Michael Burawoy. Marxism After Polanyi

[@mihailis82]

Thanks for uploading this.

[@user-gv4mx5yq1p]

Люди добрые, подскажите как правильно произносится фамилия этого светила.

[@Aleph500adam]

Боровой :)

[@tothandhu]

Burawoy should read more closely the Great Transformation before speaking about. Fascims and Stalinism is not countermovement. They are the consequence that countermovement invokes states interventionism, and coexistence of state interventionism and market is an unstable system (an idea borrowed from Ludwig von Mises). Polanyi argues that Fascism and Socialism is the solution of the crisis of the unstable system of mixed economy of markets and interventionist state.

[@simon-999]

Mhh that's just not really true is it? Facism and stalinism were protective reactions against the marketization of money, land and labour. Polanyi also literally argues that the market cannot exist without other economic intergration spheres such as redistribution (state intervention) or reciprocity. So unless you point at the instability inherent in the market (as it tries to commodify those goods that would be unsustainable and destructive to commodify), I'm not sure how you mean that this coexistence is unstable?

[@hugodec7331]

@@simon-999 The coexistence is unstable in the national and international spheres. The Polanyian countermovement takes place within the national boundries. However, Nation states (and their economies) are embedded within international system of free-market capitalism. Impairing the self-adjusting mechanism of national economies is indeed a spontaneous reaction to liberalisation. Yet it in turn messes up the international free-trade system, thus worsening the politico-economic situation. This leads nations to a crisis which they try to solve by adopting a manifold of political systems -each of which has a different position within the formerly liberalised international world-order-: Rossevelt's New Deal, Soviet Russia or Nazi Germany, amongst others.