The Demise of Radical Political Economics? An Essay on the Evolution of a Theory of Capitalist Production
The paper traces the historical development of American radical economics. The focus is on the work of Samuel Bowles and Herbert Gintis. The central aim is to examine the implications of their recent move towards neoclassical economics for the study of capitalist production in particular, and the future of American radical economics more generally. By embracing neoclassical concepts and methodology, radical economists have denied themselves the opportunity to elucidate both the bases of capitalist class conflict, and the nature of more complex social interactions at the point of production. American radical economics once provided a powerful critique of capitalism and its system of production, but it now struggles to provide more than a policy prescription for reduced levels of opportunism among individual workers. American radical economics cannot remain a distinctive voice in economics while it retains such close associations with neoclassicism. Copyright 2000 by Oxford University Press.
To our knowledge, this item is not available for
download. To find whether it is available, there are three
1. Check below under "Related research" whether another version of this item is available online.
2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.
Volume (Year): 24 (2000)
Issue (Month): 5 (September)
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: Oxford University Press, Great Clarendon Street, Oxford OX2 6DP, UK|
Fax: 01865 267 985
Web page: http://www.cje.oupjournals.org/
|Order Information:||Web: http://www.oup.co.uk/journals|
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Samuel Bowles, 1998. "Endogenous Preferences: The Cultural Consequences of Markets and Other Economic Institutions," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 36(1), pages 75-111, March.
- Nicolaides, Phedon, 1988. "Limits to the Expansion of Neoclassical Economics," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 12(3), pages 313-28, September.
- Herbert Gintis, 1972. "A Radical Analysis of Welfare Economics and Individual Development," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 86(4), pages 572-599.
- John E. Roemer, 1979. "Divide and Conquer: Microfoundations of a Marxian Theory of Wage Discrimination," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 10(2), pages 695-705, Autumn.
- McCloskey,Deirdre N., 1994. "Knowledge and Persuasion in Economics," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521436038, October.
- Costabile, Lilia, 1995. "Institutions, Social Custom and Efficiency Wage Models: Alternative Approaches," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 19(5), pages 605-23, October.
- Terence Hutchison, 1998. "Ultra-deductivism from Nassau Senior to Lionel Robbins and Daniel Hausman," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 5(1), pages 43-91.
- McCloskey,Deirdre N., 1994. "Knowledge and Persuasion in Economics," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521434751, October.
- Rebitzer, James B, 1993. "Radical Political Economy and the Economics of Labor Markets," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 31(3), pages 1394-434, September.
- Edwards, P. K., 1990. "The politics of conflict and consent : How the labor contract really works," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 13(1), pages 41-61, January.
- Hodgson, Geoffrey M., 1998. "Competence and contract in the theory of the firm," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 35(2), pages 179-201, April.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:cambje:v:24:y:2000:i:5:p:543-64. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Oxford University Press)or (Christopher F. Baum)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.