Search results

In his 1919 article ‘The Intellectual Pre-eminence of Jews in Modern Europe’, Thorstein Veblen addressed the subject of Jewish intellectual creativity. Specifically, Veblen traced Jewish overrepresentation in the ranks of leading scientists and scholars back to their hyphenate status between their own community and gentile society. This essay has generally been neglected by Veblen scholars as puzzling or pointless in comparison with his preceding works, in which he developed his institutional-evolutionary economics. Moreover, the allegoric reading of Veblen’s image of the ‘renegade Jew’ as a representation of his own social and academic marginalization has overshadowed the scientific relevance of his analysis of Jewish intellectual creativity. The present article attempts both to take this 1919 essay seriously and to place it firmly within the context of his preceding literary productions. Specifically, this essay shows how Veblen’s view of Jewish intellectual creativity as the product of an enduring dynamic of Jewish–gentile relations is consistent with his ideas on the mechanism of development and reinforcement of institutions developed in his writings published between 1898 and 1914. The present chapter also suggests that Veblen reversed anti-Semitic arguments about the so-called ‘Jewish type’ in a pro-Semitic direction. In this respect, Edward Alsworth Ross’s explanation of the supposed characteristics of the Jewish people is taken as one hallmark of the racial thought of the American Progressive Era.

Most contemporary economists feel ill at ease with respect to big topics — national economic organisation, interpretation of economic history, relations of economic and political power, origins and functions of economic institutions. The terrain is unsuitable for our tools. We find it hard to frame meaningful questions, much less to answer them. (James Tobin, Nobel Laureate)

This paper aims to show the interrelation and relevancy of the concept and theory of cultural lag to social justice. The conception of social justice, though wide in scope, is applied in this paper to the limited domain of equality of opportunity and fairness with respect to income distribution.Design/methodology/approach – The methodology of this paper is holistic and interdisciplinary, and interrelates the social and the economic in the overall dynamics of general culture evolution.Findings – The “inverted U‐curve hypothesis” of Simon Kuznets implies that a greater equality of income distribution would be forthcoming in an economy characterized by a mature phase of modern economic growth. Empirical evidence demonstrates that such a movement toward greater equality is subject to question. The American experience of the 1920s and the period from 1973 to the present offers evidence to question the U‐curve hypothesis. Contrary to expectations, during these periods income distribution became more unequal. These periods, indicative of maladjustment, are used to demonstrate and serve as examples of cultural lags. The concept and theory of cultural lag exposes the need for prerequisite institutional adjustment. It consequently appears that the American institutional structure, currently directing the economy toward a policy orientation of laissez‐faire and the resulting increased inequality of income distribution, is anachronistic to a modern industrial society oriented toward the goal of social justice.Originality/value – Relevant to the quest of social justice.

Sets out to review the points for and against the concept of cultural lag. First clarifies the cultural lag concept and theory. Addresses the issue of empirical verification, and discusses the relevance of the concept and theory of cultural lag to socioeconomic policy.

The Berle and Means thesis focuses on a managerial revolution in which corporate control came to be transferred from owners to managers. Currently, it is arguable that control of corporate policy has shifted back to owners in what has come to be called “investor capitalism.” Stock market manipulators, as owners, have currently come to assert increased levels of control over CEO autonomy. This empirical reality appears in a vicious circle culminating in excessive CEO profits. The result has been to give support to a basic Veblenian assertion that imbecile business institutions hold sway to direct and dominate the economic process. In this process, the making of money rather than the production of goods serviceable for basic human needs have increasingly come to prevail over the US economy and culture.

The news is full of stories about business impropriety, employee theft and drug use, government scandals, teenage pregnancies, welfare scams, and a host of other problems associated with a lack of morals and ethics. The cumulative effect of this barrage of bad news has led some to raise the question, “Is America experiencing a moral decline?”

Discusses the correspondence and use of each other′s ideas of Loeb and Veblen which are seen to be significant both in understanding the evolution of their own thought and as commentary on the times.

Economic theories are integrally related to the social and historical processes from which they emerge. They evolve from, reflect, and seek to communicate explanations of the on‐going phenomena in which they participate. While, therefore, economic theories are mostly the product of the socio‐economic matrices in which they are conceived, the most influential political economists in history have also reflected the most advanced principles of science in their work. This they have done as their common calling to build a science of economic activity that would prove adequate to serving the most basic needs of people throughout the world and to meeting the growing requirements of public policy making. It is in these senses that the economic theories of Thorstein Veblen and Piero Sraffa have revealed the poverty and sterility of marginal utility speculations, while their combined innovations offer a hopeful prospect for continuing the classical heritage of production and social surplus theory which preceded the century‐long dominance of the demand‐and‐supply approach in political economy.