Giulio Palermo | University of Brescia (original) (raw)
Papers by Giulio Palermo
Cambridge Journal of Economics, Jan 3, 2019
Lukes’ Power: A Radical View is a milestone in the debate on power. First, it criticises the narr... more Lukes’ Power: A Radical View is a milestone in the debate on power. First, it criticises the narrow conceptions of political sociology, which reduces power to merely interpersonal relations. Second, it suggests an enlarged ontology of power capable of dealing with social coercion and collective action. Lukes, however, seeks the causes of power in politics and society by abstracting from the economic sphere. This detaches power from exploitation and confuses the essential with the only contingent forms of power of capitalism. The economics debate is predicated on this error because mainstream economics rules out the exploitative nature of capitalist production and introduces power later only as a residual category, which might develop only out of competition. The result is a mystified conception in which social coercion is no longer visible and competition appears as power-free. My ‘Marxist view’ on power is founded on a simple idea: exploitation in the economy imposes particular forms of power and coercion in society. Therefore, in the same way as the capitalist mode of production is essentially based on exploitation so it is also based on power and coercion. The economy is not merely one of the many possible sources of power, but the sphere in which the essential forms of capitalist power are generated. Competition is not the antithesis of power but the vehicle through which exploitation imposes the essential power relations of capitalism.
Economía y Desarrollo, Jan 6, 2021
En este trabajo se analiza cómo la competencia es la fuerza coercitiva que impone las leyes del c... more En este trabajo se analiza cómo la competencia es la fuerza coercitiva que impone las leyes del capital a los individuos y a la sociedad en su conjunto. Su existencia no depende de la política económica sino de la organización capitalista de la economía y sus efectos son una serie de tendencias económicas en el desarrollo capitalista. Sin embargo, la competencia es también una herramienta poderosa en la lucha de clases. El punto de inflexión neoliberal ha liberado esta fuerza y la ha dirigido contra la clase obrera, desarrollando procesos de globalización y comodificación que han reestructurado completamente las relaciones económicas y sociales según las exigencias de la acumulación capitalista. Al mismo tiempo, se explica cómo el incremento de la competencia a valor universal ha producido una transformación política y cultural en la sociedad que hace que, hoy en día, la lucha contra el capital y la competencia parezca irracional y sin base científica.
Cambridge Journal of Economics, 2017
Mainstream economics conceives power to be incompatible with perfect competi-tion. This conceptio... more Mainstream economics conceives power to be incompatible with perfect competi-tion. This conception, I argue, derives from its deductivist method and the ‘empirical realist ’ ontology that it presupposes. Following Marx, I show that capitalism constantly reproduces asymmetrical constraints on classes of individuals, indepen-dent of the market form. My ontological argument is rooted in the philosophy of ‘critical realism’. My conclusion is that the dichotomy ‘power–competition ’ is ontologically untenable. If capitalist relations necessarily involve power, it is not simply because neoclassical competition does not exist in reality, as radical mainstream economists suggest, but rather because capitalism altogether is a ‘system of power’.
New institutional economics explains capitalist institutions by means of neoclassical tools. This... more New institutional economics explains capitalist institutions by means of neoclassical tools. This method consists of introducing non-market institutions as solutions to market failures. The explicit or implicit assumption is that ‘in the beginning there were markets’. In this paper, we criticise this conception inherited from neoclassical economics by focusing on Williamson’s theory. First, we discuss Williamson’s speculative method, which idealises the market and presents it as natural and univer-sal. We then suggest that Williamson’s categories, his method and conception are themselves products of bourgeois ideology. In this sense, we conclude, Williamson himself is ultimately an ‘institution of capitalism’.
In this paper I criticize the positive and normative contents of the theory of convergence of the... more In this paper I criticize the positive and normative contents of the theory of convergence of the market process of Hayek and Kirzner. To overcome the limits of this theory, I present a scheme of the process of formation of individual plans that generalizes the implicit scheme of the Austrian authors and that allows to explicitly contemplate economic power. On the basis of such a scheme, I develop an alternative view of the process of convergence (inspired to aspects of institutionalism and Marxism) based on the role of economic power in the market process. My thesis is twofold: (1) if, under general conditions, the market process converges, it is because of the role of economic power, an element absent in the Austrian theory; (2) convergence has nothing to do with the efficiency of laissez faire capitalism as claimed the Austrians.
The article points out the limits of Austrian economics in so far as the passage from positive to... more The article points out the limits of Austrian economics in so far as the passage from positive to normative economics is concerned. We propose a comparison with neoclassical economics and discuss the different theoretical solutions adopted by these two schools of thought in their legitimization of the normative discourse. The bridge from positive to normative economics is analyzed as resting upon two interdependent pillars, one of a technical nature, the other of an ethical one. In the case of neoclassical theory, these two pillars are, respectively, the “Pareto principle ” and the so-called “minimal benevolence principle”. In the case of Austrian economics, they are the “coordination principle ” and the set of “quasi-universal ” value judgements. A first problem for Austrian economics is that the coordination principle turns out to be incompatible with process analysis, the latter being a central theoretical tenet of the Austrian school. A second problem, which overwhelms both the ...
ABSTRACT. The article points out the limits of Austrian economics in so far as the passage from p... more ABSTRACT. The article points out the limits of Austrian economics in so far as the passage from positive to normative economics is concerned. We propose a comparison with neoclassical economics and discuss the different theoretical solutions adopted by these two schools of thought in their legitimization of the normative discourse. The bridge from positive to normative economics is analyzed as resting upon two interdependent pillars, one of a technical nature, the other of an ethical one. In the case of neoclassical theory, these two pillars are, respectively, the “Pareto principle ” and the so-called “minimal benevolence principle”. In the case of Austrian economics, they are the “coordination principle ” and the set of “quasi-universal ” value judgements. A first problem for Austrian economics is that the coordination principle turns out to be incompatible with process analysis, the latter being a central theoretical tenet of the Austrian school. A second problem, which overwhelms...
it is not easy to identify the defining elements of post-Keynesian econo-mics. One might even arg... more it is not easy to identify the defining elements of post-Keynesian econo-mics. One might even argue that from a strictly theoretical and metho-dological viewpoint, post-Keynesianism is not a ‘school of thought ’ in the proper sense. The Elgar Companion to Post Keynesian Economics is an ambitious attempt to explain both the coherence and the heterogeneity of this theore-tical approach to economics. In his introduction to this thematic encyclopaedia, John E. King describes post-Keynesian economics as resting on the principle of effective demand and on the related idea that there exists no automatic mechanism capable of eliminating excess capacity and involuntary unemployment. These ideas, however, are also shared by the so-called bastard Keynesianism, methodo-logically closer to neoclassical economics. In fact, King continues, it was as a reaction to this attempt at neoclassical vulgarisation – which implied a substantial degeneration of John Maynard Keynes ’ conception – that post-Ke...
Empirical evidence on exchange rate economics is contradictory. During the 1970s there was high c... more Empirical evidence on exchange rate economics is contradictory. During the 1970s there was high confidence in Purchasing Power Parity (PPP) theories and monetary explanations of the exchange rate. Nevertheless, these models have given unsatisfactory results in the explanation of the movements of the
Since its birth in the 1870s, the Austrian tradition has always been facing the problem of defini... more Since its birth in the 1870s, the Austrian tradition has always been facing the problem of defining itself as a specific and identifiable school of thought, distinct from marginalism and later on from neoclassical economics. The whole story of the Austrian school is
This article points out the limits of Austrian economics as far as the passage from positive to n... more This article points out the limits of Austrian economics as far as the passage from positive to normative economics is concerned. We propose a comparison with neoclassical economics and discuss the different theoretical solutions adopted by these two schools of thought in their legitimization of the normative discourse. The bridge from positive to normative economics is analyzed as resting upon two interdependent pillars, one of a technical nature, the other of an ethical one. In neoclassical theory, these two pillars are, respectively, the Pareto principle and the so-called minimal benevolence principle. In the case of Austrian economics, they are the coordination principle and a set of value judgments considered to be ‘quasi-universal’. One problem for Austrian economics is that the coordination principle turns out to be incompatible with process analysis, the latter being a central tenet of the Austrian theory. A second problem, which creates serious difficulties for both schools...
... approfondita. Tra i lavori che coprono l'intera storia d'Italia, si segnala l'... more ... approfondita. Tra i lavori che coprono l'intera storia d'Italia, si segnala l'opera a cura di Gian Paolo Brizzi, Piero Del Negro e Andrea Romano (2007), a chiusura della quale Maria Luisa Accorsi propone una vasta guida bibliografica. ...
Cambridge Journal of Economics, Jan 3, 2019
Lukes’ Power: A Radical View is a milestone in the debate on power. First, it criticises the narr... more Lukes’ Power: A Radical View is a milestone in the debate on power. First, it criticises the narrow conceptions of political sociology, which reduces power to merely interpersonal relations. Second, it suggests an enlarged ontology of power capable of dealing with social coercion and collective action. Lukes, however, seeks the causes of power in politics and society by abstracting from the economic sphere. This detaches power from exploitation and confuses the essential with the only contingent forms of power of capitalism. The economics debate is predicated on this error because mainstream economics rules out the exploitative nature of capitalist production and introduces power later only as a residual category, which might develop only out of competition. The result is a mystified conception in which social coercion is no longer visible and competition appears as power-free. My ‘Marxist view’ on power is founded on a simple idea: exploitation in the economy imposes particular forms of power and coercion in society. Therefore, in the same way as the capitalist mode of production is essentially based on exploitation so it is also based on power and coercion. The economy is not merely one of the many possible sources of power, but the sphere in which the essential forms of capitalist power are generated. Competition is not the antithesis of power but the vehicle through which exploitation imposes the essential power relations of capitalism.
Economía y Desarrollo, Jan 6, 2021
En este trabajo se analiza cómo la competencia es la fuerza coercitiva que impone las leyes del c... more En este trabajo se analiza cómo la competencia es la fuerza coercitiva que impone las leyes del capital a los individuos y a la sociedad en su conjunto. Su existencia no depende de la política económica sino de la organización capitalista de la economía y sus efectos son una serie de tendencias económicas en el desarrollo capitalista. Sin embargo, la competencia es también una herramienta poderosa en la lucha de clases. El punto de inflexión neoliberal ha liberado esta fuerza y la ha dirigido contra la clase obrera, desarrollando procesos de globalización y comodificación que han reestructurado completamente las relaciones económicas y sociales según las exigencias de la acumulación capitalista. Al mismo tiempo, se explica cómo el incremento de la competencia a valor universal ha producido una transformación política y cultural en la sociedad que hace que, hoy en día, la lucha contra el capital y la competencia parezca irracional y sin base científica.
Cambridge Journal of Economics, 2017
Mainstream economics conceives power to be incompatible with perfect competi-tion. This conceptio... more Mainstream economics conceives power to be incompatible with perfect competi-tion. This conception, I argue, derives from its deductivist method and the ‘empirical realist ’ ontology that it presupposes. Following Marx, I show that capitalism constantly reproduces asymmetrical constraints on classes of individuals, indepen-dent of the market form. My ontological argument is rooted in the philosophy of ‘critical realism’. My conclusion is that the dichotomy ‘power–competition ’ is ontologically untenable. If capitalist relations necessarily involve power, it is not simply because neoclassical competition does not exist in reality, as radical mainstream economists suggest, but rather because capitalism altogether is a ‘system of power’.
New institutional economics explains capitalist institutions by means of neoclassical tools. This... more New institutional economics explains capitalist institutions by means of neoclassical tools. This method consists of introducing non-market institutions as solutions to market failures. The explicit or implicit assumption is that ‘in the beginning there were markets’. In this paper, we criticise this conception inherited from neoclassical economics by focusing on Williamson’s theory. First, we discuss Williamson’s speculative method, which idealises the market and presents it as natural and univer-sal. We then suggest that Williamson’s categories, his method and conception are themselves products of bourgeois ideology. In this sense, we conclude, Williamson himself is ultimately an ‘institution of capitalism’.
In this paper I criticize the positive and normative contents of the theory of convergence of the... more In this paper I criticize the positive and normative contents of the theory of convergence of the market process of Hayek and Kirzner. To overcome the limits of this theory, I present a scheme of the process of formation of individual plans that generalizes the implicit scheme of the Austrian authors and that allows to explicitly contemplate economic power. On the basis of such a scheme, I develop an alternative view of the process of convergence (inspired to aspects of institutionalism and Marxism) based on the role of economic power in the market process. My thesis is twofold: (1) if, under general conditions, the market process converges, it is because of the role of economic power, an element absent in the Austrian theory; (2) convergence has nothing to do with the efficiency of laissez faire capitalism as claimed the Austrians.
The article points out the limits of Austrian economics in so far as the passage from positive to... more The article points out the limits of Austrian economics in so far as the passage from positive to normative economics is concerned. We propose a comparison with neoclassical economics and discuss the different theoretical solutions adopted by these two schools of thought in their legitimization of the normative discourse. The bridge from positive to normative economics is analyzed as resting upon two interdependent pillars, one of a technical nature, the other of an ethical one. In the case of neoclassical theory, these two pillars are, respectively, the “Pareto principle ” and the so-called “minimal benevolence principle”. In the case of Austrian economics, they are the “coordination principle ” and the set of “quasi-universal ” value judgements. A first problem for Austrian economics is that the coordination principle turns out to be incompatible with process analysis, the latter being a central theoretical tenet of the Austrian school. A second problem, which overwhelms both the ...
ABSTRACT. The article points out the limits of Austrian economics in so far as the passage from p... more ABSTRACT. The article points out the limits of Austrian economics in so far as the passage from positive to normative economics is concerned. We propose a comparison with neoclassical economics and discuss the different theoretical solutions adopted by these two schools of thought in their legitimization of the normative discourse. The bridge from positive to normative economics is analyzed as resting upon two interdependent pillars, one of a technical nature, the other of an ethical one. In the case of neoclassical theory, these two pillars are, respectively, the “Pareto principle ” and the so-called “minimal benevolence principle”. In the case of Austrian economics, they are the “coordination principle ” and the set of “quasi-universal ” value judgements. A first problem for Austrian economics is that the coordination principle turns out to be incompatible with process analysis, the latter being a central theoretical tenet of the Austrian school. A second problem, which overwhelms...
it is not easy to identify the defining elements of post-Keynesian econo-mics. One might even arg... more it is not easy to identify the defining elements of post-Keynesian econo-mics. One might even argue that from a strictly theoretical and metho-dological viewpoint, post-Keynesianism is not a ‘school of thought ’ in the proper sense. The Elgar Companion to Post Keynesian Economics is an ambitious attempt to explain both the coherence and the heterogeneity of this theore-tical approach to economics. In his introduction to this thematic encyclopaedia, John E. King describes post-Keynesian economics as resting on the principle of effective demand and on the related idea that there exists no automatic mechanism capable of eliminating excess capacity and involuntary unemployment. These ideas, however, are also shared by the so-called bastard Keynesianism, methodo-logically closer to neoclassical economics. In fact, King continues, it was as a reaction to this attempt at neoclassical vulgarisation – which implied a substantial degeneration of John Maynard Keynes ’ conception – that post-Ke...
Empirical evidence on exchange rate economics is contradictory. During the 1970s there was high c... more Empirical evidence on exchange rate economics is contradictory. During the 1970s there was high confidence in Purchasing Power Parity (PPP) theories and monetary explanations of the exchange rate. Nevertheless, these models have given unsatisfactory results in the explanation of the movements of the
Since its birth in the 1870s, the Austrian tradition has always been facing the problem of defini... more Since its birth in the 1870s, the Austrian tradition has always been facing the problem of defining itself as a specific and identifiable school of thought, distinct from marginalism and later on from neoclassical economics. The whole story of the Austrian school is
This article points out the limits of Austrian economics as far as the passage from positive to n... more This article points out the limits of Austrian economics as far as the passage from positive to normative economics is concerned. We propose a comparison with neoclassical economics and discuss the different theoretical solutions adopted by these two schools of thought in their legitimization of the normative discourse. The bridge from positive to normative economics is analyzed as resting upon two interdependent pillars, one of a technical nature, the other of an ethical one. In neoclassical theory, these two pillars are, respectively, the Pareto principle and the so-called minimal benevolence principle. In the case of Austrian economics, they are the coordination principle and a set of value judgments considered to be ‘quasi-universal’. One problem for Austrian economics is that the coordination principle turns out to be incompatible with process analysis, the latter being a central tenet of the Austrian theory. A second problem, which creates serious difficulties for both schools...
... approfondita. Tra i lavori che coprono l'intera storia d'Italia, si segnala l'... more ... approfondita. Tra i lavori che coprono l'intera storia d'Italia, si segnala l'opera a cura di Gian Paolo Brizzi, Piero Del Negro e Andrea Romano (2007), a chiusura della quale Maria Luisa Accorsi propone una vasta guida bibliografica. ...