Search Results

You are looking at 1 - 10 of 803 items for :

  • All: "presentism" x
  • Social Sciences x
Clear All


Edited by Fred Moseley and Tony Smith

This book provides a wide-ranging and in-depth reappraisal of the relation between Marx’s economic theory in Capital and Hegel’s Logic by leading Marxian economists and philosophers from around the world. The subjects dealt with include: systematic dialectics, the New Dialectics, materialism vs. idealism, Marx’s ‘inversion’ of Hegel, Hegel’s Concept logic (universality-particularity-singularity), Hegel’s Essence logic (essence-appearance), Marx’s levels of abstraction of capital in general and competition, and capital as Hegelian Subject.

The papers in this volume were originally presented at the 22nd annual meeting of the International Symposium on Marxian Theory at Mount Holyoke College in August 2011. The twelve authors are divided between seven economists and five philosophers, as is fitting for the interdisciplinary subject of the relation between Marx’s economic theory and Hegel’s logic.

Contributors are: Chris Arthur, Riccardo Bellofiore, Roberto Fineschi, Gastón Caligaris, Igor Hanzel, Juan Iñigo Carrera, Mark Meaney, Fred Moseley, Patrick Murray, Geert Reuten, Mario Robles, Tony Smith, and Guido Starosta.

Money and Totality

A Macro-Monetary Interpretation of Marx's Logic in Capital and the End of the 'Transformation Problem'


Fred Moseley

This ambitious book presents a comprehensive new 'macro-monetary' interpretation of Marx’s logical method in Capital, based on substantial textual evidence, which emphasises two main points: (1) Marx’s theory is primarily a macroeconomic theory of the total surplus-value produced in the economy as a whole; and (2) Marx’s theory is a monetary theory from beginning to end and the circuit of money capital – M - C - M’ – is the logical framework of Marx’s theory. It follows from this 'macro-monetary' interpretation that, contrary to the prevailing view, there is no 'transformation problem' in Marx’s theory; i.e., Marx did not 'fail to transform the inputs of constant capital and variable capital' in his theory of prices of production in Part 2 of Volume III.

Peripheral Visions in the Globalizing Present

Space, Mobility, Aesthetics


Edited by Esther Peeren, Hanneke Stuit and Astrid Van Weyenberg

This volume sheds new light on how today’s peripheries are made, lived, imagined and mobilized in a context of rapidly advancing globalization. Focusing on peripheral spaces, mobilities and aesthetics, it presents critical readings of, among others, Indian caste quarters, the Sahara, the South African backyard and European migration, as well as films, novels and artworks about marginalized communities and repressed histories. Together, these readings insist that the peripheral not only needs more visibility in political, economic and cultural terms, but is also invaluable for creating alternative perspectives on the globalizing present. Peripheral Visions combines sociological, cultural, literary and philosophical perspectives on the periphery, and highlights peripheral innovation and futurity to counter the lingering association of the peripheral with stagnation and backwardness.

From the Demise of Social Democracy to the ‘End of Capitalism’

The Intellectual Trajectory of Wolfgang Streeck

Jerome Roos

capitalist social order more generally. In a series of papers and books – most prominently Buying Time , published by Verso in 2014 – Streeck has presented a rousing and compelling critique of the transformations of the capitalist state and the ‘delayed crisis of democratic capitalism’. 2 More recently

Panagiotis Sotiris

already been suggested by Althusser or Poulantzas, but a stronger form of autonomisation. Class relations affected the form but not necessarily the content of ideology and political practice. If classes are present at the ideological and political levels – since relations of production maintain the role

Line Kollerup Oftedal and Jes Lynning Harfeld

. The issues in question can be PTSD , anxiety, depression or other inhibiting issues. Several organizations in the US, Europe and Australia provide psychiatric service dog training and certification which indicates that such dogs are, if not common, then at least present in several societies (see for

‘My Capitalism Is Bigger than Yours!’

Against Combining ‘How the West Came to Rule’ with ‘The Origins of Capitalism’

Maïa Pal

coercively reproduces itself. The present analysis is concerned with the problem of the intersocietal as a primary ontological unit for historicising the origins and development of capitalism. Its function for the authors is to provide structural definitions of capitalism and modernity without getting caught

Jairus Banaji


Anievas and Nişancıoğlu’s attempt to shift the terms of the debate about early modern capitalism by a major widening of its perspectives is a welcome move. Accepting this, the paper suggests that their argument can be more forcefully made if the theoretical residues of earlier traditions of Marxist historical explanation are purged from the way they expound that argument. The most ambivalent of these relates to their continued use of the idea of a ‘coexistence of modes of production’. This permeates the confused way they present Atlantic slavery. A second, comparable source of confusion concerns their description of the relationship between merchant capital and the absolutist state. The alliance between the modern state and mercantile capital is radically misrecognised thanks to an uncritical espousal of Anderson’s view of absolutism. The paper suggests that Anievas and Nişancıoğlu might have written a stronger book had they reconceptualised the economic history of capitalism by allowing for a whole epoch dominated by powerful groups of merchant capitalists. In conclusion, I argue (pace Marx) that the commercial capital of the later middle ages/early modern period was the first form in which production began to be subordinated to capital.

Rethinking Knowledge and Difference in Latin America’s Insurgent Moment: On de Sousa Santos and García Linera

A Review of Plebeian Power by Álvaro García Linera, and Epistemologies of the South by Boaventura de Sousa Santos

Robert Cavooris

present, suggest that for de Sousa Santos, difference is the grand political condition of our time, and addressing it our greatest political challenge. Latin America, in this sense, is the site where these issues have most recently and forcefully been articulated. This focus on difference is not

ʻHow Bourgeois Were the Bourgeois Revolutions?ʼ

Remarks on Neil Davidson’s Book

Heide Gerstenberger

interpretation. If this analytical practice is, indeed, present in How Revolutionary Were the Bourgeois Revolutions? , I have failed to detect it. Terminology and Theory For Neil Davidson, the historical content of bourgeois revolutions is the removal of those political structures which hindered capitalism from