early 1990s left ambiguous the type of political and economic order which was to replace them. Their fall was not a consequence of the classical pattern of revolution, in which an alternative ex ante economic system was postulated in the political policy of the reformers. The major systemic changes advocated by the reformers were the removal of the dominant Communist Party and its replacement by democratic forms and a move to markets in place of centralized planning. There was no major claim that Capitalism would form an alternative economic and political system. Only after the Communists had left power was Capitalism publicly advocated as a means to further democracy and public well-being. The new leaders in these societies, in alliance with those in the hegemonic capitalist world, set out to create, on the ashes of state socialism, a social system having a capitalist market economy, a polyarchic polity and a pluralist civil society. Such intentions, however, left problematic the component parts of the type of Capitalism which might be constructed and the ways that a system transfer could be effected on the institutions of state socialism. The most favoured economic model is that of neo-liberalism, the Anglo-American type of Capitalism, which was adopted by the major policy makers. (On the components of this policy, see Williamson 1990).
-
The Transformation of State Socialism in Russia
The GeoJournal Library, 2000Co-Authors: David LaneAbstract:Unlike the rise of Capitalism in Western Europe and the USA, which was largely a spontaneous autonomous process, the transition from state socialism was predicated on the decisions of the political elite which came to power after the exit of the communist leadership. A feature of the transformation of state socialism to market type societies is the role of human agency in creating a form of Capitalism by institutional design1. The new governing elites had a vision of a transition to a Western type of market capitalist society: the catchwords of the reformers were market, private ownership, democracy and civil society. Western thinking about the structure of Capitalism has played a dominant role in early policy formation, not only were the successful capitalist societies working models of what the post-communist states aspired to, they also defined the conditions under which the new states entered the global market and received financial and political support.
William H. Sewell - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
The temporalities of Capitalism
Socio-Economic Review, 2008Co-Authors: William H. SewellAbstract:The temporalities of Capitalism are in certain respects unique. The temporalities of social life in general are ‘eventful’, i.e. irreversible, contingent, uneven, discon- tinuous and transformational. Although capitalist social processes are in certain respects super-eventful, the extreme abstraction that is a signature of capitalist development enables core processes of Capitalism to escape from the irreversibil- ity of time and to sustain a recurrent logic at their core. This means that the tem- porality of Capitalism is composite and contradictory, simultaneously still and hyper-eventful. Recognizing this contradiction at the core of Capitalism poses important conceptual and methodological challenges for those who study it.
Noah Quastel - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
ecological political economy towards a strategic relational approach
Review of Political Economy, 2016Co-Authors: Noah QuastelAbstract:This article identifies three distinct traditions in what might be described as ‘ecological political economy’. First, a ‘Promethean’ approach posits that Capitalism has a relentless drive towards growth and bears responsibility for the wholesale transformation of nature. Second, critics of sustainable Capitalism acknowledge the possibility of capitalist futures with a better management of natural resources and carbon emissions. The Strategic Relational Approach, developed by Bob Jessop and Ngai-Ling Sum, points to a unique third type of ecological political economy. Each approach is shown to have distinct views concerning the commodification of nature, the role of the state and ways to understand ecological and social transitions. The Strategic Relational Approach points to the possibility of counter-hegemonic strategies and collective mobilization to transform the state and so redirect, control and contain capitalist relations with nature.
William I Robinson - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
gramsci and globalisation from nation state to transnational hegemony
Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy, 2005Co-Authors: William I RobinsonAbstract:Abstract This essay explores the matter of hegemony in the global system from the standpoint of global Capitalism theory, in contrast to extant approaches that analyse this phenomenon from the standpoint of the nation‐state and the inter‐state system. It advances a conception of global hegemony in transnational social terms, linking the process of globalisation to the construction of hegemonies and counter‐hegemonies in the twenty‐first century. An emergent global capitalist historical bloc, lead by a transnational capitalist class, rather than a particular nation‐state, bloc of states, or region, is pursuing a hegemonic project. The US state is seen as the point of condensation for pressures from dominant groups to resolve problems of global Capitalism. US‐led militarisation is a contradictory political‐military response to the crisis of global Capitalism, characterised by economic stagnation, legitimacy problems and the rise of counter‐hegemonic forces.
Guido Pezzarossi - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Introduction: Rethinking the Archaeology of Capitalism: Coercion, Violence, and the Politics of Accumulation
Historical Archaeology, 2019Co-Authors: Guido PezzarossiAbstract:Durante mucho tiempo un elemento analítico básico de la arqueología histórica, el Capitalismo en los últimos años se ha visto sometido a un nuevo escrutinio, debido en parte a las repercusiones de la crisis económica mundial de 2008. Los interrogantes sobre las fallas de la autorregulación del “libre mercado” y la proliferación de prácticas depredadoras e instrumentos de manipulación de valores fomentaron las discusiones acerca de cuál era, de hecho, la naturaleza “verdadera” del Capitalismo y si dichas prácticas, utilizando aspectos extraeconómicos como el poder, la violencia y las diversas formas de coerción en nombre de la acumulación desigual, eran una aberración o fundacionales. Un espacio emerge dentro de estas discusiones para un replanteamiento crítico del Capitalismo a través de las contribuciones emergentes de perspectivas de feministas, materialistas nuevos, redes de actores y (post)marxistas que enfatizan los diversos mecanismos y prácticas que generan los efectos atribuidos de manera diversa a un sistema capitalista abstracto, monolítico y definitorio de la época. Los enfoques articulados en esta colección temática empujan a alejarse de las definiciones limitantes e inconsistentes del Capitalismo, y hacia un conjunto más flexible de hilos analíticos para el análisis de contexto cruzado de diversos conjuntos con diversas historias de emergencias que generan efectos capitalistas paralelos. A su vez, los colaboradores de esta colección ilustran la relevancia más amplia de las contribuciones de las arqueologías históricas del Capitalismo a otros contextos arqueológicos y subdisciplinas al proporcionar un terreno común para el análisis comparativo de contextos generadores de experiencias y efectos humanos / no humanos similares que se han mantenido categóricamente segregados en sus análisis. Le Capitalisme qui a été pendant longtemps un sujet analytique récurrent de l'archéologie historique, a fait l'objet au cours des années récentes d'un intérêt renouvelé, dû en partie aux répercussions de la crise économique mondiale de 2008. Les questions relatives aux carences de l'auto-régulation de “l'économie de marché” ainsi qu'à la prolifération des pratiques prédatrices et des instruments de manipulation de la valeur ont nourri des discussions sur ce qu'était en réalité la « véritable » nature du Capitalisme, et si de telles pratiques s'appuyant sur un pouvoir extra-économique, mais aussi la violence et différentes formes de coercition au nom d'une accumulation inégalitaire, constituaient une aberration ou son fondement même. Un espace apparaît au sein de ces discussions pour un nouvel examen critique du Capitalisme grâce aux contributions émergentes de perspectives issues du féminisme, du nouveau matérialisme, de réseaux d'intervenants mais aussi (post-)marxistes. Celles-ci mettent l'accent sur les divers mécanismes et pratiques conduisant aux effets attribués de différentes façons à un système capitaliste abstrait, monolithique et définissant une époque. Les approches articulées dans cette collection thématique sont en faveur d'une distanciation à l'égard des définitions réductrices et contradictoires du Capitalisme. Elles privilégient une suite plus flexible de fils analytiques aux fins d'une analyse contextuelle croisée d'assemblages divers reliant des histoires variées d'émergence générant des effets capitalistes parallèles. Les contributeurs de cette collection illustrent quant à eux la pertinence plus large des contributions des archéologies historiques du Capitalisme à l'égard d'autres contextes et sous-disciplines archéologiques, grâce à l'apport d'un tronc commun pour l'analyse comparative de contextes créateurs d'expériences humaines/non-humaines similaires et d'effets demeurés catégoriquement isolés dans leurs analyses. Long an analytical staple of historical archaeology, Capitalism in recent years has found itself under renewed scrutiny, due in part to the repercussions of the 2008 global economic crisis. Questions about the failings of “free-market” self-regulation and the proliferation of predatory practices and value-manipulation instruments fostered discussions about what, in fact, the “true” nature of Capitalism was, and whether such practices, drawing on extra-economic power, violence, and various forms of coercion in the name of unequal accumulation, were aberrational or foundational. A space emerges within these discussions for a critical rethinking of Capitalism through the emerging contributions of feminist, new materialist, actor-network, and (post-)Marxist perspectives that emphasize the diverse mechanisms and practices generative of the effects attributed variously to an abstract, monolithic, epoch-defining capitalist system. The approaches articulated in this thematic collection push for a move away from limiting and inconsistent definitions of Capitalism, and toward a more supple suite of analytical threads for the cross-context analysis of diverse assemblages with diverse histories of emergence that generate parallel capitalist effects. In turn, the contributors to this collection illustrate the broader relevance of the contributions of historical archaeologies of Capitalism to other archaeological contexts and subdisciplines by providing common ground for the comparative analysis of contexts generative of similar human/nonhuman experiences and effects that have remained categorically segregated in their analyses.
