Search results

This book is a policy proposal aimed at the democratic left. It is concerned with gradual but radical reform of the socio‐economic system. An integrated policy of industrial and economic democracy, which centres around the establishment of a new sector of employee‐controlled enterprises, is presented. The proposal would retain the mix‐ed economy, but transform it into a much better “mixture”, with increased employee‐power in all sectors. While there is much of enduring value in our liberal western way of life, gross inequalities of wealth and power persist in our society.

There is hardly any other field of knowledge where there is more conflict or controversy between ideas and solutions proposed by theoreticians and statesmen than in politics. To date, adequate methodological tools have not been developed which enable the truth or validity of the liberal or conservative approaches to be tested. A new research programme using a simultaneous equilibrium versus disequilibrium approach is proposed which has full application in politics as well as in economics and the social sciences. This research programme shows the organic relationship between society, state, economy, money and form of government, and thus leads to a methodological unification of all the social sciences, to a new principia politica.

The economic science is again in a crisis and a new solution prolegomena to any future study in economics, finance and other social sciences has just been published by the International Institute of Social Economics in care of the MCB University Press in England. The roots of the major financial and economic problems of our time lie in an open conflict between theory and practice. In the 1930s and before the conflict was between classical theory and given realities. In the 1990s the conflict appears between the now prevailing modern, Keynesian theory and the actual realities. In addition during the twentieth century a great argument developed between the two schools of thought, argument which is not yet settled. In one sentence, the prolegomena tried and was successful to solve the conflict between theory and practice and the big doctrinal dispute of the twentieth century. It was a struggle of research and observation over half a century between 1947 and 1997.

This paper aims to propose a new model of economic behaviour in which activities are led by greed rather than by the traditional formal rules of capitalism.

This paper relies on the empirical observation of bad practices that developed in synchrony during the collapse of the former communist economic system and the rise of global financial capitalism. Both were fuelled by greedy behaviour of asset grabbing, and paved the way to an emerging greed-led economic system.

First, microeconomic individual greedy behaviours that drive asset grabbing are identified, such as rigged or corrupt privatisation drives, subprime mortgage loans, Ponzi schemes, lending to insolvent clients, bad loan securitisation, stock options, fraudulent accounting and online betting on fixed matches. Then systematic changes in the traditional formal rules of capitalism that favour those having adopted a greedy strategy are pointed at; greedy behaviour is institutionalised when these capture the state and successfully lobby for rules change. Contrary to capitalism, systemic greed uses asset grabbing, instead of capital accumulation, as its major means for wealth maximisation without constraint, in a winner-take-all economy beneficial to oligarchs.

The implications of this new systemic behaviour have implications for further economic modelling.

The emergence of systemic greed will have implications for the design of regulatory systems.

This paper proposes that a greed-controlled economy is replacing the traditional capitalist economy.

The unity of our spirit makes it impossible to work toward a certain end without thinking that this end can and must be achieved, even if only in the distant future and through the work of later generations… Objective examination in the ups and downs in the history of law cannot and must not extinguish our faith in justice as a supreme human ideal. Even in the face of events which represent a setback or a deviation, that ideal remains unshaken as a criterion of value; without it, deviation would be meaningless. Even if contradicted by empirical facts, this ideal does not lose its ethical and deontological truth. These contradictions between “is” and “ought to be” can be neither permanent nor general. Giorgio del Vecchio, Man and Nature

Historically, Panama has always been “a place of transit.” While technically the isthmus formed part of Colombia in the nineteenth century, it was linked geopolitically to the United States soon after the California gold rush, beginning in the late 1840s. The first attempt at building a canal ended in failure in 1893 when disease and poor management forced Ferdinand de Lesseps to abandon the project. The U.S. undertaking to build the canal could only begin after Panama declared itself free and broke away from Colombia in 1903, with the support of the United States.

Due to scarcity of research in governance and accountability in private higher education in developing countries, the purpose of this paper is to explore the tensions surrounding good governance in legitimizing accountability in private universities in developing countries with reference to Bangladesh.

Mixed methods are employed: a quantitative survey of 1,576 students from all 79 private universities; qualitative interviews with 23 stakeholders; and policy documents including the Private University Acts, the World Bank Report and newspapers (1992-2015) were evaluated. The objectives of these mixed methods in this study are juxtaposed and generate complementary insights that together create a bigger picture surrounding governance and accountability issues.

Using Clark's (1983) triangle model (i.e. state control, academic oligarchy, and market forces together with the external influence of donors and boards of trustees as internal governance) and new institutional theory (DiMaggio and Powell, 1983), the major contributions of this study are explaining the root causes of the poor governance of private universities through three related factors: the substantial political power and autonomy held by boards of trustees; a lack of enforcement of Private University Act; and a lack of coordination among stakeholders. The coercive power of the state becomes powerless since the board of trustees ultimately enjoys political power and “does whatever it can.” The lack of coordination of the academic oligarchy (e.g. professors and academics) and market forces (represented by students) by the board of trustees creates a paradox of governance and hence a decoupling of formal policies and actual practice.

The findings have major policy implications for local and international policymakers for improving good governance in private universities in developing countries.

The novelty of the study's findings represents an initial effort to understand the complex and persistent phenomenon of prolonged poor governance of private universities in developing countries, which is largely neglected in the literature. This will undoubtedly contribute to literature and policy implications.

This paper is prepared from the perspective of civil society and under the context of true democracy, where civil society directly participates in the public matter on a permanent basis, so that the public and private interests are reconciled and governments are made to truly work for all ranks of society and not for the owners of capital. The very concept of social responsibility is currently at the threshold dividing its future between remaining a corporate tool used by corporations to look good, without really doing the public good, or becoming a valuable instrument of civil society to make business become socially and environmentally responsible, in such a way that generates a meaningful net contribution to the sustainability of the planet. The social responsibility of business and what it should be remains very much in debate (White, 2005). For the overwhelming majority of business entities and governments, it is a voluntary option and not a legal or even a moral obligation. This has been the unrelenting position of business, which has been enthusiastically endorsed by governments, where most elected officials in high‐power positions have been the direct beneficiaries of great amounts of corporate money for their political campaigns. For civil society, in contrast, the social responsibility of business is an instrument to make corporations behave responsibly according to the standards defined by civil society at large, through due democratic process, and not according to standards conveniently selected by business (de Regil, 2005:17). In Iberian America, the most unequal region in the world, the need to make both domestic and global corporations practice a social and environmentally‐sustainable economic activity is far more urgent than elsewhere. In this region, a neocolonial business culture pervasively remains entrenched. Since the abandonment, in the 1980s, of endogenous social and economic development, aimed at developing a growing domestic market through aggregate demand to gradually include more people into the middle social strata, the region has returned, in many aspects, to times reminiscent of late Nineteen Century ‐ with the imposition of neoliberal economics globalisation ‐ when many people worked under conditions of slavery. As has been unfolding in many parts of the world, including the G7 countries, Iberian America is today back into an era reminiscent of the robber barons of the Gilded Age. Yet it has occurred in a far more pervasive and vicious way, as a result of a far more intolerant, racist and plutocratic mentality of the upper class, which has systematically jeopardised the development of a true democratic ethos. In this way, civil society in the region has begun to use and develop some CSR concepts in attempting to put in check the activity of business. However, the outright abandonment of Iberian American governments of their most basic and preeminent democratic responsibility ‐ to procure the welfare of every rank of society, especially the disposed ‐ is so extreme, that the concept of CSR may be too little and too late to do any good.