土耳其特色新自由主义下的国家资产阶级关系

IF 0.9 4区 社会学 0 PHILOSOPHY
Umut Bozkurt
{"title":"土耳其特色新自由主义下的国家资产阶级关系","authors":"Umut Bozkurt","doi":"10.1163/1569206X-12341935","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nThis article aims to analyse state–bourgeoisie relations in the era of AKP-rule in Turkey, with a specific focus on the 2018 economic crisis. It will discuss the following question: How did the AKP regime position itself with respect to the interests of the first- and second-generation bourgeoisie? Especially after 2010, the AKP was criticised for carrying out an extra-economic intervention in the sphere of accumulation as well as providing benefits to the Islamic second-generation bourgeoisie. This article draws on a Marxist conceptualisation of the state which underlines that the state’s autonomy from the economy is limited because its continued existence depends on the reproduction of accumulation, hence its need to intervene. However, the state cannot implement a unified interventionist strategy because it needs to maintain links with different groups of bourgeoisie as well as the proletariat. The article’s main argument is that the AKP struggled to balance the divergent interests of the first- and second-generation bourgeoisie and implemented policies that may be characterised as incoherent and contradictory. These contradictory policies also played an important role in the 2018 economic crisis.","PeriodicalId":46231,"journal":{"name":"Historical Materialism-Research in Critical Marxist Theory","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2021-07-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"State–Bourgeoisie Relations under Neoliberalism with Turkish Characteristics\",\"authors\":\"Umut Bozkurt\",\"doi\":\"10.1163/1569206X-12341935\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\nThis article aims to analyse state–bourgeoisie relations in the era of AKP-rule in Turkey, with a specific focus on the 2018 economic crisis. It will discuss the following question: How did the AKP regime position itself with respect to the interests of the first- and second-generation bourgeoisie? Especially after 2010, the AKP was criticised for carrying out an extra-economic intervention in the sphere of accumulation as well as providing benefits to the Islamic second-generation bourgeoisie. This article draws on a Marxist conceptualisation of the state which underlines that the state’s autonomy from the economy is limited because its continued existence depends on the reproduction of accumulation, hence its need to intervene. However, the state cannot implement a unified interventionist strategy because it needs to maintain links with different groups of bourgeoisie as well as the proletariat. The article’s main argument is that the AKP struggled to balance the divergent interests of the first- and second-generation bourgeoisie and implemented policies that may be characterised as incoherent and contradictory. These contradictory policies also played an important role in the 2018 economic crisis.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46231,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Historical Materialism-Research in Critical Marxist Theory\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-07-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"4\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Historical Materialism-Research in Critical Marxist Theory\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1163/1569206X-12341935\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"PHILOSOPHY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Historical Materialism-Research in Critical Marxist Theory","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/1569206X-12341935","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

摘要

本文旨在分析土耳其正义与发展党统治时代的国家与资产阶级关系,特别关注2018年的经济危机。它将讨论以下问题:正义与发展党政权如何看待第一代和第二代资产阶级的利益?特别是在2010年之后,正义与发展党因在积累领域进行额外的经济干预以及为伊斯兰第二代资产阶级提供利益而受到批评。这篇文章借鉴了马克思主义对国家的概念,强调国家从经济中的自主性是有限的,因为它的持续存在取决于积累的再生产,因此它需要干预。但是,国家不能实行统一的干涉主义战略,因为它需要同不同的资产阶级和无产阶级保持联系。文章的主要论点是,正义与发展党努力平衡第一代和第二代资产阶级的不同利益,并实施了可能被描述为不连贯和矛盾的政策。这些相互矛盾的政策在2018年的经济危机中也发挥了重要作用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
State–Bourgeoisie Relations under Neoliberalism with Turkish Characteristics
This article aims to analyse state–bourgeoisie relations in the era of AKP-rule in Turkey, with a specific focus on the 2018 economic crisis. It will discuss the following question: How did the AKP regime position itself with respect to the interests of the first- and second-generation bourgeoisie? Especially after 2010, the AKP was criticised for carrying out an extra-economic intervention in the sphere of accumulation as well as providing benefits to the Islamic second-generation bourgeoisie. This article draws on a Marxist conceptualisation of the state which underlines that the state’s autonomy from the economy is limited because its continued existence depends on the reproduction of accumulation, hence its need to intervene. However, the state cannot implement a unified interventionist strategy because it needs to maintain links with different groups of bourgeoisie as well as the proletariat. The article’s main argument is that the AKP struggled to balance the divergent interests of the first- and second-generation bourgeoisie and implemented policies that may be characterised as incoherent and contradictory. These contradictory policies also played an important role in the 2018 economic crisis.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
27
期刊介绍: Historical Materialism is an interdisciplinary journal dedicated to exploring and developing the critical and explanatory potential of Marxist theory. The journal started as a project at the London School of Economics from 1995 to 1998. The advisory editorial board comprises many leading Marxists, including Robert Brenner, Maurice Godelier, Michael Lebowitz, Justin Rosenberg, Ellen Meiksins Wood and others. Marxism has manifested itself in the late 1990s from the pages of the Financial Times to new work by Fredric Jameson, Terry Eagleton and David Harvey. Unburdened by pre-1989 ideological baggage, Historical Materialism stands at the edge of a vibrant intellectual current, publishing a new generation of Marxist thinkers and scholars.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信