代写范文

留学资讯

写作技巧

论文代写专题

服务承诺

资金托管
原创保证
实力保障
24小时客服
使命必达

51Due提供Essay,Paper,Report,Assignment等学科作业的代写与辅导,同时涵盖Personal Statement,转学申请等留学文书代写。

51Due将让你达成学业目标
51Due将让你达成学业目标
51Due将让你达成学业目标
51Due将让你达成学业目标

私人订制你的未来职场 世界名企,高端行业岗位等 在新的起点上实现更高水平的发展

积累工作经验
多元化文化交流
专业实操技能
建立人际资源圈

Assignment代写:American institutionalism and marxism

2018-09-21 来源: 51due教员组 类别: 更多范文

下面为大家整理一篇优秀的assignment代写范文- American institutionalism and marxism,供大家参考学习,这篇论文讨论了美国制度主义与马克思主义。美国制度主义的初始思想是在本能的基础上对达尔文进化理念与贝拉米关于资本主义批判思想的结合。长期以来,美国制度主义与马克思主义之间一直保持着密,两者拥有很多相同之处,而这些相似性构成了两者长期对话的基础。

American institutionalism,marxism,assignment代写,paper代写,美国作业代写

For a long time, American institutionalism and marxism have kept a close and incisive theoretical dialogue, which focuses on the comparison of differences or comprehensive attempts, but fails to pay attention to the continuous problems caused by this dialogue. In fact, American institutionalism has much in common with marxism in terms of social values, institution-technology dichotomy, power-conflict. These similarities form the basis of a long conversation between the two.

Few schools of thought have been as communicative and conversational as American institutionalism and marxism for more than a century. Despite their differences, American institutionalists seem to have a lot to do with Marx, whether they support or criticize, whether they discuss methodology or concrete ideas. Contemporary followers of van buren still have a strong interest in Marx: was Marx a determinist or an institutionalist who ignored the underlying logic of capitalism? Do Dewey's instrumentalism and Marx's dialectics have common basis? On the question of social change, how much do marxism and institutionalism have in common? Scholars often obsess about the differences between marxism and institutionalism, or try to remake an integrated idea that is acceptable to both sides, such as marxist institutionalist economics. But it tends to miss the question: what is it about American institutionalism and marxism that makes such a persistent dialogue possible? Steven Sue clay wrote: "system" has always advocated the historical analysis, so as an economist and philosopher Marx system has been the main focus of the field." But that explanation doesn't explain - why Marx, not other economists and philosophers?

There are at least two reasons for the close and enduring relationship between American institutionalism and marxism. First, American institutionalism was deeply influenced by marxism in its origin period. Second, in some views supported by social value proposition, marxism and institutionalism have strong resonance despite certain differences. In the conflict between technology and system, the use value and value of contradictions, class and power caused by the unfair phenomenon, both have many similarities, which determines their attitude towards capitalism is always critical, it is this similarity, the ultimate value judgment about issues to make the system of marxism and socialist by western mainstream economists labeled the "radical" or "left".

The author of American institutionalism is undoubtedly van buren. It is generally believed that van buren's thought is "a combination of Darwin's ideas of evolution and Bellamy's critical thoughts of capitalism on the basis of instinct". But hodgson, in combing through van buren's thoughts, said nothing about Bellamy, instead arguing that "the constant communication with Marx was an important source of van buren's thoughts... A feverish reading of Marx undoubtedly had a major impact on van buren's thinking." White mills and even wrote: "We can put all bollen study as he told the American academic of marxism transformation at a time." Van buren himself made no secret of his admiration for Marx's theoretical system: "there is no economic theory more logical than Marx's." According to doffman's statistics, during his tenure as editor of the journal of political economy from 1'893 to 1897, van buren published a total of 21 articles, 11 of which involved commentary on socialist and marxist writings. According to hodgson, some of the key points in van buren's thought were inspired by Marx. It was Marx's idea of time asymmetry about individuals and structures that led van buren to develop the idea of custom before individual. Therefore, habit is regarded as the focus of theoretical analysis, and van buren's natural selection of institution is also inspired by Marx's economic crisis theory.

As the other pole of veblen-ailes tradition, there are also obvious marks of Marx in ailes' thought. Hodgson commented: "another possible precursor to the ailes dichotomy is Marx... We can read ailes's theory of economic progress as a sanitized American version of Marx's theory of economic development If we substitute 'technology' for 'productivity' or 'material productivity' and 'institution' for 'social relations' or' productive relations', we can turn some of Marx's arguments to ayers. Thus, the dichotomy of institution and technology can find the closest antecedent in Marx's portrayal of the productivity-production relationship." Not only in the role of technology in social development of the role of Marx and Marx, but also in the underlying causes of the capitalist economic crisis, ailes and Marx are similar. Although the concept of exploitation and surplus value is not used, the crisis theory expressed by ailes in the question of economic order is basically consistent with that of Marx. He recognized that the roots of the U.S. recession lie in the fact that incomes of high earners have risen much more than those of lower income groups, and that a collapse in demand caused by the inequitable distribution of income would inevitably lead to depression. After ayres, Tours, and foster and system in the United States, bush doctrine of every bollen innovate traditional ayres, although they generally follows all bollen - ayers pioneered the dichotomy of tradition, but also in many places show the trace of Marx: foster the function of the category and structure principle is closer to the action and reaction between Marx's description of the productivity of a production relations, and George Bush in the distinction between the method of "behavior" concept also reflects the dialectic thinking.

Van buren's early criticism of marxism, such as the theory of presupposition of purpose, technical determinism and class struggle theory, had a profound impact on the institutionalists. In 2001, the debate between institutionalism and marxism held by the research center of institutional economics of the university of hertfordshire in the UK focused on the differences between the two ideas. At the meeting, hodgson and corinne debated as representatives of institutionalism and marxism respectively. Both sides acknowledge that institutionalism and marxism are in agreement on the following two points: first, they both recognize the importance of agency and structure issues, and they both believe that one of them cannot be completely reduced to the other; Second, both of them recognize the importance of historical specificity and focus on the dynamic, complex and chaotic nature of economic processes. For hodgson for lack of motivity theory of criticism of capitalism, Marx colin nikos retort, points out that Marx is not didn't explain the power of the development of capitalism, the answer is obvious, that is the competition between profit-seeking capital, capitalism is a process of an unlimited expansion of capital, the expansion of this logic depends on the variety of system background. The institutionalists focus too much on the process of capitalism itself, especially the technology, power and individuals in the process, but ignore the inherent logic of the capitalist mode of production, which is highlighted by the fact that their research seldom involves the process of how capitalism is generated and the process of capital accumulation. George Lange Royce evolutionary economics in the 2008 European conference on the tip of a hit the nail on the head: "institutionalism emphasizes the philosophy foundation, but have not developed a theory of capitalism itself."

How to integrate the two thoughts is also the concern of the institutionalists and marxists. For a long time, what the institutionalists have resisted most about marxism is that there is a decisive force in Marx's theory, whether it is the determination of a single factor or the constraint of structure on individual initiative. For the marxists, whether the institutionalists can maintain a critical color is their concern. A compromise that both sides can accept is to retain the critical and radical colors while diluting the unidirectional deterministic thinking. This synthesis is embodied in some western neo-marxism, among which Sherman's new critical marxism and althusser's structure marxism are especially representative. Sherman replaced the concept of Marx's division method of economic base ~ floor building, and proposed the "connection-history method". Among them, "connectedness" emphasized organic integrity and mutual influence, and "history" emphasized time specificity. New critical marxism and institutionalism agree on many issues, such as opposing technical, psychological, economic and any other form of reductionism. System, William doug in evaluating Sherman's "reconstruction of marxism" when he wrote: "the book is exciting for institutional economists, this is with full use of the evolution and the overall method of marxism." And the structuralist marxism represented by althusser is also favored because its pluralistic determinism is consistent with the emerging philosophy highly praised by the institutionalists. According to kulengberg, the hyper-determinism of structuralist marxist school is a way of combining institutionalism with marxism, and a kind of marxist institutionalist economics. According to him, althusser found a non-economic determinism or teleological interpretation for marxist philosophy, which enabled marxist philosophy to grasp the complex changes in the real society.

The institutionalism, more accurately, a mundane bollen ayers this the reason why the tradition of American system can retain, so in the process of long-term development and the dialogue and exchanges of marxism, is that they on view claims that there are a certain basis, for the same social and economic system, to make such a similar conclusion and proposition, this is not an accident.

51due留学教育原创版权郑重声明:原创assignment代写范文源自编辑创作,未经官方许可,网站谢绝转载。对于侵权行为,未经同意的情况下,51Due有权追究法律责任。主要业务有assignment代写、essay代写、paper代写服务。

51due为留学生提供最好的assignment代写服务,亲们可以进入主页了解和获取更多assignment代写范文 提供美国作业代写服务,详情可以咨询我们的客服QQ:800020041。

上一篇:Assignment代写:The world economi 下一篇:Assignment代写:The possibility o