The Return of Economic Planning

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

The Return of Economic Planning Campbell Jones Introduction: The Return of Economic Planning This issue proposes to raise the stakes of Left political strategy by returning, in quite dierent ways than might be expected, to the question of economic planning. This comes at a moment when Left politics are at the same time gravely endan- gered and in a phase of radical renewal. Such a moment requires going back to central ideas and rethinking, reworking, and reframing them anew. While the ambition of the issue is to expand, extend, and radicalize Left politics, it is argued that this can be done not only by reclaiming economic planning but further by shifting the grounds of discussions of economic planning. The point, then, is not simply to defend economic planning but to draw out new understandings of economic planning, and in doing so to make conceptual and moreover strategic interventions into contempo- rary economic, social, and political struggle. When Jacques Lacan spoke in 1955 of a “return to Freud,” he stressed that this was any- thing but a return to the commonplace reductions to which Freud had been subjected. As Lacan insisted, the return to Freud was not the “return of the repressed” but a return to the meaning of Freud, in terms of a renewal of the revolutionary gesture of Freud’s calling into question of that The South Atlantic Quarterly 119:1, January 2020 10.1215/00382876-8007617 © 2020 Duke University Press Downloaded from http://read.dukeupress.edu/south-atlantic-quarterly/article-pdf/119/1/1/750327/1190001.pdf by guest on 30 September 2021 2 The South Atlantic Quarterly • January 2020 which had been taken as truth (Lacan [1955] 2006). While it is possible to dream of a “return” to a world imagined to be integral and perfect, there is also a return that—with the deepest of respect for tradition—creates some- thing new out of the old. There is something quite distinct about the “resur- rection” of an idea or a practice that has been subjected to reaction or obscu- ration (see Badiou 2009: 62ff.). If we speak of a “return of economic planning,” then, it must be remembered that something that is resurrected can be dierent and even better than the original. Let us be clear then. The return of economic planning that we have in mind has not one jot of nostalgia for the visions of economic planning that so readily leap to mind: Five-Year Plans; misguided and perverse plans with pointless objectives; the radical depoliticization of the planning process; the monopolizing of planning by sectional interests at the expense of others; the systematic silencing of dissenting or alternative plans; the ruthless brutal- ization of those failing to meet the plan. We know all of this, and we refuse all of this, not only because of historical failures of certain versions of Left economic planning, of which we are painfully aware, but just as much because our daily lives under capital today in so many ways resemble this planned nightmare. That the horrors associated with economic planning are today so easily connected with communism and even the most modest socialist or social democratic eorts to rein in capital should make clear the eectiveness of the ideological oensive that has been waged against the very idea of economic planning. The eort to create this ideational switching was performed with genius by F. A. Hayek in his Road to Serfdom ([1944] 2007), but it has also more broadly become the staple fare of the ideological imaginary of economic planning, for both the Right and the better part of the Left. This war has been very successfully waged by capitalist economics, and so economic planning has come to be associated with everything even vaguely undesirable to the capitalist class. In economics the repudiation of economic planning is so fundamental that it orders the most basic conceptual grounds of the discipline. This gen- erally plays out through the conceptual trick of separating and then oppos- ing planning to “the market.” Indeed, the planning/market dualism is today so foundational and apparently intractable that it grounds the central catego- ries of capitalist economics even in its more apparently progressive strands. When leading economists even consider the prospect that there might be “alternative economic systems” or that there might be “fundamentally dif- ferent ways of organizing an economy,” this generally translates into taking Downloaded from http://read.dukeupress.edu/south-atlantic-quarterly/article-pdf/119/1/1/750327/1190001.pdf by guest on 30 September 2021 Jones • Introduction: The Return of Economic Planning 3 dierent positions along a continuum between on the one hand a “market economy” and on the other a “command economy” (Samuelson and Nord - haus 2010: 8). While economists do concede that all actual economies today are “mixed economies” that involve a combination of market and plan, the opposition itself has done its work. On this continuum every society has to decide between terms that are so loaded that everything is concluded in advance. On the one hand, there is a command economy in which there are “those on top of the hierarchy giving economic commands to those further down the ladder” while, on the other hand, there is a market economy in which “individuals or enterprises voluntarily agree to exchange goods or ser- vices” (Samuelson and Nordhaus 2010: 8). It has long been known that pitting hierarchy against the market ignores the incredibly hierarchical nature of almost every business organiza- tion and what it means to live daily life subject to arbitrary managerial com- mand. This setup serves to occlude the very real powers of command that have always accompanied the rise and the continued expansion of capital and paints a fantastically egalitarian image of “the market” and the reality of coming face to face with massive corporations and the organized power of the rich and super rich. Capitalist power has of course rarely been satis¢ed to simply let the market do its magic, but rather has always carefully planned the extension of market forces, which it then withdraws or modi¢es when they are not achieving the desired ends. The capital-relation had to be forci- bly imposed through ongoing rounds of “primitive accumulation” through which capital created the space for its reign. Capital has always been accom- panied by the capitalist state, to which it turns when it is unable to eect its designs through the “voluntary” agreement of individuals and enterprises. In one sense the planning/market opposition is a politically motivated obfuscation that must be abandoned. At the same time, and in a deeper and more subtle sense, it is not that the market/planning binary needs to be deconstructed one ¢ne day, but rather that every eort to pit the market against planning is doomed to fail, bringing with it intractable conceptual and practical contradictions. One of the key things that many of us learned from Jacques Derrida some years ago is that the simple reversal of an opposi- tion leaves the terms and their opposition in place, while another form of crit- ical investigation is needed to interrogate what sustains the opposition and what the opposition occludes. This is a vital lesson with regard to economic planning. When faced with the massive destructive power of capital, many have been led to the conclusion that the solution is to replace the market with planning. Others, realizing that capitalism is already fully planned from top Downloaded from http://read.dukeupress.edu/south-atlantic-quarterly/article-pdf/119/1/1/750327/1190001.pdf by guest on 30 September 2021 4 The South Atlantic Quarterly • January 2020 to bottom, are led to the conclusion that the solution is simply to repurpose capitalist planning but this time to place us in control of the machinery. In speci¢c local situations, such solutions are vitally important and are worth ¢ghting for. But beyond these, a quite dierent set of options open up in the space between and beyond the market/planning opposition. Beyond the capitalist market and absolutist command there is a vast continent of alternative ways of thinking about and practicing economic planning. Many of our struggles in recent years have been precisely over developing various experiments in “counterplanning” or “planning from below.” These forms of economic planning rest neither on capitalist planning nor state planning from above, and have opened up new ways of thinking about what it means to plan. These practices have been described by Stefano Harney and Fred Moten (2013) as the constantly present “fugitive” element that bubbles up and manifests itself in a range of what they describe as “black operations.” Whatever name we give to the third term that sits outside of the ways eco- nomic planning has for so long been understood and unsettles the opposi- tions on the basis of which it has been conceived, the purpose of this volume is precisely to draw out these often unrecognized eorts of economic plan- ning and to think through their potential consequences. The Planned Economy While planning has always been fundamental to capitalism, contemporary capitalism is the most intensively and extensively planned economy ever known. Any intervention in economic planning must take this reality as its starting point. Leigh Phillips and Michal Rozworski (2019) have demon- strated a number of the ways in which almost all capitalist organizations of a certain size are thoroughly planned, and they therefore take organizations such as Walmart and Amazon as exemplars of capitalist economic planning. The presence of planning at the heart of the most powerful capitalist corpo- rations is palpable in the rule of bureaucratic forms of organization, and in the way that large organizations systematically bracket the market mecha- nism in order to increase internal predictability and control, and to avoid the “transactions costs” that many economists know accompany coordination of activity through the market.
Recommended publications
  • Computers and Economic Democracy
    Rev.econ.inst. vol.1 no.se Bogotá 2008 COMPUTERS AND ECONOMIC DEMOCRACY Computadores y democracia económica Allin Cottrell; Paul Cockshott Ph.D. in Economics, professor of Wake Forest University, Winston Salem, USA, [[email protected]]. Ph.D. in Computer Science, researcher of the Glasgow University, Glasgow, United Kingdom, [[email protected]].. The collapse of previously existing socialism was due to causes embedded in its economic mechanism, which are not inherent in all possible socialisms. The article argues that Marxist economic theory, in conjunction with information technology, provides the basis on which a viable socialist economic program can be advanced, and that the development of computer technology and the Internet makes economic planning possible. In addition, it argues that the socialist movement has never developed a correct constitutional program, and that modern technology opens up opportunities for democracy. Finally, it reviews the Austrian arguments against the possibility of socialist calculation in the light of modern computational capacity and the constraints of the Kyoto Protocol. [Keywords: socialist planning, economic calculation, environmental constraints; JEL: P21, P27, P28] El colapso del socialismo anteriormente existente obedeció a causas integradas en su mecanismo económico, que no son inherentes a todos los socialismos posibles. El artículo muestra que la teoría económica marxista, junto con la informática, proporciona el fundamento para adelantar un programa económico socialista viable y que el desarrollo de la informática y de Internet hace posible la planificación económica. Además, argumenta que el movimiento socialista nunca desarrolló un programa constitucional correcto y que la tecnología moderna abre nuevas oportunidades para la democracia.
    [Show full text]
  • Department of Economics
    DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMICS Working Paper State Debate Post Chris O’Kane Working Paper 2019-01 State Debate Post Introduction We live in turbulent times. The long decade following the 2007 crisis has been marked by a series of movements. They can be roughly summarized as follows: The Arab Spring, Occupy, and the UK student movement arose in the immediate aftermath of 2007 in opposition to the government bailouts, austerity and persistent economic misery. So did the Tea Party, the Five Star Movement, UKIP, Austria etc. Whilst the former tried to address their grievances outside of representative government, the latter experienced increasing electoral success culminating in the election of figures such as Trump Austria etc. These successes have been met by the ascent of social democratic theory, policy pronouncements, and strategizing in an array of disciplines in tandem with an increased membership in social democratic organizations and some notable electoral victories. The Social Democratic turn Social democracy is certainly better than Trump, Orban, Macron, and May. I would also welcome some of the proposals. However, I contend that these social democratic theories, policies and strategies, much like the other radical theories and practices of the first wave of reaction to the crisis, have not fully considered the question of the state. Whilst the former did not consider the obstacle of the state, today it seems that the state is not considered to be an obstacle. The format of this intervention certainly prevents me from demonstrating this at length. So let me indicate how a few notable theories, public policies proposals, and strategies share a ‘traditional theoretical’ and ‘constructive criticism’ of capitalist political economy that assumes the state is a neutral instrument.
    [Show full text]
  • Social-Property Relations, Class-Conflict and The
    Historical Materialism 19.4 (2011) 129–168 brill.nl/hima Social-Property Relations, Class-Conflict and the Origins of the US Civil War: Towards a New Social Interpretation* Charles Post City University of New York [email protected] Abstract The origins of the US Civil War have long been a central topic of debate among historians, both Marxist and non-Marxist. John Ashworth’s Slavery, Capitalism, and Politics in the Antebellum Republic is a major Marxian contribution to a social interpretation of the US Civil War. However, Ashworth’s claim that the War was the result of sharpening political and ideological – but not social and economic – contradictions and conflicts between slavery and capitalism rests on problematic claims about the rôle of slave-resistance in the dynamics of plantation-slavery, the attitude of Northern manufacturers, artisans, professionals and farmers toward wage-labour, and economic restructuring in the 1840s and 1850s. An alternative social explanation of the US Civil War, rooted in an analysis of the specific path to capitalist social-property relations in the US, locates the War in the growing contradiction between the social requirements of the expanded reproduction of slavery and capitalism in the two decades before the War. Keywords origins of capitalism, US Civil War, bourgeois revolutions, plantation-slavery, agrarian petty- commodity production, independent-household production, merchant-capital, industrial capital The Civil War in the United States has been a major topic of historical debate for almost over 150 years. Three factors have fuelled scholarly fascination with the causes and consequences of the War. First, the Civil War ‘cuts a bloody gash across the whole record’ of ‘the American .
    [Show full text]
  • What We Know and Do Not Know About the Natural Rate of Unemployment
    Journal of Economic Perspectives—Volume 11, Number 1—Winter 1997—Pages 51–72 What We Know and Do Not Know About the Natural Rate of Unemployment Olivier Blanchard and Lawrence F. Katz lmost 30 years ago, Friedman (1968) and Phelps (1968) developed the concept of the "natural rate of unemployment." In what must be one of Athe longest sentences he ever wrote, Milton Friedman explained: "The natural rate of unemployment is the level which would be ground out by the Wal- rasian system of general equilibrium equations, provided that there is imbedded in them the actual structural characteristics of the labor and commodity markets, in- cluding market imperfections, stochastic variability in demands and supplies, the cost of gathering information about job vacancies and labor availabilities, the costs of mobility, and so on." Over the past three decades a large amount of research has attempted to formalize Friedman's long sentence and to identify, both theo- retically and empirically, the determinants of the natural rate. It is this body of work we assess in this paper. We reach two main conclusions. The first is that there has been considerable theoretical progress over the past 30 years. A framework has emerged, organized around two central ideas. The first is that the labor market is a market with a high level of traffic, with large flows of workers who have either lost their jobs or are looking for better ones. This by itself implies that there must be some "frictional unemployment." The second is that the nature of relations between firms and workers leads to wage setting that often differs substantially from competitive wage setting.
    [Show full text]
  • Mill's "Very Simple Principle": Liberty, Utilitarianism And
    MILL'S "VERY SIMPLE PRINCIPLE": LIBERTY, UTILITARIANISM AND SOCIALISM MICHAEL GRENFELL submitted for degree of Ph.D. London School of Economics and Political Science UMI Number: U048607 All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. Dissertation Publishing UMI U048607 Published by ProQuest LLC 2014. Copyright in the Dissertation held by the Author. Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC. All rights reserved. This work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code. ProQuest LLC 789 East Eisenhower Parkway P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346 I H^S £ S F 6SI6 ABSTRACT OF THESIS MILL'S "VERY SIMPLE PRINCIPLE'*: LIBERTY. UTILITARIANISM AND SOCIALISM 1 The thesis aims to examine the political consequences of applying J.S. Mill's "very simple principle" of liberty in practice: whether the result would be free-market liberalism or socialism, and to what extent a society governed in accordance with the principle would be free. 2 Contrary to Mill's claims for the principle, it fails to provide a clear or coherent answer to this "practical question". This is largely because of three essential ambiguities in Mill's formulation of the principle, examined in turn in the three chapters of the thesis. 3 First, Mill is ambivalent about whether liberty is to be promoted for its intrinsic value, or because it is instrumental to the achievement of other objectives, principally the utilitarian objective of "general welfare".
    [Show full text]
  • Privatisation Education and Commodity Forms
    CHAPTER 25 Privatisation Education and Commodity Forms Glenn Rikowski Introduction Privatisation in education is not essentially about education. It is about the development of capitalism and the deepening of the rule of capital in par- ticular institutions (schools, colleges, universities etc.) in contemporary soci- ety. Of course, this is not how the situation appears in the relevant academic literature. Privatisation in and of education is typically framed within a dis- course regarding whether it ‘works,’ or not; or whether aspects of education— standards, equity and efficiency in particular—are enhanced or threatened by privatisation in educational institutions. Focus on the marketisation of edu- cation is particularly to the fore in writing and research on educational priva- tisation. Finally, and politically significant, is that privatisation is posited as a threat to public, state-financed education. The very ‘publicness’ of education is at issue (Miron, 2008). What remains largely uncovered in these standard academic approaches is the nature of the commodity forms that are worked on, developed and expanded in processes of educational privatisation. This article starts out from these commodity forms in order to set a path for a critique of the privatisation of education that delves deeper than mainstream academic accounts. Starting from commodity forms opens a shaft on the insidious and grubby underworld of capital’s mingling with education: capitalisation, the ‘becoming of capital’ in educational institutions, is uncovered. Current theoretical work on the privatisation of education is inadequate as a starting point for understanding what is at stake in the critique of educational privatisation as capitalist development. As Francine Menashy (2013) indicates, three of the most ‘commonly adopted approaches’ for analysing educational privatisation are the neoclassical-neoliberal, social primary goods, and rights- based approaches (p.
    [Show full text]
  • POLITICAL ECONOMY for SOCIALISM Also by Makoto Itoh
    POLITICAL ECONOMY FOR SOCIALISM Also by Makoto Itoh TilE BASIC TIIEORY OF CAPITALISM TilE VALUE CONTROVERSY (co-author with I. Steedman and others) TilE WORLD ECONOMIC CRISIS AND JAPANESE CAPITALISM VALUE AND CRISIS Political Economy for Socialism Makoto ltoh Professor of Economics University of Tokyo M St. Martin's Press © Makoto ltoh 1995 All rights reserved. No reproduction, copy or transmission of this publication may be made without written permission. No paragraph of this publication may be reproduced, copied or transmitted save with written permission or in accordance with the provisions of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, or under the terms of any licence permitting limited copying issued by the Copyright Licensing Agency, 90 Tottenham Court Road, London WIP 9HE. Any person who does any unauthorised act in relation to this publication may be liable to criminal prosecution and civil claims for damages. First published in Great Britain 1995 by MACMILLAN PRESS LTD Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire RG21 2XS and London Companies and representatives throughout the world A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library. ISBN 978-0-333-55338-1 ISBN 978-1-349-24018-0 (eBook) DOI 10.1007/978-1-349-24018-0 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 I 04 03 02 01 00 99 98 97 96 95 First published in the United States of America 1995 by Scholarly and Reference Division, ST. MARTIN'S PRESS, INC., 175 Fifth A venue, New York, N.Y. 10010 ISBN 978-0-312-12564-6 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data ltoh, Makoto, 1936-- Political economy for socialism I Makoto Itoh.
    [Show full text]
  • The Way to the Socialist Planned Economy
    The Way to the Socialist Planned Economy Marek Breit and Oskar Lange Translated by Jan Toporowski* Abstract: This is the first English translation of a 1934 article by Marek Breit and Oskar Lange on the economics of socialism. Breit and Lange advocate a form of market socialism based on self-managed workers’ cooperatives, with membership open to all who wish to join. 1 The Breakdown of the Capitalist Economy Otto Bauer said not very long ago that ‘the fall of the second workers’ government in England, the events of recent years, and especially in the current year in Germany, mark the end of an epoch and the start of a new one in the history of the international workers’ movement. We find ourselves at the start of a period of severe, protracted economic crises, broken only by short moments of respite; a period in which the proletariat will rather be convinced of how narrow are the boundaries with which the world capitalist economy limits the possibilities for liberation of the working class, and how these binding constraints may only be removed together with the whole capitalist system.’1 Essentially the world-wide economic crisis, the likes of which the capitalist economy has not experienced since its beginnings, shows the complete bankruptcy of the capitalist economic system. Nothing so demonstrates that complete bankruptcy, the total breakdown of the capitalist economy, as the co-existence of poverty with excess that is met at every step. When the masses of the people in the capitalist economies are oppressed by unprecedented poverty, stores are packed with goods for which there are no buyers; when millions are starving, grain and coffee are sunk at sea or burnt; when millions cannot clothe themselves, spinning and weaving plants stand idle.
    [Show full text]
  • The Road to Serfdom
    F. A. Hayek The Road to Serfdom ~ \ L f () : I~ ~ London and New York ( m v ..<I S 5 \ First published 1944 by George Routledge & Sons First published in Routledge Classics 2001 by Routledge 2 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, OX14 4 RN 270 Madison Avenue, New York, NY 10016 Repri nted 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2006 Routledge is an imprint ofthe Taylor CJ( Francis Group, an informa business © 1944 F. A. Hayek Typeset in Joanna by RefineCatch Limited, Bungay, Suffolk Printed and bound in Great Britain by TJ International Ltd, Padstow, Cornwall All rights reserved. No part ofthis book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilised in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publishers. British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library ISBN 10: 0-415-25543-0 (hbk) ISBN 10: 0-415-25389-6 (pbk) ISBN 13: 978-0-415-25543-1 (hbk) ISBN 13: 978-0-415-25389-5 (pbk) CONTENTS PREFACE vii Introduction 1 The Abandoned Road 10 2 The Great Utopia 24 3 Individualism and Collectivism 33 4 The "Inevitability" of Planning 45 5 Planning and Democracy 59 6 Planning and the Rule of Law 75 7 Economic Control and Totalitarianism 91 8 Who, Whom? 1°5 9 Security and Freedom 123 10 Why the Worst Get on Top 138 11 The End ofTruth 157 12 The Socialist Roots of Nazism 171 13 The Totalitarians in our Midst 186 14 Material Conditions and Ideal Ends 207 15 The Prospects of International Order 225 2 THE GREAT UTOPIA What has always made the state a hell on earth has been precisely that man has tried to make it his heaven.
    [Show full text]
  • THE MAGIC MONEY TREE: the Case Against Modern Monetary Theory
    THE MAGIC MONEY TREE: The case against Modern Monetary Theory Antony P. Mueller The Adam Smith Institute has an open access policy. Copyright remains with the copyright holder, but users may download, save and distribute this work in any format provided: (1) that the Adam Smith Institute is cited; (2) that the web address adamsmith.org is published together with a prominent copy of this notice; (3) the text is used in full without amendment [extracts may be used for criticism or review]; (4) the work is not re–sold; (5) the link for any online use is sent to info@ adamsmith.org. The views expressed in this report are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect any views held by the publisher or copyright owner. They are published as a contribution to public debate. © Adam Smith Research Trust 2019 CONTENTS About the author 4 Executive summary 5 Introduction 7 1 What is Modern Monetary Theory? 10 2 Mosler Economics 16 3 Theoretical foundations 21 4 The Neo-Marxist Roots of MMT 26 5 Main points of critique 34 Conclusion 45 ABOUT THE AUTHOR Professor Antony P. Mueller studied economics, political science, and philosophy along with foreign relations in Germany with study stays in the United States (Center for the Study of Public Choice in Blacksburg, Va.), in England, and in Spain and obtained his doctorate in economics from the University of Erlangen-Nuremberg (FAU). He was a Fulbright Scholar in the United States and a visiting professor in Latin America - including two stays at the Universidad Francisco Marroquin (UFM) in Guatemala.
    [Show full text]
  • 'Real Utopias'?
    ANNUAL CONFERENCE - ASSOCIATION FOR HETERODOX ECONOMICS ECONOMICS, PLURALISM AND THE SOCIAL SCIENCES London, July 14-16, 2006 Incentives for ‘Real Utopias’? Motivations, Cooperation and Alternative Market Models João Rodrigues José Castro Caldas DINÂMIA, DINÂMIA and ISCTE Lisbon, Portugal Dep. of Economics, [email protected] ISCTE Lisbon, Portugal [email protected] Abstract In this paper, a brief account of John Stuart Mill’s views on socialism is given, exploring the possibilities that he envisioned for building a culture of cooperation which fosters other-regarding motivations and the articulation of this culture with pecuniary incentives and markets. Furthermore, the recent egalitarian proposal, made by Bowles and Gintis (1998), is scrutinized, and the lines of continuity and departure with Mill are emphasized. Some of the problems with these two visions of an alternative socioeconomic order, both in terms of desirability and feasibility, are also explored. 1. Introduction John Stuart Mill’s attempt is perhaps one of the first to articulate a vision of a socio- economic order that combines democratic association in production and markets in exchange thus obtaining workers emancipation in a decentralized economy. For Mill, socialism was an extension of his liberal premises on property and personal liberty. But his articulation and advocacy of the ultimate compatibility between the principles of liberalism and socialism was always seen with suspicion and scepticism by free- marketers and Marxists alike, and this may account for the neglect of this aspect of Mill’s political economy. Presently, however, after the perceived failures of central planning, associational socialism has re-emerged and is advanced as a viable alternative.
    [Show full text]
  • Agrarian Anarchism and Authoritarian Populism: Towards a More (State-)Critical ‘Critical Agrarian Studies’
    The Journal of Peasant Studies ISSN: 0306-6150 (Print) 1743-9361 (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/fjps20 Agrarian anarchism and authoritarian populism: towards a more (state-)critical ‘critical agrarian studies’ Antonio Roman-Alcalá To cite this article: Antonio Roman-Alcalá (2020): Agrarian anarchism and authoritarian populism: towards a more (state-)critical ‘critical agrarian studies’, The Journal of Peasant Studies, DOI: 10.1080/03066150.2020.1755840 To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/03066150.2020.1755840 © 2020 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group Published online: 20 May 2020. Submit your article to this journal Article views: 3209 View related articles View Crossmark data Citing articles: 4 View citing articles Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=fjps20 THE JOURNAL OF PEASANT STUDIES https://doi.org/10.1080/03066150.2020.1755840 FORUM ON AUTHORITARIAN POPULISM AND THE RURAL WORLD Agrarian anarchism and authoritarian populism: towards a more (state-)critical ‘critical agrarian studies’* Antonio Roman-Alcalá International Institute of Social Studies, The Hague, Netherlands ABSTRACT KEYWORDS This paper applies an anarchist lens to agrarian politics, seeking to Anarchism; authoritarian expand and enhance inquiry in critical agrarian studies. populism; critical agrarian Anarchism’s relevance to agrarian processes is found in three studies; state theory; social general areas: (1) explicitly anarchist movements, both historical movements; populism; United States of America; and contemporary; (2) theories that emerge from and shape these moral economy movements; and (3) implicit anarchism found in values, ethics, everyday practices, and in forms of social organization – or ‘anarchistic’ elements of human social life.
    [Show full text]