Archive

Posts Tagged ‘Teoría de la crisis’

“La Larga Depresión”: Entrevista a Michael Roberts

19/09/2016 Deja un comentario

michael_robertsMK: Nuestro gobierno asegura que la economía se recupera. Al mismo tiempo, vemos que Grecia necesita de forma continua “paquetes de rescate” y ahora hay problemas en Italia. ¿Cuál es el estado de la economía mundial?

MR: El desarrollo de la economía mundial desde 1945 no ha sido armonioso, no ha crecido en línea recta. Ha habido una serie de auges y recesiones. Me refiero a una disminución del ingreso nacional o la producción nacional de un país por lo menos durante seis meses o más, antes de volver a recuperarse y crecer.

Pero lo específico de este último periodo, es que tuvimos una gran caída en 2008-9 después de la crisis financiera internacional. La Gran Recesión, que duró 18 meses, fue la mayor desde la década de 1930. Como resultado, todas las grandes economías del mundo, entre ellas la de los Países Bajos, experimentaron una fuerte disminución de su renta y producción nacional. Cada vez que sucede, millones de personas ven sus vidas arruinadas, pierden sus puestos de trabajo y, posiblemente, sus casas, porque no pueden pagar el alquiler o la hipoteca. Además, los gobiernos aplican toda una serie de medidas, de recortes en el estado de bienestar y en los servicios públicos, que afectan a la población también. Además, todo ese período de declive es una pérdida permanente. Si no hubiera habido caída, la producción y los ingresos habría sido mayores, el volumen y la calidad del empleo hubiera sido mejor. Eso nunca se puede recuperar. Leer más…

“The decline of the rate of profit in the postwar US economy: A comment on Brenner”: Fred Moseley

19/09/2016 1 comentario

fred-moseley-1 -cdmThe publication of Robert Brenner’s “The Economics of Global Turbulence” is an important and very welcome event. Brenner’s essay brings to the fore once again the analysis of the economic crisis of the 1970s and 1980s, and argues that this economic crisis is not over yet. Therefore, there is still a great need to try to understand better the underlying causes of this continuing crisis and to have a public debate about the nature of these causes. The causes of the crisis determine the preconditions for recovery from the crisis and the likelihood of a full and lasting recovery in the years ahead. Brenner’s essay has once again put these questions squarely on the left agenda, and this is a significant contribution.

I also agree completely with Brenner’s emphasis on the rate of profit as the key explanatory variable in understanding the dynamics of capitalist economies in general and the causes of the economic crisis of the last 25 years in particular. Many radical economists, including myself, have placed a similar emphasis on the rate of profit as the key variable in explaining the current crisis. From this perspective, a significant decline in the rate of profit in all major capitalist countries in the 1960s and 1970s was the fundamental cause of both of the “twin evils” of higher unemployment and higher inflation that have afflicted these countries since the 1970s. As in business cycles of the past, the decline in the rate of profit resulted in a decline in business investment and higher rates of unemployment. One new factor in the postwar period has been that many governments in the 1970s responded to the higher unemployment by adopting Keynesian expansionary policies (more government spending, lower interest rates, etc.) in an attempt to reduce this unemployment. However, these government attempts to reduce unemployment generally resulted in higher rates of inflation, as capitalist enterprises responded to the government stimulation of demand by raising their prices at a faster rate in order to reverse the decline in their rate of profit. In the 1980s, financial capitalists revolted against these higher rates of inflation and have generally forced governments to adopt restrictive policies (less government spending, higher interest rates, etc.). The result has been less inflation, but also sharply higher unemployment and sharply reduced living standards. Therefore, government policies have affected the particular combination of unemployment and inflation that has occurred, but the fundamental cause of both of these “twin evils” has been the decline in the rate of profit. It is striking that mainstream economists have almost completely ignored the decline of the rate of profit in their explanations of the economic crisis of the 1970s and 1980s. Leer más…

“De crisis en crisis o la gran fortaleza del capital”: Sergio Cámara Izquierdo

19/09/2016 Deja un comentario

Cómo caracterizaría la crisis capitalista actual? ¿se trata una crisis de nuevo tipo o más bien una fase de la crisis iniciada en 1973?

SC: En el capitalismo existe una continuidad de los procesos económicos, pero se debe caracterizar no como una continuidad de la crisis de los setenta, sino como una nueva crisis estructural. La crisis de los setenta era una crisis estructural de rentabilidad asociada a la caída tendencial de la tasa de ganancia, que provocó un proceso de reestructuración de las condiciones generales de valorización del capital. Este proceso de reestructuración, que se conoce como neoliberalismo, puso en marcha los mecanismos necesarios para revertir la caída y recuperar la tasa general de ganancia. El neoliberalismo se caracteriza por un fuerte ataque a la clase trabajadora y el deterioro de las condiciones de reproducción de la fuerza de trabajo, por una globalización específica dada por la mayor movilidad de capitales de todo tipo –productivos, mercancías y dinero– a nivel internacional y por lo que se ha llamado financiarización o hegemonía financiera. Evidentemente, todos estos rasgos que han caracterizado a la economía en las últimas décadas, son consecuencia de la crisis estructural de la década de 1970, pero la nueva crisis estructural que estalla en 2008 en Estados Unidos (algunos incluso piensan que el punto de inflexión fue la anterior crisis cíclica en Estados Unidos en 2000-2001) es una crisis estructural nueva, distinta a la anterior. De hecho, es una crisis que podemos considerar de la reestructuración neoliberal, o la crisis del neoliberalismo. Leer más…

Categorías:Economía Etiquetas: ,

“Capitalism and Anwar Shaikh”: Michael Roberts

06/09/2016 Deja un comentario

518bxGmoqbL._SX327_BO1,204,203,200_The most important book on capitalism this year will be Anwar Shaikh’s Capitalism – competition, conflict, crises.

As one of the world’s leading economists who draws on Marx and the classical economists (‘political economy’, if you like), Anwar Shaikh has taught at The New School for Social Research for more than 30 years, authored three books and six-dozen articles.  This is his most ambitious work.  As Shaikh says, it is an attempt to derive economic theory from the real world and then apply it to real problems.  Shaikh applies the categories and theory of classical economics to all the major economic issues, including those that are supposed to be the province of mainstream economics, like supply and demand, relative prices in goods and services, interest rates, financial asset prices and technological change.

Shaikh says that his “approach is very different from both orthodox economics and the dominant heterodox tradition.”  He rejects the neoclassical approach that starts from “Perfect firms, perfect individuals, perfect knowledge, perfectly selfish behavior, rational expectations, etc.” and then “various imperfections are introduced into the story to justify individual observed patterns” although there “cannot be a general theory of imperfections”.  Shaikh rejects that approach and instead starts with actual human behavior instead of the so-called “Economic Man”, and with the concept of ‘real competition’ rather than ‘perfect competition’. Chapters 3 and 7-8 emphasize that.  It is the classical approach as opposed to the neoclassical one. Leer más…

“El capital: razón histórica, sujeto revolucionario y conciencia”: Juan Iñigo Carrera

24/05/2016 Deja un comentario

Juan Iñigo Carrera, es economista e historiador de la Universidad de Buenos Aires, y director del Centro para la Investigación como Crítica Práctica (CICP). Entre el 5 y 12 de enero se encontrará en Chile, de forma inédita, impartiendo el seminario “El capital: razón histórica, sujeto revolucionario y conciencia” en la Universidad Academia de Humanismo Cristiano, en el marco de las “Jornadas de Crítica de la Economía Política. El Desarrollo Capitalista: Capital, Renta, Clases y Alternativa Política”, organizadas por CISOH. Leer más…

“Dietro e oltre la crisi”: Guglielmo Carchedi

24/05/2016 Deja un comentario

crisisLa crisi finanziaria del 2007-2010 ha riacceso la discussione sulle crisi, sulla loro origine e sui loro possibili rimedi.2 Oggigiorno, la tesi più influente nella sinistra identifica le cause della crisi da una prospettiva sottoconsumista e raccomanda politiche redistributive e politiche di investimento Keynesiane come soluzioni. Questo articolo sostiene che la giusta prospettiva per capire la crisi dovrebbe essere la legge della caduta tendenziale del tasso di profitto medio (TPM) di Marx, in breve la legge. La sua caratteristica è che il progresso tecnologico diminuisce il TMP piuttosto che aumentarlo, come si pensa comunemente. Vediamo perché.


I. La legge in poche parole
. Leer más…

“Capitalism: Competition, Conflict and Crises”: Anwar Shaikh

08/03/2016 Deja un comentario

518bxGmoqbL._SX327_BO1,204,203,200_The Henry George School of Social Science, and the New School of Social Research invite you to follow Professor Anwar M. Shaikh in a new series of lectures exploring his new ground-breaking Economic treatise, “Capitalism: Competition, Conflict and Crises”. The course will be introduced over two semesters. Recordings of the first semester, becoming available now, is comprised of 15 lectures. Subscribe to our YouTube Channel, Henry George School of Social Science to receive updates as new lectures are added.

Competition and conflict are intrinsic features of modern societies, inequality is persistent, and booms and busts are recurrent outcomes throughout capitalist history. State intervention modifies these patterns, but does not abolish them.

Professor Shaikh exposes how these and many other observed patterns are the results of intrinsic forces that shape and channel outcomes. Social and institutional factors play an important role, but at the same time, the factors are themselves limited by the dominant forces arising from “gain-seeking” behavior, of which the profit motive is the most important. These dominant elements create an invisible force field that shapes and channels capitalist outcomes.

The book’s approach departs from that of orthodox economics as well as the dominant elements in the heterodox tradition. There is no reference whatsoever to an idealized framework rooted in perfect firms, perfect individuals, perfect knowledge, perfectly selfish behavior, rational expectations, or so-called optimal outcomes. The book develops microeconomic and macroeconomic theory from real behavior and real competition, and uses it to explain empirical patterns in microeconomic demand and supply, wage and profits, technological change, relative prices of goods and services, interest rates, bond and equity prices, exchange rates, patterns of international trade, growth, unemployment, inflation, national and personal inequality, and the recurrence of general crises such as the current one which began in 2007-2008.

Leer más…

“Capitalism: Competition, Conflict, Crisis”: Interview to Anwar Shaikh

24/02/2016 Deja un comentario

Competition and conflict are intrinsic features of modern societies, inequality is persistent, and booms and busts are recurrent outcomes throughout capitalist history. State intervention modifies these patterns but does not abolish them. Professor Anwar Shaikh, an economics professor at the Graduate Faculty of the New School for Social Research, develops these ideas in his latest book. Leer más…

“Cómo funciona la economía capitalista: una introducción a la teoría del valor-trabajo de Marx”: Maxi Nieto Ferrández

05/10/2015 Deja un comentario

libro MaxiEl propósito fundamental [de este libro] es mostrar que la teoría del valor-trabajo expuesta globalmente, pero no por completo desarrollada en El Capital constituye el marco fundamental para construir una teoría general del funcionamiento y la dinámica del modo de producción capitalista.

Se trata de reivindicar este marco teórico como un todo coherente en sus fundamentos, mostrando que tanto la teoría de los precios relativos y la explotación como la teoría de la acumulación, la distribución y la crisis se asientan sobre la categoría de valor, por lo que la «microeconomía» y la «macroeconomía» de Marx están orgánicamente conectadas. Mi planteamiento es que en El Capital, como sucede con cualquier otra obra esencial en la historia del pensamiento, no hay propiamente «partes» que pudieran reivindicarse o rescatarse aisladamente frente a otras descartables (es habitual que unos se queden con el análisis de clase, otros con su teoría de la explotación, otros con la de la acumulación y la crisis, etc.), como pretenden las lecturas convencionales (marxistas o no); lo que hay es una secuencia de pasos lógicos –aunque no desarrollada en su totalidad– dentro de un mismo proceso constructivo encaminado a investigar y exponer el sistema completo de relaciones sociales y económicas en que consiste el modo de producción capitalista. Leer más…

“Contemporary Imperialism”: Samir Amin

31/07/2015 Deja un comentario

Lenin, Bukharin, Stalin, and Trotsky in Russia, as well as Mao, Zhou Enlai, and Den Xiaoping in China, shaped the history of the two great revolutions of the twentieth century.1 As leaders of revolutionary communist parties and then later as leaders of revolutionary states, they were confronted with the problems faced by a triumphant revolution in countries of peripheral capitalism and forced to “revise” (I deliberately use this term, considered sacrilegious by many) the theses inherited from the historical Marxism of the Second International. Lenin and Bukharin went much further than Hobson and Hilferding in their analyses of monopoly capitalism and imperialism and drew this major political conclusion: the imperialist war of 1914–1918 (they were among the few, if not the only ones, to anticipate it) made necessary and possible a revolution led by the proletariat.

With the benefit of hindsight, I will indicate here the limitations of their analyses. Lenin and Bukharin considered imperialism to be a new stage (“the highest”) of capitalism associated with the development of monopolies. I question this thesis and contend that historical capitalism has always been imperialist, in the sense that it has led to a polarization between centers and peripheries since its origin (the sixteenth century), which has only increased over the course of its later globalized development. The nineteenth-century pre-monopolist system was not less imperialist. Great Britain maintained its hegemony precisely because of its colonial domination of India. Lenin and Bukharin thought that the revolution, begun in Russia (“the weak link”), would continue in the centers (Germany in particular). Their hope was based on an underestimate of the effects of imperialist polarization, which destroyed revolutionary prospects in the centers.

Leer más…

“Capitalismo en recesión. La crisis en el centro y la periferia de la economía mundial”: Mateo, Juan Pablo (coord.)

20/03/2015 Deja un comentario

cerMateo, Juan Pablo (coord.) (2015): Capitalismo en recesión. La crisis en el centro y la periferia de la economía mundial. Madrid: Maia, 224 pp., 11 euros. ISBN: 978-84-92724-53-6

 Breve descripción

¿Cuáles son los aspectos característicos de la teoría marxista de la crisis? ¿Es posible comprender esta Gran Recesión a partir de las contradicciones propias del capitalismo según el planteamiento de Marx? ¿Por qué se deben rechazar las explicaciones de economistas neoliberales y keynesianos? ¿Qué papel tienen las finanzas en el proceso de acumulación y crisis? ¿Por qué y cómo una fase de expansión caracterizada por un espiral especulativa ha culminado en una crisis global del capitalismo?

A estas y otras preguntas trata de responder Capitalismo en recesión. La crisis en el centro y la periferia de la economía mundial, un esfuerzo por analizar una de las grandes crisis del sistema capitalista a partir de los fundamentos del enfoque marxista. Mientras que los economistas ortodoxos, que son los que en mayor medida tienen acceso a los medios de comunicación, explican la crisis económica a partir de aspectos ajenos a la dinámica del capitalismo, unos por la excesiva desregulación (keynesianos), otros por el intervencionismo del Estado (neoliberales), junto a elementos como la distribución del ingreso, la psicología de los inversores, las finanzas, etc., en este libro se aborda la crisis mundial como un momento necesario e inevitable de la dinámica de acumulación de capital. De lo contrario, ¿cómo explicar si no la recurrencia de las crisis a lo largo de la historia del capitalismo? Leer más…

“O Feitiço do Tempo: A crise financeira de 2007/2008 nas telas do cinema”: Marcelo Dias Carcanholo, João Leonardo Medeiros

20/02/2015 Deja un comentario

Film Fall PreviewResumo
Passado um bom tempo do estouro da atual crise do capitalismo, ainda não é claro se a crise foi superada ou se continua entre nós, provocando a quebra financeira da Europa. Três produções estadunidenses são particularmente hábeis ao expor o jogo financeiro sujo e irresponsável que funcionou como gatilho da crise: Capitalismo: uma história de amor (2009), de Michael Moore; Wall Street: o dinheiro nunca dorme (2010), de Oliver Stone; e Trabalho Interno (2010), de Charles Ferguson. O propósito do artigo é contrastá-las, discutindo a  capacidade dos filmes em (1) associar a crise ao funcionamento regular do capitalismo; (2) perceber a desarticulação, no plano teórico e prático, da mobilização anticapitalista como elemento decisivo do atual estágio do capitalismo; e (3) vislumbrar uma superação da crise para além dos marcos do próprio pensamento conservador, hoje pendendo para as costumeiras demandas por regulação estatal.

Palavras-chave: crise; capitalismo contemporâneo; cinema; estranhamento; alienação. Leer más…

“Harvey e o enigma da crise econômica recente”: Alex Wilhans Antonio Palludeto, Rogerio P. de Andrade

20/02/2015 Deja un comentario

harvey-enigma-of-capital-front-cover-5d1655d50599a7d787274c1583e46830Resenha do livro: HARVEY, D. The enigma of capital and the crises of capitalism. 2. ed. London: Profile Books, 2011. Edição brasileira: O Enigma do Capital. São Paulo: Boitempo, 2011.

Embora não exista na obra de Marx, de forma bem articulada e sistematizada, uma teoria geral da crise capitalista, este tema é objeto recorrente de análise na economia política marxista. Não é surpresa, portanto, que a última grande crise do capitalismo, conhecida como “Grande Recessão”, ainda seja objeto de análise por uma ampla gama de teóricos marxistas contemporâneos, como, por exemplo, Andrew Kliman, John Foster e Fred Magdoff, Gerard Duménil e Dominique Lévy, e David Harvey, para citar alguns.

Um aspecto central das teorias das crises capitalistas de inspiração marxista é que as crises são o resultado da operação das contradições inerentes ao modo de produção capitalista. Elas não decorrem de eventos que acontecem fora do sistema econômico, mas emergem em virtude do seu próprio desenvolvimento. A questão que se coloca é: quais são essas contradições? A identificação daquela que se crê central na explicação da crise é o que separa as várias abordagens marxistas sobre o tema. Neste sentido, na literatura econômica marxista existem três vertentes mais gerais que procuram explicar a natureza das crises: a teoria do subconsumo (por exemplo, Rosa de Luxemburgo, Paul Sweezy); a das desproporções interdepartamentais (Rudolf Hilferding); e a baseada na lei da tendência à queda da taxa de lucros (Paul Mattick, David Yaffe). Leer más…

“O Capital Monopolista-Financeiro e a Grande Recessão”: Alex Wilhans Antonio Palludeto, Rogerio P. de Andrade

20/02/2015 Deja un comentario

PB1849Resenha Bibliográfica: FOSTER J. B.; MAGDOFF, F. The Great Financial Crisis: Causes and Consequences. New York: Monthly Review Press, 2009.

A análise econômica marxista é marcada pela existência de abordagens reconhecidamente distintas. Há controvérsias recorrentes acerca do significado de quase todo o legado de Marx e de sua adequação para a compreensão dos fenômenos econômicos modernos. As inúmeras interpretações sobre a crise recente que o tomam como principal referência ilustram a pluralidade e a vitalidade que caracterizam a  economia política marxista.

Embora não exista na obra de Marx de forma bem articulada e sistematizada uma teoria geral da crise capitalista, este tema é objeto recorrente de análise na economia política marxista. Não é surpresa, portanto, que a última grande crise do capitalismo, conhecida como “Grande Recessão”, seja área de estudos de uma ampla gama de teóricos marxistas contemporâneos, como, por exemplo, David Harvey, Andrew Kliman, Gerard Duménil, John Foster e Fred Magdoff, para citar alguns.

Um aspecto central das teorias das crises capitalistas de inspiração marxista é que as crises são o resultado da operação das contradições inerentes ao modo de produção capitalista. Leer más…

“David Harvey, monomaniacs and the rate of profit”: Michael Roberts

05/01/2015 Deja un comentario

David Harvey is a Distinguished Professor at the City University of New York (CUNY), Director of The Center for Place, Culture and Politics (http://pcp.gc.cuny.edu/) and author of numerous books. For over 40 years, he has been one of the world’s most trenchant and critical analysts of capitalist development. And he has developed a global audience for his on-line video lectures on reading Capital, (see http://davidharvey.org/). Harvey won the 2010 Isaac Deutscher prize for the best Marxist book of the year with The Enigma of Capital (http://www.amazon.com/Enigma-Capital-Crises-Capitalism/dp/0199836841).

I have commented on Harvey’s contributions to Marxist economics on various occasions on my blog.
https://thenextrecession.wordpress.com/2010/09/03/views-on-the-great-recession-david-harvey-and-anwar-shaikh/
https://thenextrecession.wordpress.com/2011/11/13/david-harvey-marxs-method-and-the-enigma-of-surplus/
https://thenextrecession.wordpress.com/2014/05/19/david-harvey-piketty-and-the-central-contradiction-of-capitalism/

Professor Harvey has always been critical of the view that Marx’s law of the tendency of the rate of profit to fall plays any significant role as a cause of crises under capitalism. In his award winning book, The enigma of capital, he states that “There is, therefore, no single causal theory of crisis formation as many Marxist economists like to assert. There is, for example, no point in trying to cram all of this fluidity and complexity into some unitary theory of, say, a falling rate of profit”. Leer más…