Economic Science Only--Or Political Economy?

1957 ◽  
Vol 71 (1) ◽  
pp. 1 ◽  
Author(s):  
O. H. Taylor
Keyword(s):  
Political Economy ◽  
Economic Science

Three questions to political economy (An attempt of system introspection)

2018 ◽  
pp. 118-127 ◽  
Author(s):  
G. B. Kleiner
Keyword(s):  
Political Economy ◽  
Modern Society ◽  
Modern World ◽  
The Political ◽  
Economic Science ◽  
Linear Component ◽  
Capitalist System ◽  
Economic Space ◽  
Economic Relations ◽  
System Paradigm

The development of the system paradigm in economic science leads to the formulation of a number of important questions to the political economy as one of the basic directions of economic theory. In this article, on the basis of system introspection, three questions are considered. The first is the relevance of the class approach to the structuring of the socio-economic space; the second is the feasibility of revising the notion of property in the modern world; the third is the validity of the notion of changing formations as the sequence of “slave-owning system — feudal system — capitalist system”. It is shown that in modern society the system approach to the structuring of socio-economic space is more relevant than the class one. Today the classical notion of “property” does not reflect the diversity of production and economic relations in society and should be replaced by the notion of “system property”, which provides a significant expansion of the concepts of “subject of property” and “object of property”. The change of social formations along with the linear component has a more influential cyclic constituent and obeys the system-wide cyclic regularity that reflects the four-cycle sequence of the dominance of one of the subsystems of the macrosystem: project, object, environment and process.

The Idea of a Meaningful Synthesis of Marxist and Non-Marxist Systems of Political Economy as a Mirror of Intellectual Turmoil (About V.T. Ryazanov’s Book «Modern Political Economy: Prospects of Neo-Marxist Synthesis»)

2019 ◽  
pp. 74-98
Author(s):  
A.B. Lyubinin
Keyword(s):  
Economic Theory ◽  
Political Economy ◽  
Economic Status ◽  
Economic Science ◽  
Objective Reality ◽  
Commodity Production ◽  
Subjective Assessments ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Political Economic

Review of the monograph indicated in the subtitle V.T. Ryazanov. The reviewer is critical of the position of the author of the book, believing that it is possible and even necessary (to increase the effectiveness of General economic theory and bring it closer to practice) substantial (and not just formal-conventional) synthesis of the Marxist system of political economy with its non-Marxist systems. The article emphasizes the difference between the subject and the method of the classical, including Marxist, school of political economy with its characteristic objective perception of the subject from the neoclassical school with its reduction of objective reality to subjective assessments; this excludes their meaningful synthesis as part of a single «modern political economy». V.T. Ryazanov’s interpretation of commodity production in the economic system of «Capital» of K. Marx as a purely mental abstraction, in fact — a fiction, myth is also counter-argued. On the issue of identification of the discipline «national economy», the reviewer, unlike the author of the book, takes the position that it is a concrete economic science that does not have a political economic status.

CRITICAL NOTICE

2006 ◽  
Vol 22 (3) ◽  
pp. 429-439 ◽  
Author(s):  
Francesco Guala
Keyword(s):  
Political Philosophy ◽  
Political Economy ◽  
Economic Science ◽  
Neoliberal Governmentality ◽  
General Theme ◽  
Collège De France ◽  
New Directions ◽  
Contemporary Liberalism ◽  
Academic Year ◽  
Critical Notice

The title of this book is rather misleading. “Birth of neoliberal governmentality,” or something like that, would have been more faithful to its contents. In Foucault's vocabulary, “biopolitics” is the “rationalisation” of “governmentality” (p. 261): it's the theory, in other words, as opposed to the art (governmentality) of managing people. The mismatch between title and content is easily explained: the general theme of the courses at the Collège de France had to be announced at the beginning of each academic year. It is part of the mandate of every professor at the Collège, however, that his lectures should follow closely his current research. As a consequence it wasn't unusual for Foucault to take new directions while he was lecturing. In 1979, for the first and only time in his career, he took a diversion into contemporary political philosophy. His principal object of investigation became “neoliberal” political economy. More precisely, he got increasingly interested in those strands of contemporary liberalism that use economic science both as a principle of limitation and of inspiration for the management of people.

scholarly journals Political Economy Theories in the Context of Defence Industry

2019 ◽  
Vol 1 (13) ◽  
Author(s):  
Donatas Palavenis
Keyword(s):  
Political Economy ◽  
Military Expenditure ◽  
Economic Effects ◽  
Practical Significance ◽  
Economic Science ◽  
Historical Case Study ◽  
Historical Case ◽  
Theoretical Approaches ◽  
Defence Industry ◽  
The Military

Object of the analysis. Increasing defence expenditures bring back a discussion weather the national defence industry is necessary to sustain economic welfare of a country, boosts innovations and enhances own military sector. Investigation problem. The use of political economy theories in that case could facilitate further research steps and guide scientists that will look for a precise answer to this issue. The aim of this manuscript is to review political economy theories that can be used in defining defence industry as such, and consider practical applicability options of different methodological approaches in the context of defence industry. To reach this aim, following objectives were designed: 1. Describe political economy phenomena and define its evolution; 2. Evaluate traditions of political economy and define their practical significance; 3. Assess methods used in actual analysis of defence industry and define the main findings. Research methods. While writing this article, the comparative literature analysis method was used. The famous scientists such as R. Abdelal, C., Adam, S. Dercon, G. Agostino, J. P. Dunne, L. Pieroni, M. Blyth, G. Browning, A. Kilmister, J. P. Dunne, E. Skons, D. Braddon, A. Gilpin, A. Goldstein, R. Jacson, G. Sorensen, S. Jevons, R. O. Keohane, C. W. Mitchell, I. D. Salavrakos, A. Sen and R. M. Smith were cited and referenced. All used literature is referenced. This article is structured into two big parts. The first part is devoted to the analysis of political economy subject itself and its approaches towards empirical research. The second part is designed to reveal possible application options of different theoretical political economy approaches in the context of defence industry. Outcomes and conclusions. In the context of current analysis of different political economy theories, different approaches on methodology, analytical side, linkage with defence industry, defence spending and possible insights about investigation possibilities the following conclusions were found: Political economy that originated in the XVII–XVIIIth century and currently is adopting different theoretical approaches in most cases is still relying on “grand” theories such as realism (mercantilism), liberalism, and Marxism. The existing variety of research methodologies and tools suggests the “correct” way to examine features of situation based on selected theory. Researches should be aware that even a proper methodology does not guaranty the reliability of research results due to the complexity of political economy subject itself and its interdependency to both political and economic science features. There are different scholars explaining trends and proposing different theoretical approaches to analyse defence sector and its connections (influence) with state. Current dynamics of defence industry led to renewed debates over whether the increase of the military expenditure enhances or deteriorates economic growth and welfare of the state. There have been numerous studies done in defining military expenditure (also research and development programs in the military sector) impact on local and state economies. Regardless of different methodologies used (econometric analyses, macro econometric models, time series models, demand side model, supply side model, cross-country correlation analyses and historical case study) there was no strong evidence that military expenditure is likely to have the negative economic effects on states. Keywords: political economy, defence industry, military expenditure, defence.

‘Useless but True’: Economic Crisis and the Peculiarities of Economic Science*

2011 ◽  
Vol 19 (2) ◽  
pp. 3-31 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ben Fine ◽  
Dimitris Milonakis
Keyword(s):  
Economic Theory ◽  
Political Economy ◽  
Economic Crisis ◽  
Economic Science ◽  
Economic Crises ◽  
Capitalist Economy

AbstractThe recent economic crisis has brought to the fore another crisis that has been going on for many years, that of (orthodox) economic theory. The latter failed to predict and, after the event, cannot offer an explanation of why it happened. This article sketches out why this is the case and what constitutes the crisis of economics. On this basis, the case is made for the revival of an interdisciplinary political economy as the only way for offering an explanation of the workings of the (capitalist) economy in general and of economic crises in particular.

From Freakonomics to Political Economy

2012 ◽  
Vol 20 (3) ◽  
pp. 81-96 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ben Fine ◽  
Dimitris Milonakis
Keyword(s):  
Political Economy ◽  
Intellectual History ◽  
Second World War ◽  
Economic Thought ◽  
Neoclassical Economics ◽  
Economic Science ◽  
The Social ◽  
History Of ◽  
Second World

AbstractIn this response to the symposium on our two books we try to deal as fully as possible in the brief space available with most of the major issues raised by our distinguished commentators. Although at least three of them are in agreement with the main thrust of the arguments put forward in our books, they all raise important issues relating to methodology, the history of economic thought (including omissions), and a number of more specific issues. Our answer is based on the restatement of the chief purpose of our two books, describing the intellectual history of the evolution of economic science emphasising the role of the excision of the social and the historical from economic theorising in the transition from (classical) political economy to (neoclassical) economics, only for the two to be reunited through the vulgar form of economics imperialism following the monolithic dominance of neoclassical economics at the expense of pluralism after the Second World War. The importance of political economy for the future of economic science is vigorously argued for.

scholarly journals 200 Years To Political Economy in Vilnius University

Ekonomika ◽  
2004 ◽  
Vol 65 ◽  
Author(s):  
Egidija Laumenskaitė
Keyword(s):  
Political Economy ◽  
Economic Thought ◽  
Economic Science ◽  
Special Event ◽  
Concise Overview ◽  
The World ◽  
History Of ◽  
Vilnius University

This paper gives a concise overview of the development of the economic thought in Lithuania mentioning the very special event in the history of the economic science - the establishment of the Department of Political Economy in Vilnius University in 1803 as the first Department of Political Economy in the world.

scholarly journals European values: a liberal doctrine through the methodology of political economy

2019 ◽  
Vol 2019 (4) ◽  
pp. 5-28
Author(s):  
Tetiana Artomova
Keyword(s):  
Political Economy ◽  
Social Relations ◽  
Economic Value ◽  
Social Economy ◽  
Economic Thought ◽  
Economic Science ◽  
Conceptual System ◽  
Modern Times ◽  
Von Mises ◽  
Classical Economic

Clarification of the laws of harmonious ordering of the social economy system was largely carried out in the depth of European civilization in the course of the evolution of fundamental scientific knowledge. Thus, the synergy of intellectual efforts of the representatives of classical German philosophy, English political economy and French social doctrines became a catalyst and, at the same time, a fertile cultural ground for the establishment of civic institutions of modern times. Transcendent understanding of civilizational values as a system of social relations is to be carried out by political economy – the science of economic laws. Such a mission of economic science was defined during the formation of its classic research line as the logic of the Middle Way. However, modern economic theory in content remains traditional. It does not conceive its object in a single space-time coordinate system or recognize the economic value (economic good) as its own object and the basis of social relations. For that reason, the most important concepts of civilizational heritage are considerably distorted. Freedom, equality, and brotherhood, which are considered to be political in origin, are the most important universal values that have been promulgated by the European community in modern times. However, the crystallization of the values of freedom, equality, and brotherhood in their syncretic unity is initially carried out in the depths of political economy. In recent times, each of them has been taken as one of the traditional methodological branches of economic science. Thus, the problem of freedom is key to the liberal-margin economic doctrine that today ideologically feeds educational courses in economics. In order to modernize the training courses, experts propose to restore their connection with the provisions of the authentic doctrine of liberal marginalization, and with the conceptual system of L. von Mises. This rethinking makes the logic of functioning of the modern market economy and the basic principles of neoliberal policy more transparent and at the same time shows the imperfection of liberal doctrine in comparison with the original scientific provisions of classical economic thought.

The Shift toward Secular Ideology

2021 ◽  
pp. 273-298
Author(s):  
Jon D. Wisman
Keyword(s):  
Nineteenth Century ◽  
Political Economy ◽  
Natural Science ◽  
Western Europe ◽  
Social Thought ◽  
The State ◽  
Invisible Hand ◽  
Late Nineteenth Century ◽  
Economic Science ◽  
Late Nineteenth

Following the rise of the state, religion served to legitimate societies’ institutions, practices, and unequal distributions of income, wealth, and privilege. However, emerging capitalism and its expanding bourgeoisie in Western Europe challenged the Catholic Church’s monopoly on truth and meaning, opening space for secular legitimation. The science of political economy increasingly evolved as a principal body of social thought legitimating inequality. This transfer from religion to political economy begins with the mercantilists and is mostly complete by the end of the nineteenth century. Political economy’s principal inequality-legitimating doctrines include the utility of poverty, the justice of the invisible hand, the Malthusian population doctrine, the wages-fund doctrine, and the trickle-down thesis. Most of these doctrines take on more of a patina of “natural” science in the late nineteenth century when the neoclassical revolution in economics attempted to sever economic science from morality and politics and express itself technically with calculus.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document