CiteULike: heraclitus' critique

The Follies of Globalisation Theory

Justin Rosenberg — 2008-06-01T15:31:09-00:00

(12 September 2002)

Rosenberg argues that fashionable preoccupations with spatiality have generated deep intellectual confusions among globalization theorists: the more clearly they attempt to articulate their arguments the more equivocal and evasive those arguments become. After first looking at the broad field of international relations, Rosenberg submits Anthony Giddens's influential _The Consequences of Modernity_ to a thorough, often highly entertaining interrogation, and concludes by drawing out the implications of his critique for globalization theory in general.

Socialism After Hayek (Advances in Heterodox Economics) (Advances in Heterodox Economics)

Theodore Burczak — 2008-06-01T10:36:54-00:00

(15 November 2006)

_Socialism after Hayek_ recasts and reinvigorates the socialist quest for class justice by rendering it compatible with Hayek's social and economic theories. Theodore A. Burczak puts forth a conception of socialism from a postmodern perspective, drawing from the apparently opposing ideas of Marx and Hayek (the latter of whom achieved worldwide recognition in the twentieth century as a champion of the free market and fierce opponent of government interference in markets). Burczak sketches an institutional structure that would promote a democratic socialist notion of distributive justice and his own interpretation of Marx's notion of freely associated labor, while avoiding Hayek's criticisms of centrally planned socialism. Burczak's version of market socialism is one in which privately owned firms are run democratically by workers, governments engage in ongoing redistribution of wealth to support human development, and markets are otherwise unregulated. Burczak poses this model of "free market socialism" against other models of socialism, especially those developed by John Roemer, Michael Albert, and Robin Hahnel. "Burczakian socialism = (Hayek + Nussbaum + Sen + Ackerman + Resnick and Wolff) = Ellerman = legal-economic democracy. Brilliant! Burczak takes Hayek, his critics, and other social theorists and produces the foundations of a legal-economic order in which the concerns of most current thinkers are provided for. It is a deep, sustained, and brilliant achievement." —Warren J. Samuels, Professor Emeritus, Economics Department, Michigan State University; former President of the History of Economics Society and the Association for Social Economics; coeditor of the _Journal of Income Distribution_; and author of over 40 books "Theodore A. Burczak's _Socialism after Hayek_ is a thoroughly researched and thoughtful examination not only of the ideological debate that framed the twentieth century, but of Hayek's intellectual framework. Burczak hopes for an economic framework that is both humanistic in its approach and humanitarian in its concern while being grounded in good reasons. The book should be on the reading list of every comparative political economist and in particular anyone who wants to take Hayek seriously, including those who would like to push Hayek's classical liberal politics toward the left in the twenty-first century. Burczak has made an outstanding contribution to the fields of political and economic thought and to Hayek studies in particular." —Peter J. Boettke, Professor and Director of Graduate Studies, Department of Economics, George Mason University, Fairfax "An advance well beyond the great 'socialist calculation debate.' _Socialism after Hayek_ is both novel and challenging to contemporary Hayekian scholars. Burczak is the only scholar working in the post-Marxist tradition that thoroughly understands and appreciates the Hayekian critique of socialism. He is on his way to answering many of our long-held objections." —Dave Prychitko, Department of Economics, Northern Michigan University "One does not have to agree with all of Burczak's arguments to accept that he has developed a bold, creative and challenging response to the powerful Hayekian critique of socialism. Burczak wisely rejects the agoraphobia—literally the fear of markets—of many socialists, and focuses instead on the socialist goal of the abolition of exploitation. If this important book is read by both socialists and Hayekians, then there is a chance that debates on the viability of socialism may avoid some past pitfalls." —Geoffrey M. Hodgson, University of Hertfordshire, UK "Provocative and expansive. An excellent book that deals in depth with the relevant literature, incorporating it into a new analysis of the question of socialism. . . . The scholarship is superior: Burczak integrates the works of Hayek and Marx to develop a new theory of justice and to provide a new way to think through the problems of a socialist economy." —Stephen Cullenberg, Department of Economics, University of California, Riverside "A brilliant, fair-minded approach to Marx, Hayek, Sen, and Nussbaum yields a needed socialist vision for the twenty-first century." —Stephen Resnick, Department of Economics, University of Massachusetts **Theodore A. Burczak** is Associate Professor of Economics at Denison University.

Against the Romance of Community

Miranda Joseph — 2006-06-20T22:01:26-00:00

(01 July 2002)

Community is almost always invoked as an unequivocal good, an indicator of a high quality of life, caring, selflessness, belonging. Into this common portrayal, Against the Romance of Community introduces an uncommon note of caution, a penetrating, sorely needed sense of what, precisely, we are doing when we call upon this ideal. <P>Miranda Joseph explores sites where the ideal of community relentlessly recurs, from debates over art and culture in the popular media, to the discourses and practices of nonprofit and nongovernmental organizations, to contemporary narratives of economic transformation or "globalization." She shows how community legitimates the social hierarchies of gender, race, nation, and sexuality that capitalism implicitly requires. <P>Joseph argues that social formations, including community, are constituted through the performativity of production. This strategy makes it possible to understand connections between identities and communities that would otherwise seem to be disconnected: gay consumers in the U.S. and Mexican maquiladora workers; Christian right "family values" and Asian "crony capitalism." Exposing the complicity of social practices, identities, and communities with capitalism, this truly constructive critique opens the possibility of genuine alliances across such differences. <P>Miranda Joseph is associate professor of women's studies at the University of Arizona.

Marching to the Promised Land? Some Doubts on the Policy Affinities of Critical Realism

Geoffrey Hodgson — 2008-05-31T16:38:12-00:00

Alethia, Vol. 2, No. 2. (October 1999), pp. 1-9.

Realistic spatial abstraction? Marxist observations of a claim within critical realist geography

John Roberts — 2008-05-31T16:24:41-00:00

Prog Hum Geogr, Vol. 25, No. 4. (1 December 2001), pp. 545-567.

Critical realism has attracted substantial interest and following within social geography for a number of years. A principal reason for this popularity lies with the critical realist method of abstraction. This method seeks to abstract the underlying causal powers of an object for social analysis at different levels of abstraction. The theoretical movement from the underlying reality of an object to its contingent and everyday appearance therefore enables geographers to explore different spatial scales of the same concrete object of analysis. This ability to take seriously an underlying reality' also enables geographers to spatialize, and embed themselves within, a radical heritage beginning with Marx. In this paper I wish to question the methodological power of critical realism for social geographical thought. By recourse to Hegel, Marx and Lefebvre, I want to show that critical realists and critical realist geographers in fact pursue different methodological projects to that of Marxism. Whereas Marxists seek to explore the self-movement of a contradictory essence, critical realists and critical realist geographers seek to explore the external and relational connection between causal powers. I argue that within this critical realist exploration there is a tendency to present a rather static account of essence, or causal powers, because of the non-dialectical and dualist assumptions about the world that such an account encourages. It is an account, moreover, which can lead to a somewhat impoverished radical social theory. 10.1191/030913201682688931

The Necessary Dichotomy of Fact and Value

Goldthwait — 2006-11-14T09:37:06-00:00

The Journal of Value Inquiry, Vol. 39, No. 1. (March 2005), pp. 105-113.

What Collapse, Exactly?

Joseph Agassi — 2007-03-13T10:57:58-00:00

Philosophy of the Social Sciences, Vol. 37, No. 1. (1 March 2007), pp. 74-84.

Hilary Putnam makes two related points in his recent collection of essays: (1) Values can be rational, and their inescapable intrusion into every kind of discourse is welcome. (2) Ignoring or suppressing this fact is common yet irrational. This is of course true; yet the intrusion in question can be trivial, and it can be problematic. Putnam ignores this here. The book is pleasant to read; it is infused with friendly and appreciative personal anecdotes and observations. It is almost entirely critical and almost always in a friendly way. Yet it is often unclear. In almost every discussion here, the author announces one item and discusses another almost identical with it but one much easier to discuss. 10.1177/0048393106296570

Comparing responses to critical realism

Austen — 2006-06-28T01:19:43-00:00

Journal of Economic Methodology, Vol. 13, No. 2. (June 2006), pp. 257-282.

EMANCIPATORY FOR WHOM? A COMMENT ON CRITICAL REALISM

Drucilla Barker — 2008-05-09T17:15:31-00:00

Feminist Economics, Vol. 9, No. 1. (2003), pp. 103-108.

Tony Lawson (1999) argues that critical realism will facilitate revelatory and emancipatory projects in feminist economics. The strength of Lawson's argument lies in its rejection of social atomism and methodological individualism. Societies are best understood as structurally connected systems rather than as atomistic aggregates. Its weakness lies in its reliance on a humanist conception of human agency, a conception that is increasingly questioned by some feminists.

CRITICAL REALISM, FEMINIST EPISTEMOLOGY, AND THE EMANCIPATORY POTENTIAL OF SCIENCE: A COMMENT ON LAWSON AND HARDING

Fabienne Peter — 2008-05-09T17:08:28-00:00

Feminist Economics, Vol. 9, No. 1. (2003), pp. 93-101.

In a recent contribution to this Journal , Tony Lawson (1999) claims that the methodological framework of critical realism fits the "explanatory and emancipatory projects" of feminist economics. This essay challenges his claim on the basis that a "naive" notion of science underlies critical realism. It argues that for feminist economists, a rethinking of traditional notions of scientific inquiry is just as important as the rethinking of methodology, and that one cannot be done without the other.

REPRESENTING REALITY: THE CRITICAL REALISM PROJECT

Sandra Harding — 2008-05-09T16:43:38-00:00

Feminist Economics, Vol. 9, No. 1. (2003), pp. 151-159.

Is there only one basic structure of reality? Can anyone produce culture-free representations of reality? Is the partiality of our representations only a problem or inconvenience rather than also an epistemic resource? Should we think of the goal of sciences as the production of accurate representations of reality or of effective interaction with it? This essay focuses on differences in how Tony Lawson and I would respond to such questions.

The Case For Strategic Realism: A Response To Lawson

Sandra Harding — 2008-05-09T16:41:08-00:00

Feminist Economics, Vol. 5, No. 3. (1999), pp. 127-133.

Tony Lawson makes a compelling case that it is only naive realism that feminist social scientists and philosophers need to avoid, not any and all realist arguments. However, he leaves mysterious, on the one hand, why so many feminists have preferred epistemological to ontological arguments and, on the other hand, why naive realism, which is indeed problematic, can appear to be a good scientific/epistemic strategy. The essay below tries to demystify these phenomena, notes a possible misleading aspect of his use of the term "epistemological relativism", and argues for a somewhat more limited value of the ontological argument he proposes for standpoint epistemologies.

Critical realism in economics and open-systems ontology: A critique

Mearman — 2006-03-23T15:17:08-00:00

Review of Social Economy, Vol. 64, No. 1. (March 2006), pp. 47-75.

Bad Samaritans: The Myth of Free Trade and the Secret History of Capitalism

Ha-Joon Chang — 2008-05-03T14:54:48-00:00

(26 December 2007)

<div><div><b>A rising young star in the field of economics attacks the free-trade orthodoxy of <i>The World Is Flat</i> head-on—a crisp, contrarian history of global capitalism.</b></div><div> </div><div>One economist has called Ha-Joon Chang “the most exciting thinker our profession has turned out in the past fifteen years.” With Bad Samaritans, this provocative scholar bursts into the debate on globalization and economic justice. Using irreverent wit, an engagingly personal style, and a battery of examples, Chang blasts holes in the “World Is Flat” orthodoxy of Thomas Friedman and other liberal economists who argue that only unfettered capitalism and wide-open international trade can lift struggling nations out of poverty. On the contrary, Chang shows, today’s economic superpowers—from the U.S. to Britain to his native Korea—all attained prosperity by shameless protectionism and government intervention in industry. We have conveniently forgotten this fact, telling ourselves a fairy tale about the magic of free trade and—via our proxies such as the World Bank, International Monetary Fund, and World Trade Organization—ramming policies that suit ourselves down the throat of the developing world.</div><div> </div><div>Unlike typical economists who construct models of how the marketplace <i>should</i> work, Chang examines the past: what has actually happened. His pungently contrarian history demolishes one pillar after another of free-market mythology. We treat patents and copyrights as sacrosanct—but developed our own industries by studiously copying others’ technologies. We insist that centrally planned economies stifle growth—but many developing countries had higher GDP growth before they were pressured into deregulating their economies. Both justice and common sense, Chang argues, demand that we reevaluate the policies we force on nations that are struggling to follow in our footsteps.</div></div>