Search results

1. Introduction: Framing Greek exoticism. History and the current crisis (Dimitris P. Sotiropoulos, Panayis Panagiotopoulos) -- PART I. Exoticism lasts a long time. Philhellenism and other historical constructions of Greece -- 2. Historical Patterns of Greek Exoticism (19th-20th century) (Dimitris P. Sotiropoulos) -- 3. The European origins of the Great Idea (Vicky Karafoulidou) -- 4. Perceptions of Antiquity and Modernity. Greece in the eyes of her allies, 1946-2018 (Dimitrios Antoniou, Zinovia Lialiouti) -- PART II. Radical anticapitalism and social deconstruction during the Greek crisis -- 5. Demodernise Greece. Sociological critique on the construction of an alternative country (Panayis Panagiotopoulos) -- 6. Cradle of Solidarity and Philoxenia. Exotic distortions of the Greek migration crisis (Yiorgos Rakkas) -- 7. Zorba the Greek. From the "Syrtaki" dance to the Eurogroup (Kostas Karavidas, Yiannis Papatheodorou) -- 8. "Spoiled Brats" or "Anti-capitalist Pioneers". Turkish views of the Greek crisis (Ioannis N. Grigoriadis) -- PART III. Ruins and artistic exoticism. Greece as a cultural Arcadia of the West -- 9. Crisis, Exoticism and the Rediscovery of Greece (Dimitris Tziovas) -- 10. The Cornucopia of Greekness. Copies and performances of a body that never was (Despina Sevasti) -- 11. Self-exoticism, The Iconography of crisis and the Greek Weird Wave (Afroditi Nikolaidou) -- 12. Athens, an alternative city. Graffiti and radical tourism (Vassilis Vamvakas)

This article investigates Victorian investor financial portfolio strategies in England and Wales during the second half of the nineteenth century. We find that investors held on average about half of their gross wealth in the form of four or five liquid financial securities, but were reluctant to adopt fully contemporary financial advice to invest equal amounts in securities or to spread risk across the globe. They generally held under-diversified portfolios and proximity to their investments may have been an alternative to diversification as a means of risk reduction, especially for the less wealthy.

The role of the small shareholder has been largely ignored in the literature, which has tended to concentrate on controlling shareholders and family ownership. Yet, focus on the importance of small shareholders can capture significant aspects of financial development. Pre-1970 debates and policy conflicts linked to stock exchange development concentrated on shareholder democracy and diffusion as key indicators. This article explores the so-called democratization of investment and the factors behind it through the lens of trends in estimates of the UK and U.S. shareholding populations between 1895 and 1970. It covers three key periods: before World War I, before and after the stock market crash of 1929, and post-World War II. It identifies three periods in the United States when shareholder numbers were paramount: in the boom years of the 1920s, as part of the inquest into the 1929 crash, and post-World War II in an attempt to boost stock market activity. In the United Kingdom, although some concern was expressed during the 1920s and 1930s at the passive nature of small investors, who held diversified portfolios with small amounts in each holding, it was the fear of nationalization after World War II that led to more in-depth shareholder estimates.

The recent theoretical works of the authors mentioned in the title of the paper provide thorough insights into the workings of contemporary capitalism. Derivatives are the key issue involved here. They comprehend financialization as a development within, rather than a distortion of, capitalist production. They nevertheless underestimate the ability of Marx's analytical categories to capture the essence of contemporary organization of capitalism. A return to Marx is not only helpful but is also indispensable for clarification of some unformed aspects in their analysis. What is actually involved in financialization is not just the emergence of a structure enabling more effective valuation of financial assets; it is also the development of a technology of power that is superimposed on existing power relations for the purpose of organizing their functioning. [Reprinted by permission of Sage Publications Inc., copyright holder.]

The recent theoretical works of the authors mentioned in the title of the paper provide thorough insights into the workings of contemporary capitalism. Derivatives are the key issue involved here. They comprehend financialization as a development within, rather than a distortion of, capitalist production. They nevertheless underestimate the ability of Marx's analytical categories to capture the essence of contemporary organization of capitalism. A return to Marx is not only helpful but is also indispensable for clarification of some unformed aspects in their analysis. What is actually involved in financialization is not just the emergence of a structure enabling more effective valuation of financial assets; it is also the development of a technology of power that is superimposed on existing power relations for the purpose of organizing their functioning.

"The article criticizes the usual narrative, that the indebtedness of the southern countries of EU is the result of reckless borrowing, exaggerated consumption and productive weakness. It is shown how current account imbalances worked for some years as an accommodation process. However, the Euro is not just a currency, it is a 'mechanism' to impose capitalist power, to force permanent processes of restructuring labour. The contemporary crisis of the Euro is not just the outcome of a wrong policy, it is a process of capitalist attack in class struggle." (author's abstract)

For more than a century 'imperialism' has been a key concept in theoretical discussions and politics, never denoting a single theoretical approach. In classical Marxist theories imperialism was seen as the notion deciphering capital's global trajectories, to the extent that the different nation-states were not fading away despite the global character of capitalism. Many subsequent narratives of international capitalism represent alternative attempts at conceptualizing the very same problem of the 'lack of correspondence' between the territory of the national state on the one hand and the sphere of operations of capital. In our view, all these theoretical strategies share a common point of departure: namely, the rejection of the Marxian concept of social capital. This rejection has significant consequences for the way of understanding how class power is organized within a social formation and so the way in which we should understand imperialism. The concept of the imperialist chain opens up a fertile theoretical terrain in an endeavor to extend the Marxian problematic.

For more than a century 'imperialism' has been a key concept in theoretical discussions & politics, never denoting a single theoretical approach. In classical Marxist theories imperialism was seen as the notion deciphering capital's global trajectories, to the extent that the different nation-states were not fading away despite the global character of capitalism. Many subsequent narratives of international capitalism represent alternative attempts at conceptualizing the very same problem of the 'lack of correspondence' between the territory of the national state on the one hand & the sphere of operations of capital. In our view, all these theoretical strategies share a common point of departure: namely, the rejection of the Marxian concept of social capital. This rejection has significant consequences for the way of understanding how class power is organized within a social formation & so the way in which we should understand imperialism. The concept of the imperialist chain opens up a fertile theoretical terrain in an endeavor to extend the Marxian problematic. Adapted from the source document.

For more than a century 'imperialism' has been a key concept in theoretical discussions and politics, never denoting a single theoretical approach. In classical Marxist theories imperialism was seen as the notion deciphering capital's global trajectories, to the extent that the different nation-states werenot fading away despite the global character of capitalism. Many subsequent arratives of international capitalism represent alternative attempts at conceptualizing the very same problem of the 'lack of correspondence' between the territory of the national state on the one hand and the sphere of operations of capital. In our view, all these theoretical strategies share a common point of departure: namely, the rejection of the Marxian concept of social capital. This ejection has significant consequences for the way of understanding how class power is organized within a social formation and so the way in which we should understand imperialism. The concept of the imperialist chain opens up a fertile theoretical terrain in an endeavor to extend the Marxian problematic. (Prokla/ FUB 2010)