...
首页> 外文期刊>Review of Political Economy >Capital, the State, and the Monetary Mode of Power: A Review of Nitzan and Bichler's Capital as Power
【24h】

Capital, the State, and the Monetary Mode of Power: A Review of Nitzan and Bichler's Capital as Power

机译:资本,国家与权力的货币模式:尼采和比克勒的资本作为权力的回顾

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

In their recent book Capital as Power, Jonathan Nitzan & Shimshon Bichler depict capitalism as a mode of power rather than a mode of production, in which political and economic power are no longer distinct. In addition, they argue, contrary to neoclassical theory, that capital has nothing to do with productivity but instead represents power. I make three broad criticisms: first, their elimination of the distinction between economics and politics renders any empirical test of their ostensible integration impossible; second, they do not adequately define their main concepts, including capital, capitalization, capitalism, and power; and third, they do not acknowledge the possibility that the patterns they attribute to power may in fact be self-organized. This paper argues that money is a claim to wealth, not wealth itself, that it measures and distributes the power of payment, and that payments redistribute the power of ownership, including the ownership of money. Finally, I suggest that, in light of the global debt crisis, a theory of capital-as-power should examine the power of finance, which entails the privatization and concentration of the power to create money as debt. View full textDownload full textRelated var addthis_config = { ui_cobrand: "Taylor & Francis Online", services_compact: "citeulike,netvibes,twitter,technorati,delicious,linkedin,facebook,stumbleupon,digg,google,more", pubid: "ra-4dff56cd6bb1830b" }; Add to shortlist Link Permalink http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09538259.2012.701932
机译:乔纳森·尼赞(Jonathan Nitzan)和申姆斯·比希勒(Shimshon Bichler)在最近的《资本作为力量》一书中将资本主义描述为一种权力模式,而不是一种生产模式,在这种模式下,政治和经济权力已不再明显。此外,他们认为,与新古典理论相反,资本与生产力无关,而是代表权力。我提出三点广泛的批评:第一,消除经济学与政治之间的区别使得对它们表面上的整合进行任何实证检验都是不可能的。第二,他们没有充分定义其主要概念,包括资本,资本化,资本主义和权力。第三,他们不承认他们归因于权力的模式实际上可能是自组织的。本文认为,金钱是对财富的要求,而不是财富本身,它衡量并分配了支付能力,并且支付重新分配了所有权,包括货币所有权。最后,我建议,鉴于全球债务危机,一种以资本为力量的理论应该研究金融的力量,这意味着将货币创造为债务的力量必须私有化和集中。查看全文下载全文相关变量var addthis_config = {ui_cobrand:“泰勒和弗朗西斯在线”,servicescompact:“ citeulike,netvibes,twitter,technorati,delicious,linkedin,facebook,stumbleupon,digg,google,更多”,发布时间:“ ra-4dff56cd6bb1830b “};添加到候选列表链接永久链接http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09538259.2012.701932

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号