Political Economy and the outlook for capitalism (Paris): Economics and Prejudices

"Political Economy and the outlook for capitalism" is the title of the conference, which will be held between the 5th to 7th 2012 in Paris. The conference will be organized by

• French Association of Political Economy (FAPE)
• Association for Heterodox Economics (AHE)
• International Initiative for Promoting Political Economy (IIPPE)
• Groupement de Recherche Européen « Monnaie Banque Finance »
• Groupement de recherche international Développement des Recherches Économiques Euro-Méditerranéennes (DREEM) and
• l’Association pour le Développement des Etudes Keynésiennes (ADEK)

I will take part in the conference and speak about the topic "Economics and Prejudices". The follwing abstract would give you a short impression.

Economics and Prejudices (abstract): Most economic theories contain an idea of man, where people are rational and maximise their utility as well as avoid the hardship of labour. It is only a small step from such negative idea of man to the stereotypes of the welfare queen or the deadbeat dad. On the base of what Wilhelm Heitmeyer called “group-focused enmity”, this article tries to discuss to what extent discriminatory prejudices exist within the history of economic thoughts and in which way economic recommendations are related to negative stereotypes against poor people. [JEL: A12, A13, B00, B12, J30, Z10, Z13.]

Links "Political Economy and the outlook for capitalism"

Economics and Prejudices

Following the sociologist Wilhelm Heitmeyer, economistic attitudes are attended by negative stereotypes about social fringe groups. As a result they cause the Economisation and De-Solidarisation of the Society. Therefore, economists have a good reason to be worried about such findings because the complained economistic attitudes are exactly what every textbook of economics is teaching us.

From this perspective, it raises some important questions: Is the economic science a misanthrophic science? Does economics base on negative stereotypes such as described by Loïc Wacquant in “Punir les Pauvres” (Punishing the Poor)? What does the history of economic thoughts tell us about the relation of stereotypes and economic arguments? What are the ethical proplems in detail? Which approaches exist to solve such problems?

Literature: Thieme,  Sebastian (2013): Economics and misanthropy. In: Int. J. Management Concepts and Philosophy, Vol. 7, No. 2, pp.83–102.

Evolutionary Thinking

Since the 80′s of the 20′s century, a new economic discipline became more and more established. It’s name: Evolutionary Economics. This is associated with the work of scientists such as Richard R. Nelson, Sidney G. Winter, Ulrich Witt, Carsten Hermann-Pillath and Geoffrey M. Hodgson. However, the roots could be traced back to masterminds such as Thorstein Veblen, who has raised the question “Why is Economics Not an Evolutionary Science?” in 1898.

Today Evolutionary Economics is a very heterogeneous discipline, which is confronted with the “evolutionary” terms used by the opposing main stream of the economic science. This raises the question for the characteristics of evolutionary thinking. Especially in the light of the long history of scientific engagement in the change of culture and society: What is “evolutionary thinking”? What are the main differences to other economic disciplines? What’s the common ground with other disciplines such as sociology, philosophy and social anthropology, which constitutes multidisciplinarity?

Subsistence

Today, the term “subsistence” is mixed with different characteristics such as

• reproduction (of labour, life etc.)
• reciprocity
• cooperation
• self-sufficient production (production = consumtion)
• agriculture etc.

The term is also used as synonym for a meager livelihood in association with “subsistence wage” (a wage that only allows to scratch a living) or minimum wage (see Wikitionary and Merriam Websters Dictionary). The term is used, but it is typically not reflected.

Therefore I followed the original philosophical and theological meaning of “subsistence” and reconstructed two subsistence terms, where viability stands for keeping the current situation (existence) and subsistence describes the existence by itself (i. e. the ability for changing the current situation).

Based on these ideas, I research in:

• subsistence (and viability): the relevance within economies in general, subsistence and subsistence strategies within “modern” economies
• the right of subsistence (as moral principle)
• resistence: kinds of and ethical aspects
• the (ethical) implications for minimum wage, working poor (low wage sector), “unconditional” basic income, right to work, squatting, land grabbing etc.

A lot of these aspects were analysed within my doctoral thesis “The Right of Subsistence: Term, Economic Traditions and Consequences” (written in German; Das Subsistenzrecht: Begriff, ökonomische Traditionen und Konsequenzen).

In addition, there are two working papers in English, which were written on the occasion of two conferences:

• Economic Thinking and Ethics: An Ethical Approach for Economical Issues. University of Leipzig, MPRA Paper, Nr. 34313, 2011, Online: http://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/34313/.
• Individual Subsistence: On a Principle of Economy and Society. University of Leipzig, MPRA Paper, Nr. 23405, 2010, Online: http://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/23405.

If you have some questions, please do not hesitate to contact me.