Journals / Akdeniz İİBF Dergisi / 2010 / Cilt: 10 - Sayı: 19

Accumulation and crisis: A radical approach

Birikim ve kriz: Radikal bir yaklaşım

Pages
183–214
Publication Date
2022-10-11
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Affected by different theoric backgrounds, the theory presents an alternative approach in order to understand the stages of capitalist development, the capital accumulation and the crisis.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The objective of this article is to examine the social structure of accumulation theory that presents an alternative approach to the matter of capital accumulation and crisis.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Social structure of accumulation theory claims that a relatively rapid and stable long term capital accumulation could only be possible with the institutional structures that support accumulation.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Affected by different theoric backgrounds, the theory presents an alternative approach in order to understand the stages of capitalist development, the capital accumulation and the crisis.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

The objective of this article is to examine the social structure of accumulation theory that presents an alternative approach to the matter of capital accumulation and crisis. Social structure of accumulation theory claims that a relatively rapid and stable long term capital accumulation could only be possible with the institutional structures that support accumulation. The central concept of the theory is “the social structures of accumulation’’. This concept defines a specific institutional structure which surrounds the process of capital accumulation. Social structure of accumulation theory maintains that the rapid and relatively stable capital accumulation stage of capitalism is related to a different social structure of accumulation. Affected by different theoric backgrounds, the theory presents an alternative approach in order to understand the stages of capitalist development, the capital accumulation and the crisis.

Özet

Bu makalenin amacı sermaye birikimi ve kriz konusunda alternatif bir yaklaşım sunan Birikimin Toplumsal Yapısı Teorisini incelenmektir. Birikimin Toplumsal Yapısı teorisi görece hızlı ve istikrarlı bir uzun dönem sermaye birikiminin bunu destekleyen kurumsal yapılarla mümkün olabileceğini öne sürmektedir. Teorinin merkezi kavramı “birikimin toplumsal yapısı”dır. Bu kavram, sermaye birikim sürecini çevreleyen belirli bir kurumsal yapıyı tanımlamaktadır. Birikimin Toplumsal Yapısı teorisi kapitalizmin hızlı ve göreli istikrarlı sermaye birikim aşamasının farklı bir birikimin toplumsal yapısıyla ilişkili olduğunu iddia etmektedir. Farklı iktisadi geleneklerden beslenen teori, kapitalist gelişme aşamalarının, sermaye birikiminin ve krizin anlaşılması için alternatif bir çerçeve sunmaktadır.

🔖

Cite This Article

AKYOL, S. (2022). Accumulation and crisis: A radical approach. Akdeniz İİBF Dergisi, Cilt: 10 - Sayı: 19, 183–214. https://ajindex.com/articles/433169

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (17)

  1. BOWLES, S. GORDON, D. M. ve WEISSKOPF, T (1986) “Power and Profits: The Social Structure of Accumulation and the Profitability of the Postwar U.S Economy” Review of Radical Political Economics, 18(1-2), 132-67.
  2. BOWLES, S. GORDON, D. M. ve WEISSKOPF, T. (1984) Beyond the Wasteland: A Democratic Alternative to Economic Decline, NJ:Anchor Press,
  3. Garden City. BOWLES, S. GORDON, D.M. ve WEISSKOPF, T. (1989) “Business Ascendancy and Economic Impasse: A Structural Retrospective on Conservative Economics, 1979-87”, Journal of Economic Perspective, 3 (1):107-134.
  4. BOWLES, S. GORDON, D.M. ve WEISSKOPF, T. (1990) After the Waste Land A Democratic Economics for the Year 2000,
  5. New York, M.E. Sharpe. BOWLES, S. ve WEISSKOPF, T. (1999) “David M. Gordon: Radical Political Economist and Activist (1944-1996)” Review of Radical Political Economics, 31(1): 1-15.
  6. BREVARMAN, H. (1974)
  7. Labor and Monopoly Capital, Monthly Review Press,
  8. New York. GORDON, D. M. (1978) “Up and Down the Long Roller Coaster ” Union for Radical Political Economics (der.), U.S Capitalism in Crisis içinde, Union for Radical Political Economics, New York, 22-35.
  9. GORDON, D. M. (1980) “Stages of Accumulation and Long Economic Cycles” T.Hopkins ve I.Wallerstein, Beverly Hills (der.) Processes of the World System içinde, Sage Publication, California, 9-45.
  10. GORDON, D. M. EDWARDS, R. ve REICH, M. (1982)
  11. Segmented Work, Divided Workers, Cambridge University Press,
  12. Cambridge. GORDON, D. M. EDWARDS, R. ve REICH, M. (1994) “Long Swing and stages of capitalism”, David Kotz; Michael Reich ve Thomas McDonough (der.), Social Structure of Accumulation içinde, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 11-28.
  13. GORDON, D. M. WEISSKOPF, T. ve BOWLES, S. (1987) “Power, Accumulation, and Crisis: The Rise and Demise of the Postwar Social Structure of Accumulation” Robert Cherry, C. D’Onofrio, Çiğdem Kurdaş, T.R. Michl, Fred Moseley, ve M.I. Naples (der.) The Imperiled Economy içinde, The Union for Radical Political Economics, New York, 43-57
  14. GÜLALP, H. (1989) “The Stages and long-Cycles of Capitalist Development”, Review of Radical Political Economics, 21 (4):83-92.
  15. HEİNTZ, J. (2002) “Political conflict and the social structure of accumulation: The case of South African apartheid” Review of Radical Political Economics, (34):319-326.
  16. JEONG, S. (1997) “The Social Structure of Accumulation in South Korea: Upgrading or Crumbling ?” Review of Radical Political Economics, 29 (4):92-112.
  17. JESSOP, B. (1990) “Regulation theories in retrospec