Suchergebnisse

Michel Albert: Capitalisme contre Capitalisme. Edition du Seuil, Paris 1991. 316 Seiten, 120 Franc

Cover -- Half Title -- Title -- Copyright -- Contents -- Foreword -- Introduction -- Chapter 1: Capitalism Around the World -- 1. In France and Germany, Anticapitalist Attitudes Are Widespread -- 2. Scandinavian Countries Practice a Superior Form of Capitalism -- 3. Popular Opinion in China Favors Capitalism -- 4. In Russia, So-Called Kremlin Capitalism Is Fascism, Not Capitalism -- 5. Africa Is Undergoing a Capitalist Revolution That Must Continue -- Periodical and Internet Sources Bibliography -- Chapter 2: Capitalism and the Global Financial Crisis -- 1. Unbridled Capitalism Is to Blame for the Worldwide Financial Crisis -- 2. Entrepreneurial Capitalism Is Not to Blame for the Worldwide Financial Crisis -- 3. Capitalism Worldwide Is Threatened by US Government Response to the Financial Crisis -- 4. The Crisis of Capitalism Requires That the United States Move Away from Consumerism -- 5. Australia Should Respond to the Financial Crisis by Rejecting Extreme Capitalism -- 6. The Impact of the Crisis on the Developing World Shows the Failure of Global Capitalism -- Periodical and Internet Sources Bibliography -- Chapter 3: Capitalism and Democracy -- 1. Capitalism Is Threatening Democracy Worldwide -- 2. In the United States and the United Kingdom, Democracy Threatens Capitalism -- 3. Capitalism Improves the Lives of Women More Than Democracy Does -- 4. In Many Countries, Capitalism Exists Without Democracy -- 5. In China, Capitalism Exists Without Political Democracy -- 6. In Latin America, Democratic Countries Are Rejecting Capitalism -- Periodical and Internet Sources Bibliography -- Chapter 4: Capitalism and Social Welfare Spending -- 1. Europe Should Not Abandon Its Social Model of Capitalism -- 2. In the United States, Social Insurance Balances the Harms of Capitalism

One might think that a crisis brought on by rapacious, unregulated capitalism would have changed a few minds about the fundamental nature of the global economy. One would be wrong. True, there is no lack of anti-capitalist sentiment in the world today, particularly as a crisis brought on by the system's worst excesses continues to ravage the global economy. If anything, people are witnessing an overload of critiques of the horrors of capitalism. Yet no matter how grievous the abuse or how indicative of a larger, more systemic failure, there's a limit to how far these critiques go. Faced with today's explosion of capitalism in China, analysts often ask when political democracy as the "natural" political accompaniment of capitalism will enforce itself. The main victim of the ongoing crisis is thus not capitalism, which appears to be evolving into an even more pervasive and pernicious form, but democracy -- not to mention the left, whose inability to offer a viable global alternative has again been rendered visible to all. Adapted from the source document.

Capitalism is first and foremost an economic system that prizes free and competitive markets, private ownership, and a comparatively small role for government intervention and regulation. Yet capitalism also has many political undertones and has become associated with notions of freedom, individualism, self-determination, and anti-unionism. As a political and economic philosophy, it was a major player in the Cold War, squaring off against communism and seemingly triumphing. The colorful history of this economic system that doubles as a political philosophy is recounted here, from Medieval-era

The purpose of this article is twofold. First, it assesses Yanis Varoufakis' theory of technofeudalism, and will argue, by way of response, that capitalism has not been displaced by a resurgence of feudalism, but is taking new forms that, increasingly, lie outside the powers of nation-states and of social democracy. Second, it questions the 'libertarian Marxist' alternative that Varoufakis proposes in its place, which abdicates any interest in the regulatory powers of the state and, paradoxically, advocates consumer-based political action to damage the market position of big corporate entities, even though markets and profits are said to be no longer central to the operation of technofeudalism.