Socialism after Hayek (Advances in Heterodox Economics) | 
| Author: Theodore A. Burczak
Publisher: University of Michigan Press
Category: Book
List Price: $19.95
Buy New: $17.96
You Save: $1.99 (10%)
New (9) Used (7) from $14.95
Avg. Customer Rating:  1 reviews
Sales Rank: 851109
Media: Paperback
Number Of Items: 1
Pages: 184
Shipping Weight (lbs): 0.6
Dimensions (in): 9 x 6 x 0.6
ISBN: 0472069519
Dewey Decimal Number: 335
EAN: 9780472069514
ASIN: 0472069519
Publication Date: October 12, 2006
Availability: Usually ships in 24 hours
|
| Also Available In:
|
| Similar Items:
|
| Editorial Reviews:
Product Description
Socialism after Hayek recasts and reinvigorates the socialist quest for class justice by rendering it compatible with Hayek's social and economic theories. Theodore A. Burczak puts forth a conception of socialism from a postmodern perspective, drawing from the apparently opposing ideas of Marx and Hayek (the latter of whom achieved worldwide recognition in the twentieth century as a champion of the free market and fierce opponent of government interference in markets). Burczak sketches an institutional structure that would promote a democratic socialist notion of distributive justice and his own interpretation of Marx's notion of freely associated labor, while avoiding Hayek's criticisms of centrally planned socialism.
Burczak's version of market socialism is one in which privately owned firms are run democratically by workers, governments engage in ongoing redistribution of wealth to support human development, and markets are otherwise unregulated. Burczak poses this model of "free market socialism" against other models of socialism, especially those developed by John Roemer, Michael Albert, and Robin Hahnel.
"Burczakian socialism = (Hayek + Nussbaum + Sen + Ackerman + Resnick and Wolff) = Ellerman = legal-economic democracy. Brilliant! Burczak takes Hayek, his critics, and other social theorists and produces the foundations of a legal-economic order in which the concerns of most current thinkers are provided for. It is a deep, sustained, and brilliant achievement."
—Warren J. Samuels, Professor Emeritus, Economics Department, Michigan State University; former President of the History of Economics Society and the Association for Social Economics; coeditor of the Journal of Income Distribution; and author of over 40 books
"Theodore A. Burczak's Socialism after Hayek is a thoroughly researched and thoughtful examination not only of the ideological debate that framed the twentieth century, but of Hayek's intellectual framework. Burczak hopes for an economic framework that is both humanistic in its approach and humanitarian in its concern while being grounded in good reasons. The book should be on the reading list of every comparative political economist and in particular anyone who wants to take Hayek seriously, including those who would like to push Hayek's classical liberal politics toward the left in the twenty-first century. Burczak has made an outstanding contribution to the fields of political and economic thought and to Hayek studies in particular."
—Peter J. Boettke, Professor and Director of Graduate Studies, Department of Economics, George Mason University, Fairfax
"An advance well beyond the great 'socialist calculation debate.' Socialism after Hayek is both novel and challenging to contemporary Hayekian scholars. Burczak is the only scholar working in the post-Marxist tradition that thoroughly understands and appreciates the Hayekian critique of socialism. He is on his way to answering many of our long-held objections."
—Dave Prychitko, Department of Economics, Northern Michigan University
"One does not have to agree with all of Burczak's arguments to accept that he has developed a bold, creative and challenging response to the powerful Hayekian critique of socialism. Burczak wisely rejects the agoraphobia—literally the fear of markets—of many socialists, and focuses instead on the socialist goal of the abolition of exploitation. If this important book is read by both socialists and Hayekians, then there is a chance that debates on the viability of socialism may avoid some past pitfalls." —Geoffrey M. Hodgson, University of Hertfordshire, UK
"Provocative and expansive. An excellent book that deals in depth with the relevant literature, incorporating it into a new analysis of the question of socialism. . . . The scholarship is superior: Burczak integrates the works of Hayek and Marx to develop a new theory of justice and to provide a new way to think through the problems of a socialist economy."
—Stephen Cullenberg, Department of Economics, University of California, Riverside
"A brilliant, fair-minded approach to Marx, Hayek, Sen, and Nussbaum yields a needed socialist vision for the twenty-first century."
—Stephen Resnick, Department of Economics, University of Massachusetts
Theodore A. Burczak is Associate Professor of Economics at Denison University.
|
| Customer Reviews:
What Socialism would look like in a post-Hayekian world.... February 8, 2008
2 out of 3 found this review helpful
This fascinating book attempts to answer directly some of Hayek's penetrating criticisms of socialism in order to show that a socialist economic system still is viable, and perhaps even strengthened by Hayek's important insights. The author begins the book by describing Hayek as a postmodernist whose radical epistemology posits the limited and socially constituted nature of all human knowledge. This novel characterization serves two functions. On the one hand, it presents Hayek as a serious intellectual to leftist thinkers, since Hayek's work is traditionally associated with the Right (reactionary conservatism), while on the other hand, it reveals to Austrian economists how truly radical Hayek's views really were. All Austrians appreciate immensely Hayek's contributions to epistemology and economic theory, but none have gone so far as to call him a postmodernist. But Burczak's accurate and persuasive description of Hayek's thought clearly shows that his work can (and should) be identified as such.
The best part of the book are chapters 4 and 5 which attempt to criticize Hayek's views of the market and legal system expounded in chapters 2 and 3. With respect to Hayek's description the rule of the law in an economy, the author argues remarkably that Hayek was not wrong, but that he inconsistently applied his "postmodern epistemology" to this area of his work. The rule of law cannot function as a place for the discovery of universal principles which judges must articulate and apply impartially to judicial cases. Their interpretation and enforcement of laws must and always will be inescapably subjective. This criticism is fascinting because it simply extends Hayek's insights to an area in which Hayek wrote and shows that Hayek simply failed to recognize the implications of his own thinking. The legal system, the author concludes, must be "non-neutral". As the author correctly notes, "[i]t is impossible to separate market processes from the rules that shape their boundaries" (p. 45). Traditionally, Austrians have relied on Hayek's work in legal theory to argue how a just and fair legal system would give rise inexorably to an equitable economic order. Burczak's criticisms cast doubt on the tenability of Hayek's legal theory and, if taken seriously, would force Austrians to go back to the drawing board to try to improve this glaring deficiency in Austrian economics.
Again, what makes this book important as a postive critique of Hayek's work from a socialist position is that it takes Hayek's critique of central planning seriously, and recognizes the fragmented, limited, and socially constituted nature of human knowledge. However, although Burczak addresses this problem repeatedly throughout this book, he tries to directly confront it only once, and unsatisfactorily at that. Burczak sees Hayek's articulation of the knowledge problem as a "large epistemic burden" and feels compelled to try to respond to it. Again, although he repeatedly notes the seriousness of this insight for socialist economies, he tries to answer it directly only in one place. Here is his response to Hayek's very important "knowledge problem":
"one counter to Hayek's knowledge based
critique ... is intended to be 'vague'.
... As a vague guide to public policy
that admits the impossibility of human
perfectibility but nevertheless seeks
to improve welfare-promoting institutions
where feasible, it would appear possible
to encourage capability development without
necessarily destroying the market order" (p. 97).
Insisting that public policy be "vague" does not sufficiently counter Hayek's essential insight of the knowledge problem, namely how would those in control be able to "obtain the requisite knowledge"? A vague policy, while it would not require the explicit and complete articulation of policies, also would not be able to 'objectify' in an intelligible way the fundamentally subjective dimensions of human knowledge and expectations. The problem is how best to create an environment that encourages the discovery, coordination, and utilization of subjective and dispersed information. I am not so sure insisting on vague policies would accomplish this aim. In fact, vagueness, far from being unambiguous and certain, might even inhibit the process of coordination because it does not lead to predictability in "the range of acceptable behavior." As Hayek (and Burczak!) note, it is clarity and stability that "allow people to form reliable expectations about how others will be permitted to act, and these expectations are essential to guide individual action in a manner consistent with social coordination" (p. 46). Vague public policies would seem to be incredibly destructive of these ends, namely that of social cooperation and coordination.
The last two chapters (6 and 7) are positive analyses of socialism. While the author says some interesting things, such as the inalienability of individual will and responsibility, the author feels confident that his views are vindicated by his response to Hayek's "knowledge problem". However, as my observation above makes clear, I have my doubts about this.
This is a fascinating book that will appeal to erudite socialists and Austrian economists. I look forward to see what the young Ted Burczak does in the future.
|
|
|
