Theory Of Capitalist Development Research Articles

The Electoral Crisis of Social Democracy: Postindustrial Dilemmas or Neoliberal Contamination?

The crisis of social democracy has been the subject of numerous articles and books from different fields such as party politics, political sociology, and political economy. This article contrasts two competing explanations prevalent in the related literature. According to the postindustrial dilemmas hypothesis, the crisis of social democracy is the inevitable result of the transition from industrial to postindustrial society and the electoral trade-offs social democrats are facing as a consequence. The neoliberal contamination hypothesis instead emphasizes social democracy’s neoliberal turn and the resulting loss of trust in social democracy, especially among working-class voters. It is argued that both hypotheses are not only based on diverging conceptions of partisan politics, pitting Downs against Gramsci, but also on different theories of capitalist development (modernization theory vs Polanyian “double movement”). As a result, each explanation captures important aspects of the current crisis of social democracy but also misses other aspects that are essential to fully understand this phenomenon.

Post-Keynesian Institutionalism and the Failure of Neoliberalism: Returning Realism to Economics by Highlighting Economic Insecurity as the Flip Side of Financialization

Post-Keynesian institutionalism (PKI) has always been about starting with the reality of human experience and working to fashion a better world rooted in broadly shared prosperity. In contrast, a decades-long pursuit of the neoliberal agenda has failed to deliver such prosperity and, in many ways, has actually moved the United States further from PKI’s conception of a better world. In an effort to bring economics back in touch with reality, this article describes the economic insecurity that has been a central problem confronting Americans for more than a generation. It then shows how PKI explains that insecurity as a consequence (in fact, the flip side) of a key aim of neoliberalism: financialization. PKI accounts for these trends with a theory of capitalist development that draws on the work of Hyman Minsky. Contributors to PKI also offer more than just theory and analyses: they also propose policy recommendations and institutional changes designed to bolster democratic decision-making, community vitality, economic opportunity, environmental sustainability, and individual wellbeing. The COVID-19 pandemic underscores the need for such changes.

THE MARXIAN PROFIT RATE: A SUGGESTED REFORMULATION

The paper attempts to reformulate Marx’s definition of the profit rate in a two-good framework so that it can be compared with the definition of the profit rate in the Ricardo-Sraffa tradition. The implications of this reformulation are investigated with regard to Marx’s theory of value and distribution and his theory of capitalist development. Specifically, the labor theory of value is proven where the price ratio in a two-good framework is shown to be equal to the ratio of unit labor requirements. Then, profits are discussed in terms of allocative efficiency and in the context of their appropriation by the capitalist class. Subsequently, there is a discussion of the compatibility of the law of the falling rate of profit and the law of increasing misery. The conclusion of the paper is that the suggested reformulation of the profit rate increases the number of necessary conditions that must be satisfied for some key results to hold in Marx’s theory of value and distribution and his theory of capitalist development.

Trotsky and Development Theory in Latin America

Elaboration of four concepts in the thought of Trotsky (backwardness, combined and uneven development, permanent revolution, and socialist transition and revolution) that are useful in understanding developmental theory and their relevance to theories of capitalist development, underdevelopment, and dependency, as prominently manifested in Latin America during the last half of the 20th century. Identification of Trotskyist movements and their splinter tendencies. Examination of principal theorists and their ideas, with emphasis on Argentine and Brazilian thought and their relevance to developmental theory.

Capital: At Least It Kills Time

The theory of temporality and historicity in question is based on two fundamental theses. First, in secular capitalism, semantic (language) and economic systems, and subjectivity—since the speaking subject is the subject of the signifier—are homologous systems of value. Second, time and social reality relate to one another in terms of Spinozist immanent causality, in which the cause (a priori time) is an effect of its own effects (empirical reality). This causality marks not only fantasy and desire but also so-called deductive logic and developmental history. Secular reason (including historiography) must become conscious of its own circularity or fantasmatic character. Addressing leading Marxist approaches to history, such as stage theories of capitalist development and the neo-Spinozist and deconstructionist Left, I argue that our concept of the ‘future’ must be radically revised. The ‘physical’ time of decaying bodies is left for a book that will link secular temporality to biopolitics.

Sraffa on von Bortkiewicz: Reconstructing the Classical Theory of Value and Distribution

Among Piero Sraffa s unpublished papers is a notebook with extensive excerpts from and critical comments on three contributions of Ladislaus von Bortkiewicz: “Der Kardinalfehler der Bohm-Bawerkschen Zinstheorie” (1906), “Zur Zinstheorie. II. Entgegnung” (1907b), and “Wertrechnung und Preisrechnung im Marxschen System” (1906–7).1 The reading notes and commentaries on Bortkiewicz s three essays were mainly written between January and April 1943, with some additions in December 1945 and June 1955. It was presumably the discussion of Bortkiewicz s contributions in Paul Sweezy s Theory of Capitalist Development (1942) that brought them to Sraffa s attention, who up until then appears to have been unaware of them.2 What will perhaps come as a surprise to

Paul M. Sweezy

Described by the Wall Street Journal as "the 'dean' of radical economics," Paul Sweezy has more than any other single person kept Marxist economics alive in North America. One work would be sufficient to have achieved this—The Theory of Capitalist Development (first published in 1942). During the period of the 1950s and 1960s, this was the book to which one turned to learn about Marxist economics.This article can also be found at the Monthly Review website, where most recent articles are published in full.Click here to purchase a PDF version of this article at the Monthly Review website.

The economic contributions of Paul Sweezy

This paper offers a critical appraisal of the work of Paul M. Sweezy (1910-2004). After a brief biographical summary, the following sections deal with Sweezy's early writings; his book, The Theory of Capitalist Development; his thinking on socialism; his contribution as an historian of events and of ideas; the Monopoly Capital, co-authored with Paul Baran; and Sweezy's work after the death of Baran in 1964. The paper concludes with an assessment of Sweezy's significance, and a comprehensive bibliography of his writings.

Money Manager Capitalism: Still Here, but Not Quite as Expected

Hyman Minsky is well known for books and essays on the cyclical instability of capitalism. In the last dozen or so years of his life, however, Minsky often looked beyond business cycles and focused instead on the structural evolution of economic systems over long periods of time. He believed that the US economy of the 1980s and 1990s was profoundly different from the economy of the 1950s and 1960s-and that an appreciation of the key differences was essential to understanding and managing economic activity at the end of the twentieth century. Minsky explained the post-World War II changes in the US economy by presenting a theory of capitalist development. That theory, influenced by his association with Joseph Schumpeter, emphasizes financial-market innovations and their impact on the broader economy. In particular, Minsky argued that the US economy evolved through three stages prior to the 1980s-commercial capitalism, finance capitalism, and managerial capitalism-and that it entered a new stage, money manager capitalism, in the 1980s (Minsky 1990; 1993; Whalen 1997; 2001). If imitation is the highest form of praise, then the notion of money manager capitalism (MMC) has received considerable acclaim. Michal Useem, of the Wharton School, published a book in 1996 entitled Investor Capitalism (1996). In 2000, James Hawley and Andrew Williams, of Saint Mary's College of California, published The Rise of Fiduciary Capitalism (2000). Like Minsky's writings, both works stress how money managers-institutional investors, especially those who oversee pension and mutual funds-can have a profound effect on business and the economy.

Integrating Schumpeter and Keynes: Hyman Minsky’s Theory of Capitalist Development

In a number of books and articles, Hyman P. Minsky influenced many of today's institutional and Post Keynesian economists. In fact, Minsky often chose the pages of this journal as the place to present and extend his Wall Street paradigm, financial theory of investment, and investment theory of business cycles, the latter of which is often called the financial instability hypothesis (FIH). Those contributions have all received significant attention in recent years, along with Minsky's writings on what might be called the secular (multi-cycle) dimension of the FIH.1 What has gone almost entirely unnoticed, however, is that during the last decade of his life Minsky adopted, and sought to develop and explore, an even more historical approach to economic analysis-a theory of capitalist development. This article seeks to prompt professional consideration of Minsky's theory of capitalist development by explaining and presenting it. The article begins by describing Minsky's interest in such a theory. The theory is then outlined, both in terms of its essential elements and as it applies to the US economy. Directions for future research are also identified.

Hyman Minsky's Theory of Capitalist Development

During the last decade of his life, Hyman Minsky drew on insights acquired from Joseph Schumpeter in an effort to explore the long-term development of capitalism. He believed such an exploration would underscore the economic implications of postwar financial-system innovations and could encourage a broad discussion regarding the appropriate structure of the U.S. economy. This paper focuses on the theory of capitalist development that Minsky produced during that decade. After describing the purposes of Minsky's exploration, his theory is outlined both in terms of its essential elements and as it applies to the U.S. economy. In addition to emphasizing the relations between finance and business, Minsky identified a transition through at least five distinct stages of capitalism: from the merchant-capitalist era to a recent period dominated by money managers. A concluding section identifies a number of research directions suggested by Minsky's analysis.

Interview with Paul Sweezy

A founding editor of Monthly Review, Paul Sweezy has made widely recognized contributions to economics, history, and political analysis. Born in 1910 in New York City, son of a Wall Street bank executive, Sweezy attended Philips Exeter Academy and Harvard University, where he was president of the Harvard Crimson, graduating in 1931. He spent the 1932-1933 academic year at the London School of Economics, where he was exposed to Marxism, and returned to Harvard as a graduate student. He received his Ph.D. in 1937, and his dissertation, Monopoly and Competition in the English Coal Trade, 1550-1800, was published by Harvard University Press the following year. Sweezy taught economics at Harvard for five years until, in the year of publication of his work The Theory of Capitalist Development (Oxford University Press, 1942), he joined the research and analysis division of the Office of Strategic Services, wartime forerunner of the Central Intelligence Agency, for which he edited the classified European Political Report. Returning to the United States in fall 1945, Sweezy decided that, faced with the certitude of being denied tenure, he should resign from Harvard. In 1946, he received a grant from the Social Sciences Research Council and took up residence in New Hampshire, where he wrote Socialism (McGraw-Hill, 1949).This article can also be found at the Monthly Review website, where most recent articles are published in full.Click here to purchase a PDF version of this article at the Monthly Review website.

Marx, Schumpeter and the Myths of Economic Rationality

This article explores parallels between Marx's and Schumpeter's theories of capitalist development, and discusses the relationship of these classical approaches to later constructivist theories of technological and organizational changes. It is suggested that Marxian and Schumpeterian ideas could be combined in a way which remedies the weaknesses of both sides, and provides a better understanding of the innovative dynamics of capitalism; such a synthesis could then be linked to a constructivist model of the rise and fall of economic `myths'.

The Theory of Capitalist Development, Chapter One, "Marx's Method"

The year 1992 marks the fiftieth anniversary of the publication of The Theory of Capitalist Development by Paul Sweezy. It was originally published by Oxford University Press but for many years has been an MR Press title. It has been translated into many languages (German, French, Italian, Spanish, Polish, Serbo-Croat, Japanese, Chinese, among others) and has served as an introduction to Marxism for thousands of students around the world. The MR Press edition still has a steady sale, mostly for classroom use. To observe the occasion and remind readers of the book's continued availability, we reproduce here the first chapter entitled "Marx's Method." This seems to us particularly appropriate in view of the sorry state and dismal prospects of capitalism as we approach the twenty-first century. If this continues, as we are confident it will, a renaissance of Marxism, the heart and soul of which is a critical analysis of capital and capitalism, is as predictable as anything in the realm of human affairs can ever be. - The EditorsThis article can also be found at the Monthly Review website, where most recent articles are published in full.Click here to purchase a PDF version of this article at the Monthly Review website.

Dillard on Keynes and Marx: Rejoinder

I welcome Paul Burkett's comments on my paper on Keynes and Marx. His apparent acceptance of my central theme that the economics of both Keynes and Marx may be interpreted as monetary theories of production is especially significant coming from one so obviously well versed in the economics of Marx. A monetary interpretation of Keynes is not unusual, but placing at the center of Marx's economic thought is uncommon. For example, money does not appear in the index of the classic work on Marx by Paul Sweezy, The Theory of Capitalist Development.

Long Waves in Economic Life: an Image Without a Method

The potential of long wave theory is examined, as a possible basis for theoretising the history of industrial capitalist development. A brief review of the various forms of the long-wave account is given; recent versions are dealt with in 3categories—Neo-Schumpeterian, Marxist and Financial. It is concluded that no long-wave scheme meets the minimal requirements of a genuine theory. The most successful attempts are those which develop the idea of a ‘social structure of accumulation’. A theory of capitalist development must be one of social action, in the context of the relative persistence of certain structural features. But such a theory would not require the image of the wave.

The Political Economy of Joseph Schumpeter A Theory of Capitalist Development and Decline

(1984). The Political Economy of Joseph Schumpeter A Theory of Capitalist Development and Decline. Studies in Political Economy: Vol. 15, No. 1, pp. 5-42.

School and Wage Labor

The paper presents a criticism of the widely held assumption that the major function of schools is to educate and train indivduals and that the functioning of society depends decisively upon the school's sozialization function. The question for individual socialization is replaced by a discussion of how schools fit into the development of western society which has been described by Marx as increasing expropriation of workers and reification of society and by Max Weber as increasing bureaucratization or objectification. In the context of Marx's and Weber's theories of capitalist development three effects of the formal school system are discussed: 1. Effects of the formalization of cultural traditions upon the quality of their content. 2. Effects of the educational system as a mechanism for the distribution of knowledge. 3. Effects of the educational system as a system of social positions.

The Underdevelopment of Atlantic Canada

A preliminary study of the structure of capitalist underdevelop ment in the Atlantic provinces of Canada. Departing from a critique of a Staples Theory that reduces this problem to the spatial distribution of economic factors and a Dependency Theory based on exchange relationships, the author suggests a more rewarding approach based on Marx's theory of capitalist development. Connecting the regional and class conditions of underdevelopment, the author argues that the workings of capitalism has created in Atlantic Canada the condi tions of a reserve army for industries in Central Canada. This position is sup ported with appropriate statistics on the history and structure of capital and labor in the region.

The Subjection of Labour to Capital: The Rise of the Capitalist System

In this paper I present an analytical study of the historical development of the family, mass schooling, and the labor movement in 19th century England. It is emphasized that what occurred in 19th century England was not just the emergence of the first industrial capitalist economy but also the first industrial capitalist system. By the 1870s in England, most of the characteristic institutions of the advanced capitalist systems of the 20th century - the factory, the welfare system, the industrial city, municipal police forces, the dependent family unit, mass public schooling, labor unions, electoral democracy — had emerged. Therefore, just as 19th century England supplied Marx with the classic case of the development of capitalist production, so, too, does it provide us with the classic case of the development of the capitalist system. Here, for the first time in history, the materialist conception of history can be applied to developed capitalism itself. In addition, by analyzing the system as a whole, we are in a better position to assess the strengths and limitations of Marx's own theories of capitalist development. A main theme is that, while Marx presents a profound analysis of how economic development both creates and reproduces the subjection of labor to capital, he neglects the role of cultural and political development in reinforcing and reproducing this domination.