A philosophical defense of market socialism. Review of Gerald A. Cohen, Why not socialism? (original) (raw)
Related papers
Cohen on Socialism, Equality and Community
2012
Abstract In this article I discuss GA Cohen's account of the principles animating the socialist ideal. In his book Why Not Socialism? Cohen argues that socialism is based on two principles of radical equality of opportunity and community. Although I am quite sympathetic to Cohen's contribution, I identify what I take to be some problems in it and suggest ways to overcome them.
G.A. Cohen and the Ethical Core of Socialism: Equality or Life-Sufficiency?
Socialist Studies Etudes Socialistes, 2012
In this paper I will critically examine G.A.'s Cohen understanding of equality as the normative foundation of socialism. Cohen consistently maintained that inequality was the primary social problem systematically generated by capitalism, and that equality was the primary normative foundation of the socialist alternative. The general question that I want to pose in this paper is: is Cohen's understanding of equality as the normative foundation of socialism consistent with his general conception of socialism as a systemic alternative to capitalism? I will answer that it is not, because equality is not the best normative foundation for socialism conceived of as a systematic alternative to capitalism, and that elements of Cohen's own work imply a deeper normative foundation in what I call the principle of life-sufficiency. Résumé Cet article examine la façon dont G.A. Cohen comprenait l'égalité comme l'un des fondements normatifs du socialisme. Cohen a argumenté que l'inégalité est le premier problème social du capitalisme, et que l'égalité est le premier fondement normatif de l'alternative socialiste. Dans cet article, je m'interroge sur la cohérence entre l'idée portée par Cohen selon laquelle l'égalité est le fondement normatif du socialisme et sa conception générale du
G.A. Cohen. Why Not Socialism?
Socialist Studies/Études Socialistes, 2009
This book was the last thing published by G.A. Cohen (or Jerry Cohen as he called himself) before his sudden death at age 68 from a stroke in August. It was not the last book written by him, as a version first appeared in 2001 in Democratic Equality: What Went Wrong? edited by Ed Broadbent. This pamphlet-sized monograph (small pages, large type, no notes) is reminiscent of writings in the 1930s and 40s of the Left Book Club in the UK. Like its publications, written by such as G.
Why Not Community? An Exploration of the Value of Community in Cohen's Socialism
Res Publica, 2021
The work of prominent analytical Marxist G. A. Cohen provides a vision of socialism which has distributive justice and community at its core. While Cohen's view of distributive justice has been hugely influential, much less has been said about community. This article argues that community plays three distinct roles in Cohen's socialism. One is as an independent value, the second is as a necessary adjacent counterpart to justice, which serves both to restrict and facilitate distributive equality, and the third is as a critique of the liberal contractualist view of humanity. We argue that each of these are distinct and valuable elements in Cohen's thought, each of which must be recognized to understand the range and implications of Cohen's socialism.
The philosopher Gerald A. Cohen died on the 5th of August 2009. His contributions were at rst based on Marx's thought. He really appeared on the intellectual stage in 1978 with his book Karl Marx's Theory of History: A Defence. Later on, he gradually departed from Marx's theory. He discussed the libertarian concept of selfownership and the possibility of associating it with a Marxist approach, before entering into the normative debate around Rawls's Theory of Justice, while his Marxism was withering away. Based on Kantian philosophy, his critique of Rawls was that it allowed too little autonomy to individual choices. This paper discusses the consistency of Jerry Cohen's intellectual journey with regards to his relation with Marx's work. * Grateful thanks to the editors, especially Anton Leist, for their precious advice, and to Pierre Van Zyl for his linguistic help. 1 Cohen remembers that, when he was a high school student, to go to McGill was a widespread hope and expectation (1999, 35).
Our Unfinished Debate about Market Socialism
Politics, Philosophy and Economics, 2014
This article reconstructs and reflects on the 1989 debate between Jerry Cohen and myself on market socialism in the light of Cohen’s ongoing defence of communitarian socialism. It presents Cohen’s view of market socialism as ethically deficient but a modest improvement on capitalism, and outlines some market socialist proposals from the 1980s. Our debate centred on the issues of distributive justice and community. I had argued that a market economy might be justified by appeal to desert based on productive contribution, but Cohen saw effort as the only relevant desert base, and claimed that only non-comparative judgements of economic desert were possible. Market-derived inequalities, therefore, could not be deserved. He also condemned markets for relying on the motives of greed and fear, and therefore as destructive of community. In reply, I asserted that markets also liberated people from fixed social roles, and that market competition could be viewed differently, as providing the most effective way for people to contribute to each other’s welfare. In retrospect, this debate can be seen to raise questions about the nature of justice and the purpose of political philosophy that have come to the fore in recent exchanges between ‘realists’ and ‘idealists’.
Analyse and Kritik, 2015
The philosopher Gerald A. Cohen died on the 5th of August 2009. His contributions were at rst based on Marx's thought. He really appeared on the intellectual stage in 1978 with his Karl Marx's Theory of History: A Defence. Later on, he gradually departed from Marx's theory. He discussed the libertarian concept of self-ownership and the possibility of associating it with a Marxist approach, before entering into the normative debate around Rawls's Theory of Justice, while his Marxism was withering away. Based on Kantian philosophy, his critique of Rawls was that he allowed too little autonomy to individual choices. This paper discusses the consistency of Jerry Cohen's intellectual journey with regards to his relation with Marx's work.
G.A. Cohen, the neglect of democratic self‐management, and the future of democratic socialism
2021
SHOIKHEDBROD Carensian model risks producing a psychologically conflicted self (i.e., a pre-tax individual motivated by profit maximization and a post-tax individual committed to full equality), which has the potential of undermining community in Cohen's specific sense of "communal reciprocity," as well as the stability of egalitarian commitments. Second, Carens' continued disregard for DSM represents a failure to extend the ambit of justice to the workplace, which ceteris paribus, would remain organized in an undemocratic and paternalistic manner. I show that this move is inconsistent with the spirit of Cohen's response to the Rawlsian basic structure objection. Moreover, when Cohen seeks to reconcile freedom, equality, and Pareto optimality with recourse to the Carensian model, he follows Carens in limiting the scope of freedom to occupational choice, which while important, overlooks the equality, autonomy, and welfare-enhancing features associated with DSM. After illustrating the drawbacks of disregarding DSM, I extend my critique to John Roemer's recently revised account of socialism. Finally, drawing on the work of Carol Gould, Erik Olin Wright and others, I argue for the inclusion of DSM as a consideration of justice in the sphere of production and show its instrumental role in furthering freedom, equality, and community-values that should remain vital to any defensible version of democratic socialism.
Hermann Cohen's Neo-Kantian Ethical Socialism
Kantian Review (forthcoming), 2024
Hermann Cohen, the founding father of Marburg neo-Kantianism, is known for criticizing capitalism from a Kantian ethical perspective. Thus far, the role of the notion of humanity has been viewed as grounding the-what I shall call-'purposive-labour reading'. This interpretation suggests that Cohen aimed at a reorganization of work so that our humanity, which requires us to be treated as ends, remains intact. With the aim to better understand his usage of humanity, I contextualize the discussion of socialism and capitalism within Cohens' overall framework and situate his ideas in the context of his contemporary interlocutors. Revisiting Cohen's remarks on socialism and capitalism against the backdrop of his neo-Kantian account of ethical cognition reveals that his discussion of labour serves as an exemplar, showcasing how ethical rationality manifests in the liberal socialists' demands. I argue that his primary aim was not to prepare the ground for a prescriptive labour theory -- though this is likely to follow -- but to argue for an alternative framework to historical materialism, allowing us to perceive and interpret social practices in an ethical light.