Search results

That these two passages can appear in the same work, separated by only two paragraphs, confirms a tension latent in Marxian thought. After offering an appealing vision of a society in which the individual and community have been reconciled, Marx almost immediately denies any reliance on ethical ideals. Yet, as I shall argue, the very vision of the future society as transcending the conflict between individual will and systemic functioning is grounded in an ethic of human fulfillment as derived from the development and exercise of capacities within a community of equals. In the Marxian approach to understanding society, the ethical element is not excluded, but rather co‐exists uneasily with a theory of historical evolution.

Recent proposals for swift privatization of all social property in Eastern Europe overlook the unique history and culture of that region. The neoclassical model of development treats private property and free markets as virtual guarantees of prosperity, stability, and political democracy. However, the more comprehensive method of political economy highlights the social, political, and cultural underpinnings of economic activity. Centuries of authoritarian rule, culminating in four decades under communism, have left Eastern Europe ill‐equipped for the rigours of international competition. Until Eastern Europe develops stable democratic institutions, mass privatization is likely to result in chaos and the reimposition of political authority.

The relationship between capitalism and democracy has been questioned recently by economists and political scientists. In view of this debate, a reappraisal is made of the writings of Richard Henry Tawney, the English economist and social philosopher. Central to his personal, intellectual and socio‐political project was the ideal of the creation of a genuinely democratic community. Capitalism; the principles of a democratic economy; institutions and processes; and the alternative perspectives on political economy are discussed.

After a clarification of definitions important in methodological discussions, a brief history of early methodological thought in economics and political economy is presented. The development of “orthodox” methodology is traced, and the fundamental assumptions underlying neoclassical economic methodology are enumerated. Philosophical positions – both critical of and sympathetic to the orthodox assumptions – are presented. In addition, the advantages and disadvantages of various heterodox positions are surveyed. Throughout the paper, methodological justifications for the emphasis on primarily deductive, complex mathematical models in contemporary economics as practiced in the USA – especially in light of the relevance and importance of primarily verbal, interpretive methodologies in the realm of applied and policy‐oriented economics – are examined.

John E. Elliott has been a professor of economics at the University of Southern California in Los Angeles since 1956 when he graduated from Harvard University with a doctorate in economics. In that position at USC, John has distinguished himself not only as a scholar and prolific writer but also as an outstanding teacher. He has received every teaching honour which USC has within its power to bestow. Moreover, John has distinguished himself for his contribution to the well‐being of the faculty and to the advancement of its efforts to preserve and extend the concept of academic freedom. John E. Elliott was born in the year 1931 and the essays which comprise this Festschriftare written in celebration of his sixtieth birthday. The numerous awards he has received for the high quality of his teaching, for his creativity and innovation in the dissemination of knowledge, his record of books published, articles contributed to scholarly journals and book reviews are to be found in his curriculum vitae printed at the end of this work.

John E. Elliott has been a professor of economics at the University of Southern California in Los Angeles since 1956 when he graduated from Harvard University with a doctorate in economics. In that position at USC, John has distinguished himself not only as a scholar and prolific writer but also as an outstanding teacher. He has received every teaching honour which USC has within its power to bestow. Moreover, John has distinguished himself for his contribution to the wellbeing of the faculty and to the advancement of its efforts to preserve and extend the concept of academic freedom. John E. Elliott was born in the year 1931 and the essays which comprise this Festschrift are written in celebration of his sixtieth birthday. The numerous awards he has received for the high quality of his teaching, for his creativity and innovation in the dissemination of knowledge, his record of books published, articles contributed to scholarly journals, and book reviews, are to be found in his curriculum vitae printed at the end of this work.

The new rich of the nineteenth century were not brought up to large expenditures, and preferred the power which investment gave them to the pleasures of immediate consumption. In fact, it was precisely the inequality in the distribution of wealth which made possible those vast accumulations of fixed wealth and of capital improvements which distinguished that age from all others. … The immense accumulations of fixed capital which, to the great benefit of mankind, were built up during the half century before the war, could never have come about in a Society where wealth was divided equitably. [Sic!] — John Maynard Keynes, The Economic Consequences of the Peace (1919/20; Chap. II, sec. III), “Europe before the War,” “The Psychology of Society.”

This paper aims to investigate the phenomenon of co-competition, within service-dominant logic, whereby multiple parties with mutually exclusive goals compete for the rights to co-create with a firm.

Within the context of a massively multiplayer online role-playing game, the paper uses a naturalistic inquiry approach guided by the core objectives of qualitative research provided by Belk et al. (2012). These objectives include understanding the construct of study, the antecedents and consequences of what is being studied and, finally, the process used by the consumer during the phenomena. Additionally, the results are presented within an idiographic framework.

This study finds that co-competition arises when heterogeneous segments of consumers attempt different co-creation strategies with the firm, an overlooked dark side of co-creation and co-production of value. Additionally, the study finds evidence that co-competition may have led to co-destruction of value for both consumer parties and the firm.

The outcomes of this process could have significant financial and reputational impacts for the firm resultant from alienating both types of consumers competing for the rights to co-create. The conceptual framework established here provides a guide through which further investigation of co-creative forces can occur.

This chapter explores the ideas of Alasdair MacIntyre and Vaclav Havel and what these two thinkers can contribute to green political theory.

This chapter includes examination of some of the key works of Havel and MacIntyre and analysis of these works from the point of view of green political theory.

The section ‘Havel and the Imperative to “Live in Truth”: Dissent and Green Politics’ explores Havel’s thought with a particular emphasis on his ethicised notion of political action and critique (‘living in truth’) and his focus on the centrality of dissent (both intellectually and in practice) as central to political critique and action. The section ‘MacIntyre as a Green Thinker: Vulnerability in Political and Moral Theory’ offers an overview of MacIntyre interpreted as a putative green thinker, with a particular emphasis on his ideas of dependence and vulnerability. The Conclusion attempts to draw some common themes together from both thinkers in terms of what they have to offer contemporary green political thought.

What is presented here is introductory, ground clearing and therefore necessarily suggestive (as well as under-developed). That is, it is the start of a new area of exploration rather than an analysis based on any exhaustive and comprehensive knowledge of both thinkers.

This chapter offers some initial lines of exploration for scholars interested in the overlap between green thinking and the work of Havel and MacIntyre.

This is the first exploration of the connections between the works of Havel and MacIntyre and green political theory.