Capital, Economic Crises, Institutions and History

Abstract

This article examines different ways of “doing” heterodox political economy by way of “book plans” for “principles and practices” volumes (and articles). First, the Uno Japanese School method is scrutinized, as utilized by Robert Albritton and John Bell; starting with [a] the pure theory of “capital”; followed by [b] stages of evolution including institutions; and concluding with [c] political economy history. Second, this is compared with the methods of Michael Lebowitz and David Harvey, who both seek to interpenetrate within discourse the [i] the principles of “capital,” with more concrete issues such as [ii] wage labor, [iii] landed property, [iv] state, and [v] the uneven world economy and crises. Third, the Japanese School, Lebowitz, and Harvey methods are compared vis-à-vis both Karl Marx’s “Book Plans” and explanations of the 2008-14 crises of capitalism (deep recessions, debt crises). Fourth, I introduce other plans, such as those developed by Samuel Bowles, Howard Sherman, and Danny Mackinnon (and coauthors), respectively. One of these such plans starts with [1] history and institutions; followed by [2] capitalism and the surplus; linking this with [3] social structures of accumulation, community, and state; and last adding [4] policy/governance plus alternative systems and institutions. The significance of these various book plans for the future of heterodox political economy is then outlined.