Including a Symposium on Robert Heilbroner at 100最新文献

Heilbroner on Capital and Capitalism (But Overlooking Finance) 论资本与资本主义(但忽略了金融)

Including a Symposium on Robert Heilbroner at 100 Pub Date : 2019-10-15 DOI: 10.1108/s0743-41542019000037c008

E. Nell

引用次数: 0

On Karl Marx’s Evolutionary Credentials and the Marx–Mill Intellectual Relationship 论马克思的进化论理论与马克思—穆勒的思想关系

Including a Symposium on Robert Heilbroner at 100 Pub Date : 2019-10-15 DOI: 10.1108/s0743-41542019000037c005

S. Hollander

{"title":"On Karl Marx’s Evolutionary Credentials and the Marx–Mill Intellectual Relationship","authors":"S. Hollander","doi":"10.1108/s0743-41542019000037c005","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1108/s0743-41542019000037c005","url":null,"abstract":"The view of Karl Marx as “revolutionary” endorsing violent overturn of the capitalist system is standard textbook fare filtering through to popular and professional opinion. John Stuart Mill specialists frequently contrast their subject with Marx in this regard. The perspective on Marx as “revolutionary” is unconvincing, for Marx was no less “evolutionary” than Mill, his version of evolution reflecting concern that reformist measures to correct perceived injustices in the capitalist-exchange system might assure its permanence, and extending to the stage following a proletarian political takeover which might itself occur by way of democratic voting enabled by extensions of the franchise accorded by the capitalist state itself. Our demonstration prefaces a speculative evaluation of Mill’s stance regarding Marx – “speculative” since Mill apparently never read Capital. In particular, Mill would doubtless have welcomed Marx’s position, for to differentiate him from the continental “revolutionaries” makes excellent sense considering his principle that when it comes to prediction all depends on ruling circumstances coupled with his evolutionism including allowance after a proletarian takeover of a residual capitalist sector, income inequality, and compensation of expropriated property owners. By the same token he would have found unpalatable Marx’s vision for a more distant communism of a central-controlled system.","PeriodicalId":300015,"journal":{"name":"Including a Symposium on Robert Heilbroner at 100","volume":"80 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-10-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"131733819","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Robert Heilbroner and Keynesian Public Finance 罗伯特·海尔布朗与凯恩斯公共财政

Including a Symposium on Robert Heilbroner at 100 Pub Date : 2019-10-15 DOI: 10.1108/s0743-41542019000037c004

S. Pressman

{"title":"Robert Heilbroner and Keynesian Public Finance","authors":"S. Pressman","doi":"10.1108/s0743-41542019000037c004","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1108/s0743-41542019000037c004","url":null,"abstract":"This paper focuses on two books that Robert Heilbroner wrote with Peter Bernstein on public finance – A Primer on Government Spending (1963) and The Debt and the Deficit (1989). It also discusses how the economic world changed between the early 1960s and the late 1980s, and how these changes affected their books. Primer introduced Keynesian economics, and the possibility that government policy and deficits could be forces for good in the world. Debt focused exclusively on government deficits and public debt. Changing circumstances made this work a more difficult undertaking. During the late 1950s and early 1960s, government budget deficits were small, growth was sluggish, and Keynesianism was the dominant paradigm in macroeconomics. Primer explained Keynesian public finance, why tax cuts would spur spending and growth, and why we should not worry about government debt under these circumstances. By the 1980s, Keynes was vanquished, deficits were ballooning, and Keynesian public finance was under attack. Contrary to the conventional wisdom at the time, Debt advocated government deficits along the lines proposed by Keynes but not along the lines enacted during the Reagan administration. Nonetheless, there were many similarities in these two works. Both made a case for an active government role in creating a good society; and both argued that when done correctly deficit spending created no economic problems and had many benefits.","PeriodicalId":300015,"journal":{"name":"Including a Symposium on Robert Heilbroner at 100","volume":"30 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-10-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"128031290","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Introduction to a Symposium on Robert Heilbroner at 100 罗伯特·海尔布朗100岁研讨会导言

Including a Symposium on Robert Heilbroner at 100 Pub Date : 2019-10-15 DOI: 10.1108/s0743-41542019000037c002

L. Fiorito

引用次数: 0

Prelims 预备考试

Including a Symposium on Robert Heilbroner at 100 Pub Date : 2019-10-15 DOI: 10.1108/s0743-41542019000037c001

引用次数: 0

Social Stratification, Hereditarianism, and Eugenics. A Harvard Tale☆ 社会分层、遗传主义和优生学。哈佛的故事☆

Including a Symposium on Robert Heilbroner at 100 Pub Date : 2019-10-15 DOI: 10.1108/s0743-41542019000037c006

L. Fiorito

{"title":"Social Stratification, Hereditarianism, and Eugenics. A Harvard Tale\u0000☆","authors":"L. Fiorito","doi":"10.1108/s0743-41542019000037c006","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1108/s0743-41542019000037c006","url":null,"abstract":"This chapter documents how eugenics, scientific racism, and hereditarianism survived at Harvard well into the interwar years. In the late 1920s and early 1930s, Thomas Nixon Carver and Frank W. Taussig published works in which they established a close nexus between an individual’s economic position and his biological fitness. Carver, writing in 1929, argued that social class rigidities are attributable to the inheritance of superior and inferior abilities on the respective social class levels and proposed an “economic test of fitness” as a eugenic criterion to distinguish worthy from unworthy individuals. In 1932, Taussig, together with Carl Smith Joslyn, published American Business Leaders – a study that showed how groups with superior social status are proportionately much more productive of professional and business leaders than are the groups with inferior social status. Like Carver, Taussig and Joslyn attributed this circumstance primarily to hereditary rather than environmental factors. Taussig, Joslyn, and Carver are not the only protagonists of our story. The Russian-born sociologists Pitirim Alexandrovich Sorokin, who joined the newly established Department of Sociology at Harvard in 1930, also played a crucial role. His book Social Mobility (1927) exercised a major influence on both Taussig and Carver and contributed decisively to the survival of eugenic and hereditarian ideas at Harvard in the 1930s.","PeriodicalId":300015,"journal":{"name":"Including a Symposium on Robert Heilbroner at 100","volume":"54 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-10-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"124265441","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 1