|
|
Title: The Great Transformation
Purchase
Item
Manufacturer: Beacon Press
List Price: $24.00
Our Price: $19.90
|
|
| Customer Reviews: |
| The Great Transformation by Beacon Press The Origins of Factor Markets | Adam Smith's *Wealth of Nations* may well have been the premier work in the history of economic thought, but his ventures into the realm of economic origins are, alas, founded on Platonic myth. Polanyi's work *Great Transformation* incorporated anthropological work from known primitive societies, plus available historical documents, to construct a far more empirical explanation of the origins of the market economy.
In this work, published fourteen years later, Polanyi (and colleagues) returns to the anthropological and archaeological evidence to reconstruct exactly how prices, real wages, and exchange relationships were organized. The early empires this book addresses include ancient Mesopotamia, Western Africa, Anatolia and Greece, Mesoamerica, the Sahel Steppe, and India. Additionally, a series of essays in the back by the books several authors draw upon primitive and classical empires to examine how early man used commerce, and how that later led to institutions of trade.
This receives four stars because, while it is a milestone in the field of economic history, it has since been superseded by more recent, nuanced analysis. His essay "The Economy as Instituted Process" is compelling, yet schematic; of course he brushes over countervailing evidence, because he is sketching out a stylized model of how labor, land, and tools were reified and subordinated to markets. | | The Great Transformation by Beacon Press The satanic mill | Polanyi's great transformation starts in the 19th century with the installation of a self-regulating market system ('the satanic mill') for labor, land and money and by letting the whole society be run by the system without any intervention. It provoked a wholesale destruction of the `traditional fabric of society'.
Attack on the market economy and democracy
In fact, this book is not only an attack against `laissez-faire', but also against a `regulated' market system and against, for Polanyi, the main cause of this great transformation (democracy). His book is not less than a plea for a return to the `Ancien Régime', for Polanyi the Golden Age of mankind, `the traditional unity of the Christian society', `the social fabric of the village under the supremacy of squire and parson', the society of `the benevolent gentlemen of England with their compassion from the heart', when economics where `embedded' in the whole society.
What was this Ancien Régime?
A disaster for 999 out of 1000 individuals. The poor had only one option: 'steal to be hanged' (J. Swift, D. Defoe, E.J. Burford). But for Polanyi, `under the regime of feudalism and the village community, noblesse oblige, clan solidarity, and regulation of the corn market checked famine'.
The kings owned the salt mines and sold (!) as a monopoly their salt (a necessity for survival) dearly: one block of about 5 kg was worth a whole village, population included (the ancient salt mines of Krakow are well worth a visit). For Polanyi, `it is the absence of the threat of individual starvation which makes primitive society more humane.'
Polanyi defends the guild system, feudalism and mercantilism: `Feudalism and landed conservatism were only seemingly contrary to the general interest of the community' and `neither under tribal nor under feudal nor under mercantile conditions was there a separate economic system in society'. But the guild system was an antidemocratic closed shop and mercantilism (F. Colbert) was a system for strengthening the Nation, in other words, the power of one man (`L'Etat, c'est moi').
What is the cause of this great transformation?
`The democratization of the political State which caused the separation of the economic and political sphere', `the transition to a democratic system and representative politics'.
What is Polanyi's solution?
`The passing of the market-economy can become the beginning of an era of unprecedented freedom.' What we need is planning, control, power and compulsion to ensure conformity which is needed for the survival of the group. Contradictio in terminis? Absolutely not: `the individual person should not fear that power and planning will turn against him'.
Of course, submitting the whole society to a pure self-regulating market system (e.g., the gold standard) is asking for disaster. The market system, a must for democracy, should be regulated and parts of the fabric of society should be managed by the State under a democratically elected government (R. Kuttner, J. Stiglitz). Indeed, `The economic order is merely a function of the social order'.
This book is an extraordinary reactionary and naïve defense of a `black' past.
However, the introduction by J. Stiglitz is excellent and justifies a modest outlay.
| | The Great Transformation by Beacon Press A masterpiece of economic history that is as relevant as ever sixty years on | Although this book was published in 1944, the same year as Hayek's THE ROAD TO SERFDOM, it remains as relevant as ever. Some say that it is dated and it is true that many of the historical references are not the ones that would spring to mind today, but the critique of the myth of the self-regulating free market remains as relevant and to-the-point as ever. One of the main targets of his book was the Vienna school of economics, the central figures of which were Ludwig von Mises and F. A. Hayek. What Polanyi does is help one to see how hopelessly naïve and ahistorical many of their central assumptions are. Though one might question some of the details of Polanyi's thesis, especially regarding the gold standard the causes of the two world wars, he makes two incredibly powerful arguments about the myth of the self-regulating market to which proponents of that theory have offered no convincing reply. More of this is a second.
Polanyi's method is multi-disciplinary. He wants to show by a multitude of ways that the central historical contentions of those advocates of the self-regulating market are simply fasle. These people have argued, for instance, that by nature humans engage in market trade and that these markets by nature are self-regulating. If this were, as they insist, true, then wherever one would look in human history one would find markets that were by their nature self-regulating. Remember, Adam Smith's Austrian heirs were making arguments not just about what ought to be, but what naturally is in a state of nature. They are making claims about what is the case if government and others will just get out of the way of the workings of nature. So to this end Polanyi looks at the results of anthropological and historical studies to see what the evidence shows. Overwhelmingly, he finds no evidence that things have been in the course of human history as the self-regulators have claimed. In fact, Polanyi finds little or no evidence of the worldwide prevalence of markets at all. He finds little historical evidence for the kinds of claims about the state of nature that self-regulating free marketers posit. Instead, he finds a world of evidence that free markets were human artifacts, created and maintained entirely by government intervention. The chapters that detail Polanyi's argument can be a bit heavy going, but they are crucial to his overall argument.
Polanyi makes two central claims about the myth of the self-regulating free market. The first is that in its essential nature it is utopian and nonhistorical. It is utopian in that it describes not the world as it ever has been or ever could be, but a fantasy that exists only in the minds of its adherents. It is a powerful myth because whenever one points to the failures and shortcomings of attempts to promote free market principles, its adherents reply by insisting that the market hasn't yet been made pure enough. If only we decrease government involvement, further reduce regulation, remove restrictions on the kinds of compacts companies can form with one another, further gut the power of trade unions, and so forth, we will see the birth of a glorious new economic world in which all will be right in the world and God will be on his throne. But as Polanyi argues, not only has such a creature as a self-regulating free market economy never existed, it never could. In fact, what has passed for self-regulating markets has in fact been the result of drastic and pervasive government intervention. Additional interventions take place to protect society as a whole from the damage that a self-regulating economy inflicts on the citizenry as a whole.
The second major point that Polanyi makes is that of embeddedness: any economic system is embedded in society as a whole, with a host of moral, political, and religious values that are not primarily economic in nature. The self-regulating free marketers would somehow wish for an economic system that is distinct from and separated from those values; that is, an economic system that is not embedded. But such a thing, Polanyi argues, is impossible. This is another reason why belief in a self-regulating free market is a sheer fantasy: it is predicated on a host of impossible situations being possible. As the effects of a self-regulating free market occur, society intervenes to counteract the harmful effects of that economy. For instance, workers compensation is neither required nor desirable by pure free market principles. The same is true for unemployment insurance or anti-trust legislation. Or pollution standards. There is no question that keeping a plant from polluting is an interference with the market, but this is an example of noneconomic values trumping economic ones.
The basic dilemma of free market capitalism has always been this: is an economic system that generates a great deal of wealth for a society as a whole but concentrates most of that wealth in the hands of a few people, leaving most with less than they would have in a different economic system, a good economic system? Most of us would say no. Even free marketers would have to concede this, which is why they have had to concoct articles of faith (though not of fact) such as the trickle down theory. "Trickle down" has been debunked repeatedly over the years, both in theory and reality, but perhaps never so eloquently as by Will Rogers. Some people, he said, thought gold water like water: put it at the top and it will trickle down to everyone below. But, he went on, gold wasn't like water at all; put it at the top and it just stays there. Polanyi's book gives meat to the question of whether one would prefer a society where a very large amount of profit were concentrated in the hands of a very small number of people (essentially the situation in the United States today) or a somewhat smaller overall amount distributed more equitably among al the people. Yes, the few who profited under the former would have less, but the vast majority would have more.
I want to question one reviewer below who says that Polanyi doesn't understand the essential nature of the free market. I find that an amazing statement. The reason that the myth of the self-regulating free market has spread so easily and widely is that it is so incredibly easy to understand. What one can question is whether this easy-to-understand, perhaps simplistic, theory is right. We have no examples of self-regulating economies from history even though in the utopian fantasy one of the tenets is that it is the "natural" course of things. Of course Polanyi understands the theory he is criticizing. He just finds it naïve and silly. My only hope is that more people in the United States come to realize this. Ever since the election of Reagan in 1980, though in fact the tendency began under Jimmy Carter (most Americans don't seem to remember how conservative he was on economic matters, far more conservative than either Ford or Nixon), America has toyed with ideas promulgated by the free marketers. The result? Vast accumulation of wealth, especially in the financial markets despite the progressive decay in the industrial base, concentrated almost exclusively in the top 2% of the population. In fact, real wages for the vast majority of Americans has fallen since 1980, the percentage of the population to live below the poverty line has increased, and America has become the industrial nation with the greatest economic inequality.
My own fantasy is that more people would read Polanyi and fewer Hayek. I can understand why they don't. Hayek is easy to read and understand and feeds the fantasy that one can pursue economic advantage with no thought of the damage it might do; the invisible hand will take care of everything. Polanyi is difficult and complex and subtle and pricks a hole in the fantasy. Polanyi reminds us that economics has to be tempered by our values as a whole, that we cannot be reduced to economic animals. My fantasy--or is it a hope?--is that we as a society will come to care more for the welfare of the majority more than the welfare of the few. I would love to see a world in which our highest values did not have a price put upon them. | | The Great Transformation by Beacon Press Absolutely Brilliant | Polanyi's The Great Transformation is truly a masterpiece of historical analysis and social theory. Polanyi deftly uses his extensive knowledge of economic history, anthropology, and political theory to demonstrate the failure of "market society" and the myopia of those who believe that the "free" market is the answer to all social ills. He's at his best when he combines his historical analysis of 18th and 19th century capitalism -- an experiment with a free market economy that resulted in the Great Depression and world war -- with anthropological data showing that there is no innate human propensity to engage in trade or accumulate wealth at the expense of others. Conservatives and libertarians hate this book because it thoroughly undermines their claims that markets are natural, spontaneous, and reflect the uncoerced interaction of free agents; the reviewer below who gave it 1 star is a case in point (he argues that "Polanyi fails to understand the essential nature of a free market, voluntary trade for mutual benefit," but the problem isn't that Polanyi doesn't understand such a concept but rather that he shows it isn't true). Other critics like to misrepresent Polanyi's arguments and paint him as a Marxist, a romantic, or an opponent of modernity; in reality, he was merely pointing out how devastating it is when every aspect of human life is left up to the market, with its cold logic of efficiency.
The Great Transformation is an exceptionally lucid and well-researched study that should be required reading for anyone interested in economics, social theory, political history, or international relations. Some reviewers have suggested that the book is outdated, but anyone interested in the current debates surrounding free trade, the IMF/World Bank, or Social Security privatization would be wise to pick up a copy of this fascinating book. | | The Great Transformation by Beacon Press Mere Insinuation, but plausible, important and transcendant | Polanyi sets forth an incredibly relevant, radical, and all too plausible theory in this book.
Going beyond a mere analysis of how the market system functions, Polanyi endeavors to answer the question as to how the market came about. Polanyi's answer will not be pleasing to libertarians, he argues that a free land and labor market can only come about through government intervention, and must be sustained through further intervention. He also argues that the market ransforms the nature of social relations. Usually, economic relations were a result of social relations, under the market, it is the latter.
Polanyi attempts to show how a market for land and labor came about in Britain. His argument that government "enclosures" created it through dislodging the poor and turning their land into sources of economic production is convincing. However, other arguments Polanyi advances simply demonstrate a central government repealing the interventions of subaltern governments.
Polanyi's argument that there was no "rent-seeking" (he doesn't use that term) involved in the enactment of state intervion in the economy ("proving" that this intervention was objectively necessary is suspect. One 19th century investigators conclusions don't serve to overturn the implications of public choice theory.
The greatest problem with this book is that Polanyi doesn't do too much to back up his arguments. He fortunately has a section called "notes and sources" where he lists his research material, but I'd wager that most of this is difficult to find 60 years later. | | The Great Transformation by Beacon Press Product Description | | One of the twentieth century's most thorough and discerning historians, Karl Polanyi sheds "new illumination on . . . the social implications of a particular economic system, the market economy that grew into full stature in the nineteenth century." -R. M. MacIver |
| |
