Doing Social Economics In A Postmodern World
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 9256544 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Doug Brown (Northern Arizona University, corresponding author) |
| Year | 1992 |
| Volume | 50 |
| Issue | 4 |
| Pages | 383-403 |
| Publication date | 1992-12-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | No |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Review of Social Economy (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0034-6764 • E-ISSN: 1470-1162 |
| Publisher | Informa UK Limited (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1080/758539922 |
| OpenAlex | W2111470997 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 4 |
| References cited | 10 |
We live today in most radical of times. Humanity is fighting at this moment over content of that new civilization. Those who lose heart on very eve of a new generation of should remember that it is not a matter of a political victory on this or that day, or even this or that decade. It is not an economic program, a recipe. It is a moral and intellectual reformation, creation of a new civilization. Michael Harrington Introduction The statement that is changing too quickly and everything is out of control has ring of a tired cliche. Yet, if there is one label that has been attached to this cliche and one notion that attempts to come to terms with what Fredric Jameson describes as a change in structure of feeling, it is postmodernism. Among other things, this essay argues that most pressing problem for economics today is what is here called the postmodern of capitalism. From vast array of urgent issues -- including increasing poverty, sexism, increasing inequality, collapse of soviet society, racism, deindustrialization, and environmental decay -- economists would have difficulty prioritizing even a short list. Each of these problems demands our attention if we are to do economics (see Dugger, 1977, and Stanfield, 1979). But viewed in a broader context, from perspective of reproduction of society as a whole as suggested by Stanfield and Dugger, these problems are linked to fundamental postmodern changes now taking place on an increasingly global scale. They do not all derive from or reduce to a common source. But recognizing that they are all part of global transformation of capitalism that we term postmodernism is essential if we are to develop strategies for their amelioration. We can study them separately, but we need a context for interpretation. With this in mind, following comments are premised on notion that we must acknowledge that we are living through a period of structural -- postmodern drift of capitalism. Much of it is induced by high technology revolution currently underway, and it is, paradoxically, producing both greater insecurity and greater means for self-expression and, most importantly, social heterogeneity. What is taking place is development of postmodern consumer capitalism. It is still capitalism, and it is still consumer-based in sense that guiding ideological pillar is that the good life is goods life. It is not a revolution, but like shift from competitive capitalism to monopoly capitalism (i.e., consumer capitalism) that occurred by beginning of twentieth century, postmodern drift today has significant cultural spinoffs connected with it. One would not want to say that high tech developments are driving this cultural shift within capitalism, but as Stanfield maintains, social problems and their institutional, historical origins usually stem from frictions generated by institutional fixity and technological change. Moral philosophy and place of economy in society are interrelated with state of productive apparatus and extent of human knowledge (Stanfield, 1979, p. 120). This is a period where technological is definitely influencing institutional adjustments. In general, high tech revolution has fostered an increasingly integrated, self-regulating, competitive, and highly globalized world market system. The globalization of production and the new international economic are two of many labels now being suggested for this development (see Soja, 1989, p. 160, for an interesting taxonomy of labels). The self-regulating character of highly mobile world markets has then undermined three pillars of US consumer capitalism that have helped to provision security and stability for last half century. The three pillars of stability in old Fordist order of consumer capitalism were 1) US global dominance, 2) welfare state, and 3) negotiated wage system
Aesthetics · Art · Capitalism · Civilization · Cliché · Context (archaeology) · Environmental ethics · Epistemology · Literature · Political science · Politics · Postmodernism · Sociology · Entrepreneurship Studies and Influences · History · Law · Philosophy
| Unique citing works | 4 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 0,14 |
| Citation span | 1997 - 2012 (16) |
| Citation velocity | historical |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 4 |