Polanyi

[marvenger]

Our thesis is that the idea of a self-adjusting market implied a stark
utopia. Such an institution could not exist for any length of time
without annihilating the human and natural substance of society; it
would have physically destroyed man and transformed his surroundings
into a wilderness. Inevitably, society took measures to protect

itself,

but whatever measures it took impaired the self-regulation of the market,

disorganized industrial life, and thus endangered society in yet another way.

Polanyi, The Great Transformation, p. 3 (emphasis added).




What do people think of these 3 sentences? Is the market self regulating and if it is is it reasonable to subject people completely to its vagaries? if there are some protections, we all know many EJ included are extremely sceptical due to unintended consequences; is it reasonable to try and strike some kind of balance between benefits of some protection for social reasons and negatives of protection against the self regulating economy? can this dynamic interplay, tweaking the level of protection be the end of history as far as society's organisation goes?

[aaron]

Re: Polanyi

In the U.S., things worked fine up until about 30 years ago. Whatever was changed, "enhanced", rolled back, or whatever... Needs to be re-implemented.

Or, I am just young and naive. Maybe things stunk in 1984 too.

[marvenger]

Re: Polanyi

well Polanyi would probably argue that there were pro-market market reforms in this period that helped free up the economy and make it run more smoothly.

So why did it change?

I think Polanyi would argue that his 3 ficticious commodities; land, labour and money would answer the question.

Capital markets need these three to be commodititised to function but they are not true commodities. You can try and force them to behave like commodities but they will not for an extended period.

As the society becomes more reliant on the market for its social reproduction and the breakdown of these ficticious commodities acting like commodities threatens the social reproduction, society then takes action to protect itself which further threatens the self adjusting mechanisms in the market and further threatens the social reproduction.

Polanyi argues that the inevitable breakdown of Laissez-faire policies post 1870 led to the protectionism and colonialism and the two great wars.

I like Polanyi because you can fit so much into it. ITulip is convinced that the sole problem is money and how its created and abused, well this fits with Polanyi in my opinion, but I've always had a problem with just thinking you can blame everything on that, but no matter even if its just money you are focusing on it still creates an intractible problem. That society becomes reliant on a system that cannot sustain itself, and the measures to correct the inevitable problems often make it worse.

Polanyi argues that society therefore cannot be reliant on the market for its reproduction, buti'd really like hear people's views.

[cindykimlisa]

Re: Polanyi

Our thesis is that the idea of a self-adjusting market implied a stark

utopia. Such an institution could not exist for any length of time
without annihilating the human and natural substance of society; it
would have physically destroyed man and transformed his surroundings
into a wilderness. Inevitably, society took measures to protect

itself,

but whatever measures it took impaired the self-regulation of the market,

disorganized industrial life, and thus endangered society in yet another way.

Polanyi, The Great Transformation, p. 3 (emphasis added).




What do people think of these 3 sentences? Is the market self regulating and if it is is it reasonable to subject people completely to its vagaries? if there are some protections, we all know many EJ included are extremely sceptical due to unintended consequences; is it reasonable to try and strike some kind of balance between benefits of some protection for social reasons and negatives of protection against the self regulating economy? can this dynamic interplay, tweaking the level of protection be the end of history as far as society's organisation goes?

The market can never be self regulating because of outside forces at play

1. Religions
2. Wars
3. Philosophies
4. Climate
5. 7 deadly Sins

Cindy

[marvenger]

Re: Polanyi

can you change these outside influences so market runs ina more self-regulating way, or is it that these forces are infact a part of the market, the market cannot exist without them. The distinction is important I think.