Podcast appearances and mentions of Karl Polanyi

  • 66PODCASTS
  • 104EPISODES
  • 50mAVG DURATION
  • 1EPISODE EVERY OTHER WEEK
  • Jul 23, 2026LATEST
Karl Polanyi

POPULARITY

20192020202120222023202420252026


Best podcasts about Karl Polanyi

Latest podcast episodes about Karl Polanyi

Leaving Egypt Podcast
EP #70 A Politics of Restoration - with Maurice Glasman

Leaving Egypt Podcast

Play Episode Listen Later Jul 23, 2026 91:29


Al Roxburgh and Jenny Sinclair welcome Maurice Glasman back to Leaving Egypt for a second conversation. Maurice traces the exhaustion of a settlement built on progressivism and globalisation -one the church has too often been co-opted into rather than resisted. In its eroding, he sees opportunity for a politics built not on elite abstraction but on ordinary virtues - commitment, constraint, solidarity, family, place and nation - drawn from the well of Catholic Social Teaching. Water, land, the human person: for Maurice these are gifts of God, not commodities, and recovering that conviction is where renewal begins. He argues the divide is no longer left versus right but sovereignists versus globalists, those who want power to rest with peoples and places, versus those who would transfer it to borderless, unaccountable systems of capital, ideology and technology. He turns to two countries close to his heart: confronting Iran's regime and backing its people's resistance, and Ukraine's costly defence of its sovereignty. What may be coming, he senses in a yearning for settled life from working-class Britain to Ukraine and the Iranian people, is restoration: the recovery of family, faith, place and nation: a hopeful story the church could yet join, if only it had eyes to see it.Lord Maurice Glasman is a British politician, political theorist, commentator and community organiser who has served as a Labour life peer in the UK Parliament since 2011. He is best known as the founder of Blue Labour, a movement launched in 2009 to address Labour's drift from its founding roots, challenging both New Labour's neoliberalism and progressive identity politics. Drawing on Catholic Social Teaching, Aristotle and the thought of Karl Polanyi, he promotes a politics of the common good. Alongside his parliamentary work he remains active internationally, particularly in relation to Ukraine and Iran. He has a longstanding commitment to community organising, most recently in Grimsby, through the Common Good Foundation, which he founded and directs. Born into a Jewish working-class family in North London, he studied at Cambridge, York and Florence. His official title is Baron Glasman of Stoke Newington and of Stamford Hill.LINKSFor Maurice Glasman:https://x.com/blue_labour?lang=enhttps://www.bluelabour.org/https://www.commongoodfoundation.org.uk/Books:Blue Labour: the Politics of the Common GoodUnnecessary Suffering: Management, Markets and the Liquidation of SolidarityFor Alan J Roxburgh:http://alanroxburgh.com/aboutFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/alan.roxburgh.127/Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/thecommonsnetworkBooks:Forming Communities of Hope in the Great Unravelling: Leadership in a Changing World (with Roy Searle)Joining God in the Great UnravellingLeadership, God's Agency and DisruptionsJoining God, Remaking Church, Changing the World: The New Shape of the Church in Our TimeFor Jenny Sinclair:Substack: https://t4cg.substack.com/s/from-jenny-sinclairWebsite: https://togetherforthecommongood.co.uk/from-jenny-sinclairLinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/jenny-sinclair-0589783b/Twitter: https://twitter.com/T4CGFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/TogetherForTheCommonGoodUKInstagram: https://www.instagram.com/t4cg_insta/ Get full access to Leaving Egypt at leavingegyptpodcast.substack.com/subscribe

El Podcast de Marc Vidal
1.800 años de calma, 30 de vértigo

El Podcast de Marc Vidal

Play Episode Listen Later Jul 23, 2026 25:08


Un ejército romano y otro napoleónico se movían a la misma velocidad: treinta kilómetros al día, con dieciocho siglos de diferencia entre ambos. Ese dato, aparentemente trivial, es la clave para entender por qué el presente se siente tan vertiginoso. Analizamos la curva que mide el intervalo entre rupturas tecnológicas de gran escala: nueve mil quinientos años entre la revolución neolítica y la imprenta de Gutenberg, apenas veintisiete entre la aparición de internet y la inteligencia artificial generativa. Karl Polanyi advirtió que el ritmo del cambio puede importar tanto como su dirección, y esa tesis se pone a prueba con tres rupturas que están a punto de llegar: la fusión nuclear comercial, que sustituiría el control geológico de la energía por uno tecnológico, la inteligencia artificial general, que el consenso de los grandes laboratorios sitúa entre 2030 y 2045 y que persigue objetivos en lugar de solo ejecutar instrucciones, y el salto de las interfaces cerebro máquina desde el uso médico hacia la mejora electiva, con todo lo que eso implica para la privacidad de los propios pensamientos. John Maynard Keynes ya hablaba de desempleo tecnológico hace casi un siglo, sin imaginar la magnitud de lo que vendría después. La condición humana no ha cambiado: seguimos digiriendo el mundo a la misma velocidad biológica que un campesino del año 980. Lo que se ha acelerado es todo lo demás, y nadie va a frenar esa curva por nosotros. ¿Cuánto tiempo queda antes de que la distancia entre lo que somos y lo que nos rodea se vuelva insalvable? Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Vlan!
#403 Comment sortir la France de l'épuisement? Avec François Ruffin

Vlan!

Play Episode Listen Later Jul 14, 2026 60:38


François Ruffin est député et journaliste, auteur de plusieurs documentaires et candidat à notre prochaine élection présidentielle.Je me méfie de moi-même quant il s'agit de faire des interviews politiques car je ne crois pas du tout que si tu parles à une personne pendant 2h tu fini par savoir ce qu'elle a dans le ventre.Alors j'ai proposé à François une discussion à bâton rompu, sur des tonnes de sujets à débuter par l'écologie comme la plus grande insécurité qu'on refuse de nommer, du logement comme premier problème de pouvoir d'achat en France, de la mondialisation que les Français n'ont jamais vraiment choisie, de l'intelligence artificielle qui menace autant les cadres que les ouvriers, et de la manière dont le Rassemblement National a construit sa progression en trois étages.J'ai questionné François Ruffin sur ses propres angles morts, sur ce que "faire ensemble" veut dire pour lui, et sur ce qu'il changerait dans l'école, la police et la fiscalité s'il en avait le pouvoir.Je crois que comme il le dit lui même c'est une discussion qu'on en entend rarement avec un politique : sans petite phrase, sans recherche de buzz, avec une vraie tentative de dire ce qu'il pense dans ses tripes.Citations marquantes"L'économie et l'argent, ce sont des imaginaires. Il n'y a pas d'argent, il n'y a pas d'économie." (00:10:01)"Si la planète était une banque, ça fait longtemps qu'on l'aurait sauvée." (01:21:58)"On a des PDG à stock-options ou propriétaires multimilliardaires qui viennent se cacher derrière la vertu du petit entrepreneur." (00:45:41)"Je crois qu'on existe par les autres et qu'on se sauve par les autres." (01:04:00)"La démocratie, ce n'est pas du consensus. C'est du conflit, mais organisé, verbalisé, institutionnalisé." (01:41:54)Idées centrales L'écologie comme la plus grosse insécurité (00:07:06) Pour Ruffin, l'écologie n'est pas un sujet parmi d'autres mais l'insécurité la plus grave qu'on refuse de traiter comme telle, parce qu'on préfère l'éviter psychologiquement plutôt que de regarder en face une "chronique d'une mort annoncée".Le logement, angle mort du pouvoir d'achat (00:27:53) La part du logement dans le budget des ménages est passée de 10 % à 30 % en vingt ans, avec des loyers en hausse de 80 % pendant que les salaires réels progressaient de 20 %. Ruffin en fait un sujet aussi central que les retraites, et un facteur direct de la chute de la natalité.Faire ensemble plutôt que vivre ensemble (01:05:47) Ruffin distingue une société qui cohabite (statique, côte à côte) d'une société qui avance vers un horizon commun. Sans projet partagé, il pense qu'un peuple s'épuise dans les jalousies et les boucs émissaires, comme un couple sans projet commun.Un État colonisé de l'intérieur (00:49:07) Plutôt que de parler de lobbying, Ruffin décrit un État où les intérêts privés (pharmaceutiques en particulier) ont pénétré la décision publique de l'intérieur, citant les réunions du lobby des grands labos tenues dans les salons de l'Élysée.L'IA, un double choc pour les classes moyennes (01:28:10) Contrairement aux vagues précédentes, l'IA touche des métiers qualifiés qui se croyaient protégés par leur diplôme, en cumulant robotisation et délocalisation des postes de bureau, de comptabilité ou de design.Le Rassemblement National, une fusée à trois étages (01:49:45) Ruffin décrit le RN comme construit en couches successives : Jean-Marie Le Pen et le racisme affiché, Marine Le Pen et le discours social, Jordan Bardella et le ralliement aux milieux économiques, avec une tension naissante entre ces deux derniers étages.Questions posées dans l'interviewPourquoi l'écologie n'est-elle jamais présentée comme la insécurité qu'elle est réellement ?Comment un responsable politique peut-il agir au niveau national dans un monde mondialisé ?Le logement est-il devenu le vrai sujet du pouvoir d'achat en France ?Comment expliquer que les Français n'aient jamais vraiment choisi la mondialisation ?Faut-il taxer davantage les ultra-riches sans braquer les petits patrons ?Comment redonner une finalité claire à l'école et à la police ?L'intelligence artificielle peut-elle faire s'effondrer le capitalisme lui-même ?Pourquoi les partis politiques n'arrivent-ils plus à débattre entre eux, même à gauche ?Quels sont les angles morts de la gauche, et les vôtres ?Comment le Rassemblement National a-t-il construit sa progression électorale ?Références citéesLivres et écritsLe Progrès. Le Nôtre, François Ruffin (00:56:55)Ecotopia, Ernest Callenbach (01:24:03)Résonance, Hartmut Rosa (01:26:39)La Grande Transformation, Karl Polanyi (01:29:38)"The Antisocial Century", The Atlantic (01:04:19)Travaux de Ha-Joon Chang, économiste sud-coréen (00:20:10)Rapport d'Olivier Lluansi sur la réindustrialisation (00:47:12)Article de Grégory Pouy pour la Fondation Jean-Jaurès sur l'impact des podcasts en politique (00:04:21 et 01:45:19)Personnes citéesAmbroise Croizat (00:13:44)Jean Monnet (01:10:35)Franklin D. Roosevelt (01:09:07)Christophe Castaner (00:22:58)Gérald Darmanin (00:42:52)Bernie Sanders (01:12:27)Kamala Harris (01:12:23)Michel Maffesoli (00:36:42 et 01:15:04)Sarah Saldmann (01:46:12)Annie Ernaux (01:47:42)Antoine Foucher (00:22:12)Yann LeCun et Fidji Simo (01:35:43)Jean Pisani-Ferry (01:23:09)Keynes (01:21:36)Institutions et conceptsSAFER (00:30:26)RIC, référendum d'initiative citoyenne (00:37:24)CROUS (00:31:34)Medef, CGPME, U2P (00:45:20)Classement Challenges des grandes fortunes (00:40:44)Livret A et taux de centralisation (00:56:53)Timestamps clés00:04 : Pourquoi cette conversation avec un politique sort de l'ordinaire06:13 : Générique, entrée en matière sur la canicule07:06 : L'écologie comme la plus grosse insécurité10:01 : L'économie et l'argent, de purs imaginaires12:27 : D'où vient l'engagement politique de Ruffin13:44 : Ambroise Croizat et la naissance de la Sécurité sociale17:14 : Comment agir au niveau national contre les multinationales20:10 : Le modèle sud-coréen : importer moins plutôt qu'exporter plus22:58 : La mondialisation, un choix des dirigeants, pas des Français25:48 : Protéger certains produits sans fermer le pays27:53 : Le logement, premier poste du pouvoir d'achat33:21 : Les années 80 et la grande déréglementation37:24 : Le RIC et les états généraux comme réponse démocratique40:38 : Sortir des boucs émissaires et de la jalousie sociale45:22 : Distinguer les petits patrons des multinationales49:07 : Un État colonisé de l'intérieur par les intérêts privés53:00 : Où trouve-t-on l'argent pour l'armée58:38 : Remettre la cuisine, le jardinage et la réparation à l'école1:01:02 : La théorie de la société sans friction1:05:47 : Faire ensemble plutôt que vivre ensemble1:09:07 : L'horizon commun : une économie de guerre climatique1:12:23 : Les angles morts de Kamala Harris et de la gauche1:15:18 : Insécurité, immigration, violence : ce qu'en pense Ruffin1:21:36 : Sortir de la compétitivité comme seul horizon1:26:48 : L'IA peut-elle faire tomber le capitalisme1:28:10 : Le double choc de l'IA : robotisation et délocalisation1:35:43 : Pourquoi l'Europe n'a ni réseau social ni IA souveraine1:41:54 : La démocratie comme conflit organisé, pas comme consensus1:44:06 : Le rôle des journalistes politiques dans la course au buzz1:46:12 : Ce que l'expérience de terrain change vraiment1:49:45 : Le Rassemblement National, une fusée à trois étages1:53:53 : Pourquoi la radicalité se mesure au programme, pas au ton1:56:50 : Ouvrir et fermer la porte, la conclusion de François Ruffin Suggestion d'autres épisodes à écouter : #401 Les politiques sont-ils deconnectés du réél? Avec Boris Vallaud (Partie 1) (https://audmns.com/ZOPVNPw) #376 Quelles stratégies pour reconstruire une France autonome et résiliente? Avec Arnaud Montebourg - Partie 1 (https://audmns.com/UxFQjUM) [Solo] La vraie violence est celle dont on ne parle pas (https://audmns.com/COyPqqx)Hébergé par Audiomeans. Visitez audiomeans.fr/politique-de-confidentialite pour plus d'informations.

Vlan!
#403 Comment sortir la France de l'épuisement ? avec François Ruffin (partie 2)

Vlan!

Play Episode Listen Later Jul 14, 2026 53:53


François Ruffin est député et journaliste, auteur de plusieurs documentaires et candidat à notre prochaine élection présidentielle.Je me méfie de moi-même quant il s'agit de faire des interviews politiques car je ne crois pas du tout que si tu parles à une personne pendant 2h tu fini par savoir ce qu'elle a dans le ventre.Alors j'ai proposé à François une discussion à bâton rompu, sur des tonnes de sujets à débuter par l'écologie comme la plus grande insécurité qu'on refuse de nommer, du logement comme premier problème de pouvoir d'achat en France, de la mondialisation que les Français n'ont jamais vraiment choisie, de l'intelligence artificielle qui menace autant les cadres que les ouvriers, et de la manière dont le Rassemblement National a construit sa progression en trois étages.J'ai questionné François Ruffin sur ses propres angles morts, sur ce que "faire ensemble" veut dire pour lui, et sur ce qu'il changerait dans l'école, la police et la fiscalité s'il en avait le pouvoir.Je crois que comme il le dit lui même c'est une discussion qu'on en entend rarement avec un politique : sans petite phrase, sans recherche de buzz, avec une vraie tentative de dire ce qu'il pense dans ses tripes.Citations marquantes"L'économie et l'argent, ce sont des imaginaires. Il n'y a pas d'argent, il n'y a pas d'économie." (00:10:01)"Si la planète était une banque, ça fait longtemps qu'on l'aurait sauvée." (01:21:58)"On a des PDG à stock-options ou propriétaires multimilliardaires qui viennent se cacher derrière la vertu du petit entrepreneur." (00:45:41)"Je crois qu'on existe par les autres et qu'on se sauve par les autres." (01:04:00)"La démocratie, ce n'est pas du consensus. C'est du conflit, mais organisé, verbalisé, institutionnalisé." (01:41:54)Idées centrales L'écologie comme la plus grosse insécurité (00:07:06) Pour Ruffin, l'écologie n'est pas un sujet parmi d'autres mais l'insécurité la plus grave qu'on refuse de traiter comme telle, parce qu'on préfère l'éviter psychologiquement plutôt que de regarder en face une "chronique d'une mort annoncée".Le logement, angle mort du pouvoir d'achat (00:27:53) La part du logement dans le budget des ménages est passée de 10 % à 30 % en vingt ans, avec des loyers en hausse de 80 % pendant que les salaires réels progressaient de 20 %. Ruffin en fait un sujet aussi central que les retraites, et un facteur direct de la chute de la natalité.Faire ensemble plutôt que vivre ensemble (01:05:47) Ruffin distingue une société qui cohabite (statique, côte à côte) d'une société qui avance vers un horizon commun. Sans projet partagé, il pense qu'un peuple s'épuise dans les jalousies et les boucs émissaires, comme un couple sans projet commun.Un État colonisé de l'intérieur (00:49:07) Plutôt que de parler de lobbying, Ruffin décrit un État où les intérêts privés (pharmaceutiques en particulier) ont pénétré la décision publique de l'intérieur, citant les réunions du lobby des grands labos tenues dans les salons de l'Élysée.L'IA, un double choc pour les classes moyennes (01:28:10) Contrairement aux vagues précédentes, l'IA touche des métiers qualifiés qui se croyaient protégés par leur diplôme, en cumulant robotisation et délocalisation des postes de bureau, de comptabilité ou de design.Le Rassemblement National, une fusée à trois étages (01:49:45) Ruffin décrit le RN comme construit en couches successives : Jean-Marie Le Pen et le racisme affiché, Marine Le Pen et le discours social, Jordan Bardella et le ralliement aux milieux économiques, avec une tension naissante entre ces deux derniers étages.Questions posées dans l'interviewPourquoi l'écologie n'est-elle jamais présentée comme la insécurité qu'elle est réellement ?Comment un responsable politique peut-il agir au niveau national dans un monde mondialisé ?Le logement est-il devenu le vrai sujet du pouvoir d'achat en France ?Comment expliquer que les Français n'aient jamais vraiment choisi la mondialisation ?Faut-il taxer davantage les ultra-riches sans braquer les petits patrons ?Comment redonner une finalité claire à l'école et à la police ?L'intelligence artificielle peut-elle faire s'effondrer le capitalisme lui-même ?Pourquoi les partis politiques n'arrivent-ils plus à débattre entre eux, même à gauche ?Quels sont les angles morts de la gauche, et les vôtres ?Comment le Rassemblement National a-t-il construit sa progression électorale ?Références citéesLivres et écritsLe Progrès. Le Nôtre, François Ruffin (00:56:55)Ecotopia, Ernest Callenbach (01:24:03)Résonance, Hartmut Rosa (01:26:39)La Grande Transformation, Karl Polanyi (01:29:38)"The Antisocial Century", The Atlantic (01:04:19)Travaux de Ha-Joon Chang, économiste sud-coréen (00:20:10)Rapport d'Olivier Lluansi sur la réindustrialisation (00:47:12)Article de Grégory Pouy pour la Fondation Jean-Jaurès sur l'impact des podcasts en politique (00:04:21 et 01:45:19)Personnes citéesAmbroise Croizat (00:13:44)Jean Monnet (01:10:35)Franklin D. Roosevelt (01:09:07)Christophe Castaner (00:22:58)Gérald Darmanin (00:42:52)Bernie Sanders (01:12:27)Kamala Harris (01:12:23)Michel Maffesoli (00:36:42 et 01:15:04)Sarah Saldmann (01:46:12)Annie Ernaux (01:47:42)Antoine Foucher (00:22:12)Yann LeCun et Fidji Simo (01:35:43)Jean Pisani-Ferry (01:23:09)Keynes (01:21:36)Institutions et conceptsSAFER (00:30:26)RIC, référendum d'initiative citoyenne (00:37:24)CROUS (00:31:34)Medef, CGPME, U2P (00:45:20)Classement Challenges des grandes fortunes (00:40:44)Livret A et taux de centralisation (00:56:53)Timestamps clés00:04 : Pourquoi cette conversation avec un politique sort de l'ordinaire06:13 : Générique, entrée en matière sur la canicule07:06 : L'écologie comme la plus grosse insécurité10:01 : L'économie et l'argent, de purs imaginaires12:27 : D'où vient l'engagement politique de Ruffin13:44 : Ambroise Croizat et la naissance de la Sécurité sociale17:14 : Comment agir au niveau national contre les multinationales20:10 : Le modèle sud-coréen : importer moins plutôt qu'exporter plus22:58 : La mondialisation, un choix des dirigeants, pas des Français25:48 : Protéger certains produits sans fermer le pays27:53 : Le logement, premier poste du pouvoir d'achat33:21 : Les années 80 et la grande déréglementation37:24 : Le RIC et les états généraux comme réponse démocratique40:38 : Sortir des boucs émissaires et de la jalousie sociale45:22 : Distinguer les petits patrons des multinationales49:07 : Un État colonisé de l'intérieur par les intérêts privés53:00 : Où trouve-t-on l'argent pour l'armée58:38 : Remettre la cuisine, le jardinage et la réparation à l'école1:01:02 : La théorie de la société sans friction1:05:47 : Faire ensemble plutôt que vivre ensemble1:09:07 : L'horizon commun : une économie de guerre climatique1:12:23 : Les angles morts de Kamala Harris et de la gauche1:15:18 : Insécurité, immigration, violence : ce qu'en pense Ruffin1:21:36 : Sortir de la compétitivité comme seul horizon1:26:48 : L'IA peut-elle faire tomber le capitalisme1:28:10 : Le double choc de l'IA : robotisation et délocalisation1:35:43 : Pourquoi l'Europe n'a ni réseau social ni IA souveraine1:41:54 : La démocratie comme conflit organisé, pas comme consensus1:44:06 : Le rôle des journalistes politiques dans la course au buzz1:46:12 : Ce que l'expérience de terrain change vraiment1:49:45 : Le Rassemblement National, une fusée à trois étages1:53:53 : Pourquoi la radicalité se mesure au programme, pas au ton1:56:50 : Ouvrir et fermer la porte, la conclusion de François RuffinHébergé par Audiomeans. Visitez audiomeans.fr/politique-de-confidentialite pour plus d'informations.

Sinica Podcast
China Shock 2.0: This Time It's Europe, with Adam Tooze

Sinica Podcast

Play Episode Listen Later Jun 24, 2026 46:53


Last week in Brussels, EU leaders held their first sustained debate on China policy in three years, and were so wary of Beijing's reaction they wouldn't print the word “China” on the agenda. The trigger: a goods-trade deficit closing in on 360 billion euros, and, for the first time ever, all 27 member states in the red. Recorded at Summer Davos in Dalian, I sat down with economic historian Adam Tooze to ask why the panic, and why now. Polanyi, the Plaza Accord, “glut shaming,” a $1.2 trillion surplus, and what Europe and China each most need to understand about the other.04:26 – Why the alarm now? Imbalances are decades old, so what changed—and the shift from China slotting into Western supply chains to climbing the value chain07:04 – Karl Polanyi, the “double movement,” and how the European working-class question becomes the politics of right-wing populism11:21 – Autos as the core of the fight—12 million jobs—and why the Ukraine alignment gives the whole thing its moral charge for von der Leyen14:14 – “Glut shaming”: the accusation of illegitimacy baked into the Western framing, and how it lands on a Chinese ear18:16 – Wěiqu (委屈)—the swallowed sense of being wronged and why the EU should exercise a bit of cognitive empathy20:14 – Merz reaches for the 1985 Plaza Accord, and the empathy gap that lets a German politician miss what that signals in Beijing22:00 – The currency-manipulation argument, Germany's own history with the euro, and why Switzerland is the real manipulator25:49 – The $1.2 trillion surplus—”nothing we've ever seen before”—and the consumption China refuses to do26:12 – Sorting the sectors: solar, batteries, and EVs where resistance is futile, versus steel and shipbuilding as “Polanyi double-movement as cosplay”32:04 – The Draghi report and the house of mirrors: is China the cause of Europe's malaise or just the thing exposing a homegrown one?36:27 – If Tooze had von der Leyen's ear: investment-linked talks, phased protection with a clear exit, and “investment, investment, investment”41:16 – The October clock on the U.S.–China truce, and why this autumn could get very ugly43:09 – Closing advice: what Europe and Beijing each most need to understand if this ends in managed rebalancing rather than a trade warSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Future Histories
S04E07 - Kohei Saito, Christoph Sorg and Jan Groos on Creative Construction and the Struggle over Progress

Future Histories

Play Episode Listen Later Jun 21, 2026 106:27


Kohei Saito, Christoph Sorg and Jan Groos discuss democratic planning in the 21st century.  Future Histories LIVE. This episode is part of the ‘Future Histories LIVE' format. For this, individual episodes are recorded live – that is, in front of an audience – at irregular intervals. This episode is the live recording of a book launch and discussion event that took place on June 11, 2026 at the NACHTASYL Hamburg:  https://www.thalia-theater.de/de/stuecke/creative-construction-and-the-struggle-over-progress-democratic-planning-in-the-21st-century/361 The video recording of the event can be found on our Youtube-Channel:  https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCfRFz38oh9RH73-pWcME6yw Shownotes  Sorg, C. & Groos, J. (2026). Creative Construction. Demokratische Planung im 21. Jahrhundert. Brumaire.  https://brumaireverlag.myshopify.com/products/creative-construction Saito, K. (2026). Am Ende des Fortschritts. Überleben in den Ruinen des Kapitalismus. dtv. https://www.dtv.de/buch/am-ende-des-fortschritts-28534 NACHTASYL Hamburg and Thalia Theater:  http://nachtasyl.de/ https://www.thalia-theater.de/de on Friedrich von Hayek:   https://geschichte.univie.ac.at/de/personen/friedrich-august-von-hayek Saito, K. (2023). Systemsturz. dtv.     https://www.dtv.de/buch/systemsturz-28369 Cédric Durand at the University of Geneva:  https://www.unige.ch/sciences-societe/dehes/membres/cedric-durand Philipp Staab at Humboldt University Berlin:  https://www.sowi.hu-berlin.de/de/lehrbereiche/zukunftarbeit/mitarbeiter_innen/pstaab Jacob Blumenfeld with Critical Theory in Berlin:  https://criticaltheoryinberlin.de/people/jacob-blumenfeld/ on the Dark Enlightenment (or Neo-Reactionary) movement:  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_Enlightenment https://www.populismstudies.org/Vocabulary/dark-enlightenment/ Curtis Yarvin coined the term as Blogger under the pseudonym Mencius Moldbug:  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curtis_Yarvin Nick Land summarised Yarvin's theories in a book:  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nick_Land Linus Westheuser and ‘climate populism': https://linuswestheuser.com/ Westheuser, L. & Siebert, J. (2025). Warum wir Klimapopulismus brauchen. Surplus.   https://www.surplusmagazin.de/warum-wir-einen-klimapopulismus-brauchen/ For the chapters on ‘models' by Jakob Heyer, Stefan Meretz and Simon Sutterlütti see:  https://brumaireverlag.myshopify.com/products/creative-construction on Karl Polanyi:  International Karl Polanyi Institute (2019). Karl Polanyi. Life and Works of an Epochal Thinker. Falter.  https://www.karlpolanyisociety.com/ Benanav, A. (2025). Beyond Capitalism I-II. New Left Review.  https://newleftreview.org/issues/ii153/articles/aaron-benanav-beyond-capitalism-1 https://newleftreview.org/issues/ii154/articles/aaron-benanav-beyond-capitalism-2 Herrmann, U. (2024). Das Ende des Kapitalismus. Warum Wachstum und Klimaschutz nicht vereinbar sind – und wie wir in Zukunft leben werden. Kiepenheuer & Witsch.  https://www.kiwi-verlag.de/buch/ulrike-herrmann-das-ende-des-kapitalismus-9783462007015 Neckel, S. (2022). Infrastruktursozialismus: Die Bedeutung der Fundamentalökonomie. In Kapitalismus und Nachhaltigkeit (Ed. S. Neckel, P. Degens, S. Lenz). Campus.  https://www.researchgate.net/publication/362107108_Infrastruktursozialismus_Die_Bedeutung_der_Fundamentalokonomie on Claus Offe and the 'legitimation crisis': Offe, C. (1986). Strukturprobleme des kapitalistischen Staates: Aufsätze zur Politischen Soziologie. Suhrkamp. https://www.amazon.de/Strukturprobleme-kapitalistischen-Staates-Politischen-Soziologie/dp/3518105493 Krippner, G. R. (2012). Capitalizing on Crisis. The Political Origins of the Rise of Finance. Harvard University Press. https://www.hup.harvard.edu/books/9780674066199 Menon, N. (2024). Planning Democracy. How a Professor, an Institute, and an Idea Shaped India. Penguin India.   https://www.penguin.co.in/book/planning-democracy/ Blumenfeld, J. P. (2024). Managing Decline. Cured Quail (3).  https://www.academia.edu/121062536/Managing_Decline Mau, S. (2023). Mute Compulsion. A Marxist Theory of the Economic Power of Capital. Verso.  https://www.versobooks.com/products/2759-mute-compulsion?srsltid=AfmBOooxWbwMWcWT7UUqrlpAT2yXYPK6B5TSR59_IAoxYR_lp_wpSTgf Struwe, A. (2025). Totalität. Marx, Adorno und das Problem kritischer Gesellschaftstheorie. Verbrecher Verlag.  https://www.verbrecherverlag.de/shop/totalitaet/ on Nancy Fraser and the question on ‘demos' (exemplary):  Fraser, N. (2005). Reframing Justice in a Globalizing World. New Left Review.  https://newleftreview.org/issues/ii36/articles/nancy-fraser-reframing-justice-in-a-globalizing-world Rikap, C. (2025). A Progressive Roadmap for Expanding European Digital Sovereignty. Policy Brief. FEPS.  https://feps-europe.eu/publication/a-progressive-roadmap-for-expanding-european-digital-sovereignty/ Related Episodes of Future Histories S03E59 | Cédric Durand on Ecological Planning  https://www.futurehistories.today/episoden-blog/s03/e59-cedric-durand-on-ecological-planning/ S03E53 | Philipp Staab zur Systemkrise   https://www.futurehistories.today/episoden-blog/s03/e53-philipp-staab-zur-systemkrise/ S02E15 | Jakob Heyer zu Grundproblemen einer postkapitalistischen Produktionsweise (Teil 2) https://www.futurehistories.today/episoden-blog/s02/e15-jakob-heyer-zu-grundproblemen-einer-postkapitalistischen-produktionsweise-teil-2/ S02E14 | Jakob Heyer zu Grundproblemen einer postkapitalistischen Produktionsweise (Teil 1) https://www.futurehistories.today/episoden-blog/s02/e14-jakob-heyer-zu-grundproblemen-einer-postkapitalistischen-produktionsweise-teil-1/ S03E51 | Aaron Benanav - Beyond Capitalism II  https://www.futurehistories.today/episoden-blog/s03/e51-aaron-benanav-beyond-capitalism-ii/ S03E50 | Aaron Benanav - Beyond Capitalism I  https://www.futurehistories.today/episoden-blog/s03/e50-aaron-benanav-beyond-capitalism-i/ S02E58 | Søren Mau on Planning and Freedom https://www.futurehistories.today/episoden-blog/s02/e58-soren-mau-on-planning-and-freedom/   — Future Histories Contact & Support If you like Future Histories, please consider supporting us on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/join/FutureHistories Contact: office@futurehistories.today Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/futurehpodcast/ Mastodon: https://mstdn.social/@FutureHistories English webpage: https://futurehistories-international.com   Episode Keywords #KoheiSaito, #ChristophSorg, #JanGroos, #Interview, #BookEvent, #FutureHistories, #Hamburg, #Planning, #Capitalism, #Socialism, #DarkSocialism, #Economics, #ClimateChange, #ClimateBreakdown, #Democracy, #BigTech, #WartimePlanning, #DemocraticPlanning, #State, #Collapse, #Market, #Investment, #Progress, #Future, #FutureHistoriesInternational    

Vlan!
#396 Le vrai problème écologique n'est pas l'écologie avec Frédéric Samama

Vlan!

Play Episode Listen Later May 26, 2026 81:32


Frédéric Samama est auteur de L'énigme de l'inaction climatique et pionnier de la finance verte et alors que nous vivons un de ces épisodes de canicule aujourd'hui, il m'a semblé essentiel d'essayer de comprendre pourquoi nous savons depuis 70 ans et nous ne faisons rien. En 2009, il a monté le premier centre de recherche mondial sur la finance et le climat, lancé les premiers indices low carbone et créé la première coalition d'investisseurs à la COP21. Et pourtant, son livre ne parle pas de finance. Il parle de cerveau, d'histoire, de philosophie et d'une question qui l'obsède depuis cinq ans : pourquoi, sur un problème que tout le monde connaît, que l'on a créé, et qui nous menace en tant qu'espèce, on n'arrive pas à bouger ?Dans cet épisode, nous parlons de neurosciences cognitives, d'inférence bayésienne, de moments fromages dans l'histoire de l'humanité, et du lien entre capitalisme, néolibéralisme et perte de nos réflexes moraux. J'ai questionné Frédéric sur l'overview effect des astronautes, sur Lévinas et la philosophie du visage, sur Jean Cavaillès et la résistance, et sur ce que tout ça dit de notre capacité à réinventer nos représentations du monde face à l'urgence climatique.Citations marquantes"Sur un problème où tout le monde est au courant, qu'on a créé, et qui nous menace en tant qu'espèce — pourquoi diable, on n'arrive pas à se mettre en mouvement ?" (0:29:00)"Le capitalisme, c'est comment tu fais vivre des gens ensemble en dehors de règles morales et religieuses. Et maintenant qu'on fait face à un défi moral, qui est le défi du climat, on ne sait plus faire." (0:19:30)"Face à l'enjeu moral, c'est l'action qui doit prévaloir — et pas la réflexion de est-ce qu'on est optimiste, négatif, et ainsi de suite." (1:06:44)"On a voulu détendre le lien social. En cas de problème, il n'y a plus personne, et donc il n'y a plus de devoir — on ne demande que des droits." (0:26:30)"Le climat, ce n'est plus seulement la plus grosse menace. C'est aussi la plus belle opportunité de réapprendre à vivre ensemble, nous, les 8 milliards de personnes sur Terre." (1:12:00)Big Ideas1. Notre cerveau construit des modèles à partir de signaux — et s'y enferme L'inférence bayésienne selon Stanislas Dehaene : le cerveau observe des signaux et fabrique des lois du monde. Agassi qui lit le service de Becker, le bébé qui comprend la gravité, le rat dans le labyrinthe — tous fonctionnent pareil. Le problème : une fois le modèle établi, on arrête de le mettre à jour. On entre en surconfiance. C'est exactement ce qui se passe avec le climat : on sait, mais on ne change pas de modèle. (0:02:37)2. L'histoire humaine s'est organisée autour de "moments fromages" — et le climat en exige un nouveau Deux grandes ruptures : l'agriculture et la science moderne (accès aux ressources naturelles), puis le néolibéralisme (accès aux ressources humaines mondiales). À chaque fois, l'humanité a réorganisé ses représentations. Le climat est la première fois qu'on nous demande de limiter l'accès aux ressources — un défi sans précédent pour des cerveaux conditionnés à l'expansion. (0:07:43)3. Le capitalisme a délibérément mis la morale hors jeu Au XVIIe siècle, la grande question était : comment faire vivre des gens ensemble sans passer par la morale ou la religion, qui créent des guerres ? La réponse : l'intérêt personnel. Adam Smith, Montesquieu, Hirschman ont construit un système où l'égoïsme profite à la société. Ça a marché. Mais le climat est un problème moral (les plus faibles meurent en premier) — et on n'a plus les réflexes pour ça. (0:14:55)4. L'overview effect comme signal de bascule possible Les astronautes dans l'espace deviennent poètes. Ils voient la planète fragile, belle, vivante. Frédéric propose ces trois perceptions comme signal capable de réécrire nos représentations. La fragilité déclenche la responsabilité (Lévinas). La beauté prépare à la morale (Kant). Le vivant nous réintègre dans la nature après des siècles d'extraction. Pas un programme politique — une hypothèse sur comment les cerveaux humains peuvent changer. (0:39:00)5. Face à un enjeu moral, la question n'est plus l'espoir — c'est l'action Jean Cavaillès, philosophe-mathématicien résistant, incarne la réponse. En mai 1941, zéro espoir objectif. Et pourtant il agit — parce que face à un enjeu moral, la question n'est plus "quelle est la probabilité ?" mais "quelle est mon obligation ?". C'est la même logique que d'appeler les pompiers pour quelqu'un qui fait une crise cardiaque dont on sait qu'elle sera fatale. On agit. Pas parce qu'on espère, mais parce qu'on doit. (1:04:06)Questions poséesQu'est-ce que l'anecdote d'Agassi et Becker révèle sur le fonctionnement du cerveau humain ?Quels sont les grands "moments fromages" de l'histoire de l'humanité, et où en sommes-nous aujourd'hui ?Comment définirais-tu le capitalisme à son origine — et en quoi diffère-t-il du néolibéralisme ?Pourquoi le néolibéralisme a-t-il dissous le lien social, et quelles en sont les conséquences concrètes ?Sur un problème aussi connu et aussi grave que le climat, pourquoi l'humanité n'arrive-t-elle pas à se mettre en mouvement ?Qu'est-ce que l'inférence bayésienne nous apprend sur notre incapacité à mettre à jour nos modèles face au climat ?Qu'est-ce que les astronautes et l'overview effect peuvent nous apprendre sur comment changer nos représentations collectives ?Comment Lévinas et Kant peuvent-ils nous aider à repenser notre rapport au problème climatique ?Qui était Jean Cavaillès, et pourquoi son histoire est-elle une réponse au problème de l'inaction ?Si le signal qui change nos représentations n'est pas encore arrivé, qu'est-ce qui pourrait en tenir lieu à l'échelle de nos sociétés ?Références citéesPersonnes et penseursStanislas Dehaene — chaire de sciences cognitives, Collège de France (0:04:00)André Agassi / Boris Becker — anecdote du service et de la langue (0:02:37)Max Weber — thèse sur la naissance du capitalisme (0:13:00)Albert Hirschman — économiste, auteur sur l'origine du capitalisme (0:13:00)Marcel Enaf — sur le commerce pré-capitaliste (0:17:29)Machiavel, Spinoza, Galilée, Montesquieu, Adam Smith — généalogie du capitalisme (0:15:25)Milton Friedman — article dans le New York Times sur le néolibéralisme (0:19:54)Emmanuel Lévinas — philosophe lituanien, "le visage d'autrui" et l'éthique (0:42:44)Emmanuel Kant — la beauté, le désintérêt et la morale (0:44:30)Michel Serres — "on mesure l'ampleur d'un problème à la durée qu'il a mise à se former" (0:33:34)Robin Dunbar — nombre de 150, limite de coordination des groupes humains (0:34:22)Hannah Arendt et Karl Polanyi — fascisme comme réaction au libéralisme du XIXe siècle (1:07:50)Henri Bergson — envoyé aux États-Unis pour convaincre Wilson d'entrer en guerre (0:53:43)Président Wilson — discours d'entrée en guerre au nom de valeurs morales, 1917 (0:54:30)Jean Cavaillès — philosophe-mathématicien résistant, fusillé (1:02:11)Raymond Aron — "Si Jean Cavaillès avait vécu, j'aurais dit moins de bêtises" (1:04:06)Pierre Brossolette, Jean Moulin — résistants évoqués en parallèle (1:05:00)Concepts et événementsInférence bayésienne — mécanisme cognitif de construction de modèles (0:47:50)Overview effect — phénomène de bascule perceptuelle chez les astronautes (0:39:30)Théorie des "moments fromages" — concept central du livre (0:07:43)Bulle des tulipes — première crise financière spéculative, XVIIe siècle (0:50:23)COP21 — coalition d'investisseurs créée par Frédéric (0:27:33)Passage à l'an 2000 (bug Y2K) — contre-exemple de mobilisation rapide (0:30:00)Protocole de Montréal / couche d'ozone — résolu en 18 mois (0:51:43)Timestamps clés00:00 Introduction — Et si on se réjouissait à nouveau du futur ? Gregory présente Frédéric Semama, pionnier de la finance verte et auteur de L'énigme de l'inaction climatique. 02:37 L'anecdote Agassi / Becker Comment Agassi a découvert le code du service de Becker en s'asseyant dans la foule — et ce que ça révèle sur le cerveau humain. 04:00 Comment le cerveau construit ses modèles du monde Stanislas Dehaene au Collège de France : inférence bayésienne, le bébé, le rat dans le labyrinthe. 07:43 Les "moments fromages" de l'histoire humaine Agriculture, science moderne, néolibéralisme : trois grandes ruptures où l'humanité a réorganisé ses représentations pour accéder à de nouvelles ressources. 13:00 L'origine du capitalisme — bien au-delà de l'argent Comment le capitalisme est né comme solution à la guerre de religion : faire vivre des gens ensemble sans morale ni religion. 20:56 Tout le monde veut un village mais personne ne veut être villageois La concierge qui sauve Frédéric pendant le Covid — et le choc quand il essaie de la remercier avec des cadeaux. 27:00 Pourquoi on n'agit pas sur le climat Trois raisons structurelles : c'est la première limite à l'accès aux ressources, il n'y a pas de signal à hauteur du problème, et nos modèles sont inadaptés. 36:22 La bulle sociétale — on peut savoir et continuer quand même De la bulle internet à la bulle des tulipes : le mécanisme d'enfermement conscient à l'échelle d'une planète. 39:00 L'overview effect — les astronautes comme piste de bascule Fragile, belle, vivante : les trois perceptions que les astronautes rapportent de l'espace — et ce qu'elles activent dans le cerveau. 42:44 Lévinas : le visage d'autrui comme début de l'éthique Quand voir la fragilité de l'autre nous oblige à agir au-delà de notre instinct de conservation. 52:07 La couche d'ozone vs le climat En 18 mois, tous les pays du monde se sont mis d'accord. Qu'est-ce qui est fondamentalement différent avec le climat ? 53:43 Bergson à la Maison-Blanche La France envoie le philosophe Henri Bergson convaincre Wilson d'entrer en guerre. Il réussit. Ce que ça dit du pouvoir des valeurs morales en politique. 1:00:14 Je ne cherche pas à avoir de l'espoir Frédéric explique pourquoi la question n'est pas l'espoir — avec mai 1941 comme exemple. 1:02:11 Jean Cavaillès — le héros oublié de la résistance Fils de militaire, philosophe-mathématicien, major de Normale Sup tout seul. Et résistant. Fusillé dans une fosse commune. 1:06:29 La crise cardiaque et l'obligation morale "La probabilité que tu survives est nulle. Et pourtant, tu vas tout faire pour me sauver." Ce que ça dit du rapport entre morale et action. 1:14:54 La solution concrète : recommencer à regarder le vivant Pourquoi enseigner la vie des animaux et des plantes à l'école changerait plus de choses que n'importe quelle taxe carbone. Suggestion d'autres épisodes à écouter : #286 Le cynisme politique face à l'urgence climatique? avec Fabrice Nicolino (https://audmns.com/SHnNoJp) #292 Les enjeux de la géopolitique climatique avec David Djaiz (https://audmns.com/BoZGVQa) #178 Les technologies vont-elles nous permettre de faire face au défi climatique? avec Philippe Bihouix (https://audmns.com/ktZSlzb)Hébergé par Audiomeans. Visitez audiomeans.fr/politique-de-confidentialite pour plus d'informations.

Nowy Ład
Rafał Łętocha - Utopia wolnego rynku. Karl Polanyi i Wielka transformacja [tekst audio]

Nowy Ład

Play Episode Listen Later May 4, 2026 26:45


Praca Wielka transformacja Karla Polanyiego należy do klasyki gatunku – śmiało można powiedzieć, że to dzieło przełomowe w dziedzinie ekonomii. Stanowi ono błyskotliwą i oryginalną analizę czasów rewolucji przemysłowej, w której autor wykorzystuje warsztat ekonomisty, historyka gospodarki, socjologa i antropologa. Polanyi, jeden z wybitniejszych myślicieli ekonomicznych minionego stulecia, wychodzi z dość rewolucyjnego i niesztampowego założenia, że idea samoregulującego się rynku implikowała skrajną utopię. Tego rodzaju koncepcja nie mogłaby istnieć przez dłuższy czas nie doprowadzając do całkowitego wyniszczenia albo ludzkości, albo środowiska przyrodniczego.

Future Histories
S03E53 - Philipp Staab zur Systemkrise

Future Histories

Play Episode Listen Later Dec 7, 2025 160:37


Philipp Staab zur Systemkrise und den Legitimitätsproblemen im grünen Kapitalismus.   Shownotes Philipp an der Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin: https://www.sowi.hu-berlin.de/de/lehrbereiche/zukunftarbeit/mitarbeiter_innen/pstaab Philipp am Einstein Center Digital Future: https://www.digital-future.berlin/ueber-uns/professorinnen/prof-dr-philipp-staab/ Philipps persönliche Website: https://philippstaab.de/ Staab, P. (2025). Systemkrise. Legitimationsprobleme im grünen Kapitalismus. Suhrkamp. https://www.suhrkamp.de/buch/philipp-staab-systemkrise-t-9783518128237 Staab, P. (2022). Anpassung. Leitmotiv der nächsten Gesellschaft. Suhrkamp. https://www.suhrkamp.de/buch/philipp-staab-anpassung-t-9783518127797 Staab, P. (2019). Digitaler Kapitalismus. Markt und Herrschaft in der Ökonomie der Unknappheit. Suhrkamp https://www.suhrkamp.de/buch/philipp-staab-digitaler-kapitalismus-t-9783518075159 zur Kritischen Theorie: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kritische_Theorie Hawel, M., & Blanke, M. (Hrsg.). (2012). Kritische Theorie der Krise. Karl Dietz Verlag Berlin. https://www.rosalux.de/fileadmin/rls_uploads/pdfs/Publ-Texte/Texte_72.pdf zu Claus Offe: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Claus_Offe Offe, C. (2006). Strukturprobleme des kapitalistischen Staates. Aufsätze zur Politischen Soziologie. Campus Verlag. https://www.campus.de/buecher-campus-verlag/wissenschaft/soziologie/strukturprobleme_des_kapitalistischen_staates-2412.html zu Jürgen Habermas: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/J%C3%BCrgen_Habermas Habermas, J. (1973). Legitimationsprobleme im Spätkapitalismus. Suhrkamp. https://www.suhrkamp.de/buch/juergen-habermas-legitimationsprobleme-im-spaetkapitalismus-t-9783518106235 Hoffman, O. (2025). Polykrise. Anatomie eines globalen Zusammenbruchs. Warum alle Krisen zusammenhängen - und was das für unsere Zukunft bedeutet. Königshausen & Neumann. https://verlag.koenigshausen-neumann.de/product/9783826093883-polykrise/ zur Great Depression: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Depression zur Westdeutschen Studentenbewegung der 1960er Jahre: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Westdeutsche_Studentenbewegung_der_1960er_Jahre zu den K-Gruppen: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/K-Gruppe zu den Bauernprotesten am Brandenburger Tor: https://www.deutschlandfunk.de/tausende-landwirte-demonstrieren-vor-dem-brandenburger-tor-100.html zu den Protesten gegen das Heizungsgesetz: https://www.deutschlandfunk.de/tausende-menschen-demonstrieren-gegen-geplantes-heizungsgesetz-102.html zum Inflation Reduction Act (IRA): https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inflation_Reduction_Act zu Ulrich Beck: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ulrich_Beck Beck, U. (1986). Risikogesellschaft. Auf dem Weg in eine andere Moderne. Suhrkamp. https://www.suhrkamp.de/buch/ulrich-beck-risikogesellschaft-t-9783518113653 Huber, M. T. (2022). Climate Change as Class War. Building Socialism on a Warming Planet. Verso. https://www.versobooks.com/products/775-climate-change-as-class-war Thompson, E. P. (1987). Die Entstehung der englischen Arbeiterklasse. Suhrkamp. https://www.suhrkamp.de/buch/edward-p-thompson-die-entstehung-der-englischen-arbeiterklasse-t-9783518111703 zur Flut im Ahrtal 2021 und den politischen Reaktionen darauf: https://www.bpb.de/kurz-knapp/hintergrund-aktuell/522893/nach-der-flut-an-der-ahr-2021/ zu Ingolfur Blühdorn: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ingolfur_Bl%C3%BChdorn Blühdorn, I. et al. (2019). Nachhaltige Nicht-Nachhaltigkeit. Warum die ökologische Transformation der Gesellschaft nicht stattfindet. transcript. https://www.transcript-verlag.de/978-3-8376-4516-3/nachhaltige-nicht-nachhaltigkeit/ zum Pariser Klimaabkommen von 2015: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%9Cbereinkommen_von_Paris Boltanski, L. & Chiapello, È. (2006). Der neue Geist des Kapitalismus. Herbert von Halem Verlag. https://www.halem-verlag.de/produkt/der-neue-geist-des-kapitalismus/ Lazzarato, M. (2007). Die Missgeschicke der „Künstlerkritik“ und der kulturellen Beschäftigung. transversal texts. https://transversal.at/transversal/0207/lazzarato/de Jaeggi, R. (2023). Fortschritt und Regression. Suhrkamp. https://www.suhrkamp.de/buch/rahel-jaeggi-fortschritt-und-regression-t-9783518587140 Brand, U. & Wissen, M. (2024). Kapitalismus am Limit. Öko-imperiale Spannungen, umkämpfte Krisenpolitik und solidarische Perspektiven. oekom Verlag. https://www.oekom.de/buch/kapitalismus-am-limit-9783987260650 Schaupp, S. (2024). Stoffwechselpolitik. Arbeit, Natur und die Zukunft des Planeten. Suhrkamp. https://www.suhrkamp.de/buch/simon-schaupp-stoffwechselpolitik-t-9783518029862 zum Leninismus: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leninismus Neupert-Doppler, A. (2019). Die Gelegenheit ergreifen. Eine politische Philosophie des Kairos. mandelbaum. https://www.mandelbaum.at/buecher/alexander-neupert-doppler/die-gelegenheit-ergreifen/ zu Robert Mugabe: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Mugabe zu den Sandanisten: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frente_Sandinista_de_Liberaci%C3%B3n_Nacional zu den Zapatistas: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ej%C3%A9rcito_Zapatista_de_Liberaci%C3%B3n_Nacional zum Kollapscamp 2025: https://kollapscamp.de/ Baumann, Z. (2017). Retropia. Suhrkamp. https://www.suhrkamp.de/buch/zygmunt-bauman-retrotopia-t-9783518073315 zu Max Weber: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Max_Weber Weber, M. (2019). Typen der Herrschaft. Reclam. https://www.reclam.de/produktdetail/typen-der-herrschaft-9783150195383 zu Deutsche Wohnen & Co Enteignen: https://dwenteignen.de/ zur Behauptung, dass haitianische Immigrant*innen in Springfield Haustiere essen würden: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Springfield_pet-eating_hoax zu Habermas‘ Theorie der Kolonialisierung der Lebenswelt: https://philosophischeberatung.berlin/die-verwaltung-des-wohls-ein-widerspruch-in-sich/ zu Karl Polanyi: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl_Polanyi Polanyi, K. (1973). The Great Transformation. Politische und ökonomische Ursprünge von Gesellschaften und Wirtschaftssystemen. Suhrkamp. https://www.suhrkamp.de/buch/karl-polanyi-the-great-transformation-t-9783518278604 Amlinger, C. & Nachtwey, O. (2025). Zerstörungslust. Elemente des demokratischen Faschismus. Suhrkamp. https://www.suhrkamp.de/buch/zerstoerungslust-t-9783518432662 Future Histories Episodes on Related Topics S3E52 | Alexander Neupert-Doppler zu Kairos und verbindender Organisation https://www.futurehistories.today/episoden-blog/s03/e52-alexander-neupert-doppler-zu-kairos-und-verbindender-organisation/ S03E46 | Rahel Jaeggi zur Krise des Liberalismus, Fortschritt als Prozess und sozialistischem Utopisieren https://www.futurehistories.today/episoden-blog/s03/e46-rahel-jaeggi-zur-krise-des-liberalismus-fortschritt-als-prozess-und-sozialistischem-utopisieren/ S03E43 | Steen Thorsson zu Psychoanalyse, Klimakrise und Kapitalismus https://www.futurehistories.today/episoden-blog/s03/e43-steen-thorsson-zu-psychoanalyse-klimakrise-und-kapitalismus/ S03E33 | Tadzio Müller zu solidarischem Preppen im Kollaps https://www.futurehistories.today/episoden-blog/s03/e33-tadzio-mueller-zu-solidarischem-preppen-im-kollaps/ S03E32 | Jacob Blumenfeld on Climate Barbarism and Managing Decline https://www.futurehistories.today/episoden-blog/s03/e32-jacob-blumenfeld-on-climate-barbarism-and-managing-decline/ S03E30 | Matt Huber & Kohei Saito on Growth, Progress and Left Imaginaries https://www.futurehistories.today/episoden-blog/s03/e30-matt-huber-kohei-saito-on-growth-progress-and-left-imaginaries/ S03E17 | Klaus Dörre zu Utopie, Nachhaltigkeit und einer Linken für das 21. Jh. https://www.futurehistories.today/episoden-blog/s03/e17-klaus-doerre-zu-utopie-nachhaltigkeit-und-einer-linken-fuer-das-21-jh/ S03E08 | Simon Schaupp zu Stoffwechselpolitik https://www.futurehistories.today/episoden-blog/s03/e08-simon-schaupp-zu-stoffwechselpolitik/ S02E30 | Philipp Staab zu Anpassung https://www.futurehistories.today/episoden-blog/s02/e30-philipp-staab-zu-anpassung/ S01E26 | Philipp Staab zu digitalem Kapitalismus https://www.futurehistories.today/episoden-blog/s01/e26-philipp-staab-zu-digitalem-kapitalismus/   --- Bei weiterem Interesse am Thema demokratische Wirtschaftsplanung können diese Ressourcen hilfreich sein: Demokratische Planung – eine Infoseite https://www.demokratische-planung.de/ Sorg, C. & Groos, J. (eds.)(2025). Rethinking Economic Planning. Competition & Change Special Issue Volume 29 Issue 1. https://journals.sagepub.com/toc/ccha/29/1 Groos, J. & Sorg, C. (2025). Creative Construction - Democratic Planning in the 21st Century and Beyond. Bristol University Press. [for a review copy, please contact: amber.lanfranchi[at]bristol.ac.uk] https://bristoluniversitypress.co.uk/creative-construction International Network for Democratic Economic Planning https://www.indep.network/ Democratic Planning Research Platform: https://www.planningresearch.net/ --- Future Histories Kontakt & Unterstützung Wenn euch Future Histories gefällt, dann erwägt doch bitte eine Unterstützung auf Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/join/FutureHistories   Schreibt mir unter: office@futurehistories.today Diskutiert mit mir auf Twitter (#FutureHistories): https://twitter.com/FutureHpodcast auf Bluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/futurehistories.bsky.social auf Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/futurehpodcast/ auf Mastodon: https://mstdn.social/@FutureHistories   Webseite mit allen Folgen: www.futurehistories.today English webpage: https://futurehistories-international.com   Episode Keywords #PhilippStaab, #JanGroos, #Interview, #FutureHistories, #DemokratischeWirtschaftsplanung, #DemokratischePlanwirtschaft, #Kapitalismus, #Liberalismus, #Polykrise, #SozialökologischeTransformation, #GrünerKapitalismus, #ÖkologischeModernisierung, #Anpassung, #Transformation, #Organisation, #Gesellschaft, #Klimakollaps, #DWE, #Faschisierung, #Faschismus, #ÖkologischeTransformation, #Zukunft

Hayek Program Podcast
Inside the Moral and Political Economy Program at Johns Hopkins University with Burgin, Halliday, and Liu

Hayek Program Podcast

Play Episode Listen Later Nov 26, 2025 61:29


On this episode, Peter Boettke chats with Angus Burgin, Simon Halliday, and Glory Liu to explore their innovative work at the Center for Economy and Society and the creation of a new undergraduate program in Moral and Political Economy. They dive into the revival of political economy as a cross-disciplinary field, the pedagogical innovations shaping the next generation of thinkers, the coming 250th anniversary of Adam Smith's The Wealth of Nations, and more.Dr. Angus Burgin is Associate Professor of History and Founding Director of the Program in Moral and Political Economy at Johns Hopkins University. He serves as Co-Executive Editor of the book series, Intellectual History of the Modern Age, and he is the author of The Great Persuasion: Reinventing Free Markets since the Depression (Harvard University Press, 2015).Dr. Simon Halliday is Associate Research Professor and Associate Director in the Center for Economy and Society at Johns Hopkins University. He is the co-author (with Sam Bowles) of an intermediate microeconomics textbook, Microeconomics: Competition, Conflict and Coordination (Oxford University Press, 2022).Dr. Glory Liu is Assistant Professor in the Department of Government at Georgetown University. She is the author of Adam Smith's America: How a Scottish Philosopher became an Icon of American Capitalism (Princeton University Press, 2022).Show Notes:John Hopkins University's BA in Moral + Political EconomyCore EconAdam Smith's book, An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations (Liberty Fund, 1982)Charlotte Perkins Gilman's book, Women and Economics (Small, Maynard & Company, 1898)Tim Rogan's book, The Moral Economists: R. H. Tawney, Karl Polanyi, E. P. Thompson, and the Critique of Capitalism (Princeton University Press, 2018)Warren Samuels' paper, “Adam Smith and the Economy as a System of Power”**This episode was recorded October 30, 2025.If you like the show, please subscribe, leave a 5-star review, and tell others about the show! We're available on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Amazon Music, and wherever you get your podcasts.Check out our other podcast from the Hayek Program! Virtual Sentiments is a podcast in which political theorist Kristen Collins interviews scholars and practitioners grappling with pressing problems in political economy with an eye to the past. Subscribe today!Follow the Hayek Program on Twitter: @HayekProgramFollow the Mercatus Center on Twitter: @mercatusCC Music: Twisterium

Interplace
An Economic Geography of Complicity and Control

Interplace

Play Episode Listen Later Nov 23, 2025 27:36


Hello Interactors,I'm back! After a bit of a hiatus traveling Southern Europe, where my wife had meetings in Northern Italy and I gave a talk in Lisbon. We visited a couple spots in Spain in between. Now it's time to dive back into our exploration of economic geography. My time navigating those historic cities — while grappling with the apps on my phone — turned out to be the perfect, if slightly frustrating, introduction to the subject of the conference, Digital Geography.The presentation I prepared for the Lisbon conference, and which I hint at here, traces how the technical optimism of early desktop software evolved into the all-encompassing power of Platform Capital. We explore how digital systems like Airbnb and Google Maps have become more than just convenient tools. They are the primary architects of urban value. They don't just reflect economic patterns. They mandate them. They reorganize rent extraction by dictating interactions with commerce and concentrating control. This is the new financialized city, and the uncomfortable question we must face is this: Are we leveraging these tools toward a new beneficial height, or are the tools exploiting us in ways that transcends oversight?CARTOGRAPHY'S COMPUTATIONAL CONVERGENCEI was sweating five minutes in when I realized we were headed to the wrong place. We picked up the pace, up steep grades, glissading down narrow sidewalks avoiding trolley cars and private cars inching pinched hairpins with seven point turns. I was looking at my phone with one eye and the cobbled streets with the other.Apple Maps had led us astray. But there we were, my wife and I, having emerged from the metro stop at Lisbon's shoreline with a massive cruise ship looming over us like a misplaced high-rise. We needed to be somewhere up those notorious steep streets behind us in 10 minutes. So up we went, winding through narrow streets and passages. Lisbon is hilly. We past the clusters of tourists rolling luggage, around locals lugging groceries.I had come to present at the 4th Digital Geographies Conference, and the organizers had scheduled a walking tour of Lisbon. Yet here I was, performing the very platform-mediated tourism that the attendees came to interrogate. My own phone was likely using the same mapping API I used to book my AirBnB. These platforms were actively reshaping the Lisbon around us. The irony wasn't lost on me. We had gathered to critically examine digital geography while simultaneously embodying its contradictions.That became even more apparent as we gathered for our walking tour. We met in a square these platform algorithms don't push. It's not “liked”, “starred”, nor “Instagrammed.” But it was populated nonetheless…with locals not tourists. Mostly immigrants. The virtual was met with reality.What exactly were we examining as we stood there, phones in hand, embodying the very contradictions we'd gathered to critique?Three decades ago, as an undergraduate at UC Santa Barbara, I would have understood this moment differently. The UCSB geography department was riding the crest of the GIS revolution then. Apple and Google Maps didn't exist, and we spent our days digitizing boundaries from paper maps, overlaying data layers, building spatial databases that would make geographic information searchable, analyzable, computable. We were told we were democratizing cartography, making it a technical craft anyone could master with the right tools.But the questions that haunt me now — who decides what gets mapped? whose reality does the map represent? what work does the map do in the world? — remained largely unasked in those heady days of digital optimism.Digital geography, or ‘computer cartography' as we understood it then, was about bringing computational precision to spatial problems. We were building tools that would move maps from the drafting tables of trained cartographers to the screens of any researcher with data to visualize. Marveling at what technology might do for us has a way of stunting the urge to question what it might be doing to us.The field of digital geography has since undergone a transformation. It's one that mirrors my own trajectory from building tools and platforms at Microsoft to interrogating their societal effects. Today's digital geography emerges from the collision of two geography traditions: the quantitative, GIS-focused approach I learned at UCSB, and critical human geography's interrogation of power, representation, and spatial justice. This convergence became necessary as digital technologies escaped the desktop and embedded themselves in everyday urban life. We no longer simply make digital maps of cities and countrysides. Digital platforms are actively remaking cities themselves…and those who live in them.Contemporary digital geography, as examined at this conference, looks at how computational systems reorganize spatial relations, urban governance, and the production of place itself. When Airbnb's algorithm determines neighborhood property values, when Google Maps' routing creates and destroys retail corridors, when Uber's surge pricing redraws the geography of urban mobility — these platforms don't describe cities so much as actively reconstruct them. The representation has become more influential or ‘real' than the reality itself. This is much like the hyperreality famously described by the French cultural theorist Jean Baudrillard — a condition where the simulation or sign (like app interfaces) replaces and precedes reality. In this way, the digital map (visually and virtually) has overtaken the actual territory in importance and impact, actively shaping how we perceive and interact with the real world.As digital platforms become embedded in everyday life, we are increasingly living in a simulation. The more digital services infiltrate and reconstitute urban systems the more they evade traditional governance. Algorithmic mediation through code written to influence the rhythm of daily life and human behavior increasingly determines who we interact with and which spaces we see, access, and value. Some describe this as a form of data colonialism — extending the logic of resource extraction into everyday movements and behaviors. This turns citizens into data subjects. Our patterns feed predictive models that further shape people, place…and profits. These aren't simple pipes piped in, or one-way street lights, but dynamic architectures that reorganize society's rights.LISBON LURED, LOST, AND LIVEDThe scholars gathered in Lisbon trace precisely how digital platforms restructure housing markets, remake retail ecologies, and reformulate the rights of humans and non-humans. Their work, from analyzing platform control over cattle herds in Brazil to tracking urban displacement, exemplifies the conference's focus: making visible the often-obscured mechanisms through which platforms reshape space.Two attendees I met included Jelke Bosma (University of Amsterdam), who researches Airbnb's transformation of housing into asset classes, and Pedro Guimarães (University of Lisbon), who documents how platform-mediated tourism hollows out local retail. At the end of the tour, when a group of us were looking to chat over drinks, Pedro remarked, “If you want a recommendation for an authentic Lisbon bar experience, it no longer exists!”Yet, even as I navigated Lisbon using the very interfaces these scholars' critique, I was reminded of this central truth: we study these systems from within them. There is no outside position from which to observe platform urbanism. We are all, to varying degrees, complicit subjects. This reflection has become central to digital geography's method. It's impossible to claim critical distance from systems that mediate our own spatial practices. So, instead, a kind of intrinsic critique is developed by understanding platform effects through our own entanglements.Lisbon has become an inadvertent laboratory for this critique. Jelke Bosma's analysis of AirBnB reveals how the platform has facilitated a shift from informal “home sharing” to professionalized asset management, where multi-property hosts control an increasing share of urban housing stock. His research shows “professionally managed apartments do not only generate the largest individual revenues, they also account for a disproportionate segment of the total revenues accumulated on the platform”. This professionalization is driven by AirBnB's business model and its investment in platform supporting “asset-based professionalization,” which primarily benefits multi-listing commercial hosts. He further explains that AirBnB's algorithm “rewards properties with high availability rates,” creating what he calls “evolutionary pressures” on hosts to maximize their listings' availability. This incentivizes them to become full-time tourist accommodations, reducing the competitiveness of long-term residential renting.The complexity of this ecosystem was also apparent during our Barcelona stop. What I booked as an “Airbnb” was a Sweett property — a competitor platform that operates through AirBnb's APIs. This apartment featured Bluetooth-enabled locks and smart home controls inserted into an 1800s building. Sweett's model demonstrates how platform infrastructure not only becomes an industry standard but is leveraged and replicated by competitors in a kind of coopetition based on the pricing algorithms AirBnB normalized.In Lisbon, my rental sat in a building where every door was marked with AL (Alojamento Local), the legal framework for short-term rentals. No permanent residents remained; the architecture itself had been reshaped to platform specifications: fire escape signage next to framed photos, fire extinguishers mounted to the wall, and minimized common spaces upon entry. It's more like a hotel disaggregated into independent units.Pedro Guimarães's work provides the commercial counterpart to Jelke's residential analysis, focusing on how platforms reshape urban consumption. His longitudinal study demonstrates that the “advent of mass tourism” has triggered a fundamental “adjustment in the commercial fabric” of Lisbon's city center.This platform-mediated transformation involves a significant shift from services catering to locals to spaces optimized for leisure and consumption. Pedro's data confirms a clear decline and “absence of Food retail” and convenience shops. These essential services are replaced by a “new commercial landscape” dominated by HORECA (hotels, restaurants, and cafes), which consolidates the area's function as a tourist destination.(3)Crucially, the new businesses achieve algorithmic visibility by manufacturing “authenticity”. They leverage local culture and history, sometimes even appropriating the decor of previous, traditional establishments, as part of “routine business practices as a way of maximizing profit”. The result is the “broader construction of a new commercial ambiance” where local food and goods are standardized and adapted to meet international tourist expectations.(3)My own searches validated these findings. Searching for restaurants on Google Maps throughout Southern Europe produced a bubble of highly-rated establishments near tourist sites, many featuring nearly identical, tourist-friendly menus. The platforms had learned and enforced preferences, creating a Lisbon curated only for visitors. Furthermore, data exhaust from tourist movements becomes a resource for further optimization. Google's Popular Times feature creates feedback loops where visibility generates visits, which reinforce visibility. The city becomes legible to itself through platform data, then reshapes itself to optimize what platforms measure.The Lisbon government, while complicit, also shows resistance. Both scholars highlighted municipal attempts to regulate platform effects, including issuing licensing requirements for AirBnB, zoning restrictions, and promoting local commerce apps that compete with global platforms (e.g., Cabify vs. Uber). These interventions reveal platform urbanism can be contested. However, as Jelke noted, platforms evolve faster than regulation, finding workarounds that maintain extraction while performing compliance.All through the trip, I felt my own quiet sense of complicity. Every ride we called, every Google search we ran, every Trainline ticket I purchased, fueled the very datasets everyone was dissecting. It's an uneasy position for a critical digital geographer — studying problematic systems we help sustain. We are forced to understand these infrastructures by seeing. Can that inside view start seeking a new urban being?CODE CRACKED CITIES. GOVERNANCE GONEMy conference presentation leveraged my insider vantage from three decades at Microsoft. I traced how these digital infrastructures have sunk into everyday life by reshaping labor, space, and governance. From early desktop software I helped to build to today's platform urbanism, I showed how productivity tools became cloud platforms that now coordinate work, logistics, and mobility across cities.My framing used a notion of embeddedness through the lens of three key figures in the literature: Karl Polanyi, a political economist who argued that markets are always “embedded” in social and political institutions rather than operating on their own; Mark Granovetter, a sociologist who showed that economic action is structured by concrete social networks and relationships; and Joseph Schumpeter, an economist who described capitalism as driven by “creative destruction,” the continual remaking of industries through innovation and destruction. Platforms help mediate mobility, labor, commerce, and governance, even as they position themselves at arm's length from the regulatory and civic structures that historically governed urban infrastructures.This evolution is paradoxical. As platforms weave themselves into the operational fabric of urban life, they also recast the division of responsibilities between state, market, and infrastructure provider. Their ability to sit slightly outside traditional regimes of oversight allows them to appear as ready-made “fixes” for governments and consumers at multiple scales. Yet each fix comes with systemic costs, deepening dependencies on opaque, tightly coupled infrastructures and amplifying the vulnerabilities of urban systems when those infrastructures fail.This progression reveals distinct phases of infrastructural transformation. It began in the Desktop Era (1980s-1990s) when I started at Microsoft and software was fixed to devices, localizing information work on individual desktops. Updates arrived episodically on physical media like floppy disks — users controlled when to install them. The shift to local area networks gave IT departments a hand in that control. Soon the Internet was commercialized which fundamentally altered not just how software circulated but how it was installed and updated. How it was governed. What once required user consent — inserting a disk, clicking “install” — became silent, automatic, and infrastructural. Today's cloud services and IoT extend this transformation, embedding computational governance into vehicles, supply chains, and bodies themselves.This progression reveals distinct phases of infrastructural transformation. The Desktop Era (1980s-1990s) embedded information work in individual devices — the fix was productivity, the limit was scalability. The Network Era (1990s-2000s) transformed software into continuous services — the fix promised seamless coordination, the exposure was infrastructural dependency. The Platform Era (2000s-2010s) decoupled software from devices entirely through APIs and cloud computing — the fix was coordination at scale, the cost was asymmetric control. The current IoT and Surveillance Era embeds platform logic in everyday urban environments — the fix is pervasive coordination. This creates a total dependency on opaque infrastructures provided primarily by three companies: Google, Amazon, and Microsoft. This chokepoint is what contributes to global vulnerability and cascading failures.Recent large-scale cloud incidents, such as the latest AWS outage in Virginia in October — a week before the conference — make this evident. When a single region fails, payment systems, logistics platforms, and mobility services stall simultaneously. This pattern echoes an earlier cloud-network outage in 2021, in the same Virginia region, that effectively took much of Lisbon offline for hours, disrupting everything from transit information to local commerce. In both cases, what looks like flexible, placeless digital infrastructure turns out to be highly geographically concentrated and deeply embedded in local urban systems.And yet, in nearly every case, these platforms really do operate as fixes at many different geographical scales. For capital, they open new rent-extraction terrains. For workers, they provide precarious income patches through part-time gig work. For users, they deliver connectivity and convenience. But a paradox emerges. Those same apps include affective hooks: user interfaces offering intermittent rewards — dopamine hits stemming from posts, likes, and ratings — embedded within endless, ad-riddled feeds. For cities, they promise smooth, efficient solutions to chronic problems. Yet as my presentation argued, these fixes are mutually reinforcing, binding participants into infrastructures of dependency that appear empowering while deepening exposure to systemic risk.The paradox is clearest in places like the Sweett apartment in Barcelona. For users, it's frictionless: Bluetooth locks, smart controls, and seamless check-in. For Sweett it's all running on AirBnB's own APIs even as they compete with AirBnB. For locals, the same infrastructure can help homeowners supplement income by renting a room, but it mostly converts affordable real estate into a short-term rental market. This drives up values, rents, and displacement. Platform standards like this spread until they feel inevitable. The logic embeds so deeply in the housing system that not optimizing for transient guests starts to seem irrational. Eventually, alternative futures for the neighborhood become hard to imagine and politically unviable.What distinguishes digital platforms from earlier infrastructural transformations is their selective embeddedness. At the micro scale, interfaces shape conduct through programmable boundaries. At the meso scale, standards lock institutions into ecosystems. At the macro scale, chokepoints concentrate control in firms whose decisions cascade globally. Across all scales, platforms govern without being governed. They embed coordination while evading accountability.The conference made clear that digital geography has fully evolved from my days studying ‘computer cartography' in the 80s. It's scaled to meet a world organized by the infrastructures I went on to help build. We are no longer observing digital representations of space. We're mapping out the origins of a new way of thinking about space using algorithms. My tenure at Microsoft, spent building tools that would transform into embedded, governing platforms, was a preview of the world we now inhabit. This is a world where continuous deployment has become continuous urban reorganization. The silence of the automatic software update metastasized into the silent, pervasive governance of the city itself.Lisbon, then, is not merely a case study but a dramatic staging of hyperreality. The Alojamento Local (AL) sign outside our Lisbon apartment door is not a description of a short-term rental; it is a code enforced reality optimized for a tourist's online profile. The digital map, our simplified version of reality, has not just overtaken the actual territory; it now precedes it, dictating its function and challenging its original meaning.This convergence leaves the critical digital geographer in an inherently unstable ethical position. Studying problematic systems while structurally forced to sustain them requires critiquing the data exhaust our own movements and decisions generate.This deep understanding of digital platforms effects, gained from the trenches, is an asset. How else would this complex entanglement get revealed? It begs to move beyond just observing platform effects to articulating a collective response to this fundamental question: How do we encode accountability back into these infrastructures and rebuild a foundation for civic life that is not merely an optimization of its own surveillance? This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit interplace.io

Leaving Egypt Podcast
EP#51 - Reimagining the Purposes of God - with Alan Roxburgh

Leaving Egypt Podcast

Play Episode Listen Later Oct 23, 2025 72:41


In a change-up from previous episodes, Jenny Sinclair interviews her Leaving Egypt co-host Al Roxburgh. Al shares about his journey, first, as a Baptist minister who knew how to renew and grow churches and, later, as a consultant on making churches “missional”. He talks about the significance of Lesslie Newbigin in launching a change in his thinking thirty years ago, a prompt that set him on a journey of reframing his understanding of God's agency in the context of modernity. Changes in Al's thinking and practice have continued over the last ten years—with an emerging clarity that we are living through a change of era. Amid signs of unravelling across the West, he has been drawn to engage with conversation partners around the relationship between church and society. This led him to revisit Catholic thinkers who examine political economy through the lens of the gospel, especially as the impact of economic systems on human flourishing became increasingly serious. Al describes how the Spirit has pushed him outward—away from a church-centric posture and toward a deeper awareness of God at work in the world, particularly in the local. His advice now for church leaders is not to focus on what makes the church work, but on what is going on among people in the places where they live. Through practices of discerning, dwelling, and listening, he urges us all to ask: What does it mean to be God's people here, in this neighbourhood?For Alan J Roxburgh:http://alanroxburgh.com/aboutFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/alan.roxburgh.127/Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/thecommonsnetworkBooksForming Communities of Hope in the Great Unraveling: Leadership in a Changing World (with Roy Searle)Practices for the Refounding of God's People: The Missional Challenge of the West (with Martin Robinson)Joining God in the Great UnravelingLeadership, God's Agency and DisruptionsJoining God, Remaking Church, Changing the World: The New Shape of the Church in Our TimeAlso mentioned in this episode:Paul Weston Humble Confidence: Lesslie Newbigin and the Logic of MissionTim Rogan The Moral Economists: R. H. Tawney, Karl Polanyi, E. P. Thompson, and the Critique of CapitalismAlan Seligman Modernity's Wager: Authority, the Self, and TranscendenceAlso referred to were these Catholic thinkers: Augusto Del Noce The Crisis of ModernityLuigino Bruni Civil EconomyWilliam T Cavanaugh Field Hospital and The Uses of IdolatoryRocco Buttiglioni Modernity's AlternativeFor Jenny Sinclair:Website: https://togetherforthecommongood.co.uk/from-jenny-sinclairLinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/jenny-sinclair-0589783b/Twitter: https://twitter.com/T4CGFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/TogetherForTheCommonGoodUKInstagram: https://www.instagram.com/t4cg_insta/ Get full access to Leaving Egypt at leavingegyptpodcast.substack.com/subscribe

Keen On Democracy
Episode 2542: John Cassidy on Capitalism and its Critics

Keen On Democracy

Play Episode Listen Later May 22, 2025 48:53


Yesterday, the self-styled San Francisco “progressive” Joan Williams was on the show arguing that Democrats need to relearn the language of the American working class. But, as some of you have noted, Williams seems oblivious to the fact that politics is about more than simply aping other people's language. What you say matters, and the language of American working class, like all industrial working classes, is rooted in a critique of capitalism. She should probably read the New Yorker staff writer John Cassidy's excellent new book, Capitalism and its Critics, which traces capitalism's evolution and criticism from the East India Company through modern times. He defines capitalism as production for profit by privately-owned companies in markets, encompassing various forms from Chinese state capitalism to hyper-globalization. The book examines capitalism's most articulate critics including the Luddites, Marx, Engels, Thomas Carlisle, Adam Smith, Rosa Luxemburg, Keynes & Hayek, and contemporary figures like Sylvia Federici and Thomas Piketty. Cassidy explores how major economists were often critics of their era's dominant capitalist model, and untangles capitalism's complicated relationship with colonialism, slavery and AI which he regards as a potentially unprecedented economic disruption. This should be essential listening for all Democrats seeking to reinvent a post Biden-Harris party and message. 5 key takeaways* Capitalism has many forms - From Chinese state capitalism to Keynesian managed capitalism to hyper-globalization, all fitting the basic definition of production for profit by privately-owned companies in markets.* Great economists are typically critics - Smith criticized mercantile capitalism, Keynes critiqued laissez-faire capitalism, and Hayek/Friedman opposed managed capitalism. Each generation's leading economists challenge their era's dominant model.* Modern corporate structure has deep roots - The East India Company was essentially a modern multinational corporation with headquarters, board of directors, stockholders, and even a private army - showing capitalism's organizational continuity across centuries.* Capitalism is intertwined with colonialism and slavery - Industrial capitalism was built on pre-existing colonial and slave systems, particularly through the cotton industry and plantation economies.* AI represents a potentially unprecedented disruption - Unlike previous technological waves, AI may substitute rather than complement human labor on a massive scale, potentially creating political backlash exceeding even the "China shock" that contributed to Trump's rise.Keen On America is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. Full TranscriptAndrew Keen: Hello, everybody. A couple of days ago, we did a show with Joan Williams. She has a new book out, "Outclassed: How the Left Lost the Working Class and How to Win Them Back." A book about language, about how to talk to the American working class. She also had a piece in Jacobin Magazine, an anti-capitalist magazine, about how the left needs to speak to what she calls average American values. We talked, of course, about Bernie Sanders and AOC and their language of fighting oligarchy, and the New York Times followed that up with "The Enduring Power of Anti-Capitalism in American Politics."But of course, that brings the question: what exactly is capitalism? I did a little bit of research. We can find definitions of capitalism from AI, from Wikipedia, even from online dictionaries, but I thought we might do a little better than relying on Wikipedia and come to a man who's given capitalism and its critics a great deal of thought. John Cassidy is well known as a staff writer at The New Yorker. He's the author of a wonderful book, the best book, actually, on the dot-com insanity. And his new book, "Capitalism and its Critics," is out this week. John, congratulations on the book.So I've got to be a bit of a schoolmaster with you, John, and get some definitions first. What exactly is capitalism before we get to criticism of it?John Cassidy: Yeah, I mean, it's a very good question, Andrew. Obviously, through the decades, even the centuries, there have been many different definitions of the term capitalism and there are different types of capitalism. To not be sort of too ideological about it, the working definition I use is basically production for profit—that could be production of goods or mostly in the new and, you know, in today's economy, production of services—for profit by companies which are privately owned in markets. That's a very sort of all-encompassing definition.Within that, you can have all sorts of different types of capitalism. You can have Chinese state capitalism, you can have the old mercantilism, which industrial capitalism came after, which Trump seems to be trying to resurrect. You can have Keynesian managed capitalism that we had for 30 or 40 years after the Second World War, which I grew up in in the UK. Or you can have sort of hyper-globalization, hyper-capitalism that we've tried for the last 30 years. There are all those different varieties of capitalism consistent with a basic definition, I think.Andrew Keen: That keeps you busy, John. I know you started this project, which is a big book and it's a wonderful book. I read it. I don't always read all the books I have on the show, but I read from cover to cover full of remarkable stories of the critics of capitalism. You note in the beginning that you began this in 2016 with the beginnings of Trump. What was it about the 2016 election that triggered a book about capitalism and its critics?John Cassidy: Well, I was reporting on it at the time for The New Yorker and it struck me—I covered, I basically covered the economy in various forms for various publications since the late 80s, early 90s. In fact, one of my first big stories was the stock market crash of '87. So yes, I am that old. But it seemed to me in 2016 when you had Bernie Sanders running from the left and Trump running from the right, but both in some way offering very sort of similar critiques of capitalism. People forget that Trump in 2016 actually was running from the left of the Republican Party. He was attacking big business. He was attacking Wall Street. He doesn't do that these days very much, but at the time he was very much posing as the sort of outsider here to protect the interests of the average working man.And it seemed to me that when you had this sort of pincer movement against the then ruling model, this wasn't just a one-off. It seemed to me it was a sort of an emerging crisis of legitimacy for the system. And I thought there could be a good book written about how we got to here. And originally I thought it would be a relatively short book just based on the last sort of 20 or 30 years since the collapse of the Cold War and the sort of triumphalism of the early 90s.But as I got into it more and more, I realized that so many of the issues which had been raised, things like globalization, rising inequality, monopoly power, exploitation, even pollution and climate change, these issues go back to the very start of the capitalist system or the industrial capitalist system back in sort of late 18th century, early 19th century Britain. So I thought, in the end, I thought, you know what, let's just do the whole thing soup to nuts through the eyes of the critics.There have obviously been many, many histories of capitalism written. I thought that an original way to do it, or hopefully original, would be to do a sort of a narrative through the lives and the critiques of the critics of various stages. So that's, I hope, what sets it apart from other books on the subject, and also provides a sort of narrative frame because, you know, I am a New Yorker writer, I realize if you want people to read things, you've got to make it readable. Easiest way to make things readable is to center them around people. People love reading about other people. So that's sort of the narrative frame. I start off with a whistleblower from the East India Company back in the—Andrew Keen: Yeah, I want to come to that. But before, John, my sense is that to simplify what you're saying, this is a labor of love. You're originally from Leeds, the heart of Yorkshire, the center of the very industrial revolution, the first industrial revolution where, in your historical analysis, capitalism was born. Is it a labor of love? What's your family relationship with capitalism? How long was the family in Leeds?John Cassidy: Right, I mean that's a very good question. It is a labor of love in a way, but it's not—our family doesn't go—I'm from an Irish family, family of Irish immigrants who moved to England in the 1940s and 1950s. So my father actually did start working in a big mill, the Kirkstall Forge in Leeds, which is a big steel mill, and he left after seeing one of his co-workers have his arms chopped off in one of the machinery, so he decided it wasn't for him and he spent his life working in the construction industry, which was dominated by immigrants as it is here now.So I don't have a—it's not like I go back to sort of the start of the industrial revolution, but I did grow up in the middle of Leeds, very working class, very industrial neighborhood. And what a sort of irony is, I'll point out, I used to, when I was a kid, I used to play golf on a municipal golf course called Gotts Park in Leeds, which—you know, most golf courses in America are sort of in the affluent suburbs, country clubs. This was right in the middle of Armley in Leeds, which is where the Victorian jail is and a very rough neighborhood. There's a small bit of land which they built a golf course on. It turns out it was named after one of the very first industrialists, Benjamin Gott, who was a wool and textile industrialist, and who played a part in the Luddite movement, which I mention.So it turns out, I was there when I was 11 or 12, just learning how to play golf on this scrappy golf course. And here I am, 50 years later, writing about Benjamin Gott at the start of the Industrial Revolution. So yeah, no, sure. I think it speaks to me in a way that perhaps it wouldn't to somebody else from a different background.Andrew Keen: We did a show with William Dalrymple, actually, a couple of years ago. He's been on actually since, the Anglo or Scottish Indian historian. His book on the East India Company, "The Anarchy," is a classic. You begin in some ways your history of capitalism with the East India Company. What was it about the East India Company, John, that makes it different from other for-profit organizations in economic, Western economic history?John Cassidy: I mean, I read that. It's a great book, by the way. That was actually quoted in my chapter on these. Yeah, I remember. I mean, the reason I focused on it was for two reasons. Number one, I was looking for a start, a narrative start to the book. And it seemed to me, you know, the obvious place to start is with the start of the industrial revolution. If you look at economics history textbooks, that's where they always start with Arkwright and all the inventors, you know, who were the sort of techno-entrepreneurs of their time, the sort of British Silicon Valley, if you could think of it as, in Lancashire and Derbyshire in the late 18th century.So I knew I had to sort of start there in some way, but I thought that's a bit pat. Is there another way into it? And it turns out that in 1772 in England, there was a huge bailout of the East India Company, very much like the sort of 2008, 2009 bailout of Wall Street. The company got into trouble. So I thought, you know, maybe there's something there. And I eventually found this guy, William Bolts, who worked for the East India Company, turned into a whistleblower after he was fired for finagling in India like lots of the people who worked for the company did.So that gave me two things. Number one, it gave me—you know, I'm a writer, so it gave me something to focus on a narrative. His personal history is very interesting. But number two, it gave me a sort of foundation because industrial capitalism didn't come from nowhere. You know, it was built on top of a pre-existing form of capitalism, which we now call mercantile capitalism, which was very protectionist, which speaks to us now. But also it had these big monopolistic multinational companies.The East India Company, in some ways, was a very modern corporation. It had a headquarters in Leadenhall Street in the city of London. It had a board of directors, it had stockholders, the company sent out very detailed instructions to the people in the field in India and Indonesia and Malaysia who were traders who bought things from the locals there, brought them back to England on their company ships. They had a company army even to enforce—to protect their operations there. It was an incredible multinational corporation.So that was also, I think, fascinating because it showed that even in the pre-existing system, you know, big corporations existed, there were monopolies, they had royal monopolies given—first the East India Company got one from Queen Elizabeth. But in some ways, they were very similar to modern monopolistic corporations. And they had some of the problems we've seen with modern monopolistic corporations, the way they acted. And Bolts was the sort of first corporate whistleblower, I thought. Yeah, that was a way of sort of getting into the story, I think. Hopefully, you know, it's just a good read, I think.William Bolts's story because he was—he came from nowhere, he was Dutch, he wasn't even English and he joined the company as a sort of impoverished young man, went to India like a lot of English minor aristocrats did to sort of make your fortune. The way the company worked, you had to sort of work on company time and make as much money as you could for the company, but then in your spare time you're allowed to trade for yourself. So a lot of the—without getting into too much detail, but you know, English aristocracy was based on—you know, the eldest child inherits everything, so if you were the younger brother of the Duke of Norfolk, you actually didn't inherit anything. So all of these minor aristocrats, so major aristocrats, but who weren't first born, joined the East India Company, went out to India and made a fortune, and then came back and built huge houses. Lots of the great manor houses in southern England were built by people from the East India Company and they were known as Nabobs, which is an Indian term. So they were the sort of, you know, billionaires of their time, and it was based on—as I say, it wasn't based on industrial capitalism, it was based on mercantile capitalism.Andrew Keen: Yeah, the beginning of the book, which focuses on Bolts and the East India Company, brings to mind for me two things. Firstly, the intimacy of modern capitalism, modern industrial capitalism with colonialism and of course slavery—lots of books have been written on that. Touch on this and also the relationship between the birth of capitalism and the birth of liberalism or democracy. John Stuart Mill, of course, the father in many ways of Western democracy. His day job, ironically enough, or perhaps not ironically, was at the East India Company. So how do those two things connect, or is it just coincidental?John Cassidy: Well, I don't think it is entirely coincidental, I mean, J.S. Mill—his father, James Mill, was also a well-known philosopher in the sort of, obviously, in the earlier generation, earlier than him. And he actually wrote the official history of the East India Company. And I think they gave his son, the sort of brilliant protégé, J.S. Mill, a job as largely as a sort of sinecure, I think. But he did go in and work there in the offices three or four days a week.But I think it does show how sort of integral—the sort of—as you say, the inheritor and the servant in Britain, particularly, of colonial capitalism was. So the East India Company was, you know, it was in decline by that stage in the middle of the 19th century, but it didn't actually give up its monopoly. It wasn't forced to give up its monopoly on the Indian trade until 1857, after, you know, some notorious massacres and there was a sort of public outcry.So yeah, no, that's—it's very interesting that the British—it's sort of unique to Britain in a way, but it's interesting that industrial capitalism arose alongside this pre-existing capitalist structure and somebody like Mill is a sort of paradoxical figure because actually he was quite critical of aspects of industrial capitalism and supported sort of taxes on the rich, even though he's known as the great, you know, one of the great apostles of the free market and free market liberalism. And his day job, as you say, he was working for the East India Company.Andrew Keen: What about the relationship between the birth of industrial capitalism, colonialism and slavery? Those are big questions and I know you deal with them in some—John Cassidy: I think you can't just write an economic history of capitalism now just starting with the cotton industry and say, you know, it was all about—it was all about just technical progress and gadgets, etc. It was built on a sort of pre-existing system which was colonial and, you know, the slave trade was a central element of that. Now, as you say, there have been lots and lots of books written about it, the whole 1619 project got an incredible amount of attention a few years ago. So I didn't really want to rehash all that, but I did want to acknowledge the sort of role of slavery, especially in the rise of the cotton industry because of course, a lot of the raw cotton was grown in the plantations in the American South.So the way I actually ended up doing that was by writing a chapter about Eric Williams, a Trinidadian writer who ended up as the Prime Minister of Trinidad when it became independent in the 1960s. But when he was younger, he wrote a book which is now regarded as a classic. He went to Oxford to do a PhD, won a scholarship. He was very smart. I won a sort of Oxford scholarship myself but 50 years before that, he came across the Atlantic and did an undergraduate degree in history and then did a PhD there and his PhD thesis was on slavery and capitalism.And at the time, in the 1930s, the link really wasn't acknowledged. You could read any sort of standard economic history written by British historians, and they completely ignored that. He made the argument that, you know, slavery was integral to the rise of capitalism and he basically started an argument which has been raging ever since the 1930s and, you know, if you want to study economic history now you have to sort of—you know, have to have to address that. And the way I thought, even though the—it's called the Williams thesis is very famous. I don't think many people knew much about where it came from. So I thought I'd do a chapter on—Andrew Keen: Yeah, that chapter is excellent. You mentioned earlier the Luddites, you're from Yorkshire where Luddism in some ways was born. One of the early chapters is on the Luddites. We did a show with Brian Merchant, his book, "Blood in the Machine," has done very well, I'm sure you're familiar with it. I always understood the Luddites as being against industrialization, against the machine, as opposed to being against capitalism. But did those two things get muddled together in the history of the Luddites?John Cassidy: I think they did. I mean, you know, Luddites, when we grew up, I mean you're English too, you know to be called a Luddite was a term of abuse, right? You know, you were sort of antediluvian, anti-technology, you're stupid. It was only, I think, with the sort of computer revolution, the tech revolution of the last 30, 40 years and the sort of disruptions it's caused, that people have started to look back at the Luddites and say, perhaps they had a point.For them, they were basically pre-industrial capitalism artisans. They worked for profit-making concerns, small workshops. Some of them worked for themselves, so they were sort of sole proprietor capitalists. Or they worked in small venues, but the rise of industrial capitalism, factory capitalism or whatever, basically took away their livelihoods progressively. So they associated capitalism with new technology. In their minds it was the same. But their argument wasn't really a technological one or even an economic one, it was more a moral one. They basically made the moral argument that capitalists shouldn't have the right to just take away their livelihoods with no sort of recompense for them.At the time they didn't have any parliamentary representation. You know, they weren't revolutionaries. The first thing they did was create petitions to try and get parliament to step in, sort of introduce some regulation here. They got turned down repeatedly by the sort of—even though it was a very aristocratic parliament, places like Manchester and Leeds didn't have any representation at all. So it was only after that that they sort of turned violent and started, you know, smashing machines and machines, I think, were sort of symbols of the system, which they saw as morally unjust.And I think that's sort of what—obviously, there's, you know, a lot of technological disruption now, so we can, especially as it starts to come for the educated cognitive class, we can sort of sympathize with them more. But I think the sort of moral critique that there's this, you know, underneath the sort of great creativity and economic growth that capitalism produces, there is also a lot of destruction and a lot of victims. And I think that message, you know, is becoming a lot more—that's why I think why they've been rediscovered in the last five or ten years and I'm one of the people I guess contributing to that rediscovery.Andrew Keen: There's obviously many critiques of capitalism politically. I want to come to Marx in a second, but your chapter, I thought, on Thomas Carlyle and this nostalgic conservatism was very important and there are other conservatives as well. John, do you think that—and you mentioned Trump earlier, who is essentially a nostalgist for a—I don't know, some sort of bizarre pre-capitalist age in America. Is there something particularly powerful about the anti-capitalism of romantics like Carlyle, 19th century Englishman, there were many others of course.John Cassidy: Well, I think so. I mean, I think what is—conservatism, when we were young anyway, was associated with Thatcherism and Reaganism, which, you know, lionized the free market and free market capitalism and was a reaction against the pre-existing form of capitalism, Keynesian capitalism of the sort of 40s to the 80s. But I think what got lost in that era was the fact that there have always been—you've got Hayek up there, obviously—Andrew Keen: And then Keynes and Hayek, the two—John Cassidy: Right, it goes to the end of that. They had a great debate in the 1930s about these issues. But Hayek really wasn't a conservative person, and neither was Milton Friedman. They were sort of free market revolutionaries, really, that you'd let the market rip and it does good things. And I think that that sort of a view, you know, it just became very powerful. But we sort of lost sight of the fact that there was also a much older tradition of sort of suspicion of radical changes of any type. And that was what conservatism was about to some extent. If you think about Baldwin in Britain, for example.And there was a sort of—during the Industrial Revolution, some of the strongest supporters of factory acts to reduce hours and hourly wages for women and kids were actually conservatives, Tories, as they were called at the time, like Ashley. That tradition, Carlyle was a sort of extreme representative of that. I mean, Carlyle was a sort of proto-fascist, let's not romanticize him, he lionized strongmen, Frederick the Great, and he didn't really believe in democracy. But he also had—he was appalled by the sort of, you know, the—like, what's the phrase I'm looking for? The sort of destructive aspects of industrial capitalism, both on the workers, you know, he said it was a dehumanizing system, sounded like Marx in some ways. That it dehumanized the workers, but also it destroyed the environment.He was an early environmentalist. He venerated the environment, was actually very strongly linked to the transcendentalists in America, people like Thoreau, who went to visit him when he visited Britain and he saw the sort of destructive impact that capitalism was having locally in places like Manchester, which were filthy with filthy rivers, etc. So he just saw the whole system as sort of morally bankrupt and he was a great writer, Carlyle, whatever you think of him. Great user of language, so he has these great ringing phrases like, you know, the cash nexus or calling it the Gospel of Mammonism, the shabbiest gospel ever preached under the sun was industrial capitalism.So, again, you know, that's a sort of paradoxical thing, because I think for so long conservatism was associated with, you know, with support for the free market and still is in most of the Republican Party, but then along comes Trump and sort of conquers the party with a, you know, more skeptical, as you say, romantic, not really based on any reality, but a sort of romantic view that America can stand by itself in the world. I mean, I see Trump actually as a sort of an effort to sort of throw back to mercantile capitalism in a way. You know, which was not just pre-industrial, but was also pre-democracy, run by monarchs, which I'm sure appeals to him, and it was based on, you know, large—there were large tariffs. You couldn't import things in the UK. If you want to import anything to the UK, you have to send it on a British ship because of the navigation laws. It was a very protectionist system and it's actually, you know, as I said, had a lot of parallels with what Trump's trying to do or tries to do until he backs off.Andrew Keen: You cheat a little bit in the book in the sense that you—everyone has their own chapter. We'll talk a little bit about Hayek and Smith and Lenin and Friedman. You do have one chapter on Marx, but you also have a chapter on Engels. So you kind of cheat. You combine the two. Is it possible, though, to do—and you've just written this book, so you know this as well as anyone. How do you write a book about capitalism and its critics and only really give one chapter to Marx, who is so dominant? I mean, you've got lots of Marxists in the book, including Lenin and Luxemburg. How fundamental is Marx to a criticism of capitalism? Is most criticism, especially from the left, from progressives, is it really just all a footnote to Marx?John Cassidy: I wouldn't go that far, but I think obviously on the left he is the central figure. But there's an element of sort of trying to rebuild Engels a bit in this. I mean, I think of Engels and Marx—I mean obviously Marx wrote the great classic "Capital," etc. But in the 1840s, when they both started writing about capitalism, Engels was sort of ahead of Marx in some ways. I mean, the sort of materialist concept, the idea that economics rules everything, Engels actually was the first one to come up with that in an essay in the 1840s which Marx then published in one of his—in the German newspaper he worked for at the time, radical newspaper, and he acknowledged openly that that was really what got him thinking seriously about economics, and even in the late—in 20, 25 years later when he wrote "Capital," all three volumes of it and the Grundrisse, just these enormous outpourings of analysis on capitalism.He acknowledged Engels's role in that and obviously Engels wrote the first draft of the Communist Manifesto in 1848 too, which Marx then topped and tailed and—he was a better writer obviously, Marx, and he gave it the dramatic language that we all know it for. So I think Engels and Marx together obviously are the central sort of figures in the sort of left-wing critique. But they didn't start out like that. I mean, they were very obscure, you've got to remember.You know, they were—when they were writing, Marx was writing "Capital" in London, it never even got published in English for another 20 years. It was just published in German. He was basically an expat. He had been thrown out of Germany, he had been thrown out of France, so England was last resort and the British didn't consider him a threat so they were happy to let him and the rest of the German sort of left in there. I think it became—it became the sort of epochal figure after his death really, I think, when he was picked up by the left-wing parties, which are especially the SPD in Germany, which was the first sort of socialist mass party and was officially Marxist until the First World War and there were great internal debates.And then of course, because Lenin and the Russians came out of that tradition too, Marxism then became the official doctrine of the Soviet Union when they adopted a version of it. And again there were massive internal arguments about what Marx really meant, and in fact, you know, one interpretation of the last 150 years of left-wing sort of intellectual development is as a sort of argument about what did Marx really mean and what are the important bits of it, what are the less essential bits of it. It's a bit like the "what did Keynes really mean" that you get in liberal circles.So yeah, Marx, obviously, this is basically an intellectual history of critiques of capitalism. In that frame, he is absolutely a central figure. Why didn't I give him more space than a chapter and a chapter and a half with Engels? There have been a million books written about Marx. I mean, it's not that—it's not that he's an unknown figure. You know, there's a best-selling book written in Britain about 20 years ago about him and then I was quoting, in my biographical research, I relied on some more recent, more scholarly biographies. So he's an endlessly fascinating figure but I didn't want him to dominate the book so I gave him basically the same space as everybody else.Andrew Keen: You've got, as I said, you've got a chapter on Adam Smith who's often considered the father of economics. You've got a chapter on Keynes. You've got a chapter on Friedman. And you've got a chapter on Hayek, all the great modern economists. Is it possible, John, to be a distinguished economist one way or the other and not be a critic of capitalism?John Cassidy: Well, I don't—I mean, I think history would suggest that the greatest economists have been critics of capitalism in their own time. People would say to me, what the hell have you got Milton Friedman and Friedrich Hayek in a book about critics of capitalism? They were great exponents, defenders of capitalism. They loved the system. That is perfectly true. But in the 1930s, 40s, 50s, 60s, and 70s, middle of the 20th century, they were actually arch-critics of the ruling form of capitalism at the time, which was what I call managed capitalism. What some people call Keynesianism, what other people call European social democracy, whatever you call it, it was a model of a mixed economy in which the government played a large role both in propping up demand and in providing an extensive social safety net in the UK and providing public healthcare and public education. It was a sort of hybrid model.Most of the economy in terms of the businesses remained in private hands. So most production was capitalistic. It was a capitalist system. They didn't go to the Soviet model of nationalizing everything and Britain did nationalize some businesses, but most places didn't. The US of course didn't but it was a form of managed capitalism. And Hayek and Friedman were both great critics of that and wanted to sort of move back to 19th century laissez-faire model.Keynes was a—was actually a great, I view him anyway, as really a sort of late Victorian liberal and was trying to protect as much of the sort of J.S. Mill view of the world as he could, but he thought capitalism had one fatal flaw: that it tended to fall into recessions and then they can snowball and the whole system can collapse which is what had basically happened in the early 1930s until Keynesian policies were adopted. Keynes sort of differed from a lot of his followers—I have a chapter on Joan Robinson in there, who were pretty left-wing and wanted to sort of use Keynesianism as a way to shift the economy quite far to the left. Keynes didn't really believe in that. He has a famous quote that, you know, once you get to full employment, you can then rely on the free market to sort of take care of things. He was still a liberal at heart.Going back to Adam Smith, why is he in a book on criticism of capitalism? And again, it goes back to what I said at the beginning. He actually wrote "The Wealth of Nations"—he explains in the introduction—as a critique of mercantile capitalism. His argument was that he was a pro-free trader, pro-small business, free enterprise. His argument was if you get the government out of the way, we don't need these government-sponsored monopolies like the East India Company. If you just rely on the market, the sort of market forces and competition will produce a good outcome. So then he was seen as a great—you know, he is then seen as the apostle of free market capitalism. I mean when I started as a young reporter, when I used to report in Washington, all the conservatives used to wear Adam Smith badges. You don't see Donald Trump wearing an Adam Smith badge, but that was the case.He was also—the other aspect of Smith, which I highlight, which is not often remarked on—he's also a critic of big business. He has a famous section where he discusses the sort of tendency of any group of more than three businessmen when they get together to try and raise prices and conspire against consumers. And he was very suspicious of, as I say, large companies, monopolies. I think if Adam Smith existed today, I mean, I think he would be a big supporter of Lina Khan and the sort of antitrust movement, he would say capitalism is great as long as you have competition, but if you don't have competition it becomes, you know, exploitative.Andrew Keen: Yeah, if Smith came back to live today, you have a chapter on Thomas Piketty, maybe he may not be French, but he may be taking that position about how the rich benefit from the structure of investment. Piketty's core—I've never had Piketty on the show, but I've had some of his followers like Emmanuel Saez from Berkeley. Yeah. How powerful is Piketty's critique of capitalism within the context of the classical economic analysis from Hayek and Friedman? Yeah, it's a very good question.John Cassidy: It's a very good question. I mean, he's a very paradoxical figure, Piketty, in that he obviously shot to world fame and stardom with his book on capital in the 21st century, which in some ways he obviously used the capital as a way of linking himself to Marx, even though he said he never read Marx. But he was basically making the same argument that if you leave capitalism unrestrained and don't do anything about monopolies etc. or wealth, you're going to get massive inequality and he—I think his great contribution, Piketty and the school of people, one of them you mentioned, around him was we sort of had a vague idea that inequality was going up and that, you know, wages were stagnating, etc.What he and his colleagues did is they produced these sort of scientific empirical studies showing in very simple to understand terms how the sort of share of income and wealth of the top 10 percent, the top 5 percent, the top 1 percent and the top 0.1 percent basically skyrocketed from the 1970s to about 2010. And it was, you know, he was an MIT PhD. Saez, who you mentioned, is a Berkeley professor. They were schooled in neoclassical economics at Harvard and MIT and places like that. So the right couldn't dismiss them as sort of, you know, lefties or Trots or whatever who're just sort of making this stuff up. They had to acknowledge that this was actually an empirical reality.I think it did change the whole basis of the debate and it was sort of part of this reaction against capitalism in the 2010s. You know it was obviously linked to the sort of Sanders and the Occupy Wall Street movement at the time. It came out of the—you know, the financial crisis as well when Wall Street disgraced itself. I mean, I wrote a previous book on all that, but people have sort of, I think, forgotten the great reaction against that a decade ago, which I think even Trump sort of exploited, as I say, by using anti-banker rhetoric at the time.So, Piketty was a great figure, I think, from, you know, I was thinking, who are the most influential critics of capitalism in the 21st century? And I think you'd have to put him up there on the list. I'm not saying he's the only one or the most eminent one. But I think he is a central figure. Now, of course, you'd think, well, this is a really powerful critic of capitalism, and nobody's going to pick up, and Bernie's going to take off and everything. But here we are a decade later now. It seems to be what the backlash has produced is a swing to the right, not a swing to the left. So that's, again, a sort of paradox.Andrew Keen: One person I didn't expect to come up in the book, John, and I was fascinated with this chapter, is Silvia Federici. I've tried to get her on the show. We've had some books about her writing and her kind of—I don't know, you treat her critique as a feminist one. The role of women. Why did you choose to write a chapter about Federici and that feminist critique of capitalism?John Cassidy: Right, right. Well, I don't think it was just feminist. I'll explain what I think it was. Two reasons. Number one, I wanted to get more women into the book. I mean, it's in some sense, it is a history of economics and economic critiques. And they are overwhelmingly written by men and women were sort of written out of the narrative of capitalism for a very long time. So I tried to include as many sort of women as actual thinkers as I could and I have a couple of early socialist feminist thinkers, Anna Wheeler and Flora Tristan and then I cover some of the—I cover Rosa Luxemburg as the great sort of tribune of the left revolutionary socialist, communist whatever you want to call it. Anti-capitalist I think is probably also important to note about. Yeah, and then I also have Joan Robinson, but I wanted somebody to do something in the modern era, and I thought Federici, in the world of the Wages for Housework movement, is very interesting from two perspectives.Number one, Federici herself is a Marxist, and I think she probably would still consider herself a revolutionary. She's based in New York, as you know now. She lived in New York for 50 years, but she came from—she's originally Italian and came out of the Italian left in the 1960s, which was very radical. Do you know her? Did you talk to her? I didn't talk to her on this. No, she—I basically relied on, there has been a lot of, as you say, there's been a lot of stuff written about her over the years. She's written, you know, she's given various long interviews and she's written a book herself, a version, a history of housework, so I figured it was all there and it was just a matter of pulling it together.But I think the critique, why the critique is interesting, most of the book is a sort of critique of how capitalism works, you know, in the production or you know, in factories or in offices or you know, wherever capitalist operations are working, but her critique is sort of domestic reproduction, as she calls it, the role of unpaid labor in supporting capitalism. I mean it goes back a long way actually. There was this moment, I sort of trace it back to the 1940s and 1950s when there were feminists in America who were demonstrating outside factories and making the point that you know, the factory workers and the operations of the factory, it couldn't—there's one of the famous sort of tire factory in California demonstrations where the women made the argument, look this factory can't continue to operate unless we feed and clothe the workers and provide the next generation of workers. You know, that's domestic reproduction. So their argument was that housework should be paid and Federici took that idea and a couple of her colleagues, she founded the—it's a global movement, but she founded the most famous branch in New York City in the 1970s. In Park Slope near where I live actually.And they were—you call it feminists, they were feminists in a way, but they were rejected by the sort of mainstream feminist movement, the sort of Gloria Steinems of the world, who Federici was very critical of because she said they ignored, they really just wanted to get women ahead in the sort of capitalist economy and they ignored the sort of underlying from her perspective, the underlying sort of illegitimacy and exploitation of that system. So they were never accepted as part of the feminist movement. They're to the left of the Feminist Movement.Andrew Keen: You mentioned Keynes, of course, so central in all this, particularly his analysis of the role of automation in capitalism. We did a show recently with Robert Skidelsky and I'm sure you're familiar—John Cassidy: Yeah, yeah, great, great biography of Keynes.Andrew Keen: Yeah, the great biographer of Keynes, whose latest book is "Mindless: The Human Condition in the Age of AI." You yourself wrote a brilliant book on the last tech mania and dot-com capitalism. I used it in a lot of my writing and books. What's your analysis of AI in this latest mania and the role generally of manias in the history of capitalism and indeed in critiquing capitalism? Is AI just the next chapter of the dot-com boom?John Cassidy: I think it's a very deep question. I think I'd give two answers to it. In one sense it is just the latest mania the way—I mean, the way capitalism works is we have these, I go back to Kondratiev, one of my Russian economists who ended up being killed by Stalin. He was the sort of inventor of the long wave theory of capitalism. We have these short waves where you have sort of booms and busts driven by finance and debt etc. But we also have long waves driven by technology.And obviously, in the last 40, 50 years, the two big ones are the original deployment of the internet and microchip technology in the sort of 80s and 90s culminating in the dot-com boom of the late 90s, which as you say, I wrote about. Thanks very much for your kind comments on the book. If you just sort of compare it from a financial basis I think they are very similar just in terms of the sort of role of hype from Wall Street in hyping up these companies. The sort of FOMO aspect of it among investors that they you know, you can't miss out. So just buy the companies blindly. And the sort of lionization in the press and the media of, you know, of AI as the sort of great wave of the future.So if you take a sort of skeptical market based approach, I would say, yeah, this is just another sort of another mania which will eventually burst and it looked like it had burst for a few weeks when Trump put the tariffs up, now the market seemed to be recovering. But I think there is, there may be something new about it. I am not, I don't pretend to be a technical expert. I try to rely on the evidence of or the testimony of people who know the systems well and also economists who have studied it. It seems to me the closer you get to it the more alarming it is in terms of the potential shock value that there is there.I mean Trump and the sort of reaction to a larger extent can be traced back to the China shock where we had this global shock to American manufacturing and sort of hollowed out a lot of the industrial areas much of it, like industrial Britain was hollowed out in the 80s. If you, you know, even people like Altman and Elon Musk, they seem to think that this is going to be on a much larger scale than that and will basically, you know, get rid of the professions as they exist. Which would be a huge, huge shock. And I think a lot of the economists who studied this, who four or five years ago were relatively optimistic, people like Daron Acemoglu, David Autor—Andrew Keen: Simon Johnson, of course, who just won the Nobel Prize, and he's from England.John Cassidy: Simon, I did an event with Simon earlier this week. You know they've studied this a lot more closely than I have but I do interview them and I think five, six years ago they were sort of optimistic that you know this could just be a new steam engine or could be a microchip which would lead to sort of a lot more growth, rising productivity, rising productivity is usually associated with rising wages so sure there'd be short-term costs but ultimately it would be a good thing. Now, I think if you speak to them, they see since the, you know, obviously, the OpenAI—the original launch and now there's just this huge arms race with no government involvement at all I think they're coming to the conclusion that rather than being developed to sort of complement human labor, all these systems are just being rushed out to substitute for human labor. And it's just going, if current trends persist, it's going to be a China shock on an even bigger scale.You know what is going to, if that, if they're right, that is going to produce some huge political backlash at some point, that's inevitable. So I know—the thing when the dot-com bubble burst, it didn't really have that much long-term impact on the economy. People lost the sort of fake money they thought they'd made. And then the companies, obviously some of the companies like Amazon and you know Google were real genuine profit-making companies and if you bought them early you made a fortune. But AI does seem a sort of bigger, scarier phenomenon to me. I don't know. I mean, you're close to it. What do you think?Andrew Keen: Well, I'm waiting for a book, John, from you. I think you can combine dot-com and capitalism and its critics. We need you probably to cover it—you know more about it than me. Final question, I mean, it's a wonderful book and we haven't even scratched the surface everyone needs to get it. I enjoyed the chapter, for example, on Karl Polanyi and so much more. I mean, it's a big book. But my final question, John, is do you have any regrets about anyone you left out? The one person I would have liked to have been included was Rawls because of his sort of treatment of capitalism and luck as a kind of casino. I'm not sure whether you gave any thought to Rawls, but is there someone in retrospect you should have had a chapter on that you left out?John Cassidy: There are lots of people I left out. I mean, that's the problem. I mean there have been hundreds and hundreds of critics of capitalism. Rawls, of course, incredibly influential and his idea of the sort of, you know, the veil of ignorance that you should judge things not knowing where you are in the income distribution and then—Andrew Keen: And it's luck. I mean the idea of some people get lucky and some people don't.John Cassidy: It is the luck of the draw, obviously, what card you pull. I think that is a very powerful critique, but I just—because I am more of an expert on economics, I tended to leave out philosophers and sociologists. I mean, you know, you could say, where's Max Weber? Where are the anarchists? You know, where's Emma Goldman? Where's John Kenneth Galbraith, the sort of great mid-century critic of American industrial capitalism? There's so many people that you could include. I mean, I could have written 10 volumes. In fact, I refer in the book to, you know, there's always been a problem. G.D.H. Cole, a famous English historian, wrote a history of socialism back in the 1960s and 70s. You know, just getting to 1850 took him six volumes. So, you've got to pick and choose, and I don't claim this is the history of capitalism and its critics. That would be a ridiculous claim to make. I just claim it's a history written by me, and hopefully the people are interested in it, and they're sufficiently diverse that you can address all the big questions.Andrew Keen: Well it's certainly incredibly timely. Capitalism and its critics—more and more of them. Sometimes they don't even describe themselves as critics of capitalism when they're talking about oligarchs or billionaires, they're really criticizing capitalism. A must read from one of America's leading journalists. And would you call yourself a critic of capitalism, John?John Cassidy: Yeah, I guess I am, to some extent, sure. I mean, I'm not a—you know, I'm not on the far left, but I'd say I'm a center-left critic of capitalism. Yes, definitely, that would be fair.Andrew Keen: And does the left need to learn? Does everyone on the left need to read the book and learn the language of anti-capitalism in a more coherent and honest way?John Cassidy: I hope so. I mean, obviously, I'd be talking my own book there, as they say, but I hope that people on the left, but not just people on the left. I really did try to sort of be fair to the sort of right-wing critiques as well. I included the Carlyle chapter particularly, obviously, but in the later chapters, I also sort of refer to this emerging critique on the right, the sort of economic nationalist critique. So hopefully, I think people on the right could read it to understand the critiques from the left, and people on the left could read it to understand some of the critiques on the right as well.Andrew Keen: Well, it's a lovely book. It's enormously erudite and simultaneously readable. Anyone who likes John Cassidy's work from The New Yorker will love it. Congratulations, John, on the new book, and I'd love to get you back on the show as anti-capitalism in America picks up steam and perhaps manifests itself in the 2028 election. Thank you so much.John Cassidy: Thanks very much for inviting me on, it was fun.Keen On America is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit keenon.substack.com/subscribe

america american new york amazon california ai new york city donald trump english google uk china washington france england british french germany gospel san francisco new york times phd european chinese blood german elon musk russian western italian mit modern irish wealth harvard indian world war ii touch wall street capital britain atlantic oxford democrats nations dutch manchester bernie sanders indonesia wikipedia new yorker fomo congratulations capitalism cold war berkeley industrial malaysia prime minister sanders victorian critics openai soviet union queen elizabeth ii soviet leeds alexandria ocasio cortez nobel prize mill trinidad republican party joseph stalin marx anarchy baldwin yorkshire friedman wages norfolk marxist marxism spd industrial revolution biden harris american politics lenin altman adam smith first world war englishman american south bolts trots working class engels lancashire tories luxemburg occupy wall street hayek milton friedman marxists thoreau anglo derbyshire carlyle housework rawls keynes keynesian trinidadian max weber john stuart mill thomas piketty communist manifesto east india company luddite luddites eric williams rosa luxemburg lina khan daron acemoglu friedrich hayek emma goldman piketty saez silvia federici feminist movement anticapitalism william dalrymple keynesianism thatcherism federici jacobin magazine thomas carlyle reaganism john kenneth galbraith john cassidy arkwright brian merchant win them back joan williams grundrisse karl polanyi mit phd emmanuel saez robert skidelsky joan robinson
Interplace
Cities in Chaos, Connection in Crisis

Interplace

Play Episode Listen Later May 11, 2025 23:00


Hello Interactors,This week, I've been reflecting on the themes of my last few essays — along with a pile of research that's been oddly in sync. Transit planning. Neuroscience. Happiness studies. Complexity theory. Strange mix, but it keeps pointing to the same thing: cities aren't just struggling with transportation or housing. They're struggling with connection. With meaning. With the simple question: what kind of happiness should a city make possible? And why don't we ask that more often?STRANGERS SHUNNED, SYSTEMS SIMULATEDThe urban century was supposed to bring us together. Denser cities, faster mobility, more connected lives — these were the promises of global urbanization. Yet in the shadow of those promises, a different kind of city has emerged in America with growing undertones elsewhere: one that increasingly seeks to eliminate the stranger, bypass friction, and privatize interaction.Whether through algorithmically optimized ride-sharing, private tunnels built to evade street life, or digital maps simulating place without presence for autonomous vehicles, a growing set of design logics work to render other people — especially unknown others — invisible, irrelevant, or avoidable.I admit, I too can get seduced by this comfort, technology, and efficiency. But cities aren't just systems of movement — they're systems of meaning. Space is never neutral; it's shaped by power and shapes behavior in return. This isn't new. Ancient cities like Teotihuacan (tay-oh-tee-wah-KAHN) in central Mexico, once one of the largest cities in the world, aligned their streets and pyramids with the stars. Chang'an (chahng-AHN), the capital of Tang Dynasty China, used strict cardinal grids and walled compounds to reflect Confucian ideals of order and hierarchy. And Uruk (OO-rook), in ancient Mesopotamia, organized civic life around temple complexes that stood at the spiritual and administrative heart of the city.These weren't just settlements — they were spatial arguments about how people should live together, and who should lead. Even Middle Eastern souks and hammams were more than markets or baths; they were civic infrastructure. Whether through temples or bus stops, the question is the same: What kind of social behavior is this space asking of us?Neuroscience points to answers. As Shane O'Mara argues, walking is not just transport — it's neurocognitive infrastructure. The hippocampus, which governs memory, orientation, and mood, activates when we move through physical space. Walking among others, perceiving spontaneous interactions, and attending to environmental cues strengthens our cognitive maps and emotional regulation.This makes city oriented around ‘stranger danger' not just unjust — but indeed dangerous. Because to eliminate friction is to undermine emergence — not only in the social sense, but in the economic and cultural ones too. Cities thrive on weak ties, on happenstance, on proximity without intention. Mark Granovetter's landmark paper, The Strength of Weak Ties, showed that it's those looser, peripheral relationships — not our inner circles — that drive opportunity, creativity, and mobility. Karl Polanyi called it embeddedness: the idea that markets don't float in space, they're grounded in the social fabric around them.You see it too in scale theory — in the work of Geoffrey West and Luís Bettencourt — where the productive and innovative energy of cities scales with density, interaction, and diversity. When you flatten all that into private tunnels and algorithmic efficiency, you don't just lose the texture — you lose the conditions for invention.As David Roberts, a climate and policy journalist known for his systems thinking and sharp urban critiques, puts it: this is “the anti-social dream of elite urbanism” — a vision where you never have to share space with anyone not like you. In conversation with him, Jarrett Walker, a transit planner and theorist who's spent decades helping cities design equitable bus networks, also pushes back against this logic. He warns that when cities build transit around avoidance — individualized rides, privatized tunnels, algorithmic sorting — they aren't just solving inefficiencies. They're hollowing out the very thing that makes transit (and cities) valuable and also public: the shared experience of strangers moving together.The question isn't just whether cities are efficient — but what kind of social beings they help us become. If we build cities to avoid each other, we shouldn't be surprised when they crumble as we all forget how to live together.COVERAGE, CARE, AND CIVIC CALMIf you follow urban and transit planning debates long enough, you'll hear the same argument come up again and again: Should we focus on ridership or coverage? High-frequency routes where lots of people travel, or wide access for people who live farther out — even if fewer use the service? For transit nerds, it's a policy question. For everyone else, it's about dignity.As Walker puts it, coverage isn't about efficiency — it's about “a sense of fairness.” It's about living in a place where your city hasn't written you off because you're not profitable to serve. Walker's point is that coverage isn't charity. It's a public good, one that tells people: You belong here.That same logic shows up in more surprising places — like the World Happiness Report. Year after year, Finland lands at the top. But as writer Molly Young found during her visit to Helsinki, Finnish “happiness” isn't about joy or euphoria. It's about something steadier: trust, safety, and institutional calm. What the report measures is evaluative happiness — how satisfied people are with their lives over time — not affective happiness, which is more about momentary joy or emotional highs.There's a Finnish word that captures this. It the feeling you get after a sauna: saunanjälkeinen raukeus (SOW-nahn-yell-kay-nen ROW-keh-oos) — the softened, slowed state of the body and mind. That's what cities like Helsinki seem to deliver: not bliss, but a stable, low-friction kind of contentment. And while that may lack sparkle, it makes people feel held.And infrastructure plays a big role. In Helsinki, the signs in the library don't say “Be Quiet.” They say, “Please let others work in peace.” It's a small thing, but it speaks volumes — less about control, more about shared responsibility. There are saunas in government buildings. Parents leave their babies sleeping in strollers outside cafés. Transit is clean, quiet, and frequent. As Young puts it, these aren't luxuries — they're part of a “bone-deep sense of trust” the city builds and reinforces. Not enforced from above, but sustained by expectation, habit, and care.My family once joined an organized walking tour of Copenhagen. The guide, who was from Spain, pointed to a clock in a town square and said, almost in passing, “The government has always made sure this clock runs on time — even during war.” It wasn't just about punctuality. It was about trust. About the quiet promise that the public realm would still hold, even when everything else felt uncertain. This, our guide noted from his Spanish perspective, is what what make Scandinavians so-called ‘happy'. They feel held.Studies show that most of what boosts long-term happiness isn't about dopamine hits — it's about relational trust. Feeling safe. Feeling seen. Knowing you won't be stranded if you don't have a car or a credit card. Knowing the city works, even if you don't make it work for you.In this way, transit frequency and subtle signs in Helsinki are doing the same thing. They're shaping behavior and reinforcing social norms. They're saying: we share space here. Don't be loud. Don't cut in line. Don't treat public space like it's only for you.That kind of city can't be built on metrics alone. It needs moral imagination — the kind that sees coverage, access, and slowness as features, not bugs. That's not some socialist's idea of utopia. It's just thoughtful. Built into the culture, yes, but also the design.But sometimes we're just stuck with whatever design is already in place. Even if it's not so thoughtful. Economists and social theorists have long used the concept of path dependence to explain why some systems — cities, institutions, even technologies — get stuck. The idea dates back to work in economics and political science in the 1980s, where it was used to show how early decisions, even small ones, can lock in patterns that are hard to reverse.Once you've laid train tracks, built freeways, zoned for single-family homes — you've shaped what comes next. Changing course isn't impossible, but it's costly, slow, and politically messy. The QWERTY keyboard is a textbook example: not the most efficient layout, but one that stuck because switching systems later would be harder than just adapting to what we've got.Urban scholars Michael Storper and Allen Scott brought this thinking into city studies. They've shown how economic geography and institutional inertia shape urban outcomes — how past planning decisions, labor markets, and infrastructure investments limit the options cities have today. If your city bet on car-centric growth decades ago, you're probably still paying for that decision, even if pivoting is palatable to the public.CONNECTIONS, COMPLEXITY, CITIES THAT CAREThere's a quote often attributed to Stephen Hawking that's made the rounds in complexity science circles: “The 21st century will be the century of complexity.” No one's entirely sure where he said it — it shows up in systems theory blogs, talks, and books — but it sticks. Probably because it feels true.If the last century was about physics — closed systems, force, motion, precision — then this one is about what happens when the pieces won't stay still. When the rules change mid-game. When causes ripple back as consequences. In other words: cities.Planners have tried to tame that complexity in all kinds of ways. Grids. Zoning codes. Dashboards. There's long been a kind of “physics envy” in both planning and economics — a belief that if we just had the right model, the right inputs, we could predict and control the city like a closed system. As a result, for much of the 20th century, cities were designed like machines — optimized for flow, separation, and predictability.But even the pushback followed a logic of control — cul-de-sacs and suburban pastoralism — wasn't a turn toward organic life or spontaneity. It was just a softer kind of order: winding roads and whispered rules meant to keep things calm, clean, and contained…and mostly white and moderately wealthy.If you think of cities like machines, it makes sense to want control. More data, tighter optimization, fewer surprises. That's how you'd tune an engine or write software. But cities aren't machines. They're messy, layered, and full of people doing unpredictable things. They're more like ecosystems — or weather patterns — than they are a carburetor. And that's where complexity science becomes useful.People like Paul Cilliers and Brian Castellani have argued for a more critical kind of complexity science — one that sees cities not just as networks or algorithms, but as places shaped by values, power, and conflict. Cilliers emphasized that complex systems, like cities, are open and dynamic: they don't have fixed boundaries, they adapt constantly, and they respond to feedback in ways no planner can fully predict. Castellani extends this by insisting that complexity isn't just technical — it's ethical. It demands we ask: Who benefits from a system's design? Who has room to adapt, and who gets constrained? In this view, small interventions — a zoning tweak, a route change — can set off ripple effects that reshape how people move, connect, and belong. A new path dependence.This is why certainty is dangerous in urban design. It breeds overconfidence. Humility is a better place to start. As Jarrett Walker puts it, “there are all kinds of ways to fake your way through this.” Agencies often adopt feel-good mission statements like “compete with the automobile by providing access for all” — which, he notes, is like “telling your taxi driver to turn left and right at the same time.” You can't do both. Not on a fixed budget.Walker pushes agencies to be honest: if you want to prioritize ridership, say so. If you want to prioritize broad geographic coverage, that's also valid — but know it will mean lower ridership. The key is not pretending you can have both at full strength. He says, “What I want is for board members… to make this decision consciously and not be surprised by the consequences”.These decisions matter. A budget cut can push riders off buses, which then leads to reduced service, which leads to more riders leaving — a feedback loop. On the flip side, small improvements — like better lighting, a public bench, a frequent bus — can set off positive loops too. Change emerges, often sideways.That means thinking about transit not just as a system of movement, but as a relational space. Same with libraries, parks, and sidewalks. These aren't neutral containers. They're environments that either support or suppress human connection. If you design a city to eliminate friction, you eliminate chance encounters — the stuff social trust is made of.I'm an introvert. I like quiet. I recharge alone. But I also live in a city — and I've learned that even for people like me, being around others still matters. Not in the chatty, get-to-know-your-neighbors way. But in the background hum of life around you. Sitting on a bus. Browsing in a bookstore. Walking down a street full of strangers, knowing you don't have to engage — but you're not invisible either.There's a name for this. Psychologists call it public solitude or sometimes energized privacy — the comfort of being alone among others. Not isolated, not exposed. Just held, lightly, in the weave of the crowd. And the research backs it up: introverts often seek out public spaces like cafés, libraries, or parks not to interact, but to feel present — connected without pressure.In the longest-running happiness study ever done, 80 years, Harvard psychologist Robert Waldinger found that strong relationships — not income, not status — were the best predictor of long-term well-being. More recently, studies have shown that even brief interactions with strangers — on a bus, in a coffee shop — can lift mood and reduce loneliness. But here's the catch: cities have to make those interactions possible.Or they don't.And that's the real test of infrastructure. We've spent decades designing systems to move people through. Fast. Clean. Efficient. But we've neglected the quiet spaces that let people just be. Sidewalks you're not rushed off of. Streets where kids can safely bike or play…or simply cross the street.Even pools — maybe especially pools. My wife runs a nonprofit called SplashForward that's working to build more public pools. Not just for fitness, but because pools are public space. You float next to people you may never talk to. And still, you're sharing something. Space. Water. Time.You see this clearly in places like Finland and Iceland, where pools and saunas are built into the rhythms of public life. They're not luxuries — they're civic necessities. People show up quietly, day after day, not to socialize loudly, but to be alone together. As one Finnish local told journalist Molly Young, “During this time, we don't have... colors.” It was about the long gray winter, sure — but also something deeper: a culture that values calm over spectacle. Stability over spark. A kind of contentment that doesn't perform.But cities don't have to choose between quiet and joy. We don't have to model every system on Helsinki in February. There's something beautiful in the American kind of happiness too — the loud, weird, spontaneous moments that erupt in public. The band on the subway. The dance party in the park. The loud kid at the pool. That kind of energy can be a nuisance, but it can also be joyful.Even Jarrett Walker, who's clear-eyed about transit, doesn't pretend it solves everything. Transit isn't always the answer. Sometimes a car is the right tool. What matters is whether everyone has a real choice — not just those with money or proximity or privilege. And he's quick to admit every city with effective transit has its local grievances.So no, I'm not arguing for perfection, or even socialism. I'm arguing for a city that knows how to hold difference. Fast and slow. Dense and quiet. A city that lets you step into the crowd, or sit at its edge, and still feel like you belong. A place to comfortably sit with the uncertainty of this great transformation emerging around us. Alone and together.REFERENCESCastellani, B. (2014). Complexity theory and the social sciences: The state of the art. Routledge.Cilliers, P. (1998). Complexity and postmodernism: Understanding complex systems. Routledge.David, P. A. (1985). Clio and the economics of QWERTY. The American Economic Review.Granovetter, M. (1973). The strength of weak ties. American Journal of Sociology.Hawking, S. (n.d.). The 21st century will be the century of complexity. [Attributed quote; primary source unavailable].O'Mara, S. (2019). In praise of walking: A new scientific exploration. W. W. Norton & Company.Roberts, D. (Host). (2025). Jarrett Walker on what makes good transit [Audio podcast episode]. In Volts.Storper, M., & Scott, A. J. (2016). Current debates in urban theory: A critical assessment. Urban Studies.Waldinger, R., & Schulz, M. (2023). The good life: Lessons from the world's longest scientific study of happiness. Simon & Schuster.Walker, J. (2011). Human transit: How clearer thinking about public transit can enrich our communities and our lives. Island Press.West, G., & Bettencourt, L. M. A. (2010). A unified theory of urban living. Nature.Young, M. (2025). My miserable week in the ‘happiest country on earth'. The New York Times Magazine. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit interplace.io

tl;dr
tl;dr #49: Karl Polanyi: «The Great Transformation» | mit Claus Thomasberger

tl;dr

Play Episode Listen Later May 9, 2025 64:44


Wie lässt sich aus der Krise der Marktordnung in den 1920er Jahren die Entstehung des Faschismus verstehen? Der Ökonom Karl Polanyi geht im Exil 1944 auf Spurensuche: Er sieht die Ursache in der großen Umwälzung im Marktsystem und die von ihm bestimmte Marktgesellschaft. Sie machen aus Arbeit, Boden und Geld „fiktive Waren“ und verfolgen mit staatlichen Mitteln die Utopie des selbstregulierenden Marktes. Alles soll auf der Basis von Angebot und Nachfrage gehandelt werden. Die Menschen werden sozial desintegriert. Das Bürgertum ist mit den Tatsachen des Arbeitsmarktes und des Weltmarktes konfrontiert und kann diese Prozesse nicht beherrschen. Es kommt zu Krisen und Sackgassen. Dies führt zu einer «Doppelbewegung», einer Suche nach Alternativen. Die Lösungen, die das Bürgertum dafür erfindet, führen nach dem Ersten Weltkrieg und mit dem Faschismus zur Zerstörung der Zivilisation. Polanyi will verhindern, dass nach dem Zweiten Weltkrieg das ganze Unheil noch einmal beginnen würde. Er plädiert für einen Sozialismus, der Arbeit, Boden und Geld demokratisch kontrolliert und dem Markt entzieht. Im Gespräch mit Alex Demirović ist Claus Thomasberger, emeritierter Professor für Volkswirtschaftslehre, Wirtschaftspolitik an der HTW, Vorstandsmitglied der Karl Polanyi Gesellschaft und Autor vieler Texte zu Polanyi.

BlomCast
[35] Trevor Jackson — Capitalism and the Impunity of the Elites

BlomCast

Play Episode Listen Later Apr 20, 2025 61:07


Trevor Jackson is an economic historian teaching at Berkeley. I talk to him about the current political situation of the universities and the science, and about his own research area, the history of capitalism, which has always been prone to crashes and other crises. The development of a capitalist economy is also the story of the elites learning to evade responsibility for the failures, while reaping the rewards of markets. What role does elite impunity play in the current crisis of political legitimacy? Could this be changed, and, if so, how? 

What's Left of Philosophy
106 | Karl Polanyi and the Critique of Market Society

What's Left of Philosophy

Play Episode Listen Later Jan 27, 2025 62:29


In this episode, we discuss the work of brilliant heterodox economist Karl Polanyi. We talk about his criticisms of neoclassical orthodoxy, his arguments against the commodification of land, labor, and money, and his critique of the dominance of markets in theory and in practice. Put markets in their place and regulate the hell out of them! We also consider his influence on recent leftist economic thought, and talk through what's at stake in the difference between Marxist and Polanyian approaches to history and politics. We think there are limits to the Polanyi line, but it's hard not to love an authentically humanist fellow traveler!leftofphilosophy.comReferences:Karl Polanyi, The Great Transformation: The Political and Economic Origins of Our Time (Boston: Beacon Press, 2014).Karl Polanyi, For a New West: Essays, 1919-1958, eds. Giorgio Resta and Mariavittoria Catanzariti (Malden: Polity Press, 2014).Fred Block, “Karl Polanyi and the Writing of ‘The Great Transformation'”, Theory and Society 32:3 (2003), 275-306.Music:“Vintage Memories” by Schematist | schematist.bandcamp.com“My Space” by Overu | https://get.slip.stream/KqmvAN

Radioaktiv Podcast
Sange om Merværdi #45 - Velfærdsstaten og klassekamp

Radioaktiv Podcast

Play Episode Listen Later Sep 8, 2024 48:54


Kan forskelle i arbejderklassens styrke forklare hvorfor lande har forskellige velfærdsstater? I denne bogklubs-episode af Sange om Merværdi snakker værterne Alex Arash Sand Kalaee og Lasse Skou Lindstad om bogen "The Three Worlds of Welfare Capitalism" af Gøsta Esping-Andersen om forholdet mellem klassekamp og velfærdsstater. De kommer bl.a. ind på hvorfor Danmark og USA har så forskellige velfærdsstater, hvad arbejderbevægelsens rolle er i kampen for velfærd og hvorfor Lasse tænker på den østrig-ungarske økonom Karl Polanyi, når han kigger på Trump. Lyt med!

The Ezra Klein Show
The free-market century is over

The Ezra Klein Show

Play Episode Listen Later Feb 12, 2024 54:47


Sean Illing talks with economic historian Brad DeLong about his new book Slouching Towards Utopia. In it, DeLong claims that the "long twentieth century" was the most consequential period in human history, during which the institutions of rapid technological growth and globalization were created, setting humanity on a path towards improving life, defeating scarcity, and enabling real freedom. But... this ran into some problems. Sean and Brad talk about the power of markets, how the New Deal led to something approaching real social democracy, and why the Great Recession of 2008 and its aftermath signified the end of this momentous era. Host: Sean Illing (@seanilling), host, The Gray Area Guest: J. Bradford DeLong (@delong), author; professor of economics, U.C. Berkeley References:  Slouching Towards Utopia: An Economic History of the Twentieth Century by J. Bradford DeLong (Basic; 2022) The Road to Serfdom by Friedrich von Hayek (1944) The Great Transformation by Karl Polanyi (1944) Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy by Joseph Schumpeter (1942) "A Short History of Enclosure in Britain" by Simon Fairlie (This Land Magazine; 2009) "China's Great Leap Forward" by Clayton D. Brown (Association for Asian Studies; 2012) What Is Property? by Pierre-Joseph Proudhon (1840) The Rise and Fall of the Neoliberal Order by Gary Gerstle (Oxford University Press; 2022) Apple's "1984" ad (YouTube) The General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money by John Maynard Keynes (1936) "The spectacular ongoing implosion of crypto's biggest star, explained" by Emily Stewart (Vox; Nov. 18) "Did Greenspan Add to Subprime Woes? Gramlich Says Ex-Colleague Blocked Crackdown" by Greg Ip (Wall Street Journal; June 9, 2007) "Families across the country are tightening their belts and making tough decisions. The federal government should do the same," from President Obama's 2010 State of the Union Address (Jan. 27, 2010) "The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte" by Karl Marx (1852) Why We're Polarized by Ezra Klein (Simon & Schuster; 2020) The Paradox of Democracy: Free Speech, Open Media, and Perilous Persuasion by Zac Gershberg and Sean Illing (U. Chicago; 2022)   Enjoyed this episode? Rate The Gray Area ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐ and leave a review on Apple Podcasts. Subscribe for free. Be the first to hear the next episode of The Gray Area. Subscribe in your favorite podcast app. Support Vox Conversations by making a financial contribution to Vox! bit.ly/givepodcasts This episode was made by:  Producer: Erikk Geannikis Editor: Amy Drozdowska Engineer: Patrick Boyd Editorial Director, Vox Talk: A.M. Hall Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Learn Russian Conversation
270–271 Karl Polanyi and capitalism

Learn Russian Conversation

Play Episode Listen Later Oct 26, 2023 16:50


capitalism karl polanyi
Avoir raison avec...
Avoir raison avec... Karl Polanyi 5/5 : Après Polanyi, penser le réencastrement

Avoir raison avec...

Play Episode Listen Later Aug 25, 2023 29:00


durée : 00:29:00 - Avoir raison avec... - Comment penser une démocratie "véritablement humaine" grâce à Polanyi ? Que reste-t-il de sa pensée depuis sa mort en 1964 ? Et comment se libérer des mythes qu'impose l'économie de marché ? Retrouvons, au fil des crises du 20e et du 21e siècles, ce que Polanyi a laissé. - invités : Marguerite Mendell chercheuse à l'Université Concordia au Québec et directrice de l'Institut Karl Polanyi; Augustin Sersiron enseignant-chercheur à l'université Paris 1 Panthéon Sorbonne, docteur en philosophie politique et en économie; Catherine Aubertin Economiste de l'environnement, et directrice de recherche à l'Institut de recherche pour le développement (IRD), affectée au Muséum national d'Histoire naturelle

Avoir raison avec...
Avoir raison avec... Karl Polanyi 4/5 : L'homme n'est pas un animal économique

Avoir raison avec...

Play Episode Listen Later Aug 24, 2023 28:51


durée : 00:28:51 - Avoir raison avec... - Pour mieux dénoncer la toute-puissance du marché dans les sociétés modernes, Polanyi explore l'économie des sociétés archaïques. Du code d'Hammurabi à Aristote, il montre que si les échanges commerciaux structuraient les sociétés, ils étaient régis par des lois toutes autres que celles du marché. - invités : Alain Caillé Économiste, sociologue; Alain Guéry Historien, directeur de recherche au CNRS

animal pas avoir historiens raison cnrs polanyi karl polanyi économique
Avoir raison avec...
Avoir raison avec... Karl Polanyi 3/5 : Du marché au fascisme : "Ainsi périssent les civilisations"

Avoir raison avec...

Play Episode Listen Later Aug 23, 2023 28:55


durée : 00:28:55 - Avoir raison avec... - Karl Polanyi affirme qu'en niant le caractère social de la vie en communauté, la société de marché ne pouvait qu'engendrer le chaos. Comment la société née du 19e siècle a-t-elle abouti au fascisme des années 1930 ? L'économie libérale est-elle nécessairement une menace pour la démocratie ? - invités : Nicolas Postel professeur d'économie à l'Université de Lille

Avoir raison avec...
Avoir raison avec... Karl Polanyi 2/5 : “Le capitalisme arriva sans avoir été annoncé”

Avoir raison avec...

Play Episode Listen Later Aug 22, 2023 28:58


durée : 00:28:58 - Avoir raison avec... - par : Aliette Hovine - En 1944, Karl Polanyi publie "La Grande Transformation", son œuvre la plus connue à ce jour. Il y expose les concepts fondateurs de sa pensée : désencastrement, avènement du marché autorégulateur, marchandisation fictive... Quels périls l'économiste a-t-il perçu dans l'Angleterre du 19e siècle ? - invités : Bernard Chavance Professeur émérite à l'Université Paris Diderot; Ophélie Siméon Maître de conférences en Civilisation britannique à l'université Sorbonne-Nouvelle (Paris 3)

sim quels avoir raison civilisation arriva annonc oph capitalisme polanyi karl polanyi sorbonne nouvelle paris
Avoir raison avec...
Avoir raison avec... Karl Polanyi 1/5 : Un économiste contre l'économisme

Avoir raison avec...

Play Episode Listen Later Aug 21, 2023 30:33


durée : 00:30:33 - Avoir raison avec... - par : Aliette Hovine - Pourquoi Karl Polanyi (1886-1964), intellectuel a priori bien sous tous rapports, décide-t-il de consacrer son œuvre à critiquer la société de marché ? Retour sur la construction d'une pensée iconoclaste à travers les exils et les prises de position d'un économiste rebelle à la plume bien trempée. - invités : Jérôme Maucourant Maître de conférences en sciences économiques

retour contre avoir raison polanyi karl polanyi
The Vital Center
Slouching towards Utopia, with Brad DeLong

The Vital Center

Play Episode Listen Later Aug 3, 2023 67:09


For most of our ten thousand years on the planet, the vast majority of humanity endured lives of dire poverty and extreme material deprivation. Most people spent most of their time worrying about securing the bare minimum of food and shelter. The Industrial Revolution began to change that dynamic. Still, the British economist and philosopher John Stuart Mill was correct to question in the early 1870s whether “all the mechanical inventions yet made have lightened the day's toil of any human being.” Soon after, however, the emergence of globalization, the industrial research laboratory, and the modern corporation made possible a rapid upward trajectory in human flourishing and an end to near-universal agrarian poverty. Another British economist, John Maynard Keynes, foresaw in 1930 that the continued progress of science and compound interest could mean that human beings, liberated from pressing economic cares, might find their real challenge to be how to occupy their leisure time and “live wisely and agreeably and well.” But the explosion of productivity and prosperity over the 140 years that followed the takeoff point in 1870 did not see humanity zooming toward Utopia; at best, we slouched fitfully in that direction. Brad DeLong, an economics professor at the University of California at Berkeley, has written a much-anticipated history of what he calls “the long twentieth century” from 1870 to 2010, entitled Slouching Towards Utopia: An Economic History of the Twentieth Century. In it, he explains how we achieved economic breakthroughs that once would have been considered miraculous — and yet fell short of what that breakthrough promised. And DeLong also explains why he believes that the era of remarkable prosperity, for all its problems and inequities, has now ended. In this podcast discussion, Niskanen's Brink Lindsey and Geoff Kabaservice talk with DeLong about why the material abundance that resulted from the great acceleration after 1870 was unevenly distributed between nations and within them, why developmental social democracy failed its sustainability test, and how the long twentieth century was in a sense a contest between the ideas of the towering thinkers Friedrich Hayek and Karl Polanyi. The discussion also covers differing perspectives on “the neoliberal turn,” speculations about how to benefit from the best aspects of neoliberalism and social democracy while avoiding their pitfalls, and a hypothesis as to why capitalism is like the brooms in “The Sorcerer's Apprentice.”

Wohlstand für Alle
Ep. 195: Karl Polanyi und die Entstehung des Arbeitsmarktes

Wohlstand für Alle

Play Episode Listen Later May 3, 2023 27:13


Damit der Kapitalismus funktioniert, ist er auf einen Arbeitsmarkt angewiesen, denn auch die Arbeitskraft ist eine Ware. Heute ist das eine Selbstverständlichkeit, doch in den Anfängen des kapitalistischen Systems war dies keineswegs der Fall: Während Ende des 18. Jahrhunderts in England die Industrialisierung bereits rasant wuchs und ein bürgerliches Unternehmertum entstand, sorgte ein Armengesetz dafür, dass kein freier Arbeitsmarkt sich etablieren konnte. Es gab eine verwunderliche Gleichzeitigkeit von Fortschritt und Rückschritt zu beobachten, als 1795 Friedensrichter in Speenhamland in Berkshire ein Aufstockermodell ins Leben riefen, das die Landarbeiter vor Verarmung beschützen sollte. Dieses aus gutem Ansinnen erdachte System war ein letzter Ausläufer des feudalen Paternalismus, der gleichzeitig im krassen Gegensatz zu den allgemeinen Entwicklungen in den Städten und im Welthandel stand – denn die moderne Wirtschaftswelt gierte nach Arbeitskräften. Unternehmer suchten dringend Menschen, die ihre Subsistenzwirtschaft hinter sich ließen, um möglichst viel in Fabriken zu schuften. Das ging nur mit Zuckerbrot und Peitsche. Dem aber stand das Speenhamland-System im Wege, das noch bis 1834 galt. In der neuen Folge von „Wohlstand für Alle“ ergründen Ole Nymoen und Wolfgang M. Schmitt die Entstehung des modernen Arbeitsmarkts. Ihr könnt uns unterstützen - herzlichen Dank! Paypal: https://www.paypal.me/oleundwolfgang Konto: Wolfgang M. Schmitt, Ole Nymoen Betreff: Wohlstand fuer Alle IBAN: DE67 5745 0120 0130 7996 12 BIC: MALADE51NWD Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/oleundwolfgang Steady: https://steadyhq.com/de/oleundwolfgang/about Social Media: Instagram: Unser gemeinsamer Kanal: https://www.instagram.com/oleundwolfgang/ Ole: https://www.instagram.com/ole.nymoen/ Wolfgang: https://www.instagram.com/wolfgangmschmitt/ TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@oleundwolfgang Twitter: Unser gemeinsamer Kanal: https://twitter.com/OleUndWolfgang Ole: twitter.com/nymoen_ole Wolfgang: twitter.com/SchmittJunior Die gesamte WfA-Literaturliste: https://wohlstand-fuer-alle.netlify.app

49W
Serbest Piyasa Bir Ütopya Mıdır? | Kapitalizm Serisi: Karl Polanyi

49W

Play Episode Listen Later May 1, 2023 18:48


İbrahim'le birlikte efsane serimiz Kapitalizm de yeni bölümüyle geri döndü. Ömer ve İbrahim bu bölümde Karl Polanyi neden liberallerin bizi kandırdığını düşünüyor? Serbest piyasa ekonomisinin tam olarak uygulanamamasının sebebi anti-liberal bir komplo mu? Adam Smith'in homo economicus'u gerçek mi? Neden devlet ekonomiden elini bir türlü çekemiyor? sorularını ve daha fazlasını tartışıyor.

Activist #MMT - podcast
Episode 143 [1/3]: Emily Ruhl: Religiously-defensible, divinely-supported genocide

Activist #MMT - podcast

Play Episode Listen Later Apr 29, 2023 69:39


Welcome to episode 143 of Activist #MMT. Today I talk with historian, author, and Harvard master's graduate, Emily Ruhl, on her new paper and master's thesis, In League with the Devine: How Religion Influenced Nazi Perpetrators of the Holocaust. This is the first of a three-part episode. You will find my full and detailed question list at the bottom of today's show notes. Also, be sure to see the list "audio chapters" in all three parts to find exactly where each topic is discussed. (Here are links to parts two and three. A list of the audio chapters in this episode can be found right below [above the full-question list].) (In order to preserve both my podcast and sanity as I proceed through the Torrens graduate program, I've decided to slow my podcast from one episode a week to once a month.) The Nazi Party started by trying to resist and reject all religion, but soon, religion became a fundamental part of the Party's strategy of coercing and propagandizing everybody, from members of the public, to the highest ranking figures in both religious and political institutions, into accepting the brutal and systematic murder of eleven-million souls. The Nazi religion took elements of Christianity, Protestantism, and Paganism, to make one geared not to brotherly love, but primarily to erasing non-Aryans from the Earth. This Nazi pseudo-religion served both as coercion – you must kill the unworthy, or at least stand back while others do – and also as a salve, to come to terms with what you've just done. As you'll hear in the cool quote for part two (the first minute before the opening music), that salve can make the difference between sanity and insanity, and life and death. The Nazi's didn't want to murder eleven million people, they had to, because God said they had to. It was "unfortunate, but necessary." My primary goal for this interview is to demonstrate how this is parallel to mainstream economics, which is also a tool to justify suffering, this time in the form of austerity. Instead of a gun to the head at point blank range, austerity is mass deprivation and exploitation, resulting in a slow and torturous death by despair, starvation, exposure, and untreated sickness and injury – not to mention wasted potential. We currently have the ability to provide all with what they desperately need, including healthcare, education, decent food and shelter, un-poisoned water, and breathable air. As illuminated by Kate Raworth's doughnut, if we are to continue existing as a species, then we must provide the desperate with what they most desperately need. At the same time, we also have to stop the very few on top from using the vast majority of our precious and limited resources to needlessly lavish themselves. Unfortunately, we are instead digging ourselves into an even deeper ecological crisis, when we should be getting off fossil fuels entirely, and restructuring society so we don't require as much. On our current path, in the not-too-distant future, it may indeed become unfortunate but necessary to choose who must be deprived in order for the rest to live. Of course, given our obscene and still growing inequality, the most powerful few will be the ones to make those decisions, and the least powerful many will be the sacrificed. This is the lifeboat economics of the tragedy of the tragedy of the commons. Instead of the around eleven million murdered by the Nazi Party, mainstream economics is little more than a religion to justify what may ultimately result in the death of not millions, but billions. Austerity is genocide at a slower pace. As if riding in a bus hurtling towards a cliff, we as a species currently face a binary choice, between having a terrible accident, and plunging off into oblivion. As Mark Twain said, "History never repeats itself, but it does often rhyme." There is still time to learn from that history. We can choose another path. On a completely unrelated side note, while attending her master's program, writing her master's thesis and working full time, Emily also wrote… an entire fantasy novel. You can find out more about it, and read the entire first chapter, at her website, emilyruhlbooks.com. In order to preserve both my podcast and my sanity as I proceed through Torrens University and Modern Money Lab's graduate program in MMT and ecological economics (

The Jim Rutt Show
EP 182 Brad DeLong on An Economic History of the 20th Century

The Jim Rutt Show

Play Episode Listen Later Mar 29, 2023 96:22


Jim talks with Brad DeLong about his book Slouching Toward Utopia: An Economic History of the Twentieth Century. They discuss how everything changed around 1870, the idea of a polycrisis, Friedrich von Hayek's affirmation of the market system, the calculation problem, Karl Polanyi's response, a quantitative index of technological knowledge, the pace of growth, the necessity of a grand narrative, Malthusianism, the lead-up to the Industrial Revolution, the invention of the industrial research lab, the Edison-Tesla fight, science as an institution, the transition away from force & fraud dominance, theories about the rise of global empires, communities of engineering practice, causes of World War I, Max Weber's German chauvinism, 30 glorious years of social democracy, the Macintosh launch commercial & the neoliberal turn, the evaporation of cultural conservatism, the liminal age, and much more. Episode Transcript Slouching Towards Utopia: An Economic History of the Twentieth Century, by Brad DeLong Local And Global Networks Of Immigrant Professionals In Silicon Valley, by AnnaLee Saxenian Brad DeLong is a professor of economics at the University of California at Berkeley. He was a deputy assistant secretary for economic policy at the U.S. Treasury during the Clinton Administration. He is a New York Times instant bestselling author, for Slouching Towards Utopia: An Economic History of the Twentieth Century, which was called: “magisterial” by Paul Krugman, "required reading” by Larry Summers, “immense scope and depth” by Diane Coyle, and “impressive… written with wit and style and a formidable command of detail” by Ryan Avent. He has been too online since 1995, now in the form of a SubStack, formerly at TypePad.

The Ezra Klein Show
The free-market century is over

The Ezra Klein Show

Play Episode Listen Later Nov 21, 2022 57:13


Sean Illing talks with economic historian Brad DeLong about his new book Slouching Towards Utopia. In it, DeLong claims that the "long twentieth century" was the most consequential period in human history, during which the institutions of rapid technological growth and globalization were created, setting humanity on a path towards improving life, defeating scarcity, and enabling real freedom. But... this ran into some problems. Sean and Brad talk about the power of markets, how the New Deal led to something approaching real social democracy, and why the Great Recession of 2008 and its aftermath signified the end of this momentous era. Host: Sean Illing (@seanilling), host, The Gray Area Guest: J. Bradford DeLong (@delong), author; professor of economics, U.C. Berkeley References:  Slouching Towards Utopia: An Economic History of the Twentieth Century by J. Bradford DeLong (Basic; 2022) The Road to Serfdom by Friedrich von Hayek (1944) The Great Transformation by Karl Polanyi (1944) Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy by Joseph Schumpeter (1942) "A Short History of Enclosure in Britain" by Simon Fairlie (This Land Magazine; 2009) "China's Great Leap Forward" by Clayton D. Brown (Association for Asian Studies; 2012) What Is Property? by Pierre-Joseph Proudhon (1840) The Rise and Fall of the Neoliberal Order by Gary Gerstle (Oxford University Press; 2022) Apple's "1984" ad (YouTube) The General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money by John Maynard Keynes (1936) "The spectacular ongoing implosion of crypto's biggest star, explained" by Emily Stewart (Vox; Nov. 18) "Did Greenspan Add to Subprime Woes? Gramlich Says Ex-Colleague Blocked Crackdown" by Greg Ip (Wall Street Journal; June 9, 2007) "Families across the country are tightening their belts and making tough decisions. The federal government should do the same," from President Obama's 2010 State of the Union Address (Jan. 27, 2010) "The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte" by Karl Marx (1852) Why We're Polarized by Ezra Klein (Simon & Schuster; 2020) The Paradox of Democracy: Free Speech, Open Media, and Perilous Persuasion by Zac Gershberg and Sean Illing (U. Chicago; 2022)   Enjoyed this episode? Rate The Gray Area ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐ and leave a review on Apple Podcasts. Subscribe for free. Be the first to hear the next episode of The Gray Area. Subscribe in your favorite podcast app. Support Vox Conversations by making a financial contribution to Vox! bit.ly/givepodcasts This episode was made by:  Producer: Erikk Geannikis Editor: Amy Drozdowska Engineer: Patrick Boyd Editorial Director, Vox Talk: A.M. Hall Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Hardly Working with Brent Orrell
Glenn Hubbard on Protectionism and Economic Opportunity

Hardly Working with Brent Orrell

Play Episode Listen Later Oct 20, 2022 53:37


Economic changes bring prosperity, but not without cost. The globalization of how we produce and consume has left many American workers in dead end jobs without prospects for advancement. Some critics of this change have argued for the necessity of walls to protect American industries from global competition and labor exploitation. In his new book The Wall and The Bridge: Fear and Opportunity in Disruption's Wake, Glenn Hubbard argues for bridges to economic opportunity. We discuss themes from his book in today's episode. https://www.aei.org/profile/r-glenn-hubbard/ (Glenn Hubbard) https://glennhubbard.net/ (The Wall and the Bridge) https://press.uchicago.edu/ucp/books/book/chicago/R/bo4138549.html (The Road to Serfdom by F. A. Hayek) https://business.ucf.edu/person/kenneth-white/ (Ken White) https://nesa.org/about/ (Eagle Scout) https://www.adamsmith.org/the-wealth-of-nations (The Wealth of Nations by Adam Smith) https://www.libertyfund.org/resources/adamsmithworks/ (Adam Smith Works - Liberty Fund) https://www.adamsmith.org/the-theory-of-moral-sentiments (The Theory of Moral Sentiments) https://www.adamsmithworks.org/documents/smith-on-sympathy-lauren-hall-12-1 (Smith's Idea of Mutual Sympathy) https://www.investopedia.com/terms/l/laissezfaire.asp (Laissez-Faire Economy) https://www.aei.org/research-products/report/dignity-at-work-reimagining-talent-acquisition-and-retention-with-worker-dignity-at-the-center/ (Dignity at Work by Brent Orrell) https://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2004/08/20040810-12.html (President Bush's High Growth Job Training Initiative) https://www.hudexchange.info/programs/cdbg-entitlement/cdbg-entitlement-program-eligibility-requirements/ (Block-Granting Entitlement Programs) https://www.brookings.edu/book/growing-fairly/ (Growing Fairly by Stephen Goldsmith and Kate Markin Coleman) https://commons.vccs.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1000&context=inquiry (One Counselor for Every 1,000 students - Northern Virginia) https://commons.vccs.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1000&context=inquiry (Community College System) https://www.cbpp.org/sites/default/files/archive/1-31-03ui.htm (Personal Reemployment Accounts) https://eh.net/encyclopedia/the-roots-of-american-industrialization-1790-1860/ (American Industrialization) https://www.texastribune.org/2022/04/11/texas-border-inspections-truckers-protest/ (Mexican Truck Drivers Situation) https://www.dol.gov/general/topic/training/tradeact#:~:text=The%20Trade%20Adjustment%20Assistance%20(TAA,a%20result%20of%20increased%20imports. (Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA) Program) https://library.cqpress.com/cqalmanac/document.php?id=cqal62-1326212 (Trade Expansion Act of 1962) https://guides.loc.gov/morrill-act (Morrill Act) https://www.aplu.org/about-us/history-of-aplu/what-is-a-land-grant-university/ (Land-Grant University) https://www.military.com/education/gi-bill (GI Bill) https://blog.newspapers.library.in.gov/go-west-young-man-the-mystery-behind-the-famous-phrase/ (“Go west, young man” by Horace Greeley) https://warwick.ac.uk/newsandevents/features/polanyi/ (The Great Transformation by Karl Polanyi) https://www.brookings.edu/multi-chapter-report/place-based-policies-for-shared-economic-growth/ (Place-Based Policies)

PODCAST: "Hexapodia" is þe Key Insight! XLII: "Slouching Towards Utopia"—Brad's New Book Edition

"Hexapodia" Is the Key Insight: by Noah Smith & Brad DeLong

Play Episode Listen Later Sep 20, 2022 84:50


Key Insights:Since 1870, we humans have done amazingly astonishingly uniquely and unprecedentedly well at baking a sufficiently large economic pie.But the problems of slicing and tasting the pie—of equitably distributing it, and then using our technological powers to live lives wisely and well—continue to flummox us. The big reason we have been unable to build social institutions for equitably slicing and then properly tasting our now more-than-sufficiently-large economic pie is the sheer pace of economic transformation.Since 1870 humanity's technological competence has doubled every generationHence Schumpeterian creative destruction has taken hold.Our immensely increasing wealth has come at the price of the repeated destruction of industries, occupations, livelihoods, and communities.And we have been frantically trying to rewrite the sociological code running on top of our rapidly changing forces-of-production hardwareThe attempts to cobble together a sorta-running sociological software code have been a scorched-earth war between two factions.Faction 1: followers of Friedrich von Hayek, who say: "the market giveth, the market taketh away: blessed be the name of the market"Faction 2: followers of Karl Polanyi, who say: "the market was made for man; not man for the market"Let the market start destroying "society", and society will react by trying to destroy the market orderThus the task of governance and politics is to try to manage and perhaps one day supersede this dilemma. &, of course, HEXAPODIA!!Thank you for reading Brad DeLong's Grasping Reality. This post is public so feel free to share it.References:J. Bradford DeLong: Slouching Towards Utopia: An Economic History of the 20th Century Robert Gordon: The Rise and Fall of American Growth Gary Gerstle: The Rise and Fall of the Neoliberal Order: America and the World in the Free Market Era Vaclav Smil: Creating the 20th Century: Technical Innovations of 1867-1914 and Their Lasting Impact Vaclav Smil: Transforming the 20th Century: Technical Innovations and Their Consequences Friedrich von Hayek: The Road to Serfdom Karl Polanyi: The Great Transfomation: The Political and Economic Origins of Our Time John Maynard Keynes: The General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money +, of course:Vernor Vinge: A Fire Upon the Deep  Get full access to Brad DeLong's Grasping Reality at braddelong.substack.com/subscribe

money world fall new books employment utopia friedrich faction hayek slouching karl polanyi brad delong slouching towards utopia neoliberal order america
Radio Free Humanity: The Marxist-Humanist Podcast
RFH Ep. 76 Sociological Marxism” and Capitalist Crises––Interview with Gavin Rae

Radio Free Humanity: The Marxist-Humanist Podcast

Play Episode Listen Later Sep 9, 2022 57:19


The co-hosts welcome sociologist Gavin Rae, to discuss his critique of “Sociological Marxism,” which well-known left sociologists Erik Olin Wright and Michael Burawoy proposed two decades ago. They rejected Marx's theory of capitalist crisis, claiming that state economic management has caused capitalism to stabilize, and that the value theory underlying Marx's crisis theory is internally inconsistent. Gavin argues that the Great Recession soon showed that the notion of stable capitalism is dubious, and that the temporal single-system interpretation of Marx's value theory has made it untenable to uncritically repeat the charge of the internal inconsistency. He and the co-hosts also discuss Wright and Burawoy's embrace of Karl Polanyi's thought and his focus on markets instead of production. Gavin argues that Marx's crisis theory and the “dominance of production” can be incorporated into sociology, and he suggests several ways to do so. Current-events segment: New Mexico judge bars Capitol insurrectionist from holding office. Will more disqualifications follow?

Activist #MMT - podcast
Ep125[1/3,1/6] John Harvey: MMT, the UK, and pound sterling

Activist #MMT - podcast

Play Episode Listen Later Jul 3, 2022 56:51


Welcome to episode 125 of Activist #MMT. Today's the first in a six-part series with Texas Christian University (TCU) economics professor and Cowboy Economist, John Harvey. The first three parts are hosted by me, the final three by MMT researcher, Texas lawyer, and my previous guest, Johnathan Wilson. Jonathan and John talk about how MMT can apply to nations outside the US, using Russia as an example, and also some of the core theoretical and ideological differences between MMTers and mainstream economists, focusing on a recent critique of MMT by Drumetz and Pfeister. (You can hear my own interview with Jonathan in episodes 106 and 107.) (Here's a link to all six parts in this series: parts two and three with me, and parts four, five, and six with Jonathan. A list of the audio chapters in this episode can be found at the bottom of this post. For a link to every Activist #MMT interview with John, go here.) Regarding parts one to three, John and I talk about his chapter in the upcoming book called Modern Monetary Theory: Key Insights, Leading Thinkers. The book will be published by the UK-based Gower Institute for Modern Money Studies, or GIMMS; it's edited by L. Randall Wray and GIMMS; and is scheduled for January 2023 release. John is one of 15 authors. John's chapter is called "Modern Monetary Theory, the UK, and pound sterling". He was asked to write the chapter for two major reasons: First because there is not enough MMT-specific analysis on exchange rate determination, and second, to address the reality of the so-called sterling crisis in the United Kingdom. John and I don't specifically discuss the latter topic, but it is addressed in the paper. It addresses the following criticism of MMT (this is a quote from the chapter): "MMT-inspired policies will cause high rates of price inflation which will, in turn, lower the international value of a domestic currency – perhaps catastrophically." Importantly, the critique is based on the following three assumptions: The false idea that we are already, or soon will be, at full employment A fantastical theory of exchange rate determination A terrible and lazy mischaracterization of MMT John and I spend most of our time discussing the reality of these three assumptions. Surprisingly, however, the main insight I take from this conversation is a much clearer understanding of inflation in general. I'm going to describe that insight in the introduction to part two. The heart of our conversation is on the above three assumptions, but we start and end with mostly unrelated subjects. Part one begins with John describing his experience as chair of the economics department at TCU, he discusses the Russian-Ukrainian conflict only as it relates to exchange rate determination, and he also answers a question from an Activist #MMT patron, regarding his opinion of our possibility of experiencing a recession. At the end of part three, we talk about how, for most of those that most of us directly interact with, mainstream economic theory is not, in fact, a big conspiracy. We end by discussing the good and bad of math in economics. Thanks to the recommendation of a patron, with every episode of Activist #MMT as of several months ago, you can pinpoint any part of this interview by referring to the full list of audio chapters, which can be found at the bottom of the show notes. So, for example, if you wanted to skip over this introduction and go right to the beginning of the interview proper, now you can know exactly what timestamp to go to. And now, on to my conversation with John Harvey. Enjoy. Resources My previous interviews with John: Episode 43: John Harvey on John Harvey, discrimination, and aliens. Episodes 45 and 46: On inflation: mainstream versus Post Keynesian (and the MMT job guarantee) Episodes 72 and 73: The Battle of the Bulge (and the nitty gritty of Exchange Rate Determination) Books: Fred Lee's A History of Heterodox Economics (2006) Karl Polanyi's The Great Transformation (2001 edition, 1944) Naomi Klein's The Shock Doctrine (2007) Nancy Maclean's Democracy in Chains Audio chapters 6:02 - Attics, squeaky toys, dogs, and rats 8:51 - Economics chairmanship 16:21 - Being Post Keynesian chair in a mainstream department 21:04 - Patron question: Recession coming? 26:10 - Russia-Ukraine conflict 31:31 - My lawn mower runs out of gas 32:36 - Start of main questions 33:20 - Demand-pull inflation 44:39 - George Selgin 47:35 - Back to inflation 52:55 - Duplicate of introduction, but with no background music (for listeners sensitive to the opening music)

People Conversations by Citizens' Media TV
Ep125[1/3,1/6] John Harvey: MMT, the UK, and pound sterling

People Conversations by Citizens' Media TV

Play Episode Listen Later Jul 3, 2022 56:50


Welcome to episode 125 of Activist #MMT. Today's the first in a six-part series with Texas Christian University (TCU) economics professor and , John Harvey. The first three parts are hosted by me, the final three by MMT researcher, Texas lawyer, and my previous guest, Johnathan Wilson. Jonathan and John talk about how MMT can apply to nations outside the US, using Russia as an example, and also some of the core theoretical and ideological differences between MMTers and mainstream economists, focusing on a recent critique of MMT . (You can hear my own interview with Jonathan in episodes and .) (Here's a link to all six parts in this series: parts two and three with me, and parts four, five, and six with Jonathan. A list of the audio chapters in this episode can be found at the bottom of this post. For a link to every Activist #MMT interview with John, .) Regarding parts one to three, John and I talk about his chapter in the upcoming book called . The book will be published by the UK-based Gower Institute for Modern Money Studies, or GIMMS; it's edited by L. Randall Wray and GIMMS; and is scheduled for January 2023 release. John is one of 15 authors. John's chapter is called "Modern Monetary Theory, the UK, and pound sterling". He was asked to write the chapter for two major reasons: First because there is not enough MMT-specific analysis on exchange rate determination, and second, to address the reality of the so-called sterling crisis in the United Kingdom. John and I don't specifically discuss the latter topic, but it is addressed in the paper. It addresses the following criticism of MMT (this is a quote from the chapter): "MMT-inspired policies will cause high rates of price inflation which will, in turn, lower the international value of a domestic currency – perhaps catastrophically." Importantly, the critique is based on the following three assumptions: The false idea that we are already, or soon will be, at full employment A fantastical theory of exchange rate determination A terrible and lazy mischaracterization of MMT John and I spend most of our time discussing the reality of these three assumptions. Surprisingly, however, the main insight I take from this conversation is a much clearer understanding of inflation in general. I'm going to describe that insight in the introduction to part two. The heart of our conversation is on the above three assumptions, but we start and end with mostly unrelated subjects. Part one begins with John describing his experience as chair of the economics department at TCU, he discusses the Russian-Ukrainian conflict only as it relates to exchange rate determination, and he also answers a question from an Activist #MMT patron, regarding his opinion of our possibility of experiencing a recession. At the end of part three, we talk about how, for most of those that most of us directly interact with, mainstream economic theory is not, in fact, a big conspiracy. We end by discussing the good and bad of math in economics. Thanks to the recommendation of a patron, with every episode of Activist #MMT as of several months ago, you can pinpoint any part of this interview by referring to the full list of audio chapters, which can be found at the bottom of the show notes. So, for example, if you wanted to skip over this introduction and go right to the beginning of the interview proper, now you can know exactly what timestamp to go to. And now, on to my conversation with John Harvey. Enjoy. Resources My previous interviews with John: : John Harvey on John Harvey, discrimination, and aliens. Episodes and : On inflation: mainstream versus Post Keynesian (and the MMT job guarantee) Episodes and : The Battle of the Bulge (and the nitty gritty of Exchange Rate Determination) Books: Fred Lee's (2006) Karl Polanyi's (2001 edition, 1944) Naomi Klein's (2007) Nancy Maclean's Audio chapters 6:02 - Attics, squeaky toys, dogs, and rats 8:51 - Economics chairmanship 16:21 - Being Post...

Interplace
Another Great Transformation

Interplace

Play Episode Listen Later Jun 11, 2022 22:59


Hello Interactors,Where, how, and when people work continues to shift. Meanwhile, scores of people are moving to urban regions in search of opportunities. Some of which are more accessible than others. It’s putting stresses on how cities plan, how we move, and what kinds of freedoms are afforded and to whom. But hidden in the complexities of societies are patterns of hope. As interactors, you’re special individuals self-selected to be a part of an evolutionary journey. You’re also members of an attentive community so I welcome your participation.Please leave your comments below or email me directly.Now let’s go…REMOTE CONTROLThe workplace will never be the same again. What it becomes won’t either. But don’t tell Elon Musk. He threw a temper tantrum last week accusing employees at Tesla of slacking off working from home. In a company-wide email he became the over-controlling parent and grounded everyone. He wrote, “Everyone at Tesla is required to spend a minimum of 40 hours in the office per week” and that they “must be where your actual colleagues are located, not some remote pseudo office.” He claimed had he not been on the factory floor “working alongside” his employees that Tesla would have “long ago gone bankrupt.” I’m sure every factory floor worker he has replaced by a robot might have something to say about that.Some work does require a physical presence. Teeth cleaning comes to mind. But there is something to coming together physically that is hard to replicate online. There are also many kinds of service jobs that require a physical presence, though some of those are getting replaced by robots. Last year, a Dallas restaurant turned to a Robot called Bella when they had trouble filling waiter jobs. The owner said, “They don’t complain and they’re happy to do it!” It even happily sings Happy Birthday.But even white-collar jobs require some together time. I heard one academic say he worked two years during COVID on a joint research project over Zoom. When the team finally came together physically, they accomplished more in a single day than they did in those two years.  Every company from Tesla to Target are feeling the reverberations of pandemic induced workplace alterations. Even Microsoft, a company that has long envisioned the promise of hybrid-work, is struggling through a new rhythm and workplace model. Mandatory in-office strategies like Musk tried aren’t practical. Even senior leaders are choosing to move to remote locations. Meanwhile, some high-tech teams were already distributed around the world. Despite these trends, companies continue to build new office space. Cranes loom on the horizon all around Seattle. While some of these high-rises will be housing, much of it is office space. What will they do with all this space?I met a new friend last week who is trying to figure that out. She works as a product designer for a company headquartered in Rotterdam called MapIQ. They build software and services that allow companies to optimize the space they have. She’s been busy conducting research. She talks to employees, facility managers, IT departments, human resources, and corporate realtors who are struggling with a new workplace reality. She told me one of the most acute issues for facility managers is space utilization. These companies pay a lot of money to have attractive and effective workplaces. Seeing them empty is troubling financially but also psychologically. She said, “Employees are struggling to know when it is best to come to the office. They don't want to be the only one at home in a hybrid meeting and they don't want to be in an empty office either.”Facility managers are scrambling to find ways to make the most of what they have. She said one popular outcome is subletting workspace. But even subletters will only use it occasionally and sporadically. They use software and sensors to better manage who is using it, when, and for how long. This was not how these buildings were designed and not how these companies were envisioned to be run. MapIQ has identified five trends emerging in the workplace:The office as standard. Most all employees work four or five days a week in the office.Local hybrid. Most people work two or three days a week in the office.Remote friendly. Most employees are in the office only once or twice a week.Remote first. Working in the office is completely optional with no geographic requirement.Fully distributed. There is no office at all and everyone works wherever they want.The nature of work in the foreseeable future is decidedly different than the past. It will take some time for optimizations to emerge. Meanwhile, how will this affect our built environment and how cities plan? Our roads, rails, wires, and spires, boulevards, buildings, drains and ditches were all planned and produced with a certain permanency and predictability that surrounds our economies, societies, and psychologies. These features of the physical and social landscape were assumed to be towering rocks anchored and resolute. But it turns out it was a mirage. They are made of sand and the winds of the pandemic has created a sandstorm. What shape these forms of fortune take is unknown and possibly unknowable.The landscape of living amidst this storm is hard to predict and control. The best way to know what direction we’re headed is to look where we came from. Only then can we understand how we got here. A lot has changed in how and where we live. Since the end of WWII, the world’s population has more than tripled. Over half alive right now live in urban areas and nearly three-quarters will by 2050. North America is one of the most urbanized regions in the world. In 2018 82% of the population lived in urban areas. And it’s growing every day. Europe is 74% urbanized and their cities are also growing. Half of the world’s population lives in Asia and half of those live in urban areas.Not all regions grow at the same rate. The fastest growing areas are projected to continue to be in low-income and middle-income nations. Thirty-three of the fastest growing countries between 2000 and 2020 were in Africa. Twelve were in Asia. But urbanization is both a blessing and a curse. Access to better public health, nutrition, and education improves the lives of those who suffer most, but puts increased strains on housing, transportation, energy, and other infrastructure systems. This is having widespread, varying, and compounding impacts on all who live in urban areas. But these growing pains are not equally felt by all. Understanding these sensitivities will be necessary if we’re going to find ways to solve them.SUPER SIZING THE SUPER RICH WITH SUPERLINEAR WEALTHUrban scientists have found naturally occurring mathematical patterns in growing cities. They mimic power-laws found across a diverse array of cities just as they do across plants and animals. For example, as cities grow in population their GDP, number of patents, and productivity grow at a predictable scale. However, congestion, crime, and contagious diseases also predictably grow. Doubling the size of a city will increase wages, wealth, and innovation (as measured by number of patents) by roughly 15 percent. But so will garbage and theft. Population growth has a predictable superlinear positive and negative effect on urban areas. It’s the great paradox of urbanity.There are big advantages to scale. With each doubling of population there’s also a 15 percent savings in total length of rail lines, electrical lines, water lines, and roads. This sublinear effect predictably leads to a city of 10 million people needing 15 percent less infrastructure than a city half its size. It pays to grow.But these numbers, as predictable as they are, can also be misleading. Whenever population datasets get crunched and averaged the analysis ends up crunching the realities of the average person. Hidden in the convenient clustering of ‘low-income‘, ‘middle-income’, and ‘high-income’ are varying degrees, durations, and directions as diverse as those lived experiences of the people behind the numbers. This realization has led some of those same urban scaling researchers to scrutinize their own findings. Increased wealth disparities, for example, got them wondering. If wage growth is so predictable compared to urban growth, and more people are predictably moving to urban areas, why aren’t all wages predictably growing?They wondered if there are similar scaling laws that predict income inequality based on city size. How are incomes different among the rich and the poor compared to the size of the city? After adjusting for cost-of-living differences, are poor people in a big city better off than poor people in a small city? Are rich people richer the bigger the city?To answer their questions, they broke down income brackets into percentiles. Traditional economic inequality research looks at dispersed distributions across income or wealth. Meaningful individual differences are hidden in these distributions. What they found is the wealth of the poorest 10% scales almost linearly with population size. In contrast, the top 10% shows superlinear growth. This means poor folks moving closer to the city in hopes of becoming wealthier may find themselves to be continually poor compared to those in higher income brackets. The rich get richer, and the poor stay poor.They conclude that “much has been written about the apparent increasing gains of large cities, such as greater GDP, higher wages, and more patents per capita.” But in the end, “the increasing benefits of city size are not evenly distributed to people within those cities.” For example, they found the ratio of housing costs to income is a function of city population size. The poorer the income brackets, the greater the proportion of income is spent on housing. This results in sharp increases in costs with city size. Meanwhile, in the wealthiest brackets the proportion of income spent on housing stays level.So whatever superlinear growth in GDP, innovation, and wage growth that comes with increased city size is highly concentrated in the upper income brackets. Existing research in urban scaling and innovation points to empirical evidence that these gains are due in large part to the increase in social interactions and sharing of ideas. Larger and more diverse pools of people co-located in urban areas results in an explosion of creativity, opportunity, and resources. The accumulation of shared knowledge and passion only increases the potential for innovation.This theory is found in the work of economist Karl Polanyi. In his landmark 1944 book, The Great Transformation, Polanyi gives this concept a name: embeddedness – those who share a common social context have an embedded relationship that drives a desire to provide for one another. Stanford economic sociologist, Mark Granovetter, reaffirmed the idea in his oft referenced 1973 paper, “The Strength of Weak Ties.”And one of the most influential economists in the 20th century, Austrian turned American, Joseph Shumpeter, described these acts of economic invention and innovation as ‘creative destruction’. For every new innovation that brings increased wealth another must be destroyed or devalued. Capitalists celebrate it as the unfortunate inevitability of social and economic progress while Socialists deride it as the inevitable annihilating force of capitalism.Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels wrote in their 1848 Communist Manifesto that, “Modern bourgeois society, with its relations of production, of exchange and of property, a society that has conjured up such gigantic means of production and of exchange, is like the sorcerer who is no longer able to control the powers of the nether world whom he has called up by his spells… In these crises, there breaks out an epidemic that, in all earlier epochs, would have seemed an absurdity – the epidemic of over-production. Society suddenly finds itself put back into a state of momentary barbarism; it appears as if a famine, a universal war of devastation, had cut off the supply of every means of subsistence; industry and commerce seem to be destroyed; and why? Because there is too much civilisation, too much means of subsistence, too much industry, too much commerce.”This grim prognosis from one of Capitalisms only inciteful critics is, sadly, all too relatable these days. Marx would not at all be surprised to hear there’s now empirical evidence to back his 174-year-old theory. But he would probably also be shocked to see China rising as a global superpower by combining elements of Capitalism with Socialism. Markets seem to have a way of formalizing Polanyi’s notion of embeddedness. He believed we all have the desire and creative ability to contribute to each others success and well being as part of our livelihoods. It’s not just goods and services that need exchanged but also values, moral concerns, and relationships. But to do that we must remain connected.CONNECTING THE DOTS TO FREEDOMThose urban scaling researchers hypothesize that one of the reasons income inequalities are so pronounce and unfairly propagated in our wealthiest cities is because the various income brackets have become increasingly geographically and socially segregated. Like ecosystems, the less diversity there is the greater the propensity to collapse. These researchers warn that urban regions that “inhibit mixing between diverse populations, will underperform with respect to income scaling.” If lessening income inequality is a goal, the research suggests “cities that are better mixed, allowing diverse parts of the population to be exposed to one another, should be overperforming with respect to urban scaling.”Connecting diverse sets of people across urban regions seems a more productive, and fun, way to tackle income inequality than redistribution of wealth through a government program. Ricardo Hausmann is the founder and Director of Harvard University’s Growth Lab. They uncover international growth diagnostics and develop economic complexity research methodologies. In a recent interview he said,“In my mind, the real solution to inequality is not so much redistribution as inclusion – as incorporating people into the possibility of mixing what they are…that leads to a very different agenda for inequality reduction. Do you send people a check or do you connect them to the urban transport network?...Do you connect it to the labor market? Do you connect to the schooling system?”He was joined in this interview by J. Doyne Farmer. He is the Director of Complexity Economics at the Oxford Institute of New Economic Thinking. Farmer points out that when economists look at the distribution of productivity, they commonly use a statistical technique that lops off a chunk of a giant tail of the distribution curve that is seemingly inconsequential to their analysis. This gives them a distorted point of view of productivity. And to underline Hausmann’s point about the importance of diversity needed to be connected, he said, “that there's a huge diversity out there” hidden in the fat tails those distribution curves. He adds, “And we really have to cope with that because it's inherent to the economy.”   The question is, how connected physically do people have to be, how often, and for how long to achieve optimal productivity gains? These are questions being asked by companies around the world and firms like MapIQ are there to help answer them. But how many of these companies are already segregating themselves from the socio-economic diversity of their headquarters, satellite offices, or shared urban and suburban workspaces?Arjun Ramani, a Stanford economist and journalist for The Economist, said last year in an interview by Leesman, a leader in workplace research, that “people are now willing to live an hour away in exchange for a bigger house, because they don’t have to commute in every day.” He believes it’s leading to the ‘donuting’ of cities which I mentioned may be occurring in Des Moines, Iowa. Ramani also reminds us that in the 1800s 40% of workers were working from home. He said, “working from home was quite common. Workers would go into a city or to a market to get raw materials and goods and return home to work – for example in the manufacture of clothes.”Today that just may be a 3D printer in a suburban garage or a rural toolshed, but the materials would probably be delivered to their door or flown in on a drone. But there’s no question some segment of jobs will require a more centralized physical presence. I’m not yet ready to have my teeth cleaned by a robot, though it looks like that also may be around the corner too. Even farming is moving toward robots.Regardless of what kind of job is available or desired or how much physical presence needed, there is little question getting more people connected – regardless of where they live – increases the odds of diverse interactions. My own experience tells me, and mounds of research supports, diverse collections of people and ideas yield unexpectedly miraculous outcomes. It’s not always easy or pleasant working with people of differing backgrounds, beliefs, and inclinations, but out of contention come good ideas.It's also hard to imagine how we become more connected amidst increasing geographic segregation, political polarization, religious ideology, and economic disparities. This may be today’s most perplexing social dilemma. It seems each opportunity to come together is met with an excuse to move apart. Meanwhile, there are powerful forces alive today bent on suppressing individual freedoms. And yet we live in a time when personal freedoms to choose where to live and where work are reignited. But those freedoms are not afforded to all which is an unjust outcome of an unjust history. And so the struggle continues.It’s sometimes hard to remain optimistic as the sand dunes of our institutions are shaped by the unpredictable storms of change. But hidden in the complexities of distribution curves, growing populations, and the shifting sands of urbanity are predictable patterns that offer us clues – kernels of clarity and certainty; pathways to pursue, and lessons to learn. It’s the certainty we need if we want to uphold our freedoms.When Polanyi wrote about the great transformation occurring in 1944 it was during a dark time. He started the book during the depression in the 1930s and had lived through political and economic upheaval in England. A world war preceded his writing, and the book was published during a second. He recognized the complexity of society and spoke of the freedoms that come with it.In the final chapter titled, Freedom in a Complex Society, he writes,“Uncomplaining acceptance of the reality of society gives man indomitable courage and strength to remove all removable injustice and unfreedom. As long as he is true to his task of creating more abundant freedom for all, he need not fear that either power or planning will turn against him and destroy the freedom he is building by their instrumentality. This is the meaning of freedom in a complex society; it gives us all the certainty that we need.” This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit interplace.io

historicly
The Market Fetish - Part 3

historicly

Play Episode Listen Later Apr 29, 2022 66:05


Today Jeffrey Epstein talks with Asad Zaman about the 2001 edition of Karl Polanyi's 1944 book, The Great Transformation. Professor Zaman is a PhD economist based in Pakistan, with many lectures, papers, and posts on the topic. The Great Transformation reveals, essentially, that what we think to be a foundation of our economy and society is, in fact, an illusion. Specifically, Polanyi calls capitalism and its free or "self-regulating" market "a stark Utopia". By definition, a Utopia (an imagined place where everything is perfect) is impossible to achieve. However, the attempt to achieve it – to eliminate literally all market regulation – can result only in the complete destruction of all human life and the land they live on. This is evidenced by our increasingly likely extinction at the hands of a human-created ecological crisis, caused largely by unprecedented and still-growing levels of inequality and the mass exploitation of all natural resources, including most human beings.Here's Polanyi, on the first page of the first chapter:Our thesis is that the idea of a self-adjusting market implied a stark utopia. Such an institution could not exist for any length of time without annihilating the human and natural substance of society; it would have physically destroyed man and transformed his surroundings into a wilderness.Unfortunately, the only way to maintain the fiction of the self-regulating market, is to continue the mass exploitation of the poor. Instead of treating human beings as the infinitely precious and unique beings they are, they are rather treated as mere interchangeable and disposable cogs to run the Unending Greed Machines; most often under terrible conditions. Polanyi calls this grave maltreatment the commodification of labor.The only way to get human beings to submit to these terrible conditions, is to threaten them with an even more terrible condition: starvation and death. As quoted in the book, starvation "can tame even the wildest beast". Not even the strongest man can overcome it.How is this starvation made possible? By eliminating the possibility of self sufficiency. A major tool to do this was the invention of the concept of the private ownership of land. This justified the ejection of all former occupants, who must now, for example, in modern society, purchase our food at a distant store. We have to drive to that store, and the food, plus the car and its gas, must all be paid for with money, which in turn can only be obtained by laboring at the Greed Machines. What this all means is that the commodification of labor also requires the commodification of the land.Those being potentially annihilated by the destruction of the self-regulating market resist that destruction. This results in what Polanyi calls the double movement. This is the ideological battle that has raged for centuries, where one side tries to eliminate all market regulation, while the other tries to protect itself by imposing some. When the amount of regulations are only enough to moderately reduce that destruction, as is unfortunately most often the case, then the resistance can only perpetuate and further enable the pursuit of that stark Utopia.What underlies and justifies this horror is the most dominant religion in the world, which is greed. Without Polanyi's book and his work, this religion, and its byproducts of inequality and mass exploitation, are made to appear normal, inevitable, and unstoppable – in other words, natural. The truth that Polanyi's history reveals (and as is reinforced by my recent interview with Wesley Wiles)is that inequality, exploitation, and greed are not "unfortunate, but necessary", they're deliberate choices. Those who benefit most from the self-regulating market have incentive to deceive the rest of us into thinking that these terrible things are indeed natural. This is the role played by neoclassical economics: to provide that official, neutral, and natural-sounding justification.The core problem in our society is not "capitalism" or "the free market", per se, but rather the mass exploitation of the poor. Therefore, the core solution is to empower the poor. The nature of this empowerment is simple: provide them with what they desperately need: like healthcare, education, a job, un-poisoned water, and a world that doesn't threaten to collapse around them. These things all serve to empower the poor which ultimately reduces inequality – of both wealth and income.We will annihilate the fiction of the self-regulating market or it will annihilate us. There is no gray area. We will provide for those on the bottom or we will go extinct. The first step is to emancipate ourselves from the chains of false history and false economics, and from the idea that everything horrible is "unfortunate, but necessary". Only then can we take a step back and start thinking of alternatives.As a final note, you'll hear some of Professor Zaman's thoughts on the potential form a sustainable future society might take. These are not ideas from the book but his own, in an attempt to start a discussion on one of the greatest questions of our time: how do we resist and annihilate the self-regulating market, and what can and will society be like when we do? Perhaps you have some ideas of your own. Let's start that discussion.Chapters9:27 - Hellos10:35 - The commodification of labor - what it really means14:41 - The fantasy of power, to vent the frustration of being powerless17:01 - The self-regulating market is a fiction and a stark Utopia. The double movement19:41 - Movies- Don't Look Up and Encanto22:45 - How do you resist the self-regulating market and beat it, instead of perpetuate it?26:30 - Whatever the answer, it starts with you29:33 - Peace is a balance of power, but only in a belligerent world38:20 - Peace is controlled violence - violence by, not against, the powerful40:19 - Individual imbalance of power, fiction of nation states44:38 - Corporations are more powerful than nation states46:56 - The gold standard was the glue that held the world together but for a terrible reason (and mercantilism)54:48 - Fascism is not something in and of itself, rather it's something to fill in the vacuum left by the wreckage of the self-regulating market Get full access to Historic.ly at historicly.substack.com/subscribe

historicly
Are we in the Mirror Universe?- Part 2 with Jackson Winter

historicly

Play Episode Listen Later Apr 19, 2022 55:30


Today's part two of my two-part conversation with Jackson Winter, on the 2001 edition of Karl Polanyi's 1944 book, The Great Transformation. This is also part two of a larger four-part series on the book. Jackson is co-writer and editor for PEGS Institute, which is a project to demystify and explain some commonly misunderstood realities of the modern world. Here's their YouTube channel.(A list of the "audio chapters" in this episode can be found at the bottom of this post. A link to all four parts in the series can be found in Part 1I'll summarize the book in next week's introduction. Even experienced MMTers can't know this stuff. You think you understand the foundation of our economy and society, but you don't. As described in The Great Transformation, there's another foundation underneath it.(Before we start the interview, I'm making an announcement at the request of a patron, and that is: the podcast Pod Save America, which is hosted by former Obama staffers, has millions of followers, many of who like to think of themselves as progressives. Unfortunately, although the hosts say many smart things, they still live solidly in a pay-for, scarcity, zero-sum world. Please consider contacting the hosts via Twitter and urging them to interview an MMT guest such as Stephanie Kelton, Warren Mosler, Bill Mitchell, and Randy Wray. The Twitter handles for the podcast and its hosts can be found in the show notes, and in the social media shares for this episode. Thanks for your help in spreading the word!Here at the Twitter handles for Pod Save America and its hosts: Dan Pfiffer: [@danpfeiffer], Jon Favreau: [@jonfavs], Tommy Vietor: [@tvietor08], Jon Lovett: [@jonlovett])And now, let's get right back to my conversation with Jackson Winter. Enjoy.Audio chapters4:31 - Choosing to commodify other humans is a gamble that you won't become one of them7:37 - The gold standard was the glue that held the (belligerent and greedy) world together13:53 - Individual balance of power17:41 - Fascism is a consequence of the neglect and deprivation of neoliberalism20:41 - Thinking of a better economic and political system (and if we should)27:17 - Unregulated versus regulated teenager29:58 - Childhood memories and how we change31:59 - Protecting privilege, at all levels38:35 - We are all doing tiny little evils (because it's necessary in order to survive), that add up to a lot of evil.43:22 - Haute finance and arms dealers (I win capitalism)46:15 - My upcoming online course with Asad Zaman48:11 - Closing thoughts50:41 - Polanyi was a proto-MMTer52:48 - GoodbyesOther updates:Sorry for the delays. Our editor Esha Krishnaswamy fell on the subway platform and broke her nose. She is out of the hospital now, but unfortunately her insurance does not cover fixing her broken nose. So we are going to have to crowd source this. If you have already not become paid subscriber, please become one: You can also do a one off donation via paypal orVenmo Get full access to Historic.ly at historicly.substack.com/subscribe

Historiansplaining: A historian tells you why everything you know is wrong
Dissecting the "Dawn of Everything" -- A Conversation with Geoff Shullenberger

Historiansplaining: A historian tells you why everything you know is wrong

Play Episode Listen Later Mar 19, 2022 167:55


I join with Geoff Shullenberger of "Outsider Theory" to discuss the sweeping and challenging new book, "The Dawn of Everything: A New History of Humanity" by David Graeber and David Wengrow. We consider the book's marshalling of new archaeological evidence to debunk mechanistic and deterministic assumptions about the rise of civilization, its deep rejection of Marxism, and its insistence on the human ability to imagine and create an infinite range of social and political futures. We examine the weaknesses and limitations of the book, including its over-emphasis on personal freedom, its gross inaccuracy with regard to the eighteenth century, and its blindspot regarding the profound powers of myth, ritual, and the natural environment, all of which deeply guide and shape societies in ways that Graeber & Wengrow ignore or casually discount. Please support this podcast to help keep it coming and hear patron-only lectures! -- www.patreon.com/user?u=5530632 Other books & authors mentioned: Marshall Sahlins, "The Original Affluent Society" Yuval Noah Harari, "Sapiens" James C. Scott, "Against the Grain" Claude Levi-Strauss, "The Savage Mind" Victor Turner, "The Ritual Process" Karl Wittfogel, "Oriental Despotism" John Rawls, "A Theory of Justice" Francoise de Graffigny, "Letters of a Peruvian Woman" Niccolo Machiavelli, "Discourses on Livy" Jared Diamond, "Guns, Germs, and Steel" JN Heard, "The Assimilation of Captives on the American Frontier in the Eighteenth and Nineteenth Centuries," LSU thesis David Graeber, "On Flying Cars and the Declining Rate of Profit," "Debt: The First 5000 Years" Karl Polanyi, "The Great Transformation" Mark Fisher, "Capitalist Realism" Orlando Patterson, "Slavery and Social Death" Bruno Latour, "We Have Never Been Modern" Roberto Calasso, "The Ruin of Kasch" Ivan Illich Rene Girard Richard Wolff Thomas Sowell Divya Cherian

Boundaryless Conversations Podcast
S3 Ep. 10 Ethan Buchman – Why Blockchain should be plural: Cosmos and Inter-Blockchain Communication

Boundaryless Conversations Podcast

Play Episode Listen Later Mar 14, 2022 56:49


Ethan Buchman is the co-founder of the Cosmos network and serves as the CEO of Informal Systems. Informal Systems is a member-driven worker's cooperative building software that enables trustworthy relationships between protocols and people to flourish. Ethan also serves as the President of the Interchain Foundation which funds and coordinates development of public goods in the Cosmos ecosystem.   Tune in to this discussion as we explore the current ‘moment' blockchain is experiencing and the implications of having a community computer. We also discuss the personal computer revolution, polycentricity, and how Informal Systems is organized to enable their employees to self-organize.     A full transcript of the episode can be found on our website: https://boundaryless.io/podcast/ethan-buchman/    Key highlights we discussed: > Where blockchain fits in with the the history of computing > The concept of embedded cooperativism > The role of sovereignty and multi-chain interoperability  > Standardization and commodification > How individuals can participate in structural change > How Informal Systems is structured through a high trust environment and ‘promises'     To find out more about Ethan's work:   > Twitter: https://twitter.com/buchmanster  > Website: https://ebuchman.github.io/        Other references and mentions:   > Karl Polanyi, The Great Transformation, 1944: https://www.amazon.com/Great-Transformation-Political-Economic-Origins/dp/080705643X  > Informal Systems: https://informal.systems/ > Informal Systems Twitter: https://twitter.com/informalinc  > Informal Systems' internal organisation: workflow.informal.systems    > Cosmos: https://cosmos.network/    Find out more about the show and the research at Boundaryless at https://boundaryless.io/resources/podcast/   Thanks for the ad-hoc music to Liosound / Walter Mobilio. Find his portfolio here: https://boundaryless.io/podcast-music   Recorded on 16 February 2022.

ceo president blockchain inter cosmos plural standardization great transformation karl polanyi ethan buchman informal systems inter blockchain communication
Activist #MMT - podcast
Ep112[2/2,4/4]: Asad Zaman: Polanyi's Great Transformation

Activist #MMT - podcast

Play Episode Listen Later Mar 13, 2022 54:28


Welcome to episode 112 of Activist #MMT. Today's part two of my two-part conversation with Asad Zaman, on the 2001 edition of Karl Polanyi's 1944 book, The Great Transformation. This is also the final part in a larger four-part series on the book. Parts one and two are with Jackson Winter. Jackson and I are two smart layperson MMTers trying to come to terms with the depth of what we just read, and connecting it to our lives and MMT. Parts three and four are with Professor Zaman, who is a PhD economist with many lectures, papers, and posts on the topic (all of which you can find in the show notes to part one with Professor Zaman). (A link to all four parts in the series can be found in part one with Jackson. A list of the audio chapters in this episode can be found at the bottom of this post.) Part one also contains a summary of the book. You think you understand the foundation of our economy and society, but as described in The Great Transformation, there's another foundation beneath it. If you like what you hear, then I hope you might consider becoming a monthly patron of Activist #MMT. Patrons have exclusive access to several full-length episodes, right now. A full list is here, each with a brief highlight. Patrons also get the opportunity to ask my academic guests questions (including my recent episode with Warren Mosler). They also support the development of my large and growing collection of learn MMT resources, and the course with Professor Zaman. To become a patron, you can start by going to patreon.com/activistmmt. Every little bit helps a little bit, and it all adds up to a lot. Thanks. And now, let's get right back to my conversation with Asad Zaman. Enjoy. Audio chapters 4:11 - Mercantilism 8:10 - Fascism is not something in and of itself, rather it's something to fill in the vacuum left by the wreckage of the self-regulating market 10:58 - The ideology and religion of greed 12:22 - Jane Austen- The poorest AMONG THE ARISTOCRACY (the movie Ever After) 15:43 - The importance of history to the study of economics. 22:28 - Those who benefit most from of capitalism want us to focus on the imaginary, not history. 24:08 - Entanglement- The methodology of Polanyi (history shapes our ideas which shapes history) 29:17 - "Government is bad", but the self-regulating market requires even more government to suppress the protestations of those suffering at the hand of the self-regulating market 34:47 - Average people serve as gatekeepers for the exploiters (protecting privilege) 39:21 - What do I tell my kids? 48:43 - Goodbyes 52:38 - Duplicate of introduction, but with no background music

People Conversations by Citizens' Media TV
Ep112[2/2,4/4]: Asad Zaman: Polanyi's Great Transformation

People Conversations by Citizens' Media TV

Play Episode Listen Later Mar 13, 2022 54:38


Welcome to episode 112 of Activist #MMT. Today's part two of my two-part conversation with Asad Zaman, on the 2001 edition of Karl Polanyi's 1944 book, . This is also the final part in a larger four-part series on the book. Parts one and two are with Jackson Winter. Jackson and I are two smart layperson MMTers trying to come to terms with the depth of what we just read, and connecting it to our lives and MMT. Parts three and four are with Professor Zaman, who is a PhD economist with many lectures, papers, and posts on the topic (all of which you can find in the show notes to with Professor Zaman). (A link to all four parts in the series can be found in . A list of the audio chapters in this episode can be found at the bottom of this post.) Part one also contains a summary of the book. You think you understand the foundation of our economy and society, but as described in The Great Transformation, there's another foundation beneath it. If you like what you hear, then I hope you might consider becoming a monthly patron of Activist #MMT. Patrons have exclusive access to several full-length episodes, right now. A full list is , each with a brief highlight. Patrons also get the opportunity to ask my academic guests questions (including my recent episode ). They also support the development of my large and growing collection of , and the course with Professor Zaman. To become a patron, you can start by going to . Every little bit helps a little bit, and it all adds up to a lot. Thanks. And now, let's get right back to my conversation with Asad Zaman. Enjoy. Audio chapters 4:11 - Mercantilism 8:10 - Fascism is not something in and of itself, rather it's something to fill in the vacuum left by the wreckage of the self-regulating market 10:58 - The ideology and religion of greed 12:22 - Jane Austen- The poorest AMONG THE ARISTOCRACY (the movie Ever After) 15:43 - The importance of history to the study of economics. 22:28 - Those who benefit most from of capitalism want us to focus on the imaginary, not history. 24:08 - Entanglement- The methodology of Polanyi (history shapes our ideas which shapes history) 29:17 - "Government is bad", but the self-regulating market requires even more government to suppress the protestations of those suffering at the hand of the self-regulating market 34:47 - Average people serve as gatekeepers for the exploiters (protecting privilege) 39:21 - What do I tell my kids? 48:43 - Goodbyes 52:38 - Duplicate of introduction, but with no background music

Activist #MMT - podcast
Ep111[1/2,3/4]: Asad Zaman: Polanyi's Great Transformation

Activist #MMT - podcast

Play Episode Listen Later Mar 6, 2022 67:57


Welcome to episode 111 of Activist #MMT. Today I talk with Asad Zaman about the 2001 edition of Karl Polanyi's 1944 book, The Great Transformation. Professor Zaman is a PhD economist based in Pakistan, with many lectures, papers, and posts on the topic. This is part one of a two-part episode, but it's also part three in a larger four-part series on Polanyi's book. Parts one and two are with Jackson Winter. Jackson and I are two smart layperson MMTers trying to come to terms with the depth of what we just read, and connecting it to our lives and MMT. (A link to all four parts in the series can be found in part one with Jackson. A list of the audio chapters in this episode can be found at the bottom of this post.) As I briefly describe in part one with Jackson, Professor Zaman and I are developing a free online course called "Historical Context for Real-World Economics". It's almost entirely through an MMT lens, but mostly, it's history, not directly MMT. However, it provides critical context for those who want to understand MMT better. The course is produced by Activist #MMT, and hosted by Bill Mitchell's MMTed and Esha Krishnaswamy's Historic-ly. There are five lecture chapters currently being developed, and I look forward to sharing them with you. The next seven lectures are all on Polanyi's Great Transformation. Links to the seven lectures, plus several related sources by Professor Zaman can be found [in the show notes.] in the "Resources" section at the bottom of this post. (The below summary and resources have been collected into this post: A summary of Polanyi's Great Transformation (with many sources to learn more)) The Great Transformation reveals, essentially, that what we think to be a foundation of our economy and society is, in fact, an illusion. Specifically, Polanyi calls capitalism and its free or "self-regulating" market "a stark Utopia". By definition, a Utopia (an imagined place where everything is perfect) is impossible to achieve. However, the attempt to achieve it – to eliminate literally all market regulation – can result only in the complete destruction of all human life and the land they live on. This is evidenced by our increasingly likely extinction at the hands of a human-created ecological crisis, caused largely by unprecedented and still-growing levels of inequality and the mass exploitation of all natural resources, including most human beings. Here's Polanyi, on the first page of the first chapter: Our thesis is that the idea of a self-adjusting market implied a stark utopia. Such an institution could not exist for any length of time without annihilating the human and natural substance of society; it would have physically destroyed man and transformed his surroundings into a wilderness. Unfortunately, the only way to maintain the fiction of the self-regulating market, is to continue the mass exploitation of the poor. Instead of treating human beings as the infinitely precious and unique beings they are, they are rather treated as mere interchangeable and disposable cogs to run the Unending Greed Machines; most often under terrible conditions. Polanyi calls this grave maltreatment the commodification of labor. The only way to get human beings to submit to these terrible conditions, is to threaten them with an even more terrible condition: starvation and death. As quoted in the book, starvation "can tame even the wildest beast". Not even the strongest man can overcome it. How is this starvation made possible? By eliminating the possibility of self sufficiency. A major tool to do this was the invention of the concept of the private ownership of land. This justified the ejection of all former occupants, who must now, for example, in modern society, purchase our food at a distant store. We have to drive to that store, and the food, plus the car and its gas, must all be paid for with money, which in turn can only be obtained by laboring at the Greed Machines. What this all means is that the commodification of labor also requires the commodification of the land. Those being potentially annihilated by the destruction of the self-regulating market resist that destruction. This results in what Polanyi calls the double movement. This is the ideological battle that has raged for centuries, where one side tries to eliminate all market regulation, while the other tries to protect itself by imposing some. When the amount of regulations are only enough to moderately reduce that destruction, as is unfortunately most often the case, then the resistance can only perpetuate and further enable the pursuit of that stark Utopia. What underlies and justifies this horror is the most dominant religion in the world, which is greed. Without Polanyi's book and his work, this religion, and its byproducts of inequality and mass exploitation, are made to appear normal, inevitable, and unstoppable – in other words, natural. The truth that Polanyi's history reveals (and as is reinforced by my recent interview with Wesley Wiles)is that inequality, exploitation, and greed are not "unfortunate, but necessary", they're deliberate choices. Those who benefit most from the self-regulating market have incentive to deceive the rest of us into thinking that these terrible things are indeed natural. This is the role played by neoclassical economics: to provide that official, neutral, and natural-sounding justification. The core problem in our society is not "capitalism" or "the free market", per se, but rather the mass exploitation of the poor. Therefore, the core solution is to empower the poor. The nature of this empowerment is simple: provide them with what they desperately need: like healthcare, education, a job, un-poisoned water, and a world that doesn't threaten to collapse around them. These things all serve to empower the poor which ultimately reduces inequality – of both wealth and income. We will annihilate the fiction of the self-regulating market or it will annihilate us. There is no gray area. We will provide for those on the bottom or we will go extinct. The first step is to emancipate ourselves from the chains of false history and false economics, and from the idea that everything horrible is "unfortunate, but necessary". Only then can we take a step back and start thinking of alternatives. As a final note, you'll hear some of Professor Zaman's thoughts on the potential form a sustainable future society might take. These are not ideas from the book but his own, in an attempt to start a discussion on one of the greatest questions of our time: how do we resist and annihilate the self-regulating market, and what can and will society be like when we do? Perhaps you have some ideas of your own. Let's start that discussion. If you like what you hear, then I hope you might consider becoming a monthly patron of Activist #MMT. Patrons have exclusive access to several full-length episodes, right now. A full list is here, each with a brief highlight. Patrons also get the opportunity to ask my academic guests questions, such as my recent patron-question episode with Warren Mosler. (A Patron question was also asked of Professor Zaman.) They also support the development of my large and growing collection of learn MMT resources, and the course with Professor Zaman. To become a patron, you can start by going to patreon.com/activistmmt. Every little bit helps a little bit, and it all adds up to a lot. Thanks. And now, onto my conversation with Asad Zaman. Enjoy Resources Bill Mitchell's 2022 blog post, To reclaim the state, we have to start with ourselves, which contains a substantial comment from Professor Zaman. For a good, short and basic introduction to the flaws of capitalism and its economics, Professor Zaman recommends this 17-minute 2020 TED talk by Nick Hanauer. Here are the seven lectures by Professor Zaman that will be used in the course : Adv Micro L13: Entanglement of History with Social Theories Adv Micro L14: Emergence of Economics Theories in Economic Context Adv Micro L15: 19th Century European Economic Ideas In Historical Context. Adv Micro L16: Economics from Hunter/Gatherer to World War 2 Adv Micro L17: Polanyi Great Transformation Part 2 Adv Micro L18: Polanyi TGT cont - part 3 Adv Micro L19: Polanyi TGT- Concluding Lecture Here's the overall curriculum from which these lectures come: 21st Century Economics: An Islamic Approach More from Professor Zaman on Polanyi: Video lecture summary and a written summary of The Great Transformation The Methodology of Polanyi's Great Transformation: video lecture, 2014 paper, response by Anne Mayhew Not directly related to Polanyi, but as important context (and s were briefly discussed), below are sources from the Professor on the topic of redefining "the poor" to mean the poorest among the aristocracy, such as in Jane Austen novels. I’ve provided the Professor’s full comments for context: …EJ1083726.pdf These just came up on a search, there is a lot of stuff on it which I haven't read …/kuwahara.pdf This might be the best: …/jane-austen-family-slavery-essay-devoney-looser/ Search term "Jane Austen and Colonial Politics" -- but "imperialism" would have worked too There is chapter in Edward Said "Culture and Imperialism" called: Jane Austen and Empire. This is bound to be good. I have not read the book, but it is on my reading list. Audio chapters 10:55 - The commodification of labor - what it really means 15:01 - The fantasy of power, to vent the frustration of being powerless 17:21 - The self-regulating market is a fiction and a stark Utopia. The double movement 20:01 - Movies- Don't Look Up and Encanto 23:04 - How do you resist the self-regulating market and beat it, instead of perpetuate it? 26:49 - Whatever the answer, it starts with you 29:52 - Peace is a balance of power, but only in a belligerent world 38:39 - Peace is controlled violence - violence by, not against, the powerful 40:39 - Individual imbalance of power, fiction of nation states 44:58 - Corporations are more powerful than nation states 47:15 - The gold standard was the glue that held the world together but for a terrible reason (and mercantilism) 55:07 - Fascism is not something in and of itself, rather it's something to fill in the vacuum left by the wreckage of the self-regulating market 59:40 - Duplicate of introduction, but with no background music

People Conversations by Citizens' Media TV
Ep111[1/2,3/4]: Asad Zaman: Polanyi's Great Transformation

People Conversations by Citizens' Media TV

Play Episode Listen Later Mar 6, 2022 67:56


Welcome to episode 111 of Activist #MMT. Today I talk with Asad Zaman about the 2001 edition of Karl Polanyi's 1944 book, . Professor Zaman is a PhD economist based in Pakistan, with many lectures, papers, and posts on the topic. This is part one of a two-part episode, but it's also part three in a larger four-part series on Polanyi's book. Parts one and two are with Jackson Winter. Jackson and I are two smart layperson MMTers trying to come to terms with the depth of what we just read, and connecting it to our lives and MMT. (A link to all four parts in the series can be found in . A list of the audio chapters in this episode can be found at the bottom of this post.) As I briefly describe in part one with Jackson, Professor Zaman and I are developing a free online course called "Historical Context for Real-World Economics". It's almost entirely through an MMT lens, but mostly, it's history, not directly MMT. However, it provides critical context for those who want to understand MMT better. The course is produced by , and hosted by Bill Mitchell's and Esha Krishnaswamy's . There are five lecture chapters currently being developed, and I look forward to sharing them with you. The next seven lectures are all on Polanyi's Great Transformation. Links to the seven lectures, plus several related sources by Professor Zaman can be found [in the show notes.] in the "Resources" section at the bottom of this post. (The below summary and resources have been collected into this post: ) The Great Transformation reveals, essentially, that what we think to be a foundation of our economy and society is, in fact, an illusion. Specifically, Polanyi calls capitalism and its free or "self-regulating" market "a stark Utopia". By definition, a Utopia ( where everything is perfect) is impossible to achieve. However, the attempt to achieve it – to eliminate literally all market regulation – can result only in the complete destruction of all human life and the land they live on. This is evidenced by our increasingly likely extinction at the hands of a human-created ecological crisis, caused largely by unprecedented and still-growing levels of inequality and the mass exploitation of all natural resources, including most human beings. Here's Polanyi, on the first page of the first chapter: Our thesis is that the idea of a self-adjusting market implied a stark utopia. Such an institution could not exist for any length of time without annihilating the human and natural substance of society; it would have physically destroyed man and transformed his surroundings into a wilderness. Unfortunately, the only way to maintain the fiction of the self-regulating market, is to continue the mass exploitation of the poor. Instead of treating human beings as the infinitely precious and unique beings they are, they are rather treated as mere interchangeable and disposable cogs to run the Unending Greed Machines; most often under terrible conditions. Polanyi calls this grave maltreatment the commodification of labor. The only way to get human beings to submit to these terrible conditions, is to threaten them with an even more terrible condition: starvation and death. As quoted in the book, starvation "can tame even the wildest beast". Not even the strongest man can overcome it. How is this starvation made possible? By eliminating the possibility of self sufficiency. A major tool to do this was the invention of the concept of the private ownership of land. This justified the ejection of all former occupants, who must now, for example, in modern society, purchase our food at a distant store. We have to drive to that store, and the food, plus the car and its gas, must all be paid for with money, which in turn can only be obtained by laboring at the Greed Machines. What this all means is that the commodification of labor also requires the commodification of the land. Those being potentially annihilated by the destruction of the self-regulating market resist that...

People Conversations by Citizens' Media TV
Ep109[1/2,1/4]: Jackson Winter: Polanyi's Great Transformation (layperson discussion)

People Conversations by Citizens' Media TV

Play Episode Listen Later Feb 20, 2022 64:39


Welcome to episode 109 of Activist #MMT. Today I talk with Jackson Winter, about the 2001 edition of Karl Polanyi's 1944 book, . Jackson is co-writer and editor for , which is a project to demystify and explain some commonly misunderstood realities of the modern world. Here's . (A list of the "audio chapters" in this episode can be found at the bottom of this post. Here are links to all four episodes in the series about Polanyi's Great Transformation: with Jackson, and parts and with Asad Zaman.) (Here are my , after having read only the forward, introduction, and first chapter [be sure to see the show notes for a disclaimer]. It comes from an unreleased episode, with Jonathan Wilson.) This is part one of a two-part conversation with Jackson, but it's also the first in a larger four-part series on Polanyi's book. Jackson and I are two smart layperson MMTers, trying to come to terms with the depth of what we just read, and connecting it to our lives and MMT. Parts three and four are with Asad Zaman, a PhD economist with many lectures, papers, and posts on the topic. I'll summarize the book more at the beginning of part one with Professor Zaman, but very briefly: The Great Transformation is the centuries-long history of how our current rentier capitalism came to be, and what preceded it. It reveals that much of what we believe to be inevitable and unchangeable – natural – about our society is, in fact, a deliberate choice. Those who most benefit from this system (the rentiers, those who collect rent) would like nothing more than for the rest of us (those who pay rent) to believe this system – and their unending greed – to be natural, inevitable, unchangeable and, indeed, best for everyone. I'd like to describe my journey to the book and this interview. I first interviewed Professor Zaman in November 2020, in episodes and . Our topic was his personal story, and, after decades immersed in neoclassical economics, his journey to MMT and real-world economics. For the past year, I've been working with the Professor to create a free online course, centered around his many video lectures. Each lecture is split into fifteen-minute segments, and each segment is accompanied by a very substantial five-to-eight question quiz. I compose the quizzes with lots of assistance and support from my recent guest, Jonathan Wilson [episodes and ]. The course is titled "Historical Context for Real-World Economics", which is produced by Activist #MMT and hosted by Bill Mitchell's and Esha Krishnaswamy's . I look forward to sharing it with you. As we get closer, I'll release part three with Jonathan, where we spend the entire time talking about the course. (Patrons of Activist #MMT can hear the whole thing right now. .) The first five lecture-chapters for the course are completed, but four remain in draft form and still require a good amount of work. I'm currently resolving detailed feedback I've received from the Professor. However, we've already decided on the next seven chapters for the course, which are all on Polanyi's book. You'll find a link to the seven video lectures, plus several additional resources by Professor Zaman, in the show notes of part one with the Professor, coming in two weeks. I purchased the 2001 edition of the book and read the forward, introduction, and first chapter. It blew me away. What most of us think is the foundation of our society and economy is actually not the foundation. There's another one below it. A few days ago, I released , after having read only this much. At that same time, I saw Jackson on Twitter say he's studying the history of commodification of labor. (Very briefly, commodification of labor is threatening the poor with starvation and death unless they work the Unending Greed Machines of the rich.) I told Jackson to consider Polanyi's book as a critical source on the topic. Jackson said he would add it to his infinite reading list. I urged him just read the forward and intro. Two days...

People Conversations by Citizens' Media TV
Snippet from part three with Jonathan Wilson: Polanyi's Great Transformation - first impressions (see important note)

People Conversations by Citizens' Media TV

Play Episode Listen Later Feb 17, 2022 14:59


This snippet comes from Activist #MMT, part three with Jonathan Wilson, which is called "Historical Context for Real-World Economics (new online course!)". It starts at around the 18-minute, 30-second mark of the interview proper. This snippet documents my first impressions of (the 2001 edition of) Karl Polanyi's 1944 book, , after having read only the forward, introduction, and first chapter. More importantly, this is before talking about the book with Asad Zaman, who is a PhD with many lectures, papers, and posts on the topic (which we do in episodes 111 and 112). (Part three with Jonathan is delayed, but the next four episodes of Activist #MMT are dedicated to Polanyi's book.) Important note The idea that "you can't overthrow capitalism because something that doesn't exist can't be overthrown" is, at best, a highly misguided way to say it. The primary reason is that many potential allies believe passionately that "capitalism" does indeed exist and must be (for lack of a better term) defeated or overthrown. A more accurate and much less inflammatory version of my statement can be found in an upcoming post that will accompany my upcoming episodes with Asad Zaman. It's a full general summary of the book, approved by Professor Zaman. However, there is another aspect of this argument from a very different point of view, as discussed in the February, 2022 episode of Superstructure (of Money on the Left) entitled, no less, . I am pretty sure our (final, corrected) views are roughly compatible, but I'm not going to be foolish enough to attempt to summarize the precise differences :).

The Checkout
Episode 88: Alan Lewis Takes On GMO Food Technology

The Checkout

Play Episode Listen Later Nov 5, 2021 50:00


Episode #88 Notes0:45 - Alan's issues of synthetic biology and GMO.9:15 - On gene editing, CRISPR, and defining synthetic biology.22:00 - How these technologies work and how they're deployed in food production.27:00 - Who is funding these technologies in food production?38:00 - The Commons as a response to consolidated agricultural land ownership.42:00 - On GMO's in Africa.Book RecommendationThe Great Transformation, Karl Polanyi

The Blockchain Socialist
The heterodox politics of the internet of blockchains and sustainability existentialism

The Blockchain Socialist

Play Episode Play 55 sec Highlight Listen Later Oct 17, 2021 77:18


For this week's episode I spoke with Ethan Buchman (@buchmanster), the founder of Cosmos and the CEO of  Informal Systems, a worker-owned cooperative helping build the infrastructure of the Cosmos Network. Cosmos is a particular blockchain with the goal of creating the internet of blockchains by creating a layer that facilitates interoperability between different blockchains. During the interview we talk about Ethan's own heterodox political views, synthesizing the works of the Austrian school and Karl Polanyi among others for creating what he calls "sustainability existentialism." We also talk about how these politics influenced the creation of Cosmos, his fears of the current state of the crypto ecosystem, and  the difference between DeFi degens and regens.Here are some more sources to learn more about Ethan's heterodox political views:Reconsidering the Factors of ProductionThread on AustriansDistributed StateIf you liked the podcast be sure to give it a review on your preferred podcast platform. If you find content like this important consider donating to my Patreon starting at just $3 per month. It takes quite a lot of my time and resources so any amount helps. Follow me on Twitter (@TBSocialist) and join the r/CryptoLeftists subreddit and Discord to join the discussion.Support the show (https://www.patreon.com/theblockchainsocialist)

Left Anchor
Episode 13 - Karl Polanyi

Left Anchor

Play Episode Listen Later Nov 3, 2018 70:49


In this episode (recorded some time ago) we discuss the ongoing insight and relevance of Karl Polanyi, whose brilliant work The Great Transformation continues to shed light on modern political economy.