Today, in many countries what is viewed as ‘credible’ economic knowledge stems from academic economics. The discipline of academic economics is based in universities across the world that employ economists who produce research that is published in academic journals and educate students who then go into government, businesses, and think tanks. Through the book’s authors’ and contributors’ experiences of economics education, and as part of the international student movement Rethinking Economics, it argues that academic economics in its current state does not provide people with the knowledge that we need to build thriving economies that allows everyone to flourish wherever they are from in the world, and whatever their racialised identity, gender or socioeconomic background. The consequences of this inadequate education links to modern economies being a root cause of systemic racism and sexism, socioeconomic inequality, and the ecological crisis. When economies are rooted in a set of principles that values whiteness, maleness and wealth, we should not be surprised by the inequalities that show up. Structural inequalities need systemic change, change that infiltrates through every level of the system, otherwise we risk reproducing and deepening them. This book makes the case that in order to reclaim economics it is necessary to diversify, decolonise and democratise how economics is taught and practised, and by whom. It calls on everyone to do what we can to reclaim economics for racial justice, gender equality and future generations.
services in particular. Far from a return to an old model that appeared
to work, the Irish economy has become more dependent on its status as
a tax haven. This makes the country even more vulnerable to external
shocks generated by changes in tax policies in other countries.
The populist right
The mainstream of the Irish economicsprofession has developed close
connections with the Irish political elite and have provided an intellectual framework to justify its austerity policies. However, a more radical
and populist discourse has also emerged to target state spending as
Karl Polanyi (1886–1964) returned to public discourse in the 1990s, when the Soviet Union imploded and globalization erupted. Best known for The Great Transformation, Polanyi’s wide-ranging thought anticipated twenty-first-century civilizational challenges of ecological collapse, social disintegration and international conflict, and warned that the unbridled domination of market capitalism would engender nationalist protective counter-movements. In Karl Polanyi and Twenty-First-Century Capitalism, Radhika Desai and Kari Polanyi Levitt bring together prominent and new thinkers in the field to extend the boundaries of our understanding of Polanyi's life and work. Kari Polanyi Levitt's opening essay situates Polanyi in the past century shaped by Keynes and Hayek, and explores how and why his ideas may shape the twenty-first century. Her analysis of his Bennington Lectures, which pre-dated and anticipated The Great Transformation, demonstrates how Central European his thought and chief concerns were. The next several contributions clarify, for the first time in Polanyi scholarship, the meaning of money as a fictitious commodity. Other contributions resolve difficulties in understanding the building blocks of Polanyi's thought: fictitious commodities, the double movement, the United States' exceptional development, the reality of society and socialism as freedom in a complex society. The volume culminates in explorations of how Polanyi has influenced, and can be used to develop, ideas in a number of fields, whether income inequality, world-systems theory or comparative political economy. Contributors: Fred Block, Michael Brie, Radhika Desai, Michael Hudson, Hannes Lacher, Kari Polanyi Levitt, Chikako Nakayama, Jamie Peck, Abraham Rotstein, Margaret Somers, Claus Thomasberger, Oscar Ugarteche Galarza.
Over more than thirty years of reform and opening, the Chinese Communist Party has pursued the gradual marketization of China’s economy alongside the preservation of a resiliently authoritarian political system, defying long-standing predictions that ‘transition’ to a market economy would catalyse deeper political transformation. In an era of deepening synergy between authoritarian politics and finance capitalism, Communists constructing capitalism offers a novel and important perspective on this central dilemma of contemporary Chinese development. This book challenges existing state–market paradigms of political economy and reveals the Eurocentric assumptions of liberal scepticism towards Chinese authoritarian resilience. It works with an alternative conceptual vocabulary for analysing the political economy of financial development as both the management and exploitation of socio-economic uncertainty. Drawing upon extensive fieldwork and over sixty interviews with policymakers, bankers, and former party and state officials, the book delves into the role of China’s state-owned banking system since 1989. It shows how political control over capital has been central to China’s experience of capitalist development, enabling both rapid economic growth whilst preserving macroeconomic and political stability. Communists constructing capitalism will be of academic interest to scholars and graduate students in the fields of Chinese studies, social studies of finance, and international and comparative political economy. Beyond academia, it will be essential reading for anyone interested in the evolution of Chinese capitalism and its implications for an increasingly central issue in contemporary global politics: the financial foundations of illiberal capitalism.
people the government stepped in and provided universal
education to lift the masses up out of illiteracy, ignorance and superstition. This
foundational myth is consistent with the current ‘vision and mission’ which is to
expand the public production of education to reach everyone to provide equal
opportunity to all children to have the education that prepares them to take their
place in the world.
What is most striking is that the economicsprofession – and in particular
development economics and in particular the branch that gives ‘policy advice’ –
which can normally
and how they should address a changing climate, the economicsprofession was on hand
to provide the analysis demonstrating, for example, that the cost of curbing emissions or
shifting to renewable energy was too great to justify (analysis, it should be emphasised,
often funded by major fossil fuel producers). 10 In the fraught decades since, from proposals for carbon pricing in the
United States to basic environmental protections and the adoption of the Kyoto Accord, a
handful of economists and consulting firms have published
the economicsprofession doesn’t recognise the scale of reform
that is needed. It is easy to give up hope. To feel that the change we
need isn’t possible.
That is why we wanted to start this book with
Joelle’s story. A Black American woman in a discipline that is
all too often White 5 and
dominated by men. An economist who has forcefully highlighted the
Geopolitics and capitalist development in the Asia-Pacific
that emerged in the
late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries – something that
encouraged the growth of a highly technical, abstract, and formal
economicsprofession, on the one hand, and a brand of political
science that until very recently almost entirely ignored economic
issues, on the other. 4 Of late, political economy has made an overdue and
welcome come back, partly
worth recalling (Galbraith 1967 ); and some works on neoinstitutionalism, comparative political economy, and the economics of development. Most of the rest of the economicsprofession, however, views these approaches as tolerable at best. They lie safely on the remote periphery both of theoretical work and of teaching. Ptolemy's geocentric model of the universe comes to mind here. Why did it remain dominant until the period from the fifteenth to the seventeenth centuries (and in Russia, with a mostly illiterate population, right up until the early twentieth century
economic forecasts of Brexit were labelled as
‘Project Fear’ and the Conservative politician Michael Gove claimed
that the nation had ‘had enough of experts’, comparing those supporting the Remain campaign to the scientists who worked for
the Nazis.63 This strategy proved to be effective in an econocracy
because it played on how disconnected from economic discussion
and decision-making people feel.
The economicsprofession feels that it has been ignored and
diminished by the result of the EU referendum and there has been
much soul searching in its aftermath. Paul Johnson