No abstract

No abstract

Recent changes in capitalism, especially the increasing role of the state, have brought up the question of the relationship of these changes to the general theory of capitalism. This also applies to a theory such as Marx's critique of political economy. The critique of political economy can be viewed as a theory which exposes the basic nature of the capitalist mode of production: it is the theory of a specific -the capitalist -social formation. The specificity of capitalism finds explanation in its predominant value and capital relations. Now, in the presentation of the critique of political economy, in Marx Capital , one should place emphasis on certain methodological solutions. In the first place, the presentation proceeds from the most abstract concepts to the most concrete, a movement which constitutes the crux of Marx's dialectic method. Secondly, we can distinguish between different levels in the presentation: the internal laws of capitalism and their mode of realization. This means that Marx not only revealed the laws of capitalism but also indicated how they find expression. In addition, it should be pointed out that Capital is not merely an abstract-logical discourse, rather we must also take into account, on the one hand, the relationship of the logical to the historical in Capital , and the laws of development which demonstrate the contradictory development of capitalism on the other.Monopoly theory has dealt with the question of how free competition was transformed into monopoly capitalism. This transformation is located on the level of the realization of the laws of capitalism, since the laws themselves (the internal nature of capitalism) do not change. In explaining the genesis of the monopoly it is necessary to analyze the exacerbation of the contradictions derived from capitalism's laws of development. Generally speaking, the question of the relationship of the historical development of the capitalist mode of production to the critique of political economy can be called the historicity problem. In its resolution, one must take into account the fact, first of all, that theories of the new stages of the development of capitalism have their own historical preconditions (in at The University of Iowa Libraries on June 15, 2015 asj.sagepub.com Downloaded from 370 particular, precursory empirical research), and secondly, that in spite of its pivotal position, the critique of political economy is not in itself sufficient for explaining transformations; it must be linked to other theories.

No abstract

T he Nordic model seems to be a familiar and well-defined concept today, yet we can find diverse interpretations of this famous model. For many, it refers to some kind of normative and idealized picture of a good society, uniting economic efficiency and social equity in the best possible way. For some scholars and politicians, it is rather an analytical tool to summarize the common characteristics of the economic, social, and political developments in five countries in the North of Europe. And for some researchers, it is difficult to find only a single Nordic model, and therefore they prefer to use the plural, that is, five different Nordic models, which however share some basic commonalities. Needless to say, all standpoints can be defended, and it depends on the type of approach in question which alternative is chosen. In the present, more analytical context, the common characteristics of the model are emphasized, although also differences between the Nordic countries are taken into account in many connections. The NordMod2030 publication, entitled "The Nordic model towards 2030. A new Chapter?", is based on the work of a Nordic research project that has highlighted how national and international developments have affected the Nordic countries, how the challenges have been met, and what is to be expected in the future. In particular, the project is closely connected with the labor movement, and in addition to the analysis, the report identifies main challenges to the Nordic labor movement. In this review, the emphasis will be on the more analytical part of the publication. The publication is the project's final report, summarizing the results and insights from the 17 subreports of the so-called NordMod project. These subreports, including many reports in English, are also interesting to read. Since "NordMod2030" tries to identify the evolution, current difficulties, and future challenges of the Nordic model as a whole, issues relating to the working life are not alone at the center of the analysis. However, these issues form one of the three basic pillars of the model, as understood in the research project, and are connected to the other pillars in a systematic way. Thus, we find macroeconomic governance, organized working life, and extensive welfare systems as the three basic pillars of the Nordic model. Strong institutions have laid the basis for coordination between different policy fields in which cooperation between the social partners and political authorities has played a central role. Moreover, crises and conflicts in working life and politics have often been tackled through broad compromise. This is what the authors call "conflict partnership,"