
Système économique basé sur la propriété privée
Capitalisme est un système économique basé sur la propriété privée des moyens de production et leur exploitation à but lucratif.[1][2][3][4] Les caractéristiques centrales du capitalisme comprennent l’accumulation de capital, des marchés concurrentiels, un système de prix, la propriété privée et la reconnaissance des droits de propriété, l’échange volontaire et le travail salarié.[5][6] Dans une économie de marché capitaliste, la prise de décision et les investissements sont déterminés par chaque propriétaire de richesse, de propriété ou de capacité de production sur les marchés des capitaux et financiers, tandis que les prix et la distribution des biens et services sont principalement déterminés par la concurrence sur les marchés des biens et services.[7]
Les économistes, les historiens, les économistes politiques et les sociologues ont adopté des perspectives différentes dans leurs analyses du capitalisme et en ont reconnu diverses formes dans la pratique. Ceux-ci inclus laissez-faire ou le capitalisme de marché, le capitalisme d’État et le capitalisme social. Différentes formes de capitalisme se caractérisent par des degrés divers de libre marché, de propriété publique,[8] obstacles à la libre concurrence et politiques sociales sanctionnées par l’État. Le degré de concurrence sur les marchés et le rôle de l’intervention et de la réglementation ainsi que l’étendue de la propriété de l’État varient selon les différents modèles de capitalisme.[9][10] La mesure dans laquelle les différents marchés sont libres et les règles définissant la propriété privée sont des questions de politique et de politique. La plupart des économies capitalistes existantes sont des économies mixtes qui combinent des éléments de marché libre avec l’intervention de l’État et, dans certains cas, la planification économique.[11]
Les économies de marché ont existé sous de nombreuses formes de gouvernement et à des époques, des lieux et des cultures différents. Les sociétés capitalistes modernes – marquées par une universalisation des relations sociales fondées sur l’argent, une classe de travailleurs constamment nombreuse et à l’échelle du système qui doit travailler pour un salaire (le prolétariat) et une classe capitaliste qui possède les moyens de production – se sont développées en Europe occidentale en un processus qui a conduit à la révolution industrielle. Les systèmes capitalistes avec divers degrés d’intervention directe du gouvernement sont depuis devenus dominants dans le monde occidental et continuent de se répandre. La croissance économique constante est une tendance caractéristique des économies capitalistes.[12]
Les critiques du capitalisme soutiennent qu’il concentre le pouvoir entre les mains d’une classe capitaliste minoritaire qui existe à travers l’exploitation de la classe ouvrière majoritaire et de son travail ; privilégie le profit sur le bien social, les ressources naturelles et l’environnement; est un moteur d’inégalités, de corruption et d’instabilités économiques ; et que beaucoup ne sont pas en mesure d’accéder à ses prétendus avantages et libertés, comme investir librement. Les partisans soutiennent qu’il fournit de meilleurs produits et de l’innovation grâce à la concurrence, promeut le pluralisme et la décentralisation du pouvoir, disperse la richesse vers des personnes capables d’investir dans des entreprises utiles en fonction des demandes du marché, permet un système d’incitation flexible où l’efficacité et la durabilité sont des priorités à protéger capital, crée une forte croissance économique et génère une productivité et une prospérité qui profitent grandement à la société.
Étymologie[[[[Éditer]
Le terme « capitaliste », signifiant propriétaire du capital, apparaît avant le terme « capitalisme » et date du milieu du XVIIe siècle. Le « capitalisme » est dérivé de Capitale, qui a évolué de capitale, un mot latin tardif basé sur caput, signifiant “tête” – qui est aussi à l’origine de “meubles” et “bovins” au sens de biens meubles (seulement beaucoup plus tard pour se référer uniquement au bétail). Capitale est apparu aux XIIe-XIIIe siècles pour désigner des fonds, un stock de marchandises, une somme d’argent ou une monnaie portant intérêt.[24]:232[25] En 1283, il était utilisé dans le sens des immobilisations d’une entreprise commerciale et était souvent échangé avec d’autres termes : richesse, argent, fonds, biens, actifs, propriété, etc.[24]:233
le Hollantse (allemand : holländische) Mercurius utilise “capitalistes” en 1633 et 1654 pour désigner les propriétaires du capital.[24]:234 En français, Étienne Clavier a fait référence à capitalistes en 1788,[26] six ans avant sa première utilisation de l’anglais enregistrée par Arthur Young dans son travail Voyages en France (1792).[25][27] Dans son Principes d’économie politique et de fiscalité (1817), David Ricardo a maintes fois fait référence au « capitaliste ».[28] Le poète anglais Samuel Taylor Coleridge a utilisé “capitaliste” dans son travail Discussion à table (1823).[29] Pierre-Joseph Proudhon a utilisé le terme dans son premier ouvrage, Qu’est-ce que la propriété ? (1840), pour désigner les propriétaires du capital. Benjamin Disraeli a utilisé le terme dans son ouvrage de 1845 Sybille.[25]
L’emploi initial du terme « capitalisme » dans son sens moderne est attribué à Louis Blanc en 1850 (« Ce que j’appelle « capitalisme » c’est-à-dire l’appropriation du capital par les uns à l’exclusion des autres ») et Pierre-Joseph Proudhon en 1861 (« Régime économique et social dans lequel le capital, source de revenu, n’appartient généralement pas à ceux qui le font travailler par leur travail »).[24]:237 Karl Marx et Friedrich Engels ont évoqué le « système capitaliste »[30][31] et au « mode de production capitaliste » en Capitale (1867).[32] L’emploi du mot « capitalisme » en référence à un système économique apparaît deux fois dans le tome I de Capitale, p. 124 (édition allemande) et dans Théories de la plus-value, tome II, p. 493 (édition allemande). Marx n’a pas beaucoup utilisé la forme capitalisme, mais plutôt capitaliste et mode de production capitaliste, qui apparaissent plus de 2 600 fois dans la trilogie Capitale (Das Capital).
Dans la langue anglaise, le terme « capitalisme » apparaît d’abord, selon le Dictionnaire anglais d’oxford (OED), en 1854, dans le roman Les nouveaux venus par le romancier William Makepeace Thackeray, où le mot signifiait « avoir la propriété du capital ».[33] Toujours selon l’OED, Carl Adolph Douai, un socialiste et abolitionniste germano-américain, a utilisé le terme « capitalisme privé » en 1863.
Histoire[[[[Éditer]
Le capitalisme sous sa forme moderne peut être attribué à l’émergence du capitalisme agraire et du mercantilisme au début de la Renaissance, dans des cités-États comme Florence.[34] Le capital existe depuis des siècles à petite échelle[35] sous la forme d’activités de commerce, de location et de prêt et occasionnellement en tant que petite industrie avec une certaine main-d’œuvre salariée. L’échange de marchandises simple et, par conséquent, la production de marchandises simples, qui est la base initiale de la croissance du capital à partir du commerce, ont une très longue histoire. Les Arabes ont promulgué des politiques économiques capitalistes telles que le libre-échange et la banque. Leur utilisation des chiffres indo-arabes a facilité la comptabilité. Ces innovations ont migré vers l’Europe via des partenaires commerciaux dans des villes comme Venise et Pise. Le mathématicien italien Fibonacci a parcouru la Méditerranée en discutant avec des commerçants arabes et est revenu pour populariser l’utilisation des chiffres indo-arabes en Europe.[36]
Le capital et le commerce ont donc existé pendant une grande partie de l’histoire, mais jusqu’à ces derniers siècles, ils n’ont pas conduit à l’industrialisation ni dominé le processus de production de la société. Cela nécessitait un ensemble de conditions, notamment des technologies spécifiques de production de masse, la capacité de posséder et d’échanger des moyens de production de manière indépendante et privée, une classe de travailleurs désireux de vendre leur force de travail pour gagner leur vie, un cadre juridique favorisant le commerce, un infrastructures permettant la circulation des marchandises à grande échelle et la sécurité de l’accumulation privée. Beaucoup de ces conditions n’existent pas actuellement dans de nombreux pays du tiers monde, bien qu’il y ait beaucoup de capital et de travail. Les obstacles au développement des marchés capitalistes sont donc moins techniques et plus sociaux, culturels et politiques.
Agrarianisme[[[[Éditer]
Les fondements économiques du système agricole féodal ont commencé à changer considérablement dans l’Angleterre du XVIe siècle, alors que le système seigneurial s’était effondré et que les terres commençaient à se concentrer entre les mains de moins de propriétaires avec des domaines de plus en plus grands. Au lieu d’un système de travail basé sur le servage, les travailleurs étaient de plus en plus employés dans le cadre d’une économie monétaire plus large et en expansion. Le système a fait pression sur les propriétaires et les locataires pour qu’ils augmentent la productivité de l’agriculture afin de réaliser des bénéfices ; l’affaiblissement du pouvoir coercitif de l’aristocratie pour extraire les excédents paysans les a encouragés à essayer de meilleures méthodes, et les locataires ont également été incités à améliorer leurs méthodes afin de prospérer sur un marché du travail compétitif. Les conditions de location des terres devenaient soumises aux forces économiques du marché plutôt qu’au système stagnant précédent d’obligations coutumières et féodales.[37][38]
Au début du XVIIe siècle, l’Angleterre était un État centralisé dans lequel une grande partie de l’ordre féodal de l’Europe médiévale avait été balayée. Cette centralisation était renforcée par un bon réseau routier et par une capitale disproportionnée, Londres. La capitale a agi comme une plaque tournante du marché central pour l’ensemble du pays, créant un très grand marché intérieur pour les marchandises, contrastant avec les exploitations féodales fragmentées qui prévalaient dans la plupart des régions du continent.
Mercantilisme[[[[Éditer]

La doctrine économique qui prévaut du XVIe au XVIIIe siècle est communément appelée mercantilisme.[39][40] Cette période, l’âge de la découverte, était associée à l’exploration géographique des terres étrangères par les marchands marchands, en particulier d’Angleterre et des Pays-Bas. Le mercantilisme était un système de commerce à but lucratif, même si les marchandises étaient encore largement produites par des méthodes non capitalistes.[41] La plupart des chercheurs considèrent l’ère du capitalisme marchand et du mercantilisme comme l’origine du capitalisme moderne,[42][43] bien que Karl Polanyi ait soutenu que la caractéristique du capitalisme est l’établissement de marchés généralisés pour ce qu’il a appelé les « marchandises fictives », c’est-à-dire la terre, le travail et l’argent. En conséquence, il a fait valoir que « ce n’est qu’en 1834 qu’un marché du travail compétitif a été établi en Angleterre, on ne peut donc pas dire que le capitalisme industriel en tant que système social a existé avant cette date ».[44]

L’Angleterre a commencé une approche à grande échelle et intégrative du mercantilisme pendant l’ère élisabéthaine (1558-1603). Une explication systématique et cohérente de la balance commerciale a été rendue publique à travers l’argument de Thomas Mun Le trésor de l’Angleterre par le commerce extérieur, ou la balance de notre commerce extérieur, est la règle de notre trésor. Il a été écrit dans les années 1620 et publié en 1664.[45]
Les commerçants européens, soutenus par des contrôles étatiques, des subventions et des monopoles, réalisaient l’essentiel de leurs bénéfices en achetant et en vendant des marchandises. Pour reprendre les mots de Francis Bacon, le mercantilisme avait pour but « l’ouverture et le bon équilibre du commerce ; le soin des industriels ; le bannissement de l’oisiveté ; la répression du gaspillage et des excès par des lois somptuaires ; l’amélioration et l’entretien du sol ; la régulation des prix…”.[46]
Après la période de la proto-industrialisation, la Compagnie britannique des Indes orientales et la Compagnie néerlandaise des Indes orientales, après des contributions massives du Bengale moghol,[47][48] inauguré une ère expansive de commerce et d’échanges.[49][50] Ces entreprises se caractérisaient par les pouvoirs coloniaux et expansionnistes qui leur étaient conférés par les États-nations.[49] À cette époque, les marchands, qui avaient fait du commerce sous l’étape précédente du mercantilisme, ont investi des capitaux dans les Compagnies des Indes orientales et d’autres colonies, cherchant un retour sur investissement.
Révolution industrielle[[[[Éditer]

Au milieu du XVIIIe siècle, un groupe de théoriciens économiques, dirigé par David Hume (1711-1776)[52] et Adam Smith (1723-1790), ont contesté les doctrines mercantilistes fondamentales – telles que la croyance que la richesse du monde restait constante et qu’un État ne pouvait augmenter sa richesse qu’aux dépens d’un autre État.
Pendant la révolution industrielle, les industriels ont remplacé les marchands en tant que facteur dominant du système capitaliste et ont entraîné le déclin des compétences artisanales traditionnelles des artisans, des guildes et des compagnons. Pendant cette période également, l’excédent généré par l’essor de l’agriculture commerciale a encouragé une mécanisation accrue de l’agriculture.[[[[citation requise] Le capitalisme industriel a marqué le développement du système de fabrication en usine, caractérisé par une division complexe du travail entre et au sein du processus de travail et de la routine des tâches de travail ; et finalement établi la domination du mode de production capitaliste.[53]
La Grande-Bretagne industrielle a finalement abandonné la politique protectionniste autrefois prescrite par le mercantilisme. Au XIXe siècle, Richard Cobden (1804-1865) et John Bright (1811-1889), qui fondaient leurs convictions sur l’école de Manchester, initient un mouvement de baisse des tarifs.[54] Dans les années 1840, la Grande-Bretagne a adopté une politique moins protectionniste, avec l’abrogation en 1846 des lois sur les céréales et l’abrogation en 1849 des lois sur la navigation.[55] La Grande-Bretagne a réduit les tarifs et les quotas, conformément au plaidoyer de David Ricardo en faveur du libre-échange.
La modernité[[[[Éditer]
![]() |
Cette section a besoin d’être agrandi. Vous pouvez aider en y ajoutant. (Février 2017)
|

Le capitalisme a été transporté à travers le monde par des processus plus larges de mondialisation et au début du XIXe siècle, une série de systèmes de marché faiblement connectés s’étaient réunis en un système mondial relativement intégré, intensifiant à leur tour les processus de mondialisation économique et autre.[56][57] Plus tard au 20e siècle, le capitalisme a surmonté un défi posé par les économies à planification centralisée et est maintenant le système englobant dans le monde entier,[16][58] l’économie mixte étant sa forme dominante dans le monde occidental industrialisé.
L’industrialisation a permis la production bon marché d’articles ménagers en utilisant des économies d’échelle tandis que la croissance rapide de la population a créé une demande soutenue pour les produits de base. La mondialisation de cette période a été façonnée de manière décisive par l’impérialisme du XVIIIe siècle.[56][59][60][61]
Après les première et deuxième guerres de l’opium et l’achèvement de la conquête britannique de l’Inde, de vastes populations de ces régions sont devenues des consommateurs prêts à l’exportation des exportations européennes. Pendant cette période également, des régions d’Afrique subsaharienne et des îles du Pacifique ont été colonisées. La conquête de nouvelles régions du globe, notamment l’Afrique subsaharienne, par les Européens a produit de précieuses ressources naturelles telles que le caoutchouc, les diamants et le charbon et a contribué à alimenter le commerce et les investissements entre les puissances impériales européennes, leurs colonies et les États-Unis :
L’habitant de Londres pouvait commander par téléphone, en sirotant son thé du matin, les divers produits de la terre entière, et s’attendre raisonnablement à leur livraison rapide sur le pas de sa porte. Le militarisme et l’impérialisme des rivalités raciales et culturelles n’étaient guère plus que les amusements de son quotidien. Quel épisode extraordinaire du progrès économique de l’homme fut cet âge qui s’acheva en août 1914.[62]
À cette époque, le système financier mondial était principalement lié à l’étalon-or. Le Royaume-Uni a adopté officiellement cette norme pour la première fois en 1821. Peu de temps après, le Canada en 1853, Terre-Neuve en 1865, les États-Unis et l’Allemagne (de jure) en 1873. Les nouvelles technologies, telles que le télégraphe, le câble transatlantique, le radiotéléphone, le bateau à vapeur et le chemin de fer ont permis aux marchandises et aux informations de circuler dans le monde à un degré sans précédent.[63]

Dans la période qui a suivi la dépression mondiale des années 1930, l’État a joué un rôle de plus en plus important dans le système capitaliste dans une grande partie du monde. Le boom d’après-guerre a pris fin à la fin des années 1960 et au début des années 1970 et la situation a été aggravée par la montée de la stagflation.[64] Le monétarisme, une modification du keynésianisme plus compatible avec laissez-faire, a pris une importance croissante dans le monde capitaliste, en particulier sous la direction de Ronald Reagan aux États-Unis et de Margaret Thatcher au Royaume-Uni dans les années 1980. L’intérêt public et politique a commencé à s’éloigner des soi-disant préoccupations collectivistes du capitalisme dirigé de Keynes pour se concentrer sur le choix individuel, appelé « capitalisme recommercialisé ».[65]
Selon l’universitaire de Harvard Shoshana Zuboff, un nouveau genre de capitalisme, le capitalisme de surveillance monétise les données acquises grâce à la surveillance.[66][67][68] Elle déclare qu’il a été découvert et consolidé pour la première fois chez Google, émergé en raison du “couplage des vastes pouvoirs du numérique avec l’indifférence radicale et le narcissisme intrinsèque du capitalisme financier et sa vision néolibérale qui ont dominé le commerce pendant au moins trois décennies, en particulier dans les économies anglo-saxonnes”[67] et dépend de l’architecture globale de la médiation informatique qui produit une nouvelle expression de pouvoir distribuée et largement incontestée qu’elle appelle « Big Other ».[69]
L’économiste de la Harvard Kennedy School, Dani Rodrik, distingue trois variantes historiques du capitalisme : le capitalisme 1.0 au 19e siècle impliquait des marchés largement non réglementés avec un rôle minimal pour l’État (hormis la défense nationale et la protection des droits de propriété) ; Le capitalisme 2.0 pendant les années d’après-guerre impliquait le keynésianisme, un rôle substantiel de l’État dans la régulation des marchés, et des États-providence forts ; et le capitalisme 2.1 qui impliquait une combinaison de marchés non réglementés, de mondialisation et de diverses obligations nationales de l’État.[70]
Rapport à la démocratie[[[[Éditer]

La relation entre démocratie et capitalisme est un domaine controversé en théorie et dans les mouvements politiques populaires. L’extension du suffrage masculin adulte dans la Grande-Bretagne du XIXe siècle s’est produite avec le développement du capitalisme industriel et la démocratie s’est généralisée en même temps que le capitalisme, conduisant les capitalistes à poser entre eux une relation causale ou mutuelle.[71] Cependant, selon certains auteurs, au XXe siècle, le capitalisme accompagnait également une variété de formations politiques tout à fait distinctes des démocraties libérales, notamment les régimes fascistes, les monarchies absolues et les États à parti unique.[40] La théorie de la paix démocratique affirme que les démocraties combattent rarement d’autres démocraties, mais les critiques[[[[qui?] de cette théorie suggèrent que cela peut être dû à une similitude ou à une stabilité politique plutôt qu’à leur caractère démocratique ou capitaliste. Les critiques modérés soutiennent que bien que la croissance économique sous le capitalisme ait conduit à la démocratie dans le passé, il se peut qu’elle ne le fasse pas à l’avenir, car les régimes autoritaires ont été en mesure de gérer la croissance économique en utilisant certains des principes de concurrence du capitalisme.[72][73] sans faire de concessions à une plus grande liberté politique.[74][75] Les politologues Torben Iversen et David Soskice soutiennent que la démocratie et le capitalisme se soutiennent mutuellement.[76][77]
Dans son livre La route du servage (1944), Friedrich Hayek (1899-1992) a affirmé que la compréhension du marché libre de la liberté économique telle qu’elle est présente dans le capitalisme est une condition requise de la liberté politique. Il a fait valoir que le mécanisme du marché est le seul moyen de décider quoi produire et comment distribuer les articles sans recourir à la coercition. Milton Friedman, Andrew Brennan et Ronald Reagan ont également défendu ce point de vue. Friedman a affirmé que les opérations économiques centralisées sont toujours accompagnées de répression politique. Selon lui, les transactions dans une économie de marché sont volontaires et la grande diversité que permet l’activité volontaire est une menace fondamentale pour les dirigeants politiques répressifs et diminue considérablement leur pouvoir de coercition. Certains des points de vue de Friedman ont été partagés par John Maynard Keynes, qui croyait que le capitalisme est vital pour la liberté de survivre et de prospérer.[78][79] Freedom House, un groupe de réflexion américain qui mène des recherches internationales et défend la démocratie, la liberté politique et les droits de l’homme, a fait valoir qu’« il existe une corrélation élevée et statistiquement significative entre le niveau de liberté politique tel que mesuré par Freedom House et la liberté économique. tel que mesuré par l’enquête du Wall Street Journal/Heritage Foundation ».[80]
Milton Friedman, l’un des plus grands partisans de l’idée que le capitalisme promeut la liberté politique[[[[selon qui ?], a fait valoir que le capitalisme compétitif permet de séparer le pouvoir économique et politique, en veillant à ce qu’ils ne se heurtent pas les uns aux autres.[[[[citation requise] Des critiques modérés ont récemment contesté cela, déclarant que l’influence actuelle des groupes de pression sur la politique aux États-Unis est une contradiction, étant donné l’approbation de Citizens United.[[[[citation requise] Cela a conduit les gens[[[[mots de fouine] remettre en question l’idée que le capitalisme compétitif promeut la liberté politique. La décision sur Citizens United permet aux entreprises de dépenser des sommes d’argent non divulguées et non réglementées pour des campagnes politiques, ce qui modifie les résultats en faveur d’intérêts particuliers et sape la vraie démocratie. Comme expliqué dans les écrits de Robin Hahnel, la pièce maîtresse de la défense idéologique du système de marché libre est le concept de liberté économique et que les partisans assimilent la démocratie économique à la liberté économique et prétendent que seul le système de marché libre peut fournir la liberté économique.[[[[citation requise] Selon Hahnel, il y a quelques objections à la prémisse selon laquelle le capitalisme offre la liberté par la liberté économique. Ces objections sont guidées par des questions critiques sur qui ou quoi décide quelles libertés sont les plus protégées. Souvent, la question de l’inégalité est soulevée lorsqu’on discute de la manière dont le capitalisme promeut la démocratie. Un argument qui pourrait tenir[[[[mots de fouine] est que la croissance économique peut conduire à des inégalités étant donné que le capital peut être acquis à des rythmes différents par des personnes différentes. Dans La capitale au XXIe siècle (2013), Thomas Piketty de la Paris School of Economics a affirmé que les inégalités sont la conséquence inévitable de la croissance économique dans une économie capitaliste et que la concentration des richesses qui en résulte peut déstabiliser les sociétés démocratiques et saper les idéaux de justice sociale sur lesquels elles sont construites.[81]
Les États dotés de systèmes économiques capitalistes ont prospéré sous des régimes politiques jugés autoritaires ou oppressifs. Singapour a une économie de marché ouverte réussie en raison de son climat concurrentiel et favorable aux affaires et d’un état de droit solide. Néanmoins, il est souvent critiqué pour son style de gouvernement qui, bien que démocratique et toujours l’un des moins corrompus,[82] fonctionne en grande partie sous le régime du parti unique. En outre, il ne défend pas vigoureusement la liberté d’expression comme en témoignent sa presse réglementée par le gouvernement et son penchant pour le respect des lois protégeant l’harmonie ethnique et religieuse, la dignité judiciaire et la réputation personnelle. Le secteur privé (capitaliste) de la République populaire de Chine a connu une croissance exponentielle et a prospéré depuis sa création, malgré un gouvernement autoritaire. Le règne d’Augusto Pinochet au Chili a entraîné une croissance économique et des niveaux élevés d’inégalité[83] en utilisant des moyens autoritaires pour créer un environnement sûr pour l’investissement et le capitalisme. De même, le règne autoritaire de Suharto et l’extirpation du Parti communiste d’Indonésie ont permis l’expansion du capitalisme en Indonésie.[84][85]
Le terme « capitalisme » dans son sens moderne est souvent attribué à Karl Marx.[41][86] Dans son Das Capital, Marx a analysé le « mode de production capitaliste » en utilisant une méthode de compréhension connue aujourd’hui sous le nom de marxisme. Cependant, Marx lui-même a rarement utilisé le terme «capitalisme» alors qu’il a été utilisé deux fois dans les interprétations plus politiques de son travail, principalement rédigées par son collaborateur Friedrich Engels. Au XXe siècle, les défenseurs du système capitaliste ont souvent remplacé le terme « capitalisme » par des expressions telles que libre entreprise et entreprise privée et ont remplacé « capitaliste » par rentier et investisseur en réaction aux connotations négatives associées au capitalisme.[87]
Caractéristiques[[[[Éditer]
En général, le capitalisme en tant que système économique et mode de production peut être résumé comme suit :[88]
Marché[[[[Éditer]
Sur le marché libre et laissez-faire formes de capitalisme, les marchés sont utilisés le plus largement avec une réglementation minimale ou inexistante sur le mécanisme de fixation des prix. Dans les économies mixtes, aujourd’hui quasi universelles,[96] les marchés continuent de jouer un rôle dominant, mais ils sont réglementés dans une certaine mesure par l’État afin de corriger les défaillances du marché, de promouvoir le bien-être social, de conserver les ressources naturelles, de financer la défense et la sécurité publique ou d’autres raisons. Dans les systèmes capitalistes d’État, on compte le moins sur les marchés, l’État s’appuyant fortement sur les entreprises publiques ou la planification économique indirecte pour accumuler du capital.
L’offre est la quantité d’un bien ou d’un service disponible à l’achat ou à la vente. La demande est la mesure de la valeur d’un bien que les gens sont prêts à acheter à un moment donné. Les prix ont tendance à augmenter lorsque la demande d’une ressource disponible augmente ou que son offre diminue et diminue avec la demande ou lorsque l’offre augmente.
La concurrence survient lorsque plus d’un producteur essaie de vendre des produits identiques ou similaires aux mêmes acheteurs. Les adeptes de la théorie capitaliste croient que la concurrence mène à l’innovation et à des prix plus abordables. Des monopoles ou des cartels peuvent se développer, surtout s’il n’y a pas de concurrence. Un monopole se produit lorsqu’une entreprise obtient l’exclusivité sur un marché. Par conséquent, l’entreprise peut adopter des comportements de recherche de rente tels que la limitation de la production et l’augmentation des prix, car elle n’a pas peur de la concurrence. Un cartel est un groupe d’entreprises qui agissent ensemble de manière monopolistique pour contrôler la production et les prix.
Les gouvernements ont mis en œuvre des lois dans le but d’empêcher la création de monopoles et de cartels. En 1890, le Sherman Antitrust Act est devenu la première loi adoptée par le Congrès des États-Unis pour limiter les monopoles.[97]
Motif de profit[[[[Éditer]
Le motif du profit, dans la théorie du capitalisme, est le désir de gagner un revenu sous forme de profit. Autrement dit, la raison d’être d’une entreprise est de réaliser un profit. Le motif du profit fonctionne selon la théorie du choix rationnel, ou la théorie selon laquelle les individus ont tendance à rechercher ce qui est dans leur propre intérêt. En conséquence, les entreprises cherchent à profiter à elles-mêmes et/ou à leurs actionnaires en maximisant leurs profits.
Dans la théorie capitaliste, on dit que le motif du profit garantit que les ressources sont allouées efficacement. Par exemple, l’économiste autrichien Henry Hazlitt explique : « S’il n’y a aucun profit à faire un article, c’est un signe que le travail et le capital consacrés à sa production sont mal orientés : la valeur des ressources qui doivent être utilisées pour fabriquer l’article est supérieure à la valeur de l’article lui-même”.[98] En d’autres termes, les bénéfices permettent aux entreprises de savoir si un article vaut la peine d’être produit. Théoriquement[[[[selon qui ?], sur des marchés libres et concurrentiels, maximiser le profit garantit que les ressources ne sont pas gaspillées.
Propriété privée[[[[Éditer]
La relation entre l’État, ses mécanismes formels et les sociétés capitalistes a été débattue dans de nombreux domaines de la théorie sociale et politique, avec une discussion active depuis le 19ème siècle. Hernando de Soto est un économiste péruvien contemporain qui a soutenu qu’une caractéristique importante du capitalisme est le fonctionnement de la protection étatique des droits de propriété dans un système de propriété formel où la propriété et les transactions sont clairement enregistrées.[99]
Selon de Soto, c’est le processus par lequel les actifs physiques sont transformés en capital, qui à son tour peut être utilisé de bien d’autres manières et beaucoup plus efficacement dans l’économie de marché. Un certain nombre d’économistes marxistes ont soutenu que les Enclosure Acts en Angleterre et une législation similaire ailleurs faisaient partie intégrante de l’accumulation primitive capitaliste et que les cadres juridiques spécifiques de la propriété foncière privée ont fait partie intégrante du développement du capitalisme.[100][101]
Concurrence sur le marché[[[[Éditer]
Dans l’économie capitaliste, la concurrence sur le marché est la rivalité entre les vendeurs essayant d’atteindre des objectifs tels que l’augmentation des bénéfices, des parts de marché et du volume des ventes en faisant varier les éléments du marketing mix : prix, produit, distribution et promotion. Merriam-Webster définit la concurrence dans les affaires comme “l’effort de deux ou plusieurs parties agissant indépendamment pour sécuriser les affaires d’un tiers en offrant les conditions les plus favorables”.[102] Il a été décrit par Adam Smith dans La richesse des nations (1776) et les économistes plus tard comme allouant des ressources productives à leurs utilisations les plus valorisées[103] et encourager l’efficacité. Smith et d’autres économistes classiques avant Antoine Augustine Cournot faisaient référence à la rivalité de prix et hors prix entre les producteurs pour vendre leurs marchandises aux meilleures conditions en faisant des enchères d’acheteurs, pas nécessairement à un grand nombre de vendeurs ni à un marché en équilibre final.[104] La concurrence est généralisée tout au long du processus de marché. C’est une condition où « les acheteurs ont tendance à rivaliser avec d’autres acheteurs, et les vendeurs ont tendance à rivaliser avec d’autres vendeurs ».[105] En offrant des biens à échanger, les acheteurs font des offres concurrentielles pour acheter des quantités spécifiques de biens spécifiques qui sont disponibles, ou pourraient être disponibles si les vendeurs choisissaient d’offrir de tels biens. De même, les vendeurs enchérissent contre d’autres vendeurs en proposant des biens sur le marché, rivalisant pour attirer l’attention et échanger les ressources des acheteurs. La concurrence résulte de la rareté, car il n’est pas possible de satisfaire tous les besoins humains imaginables, et se produit lorsque les gens essaient de répondre aux critères utilisés pour déterminer l’allocation.[105]:105
Croissance économique[[[[Éditer]
![]() |
Cette section a besoin d’être agrandi. Vous pouvez aider en y ajoutant. (Janvier 2021)
|
La croissance économique est une tendance caractéristique des économies capitalistes.[12]Dans les travaux d’Adam Smith, l’idée du capitalisme est rendue possible par la concurrence qui crée la croissance. Bien que le capitalisme ne soit pas entré dans l’économie dominante à l’époque de Smith, il est vital pour la construction de sa société idéale. L’un des fondements du capitalisme est la concurrence. Smith pense qu’une société prospère est une société où « chacun devrait être libre d’entrer et de sortir du marché et de changer de métier aussi souvent qu’il le souhaite ».[106] La liberté d’agir dans son propre intérêt est essentielle au succès d’une société capitaliste. La crainte surgit que si tous les participants se concentrent sur leurs propres objectifs, le bien-être de la société sera de l’eau sous le pont. Smith soutient qu’en dépit des inquiétudes des intellectuels, « les tendances mondiales ne seront guère modifiées s’ils s’abstiennent de poursuivre leurs fins personnelles ».[107] Les actions de quelques participants ne peuvent pas modifier le cours de la société. Au lieu de cela, Smith soutient qu’ils devraient plutôt se concentrer sur le progrès personnel et que cela entraînera une croissance globale pour l’ensemble.
La compétition entre les participants, « qui s’efforcent tous de se tirer d’affaire les uns les autres, oblige chacun à s’efforcer d’exécuter son œuvre » par la compétition vers la croissance.[108]
En tant que mode de production[[[[Éditer]
Le mode de production capitaliste fait référence aux systèmes d’organisation de la production et de la distribution au sein des sociétés capitalistes. La production privée d’argent sous diverses formes (location, banque, commerce, production lucrative, etc.) a précédé le développement du mode de production capitaliste en tant que tel. Le mode de production capitaliste proprement dit basé sur le travail salarié et la propriété privée des moyens de production et sur la technologie industrielle a commencé à se développer rapidement en Europe occidentale à partir de la révolution industrielle, s’étendant plus tard à la majeure partie du monde.[[[[citation requise]
Le terme mode de production capitaliste est défini par la propriété privée des moyens de production, l’extraction de la plus-value par la classe possédante à des fins d’accumulation de capital, le travail salarié et, au moins en ce qui concerne les marchandises, le fait d’être marchand. basé.[109]
Capitalism in the form of money-making activity has existed in the shape of merchants and money-lenders who acted as intermediaries between consumers and producers engaging in simple commodity production (hence the reference to “merchant capitalism”) since the beginnings of civilisation. What is specific about the “capitalist mode of production” is that most of the inputs and outputs of production are supplied through the market (i.e. they are commodities) and essentially all production is in this mode.[9] By contrast, in flourishing feudalism most or all of the factors of production, including labour, are owned by the feudal ruling class outright and the products may also be consumed without a market of any kind, it is production for use within the feudal social unit and for limited trade.[89] This has the important consequence that, under capitalism, the whole organisation of the production process is reshaped and re-organised to conform with economic rationality as bounded by capitalism, which is expressed in price relationships between inputs and outputs (wages, non-labour factor costs, sales and profits) rather than the larger rational context faced by society overall—that is, the whole process is organised and re-shaped in order to conform to “commercial logic”. Essentially, capital accumulation comes to define economic rationality in capitalist production.[90]
A society, region or nation is capitalist if the predominant source of incomes and products being distributed is capitalist activity, but even so this does not yet mean necessarily that the capitalist mode of production is dominant in that society.
Supply and demand[[[[edit]

In capitalist economic structures, supply and demand is an economic model of price determination in a market. It postulates that in a perfectly competitive market, the unit price for a particular good will vary until it settles at a point where the quantity demanded by consumers (at the current price) will equal the quantity supplied by producers (at the current price), resulting in an economic equilibrium for price and quantity.
The basic laws of supply and demand, as described by David Besanko and Ronald Braeutigam, are the following four:[110]:37
- If demand increases (demand curve shifts to the right) and supply remains unchanged, then a shortage occurs, leading to a higher equilibrium price.
- If demand decreases (demand curve shifts to the left) and supply remains unchanged, then a surplus occurs, leading to a lower equilibrium price.
- If demand remains unchanged and supply increases (supply curve shifts to the right), then a surplus occurs, leading to a lower equilibrium price.
- If demand remains unchanged and supply decreases (supply curve shifts to the left), then a shortage occurs, leading to a higher equilibrium price.
Graphical representation[[[[edit]
Although it is normal to regard the quantity demanded and the quantity supplied as functions of the price of the goods, the standard graphical representation, usually attributed to Alfred Marshall, has price on the vertical axis and quantity on the horizontal axis, the opposite of the standard convention for the representation of a mathematical function.
Since determinants of supply and demand other than the price of the goods in question are not explicitly represented in the supply-demand diagram, changes in the values of these variables are represented by moving the supply and demand curves (often described as “shifts” in the curves). By contrast, responses to changes in the price of the good are represented as movements along unchanged supply and demand curves.
Supply schedule[[[[edit]
A supply schedule is a table that shows the relationship between the price of a good and the quantity supplied. Under the assumption of perfect competition, supply is determined by marginal cost. That is, firms will produce additional output while the cost of producing an extra unit of output is less than the price they would receive. A hike in the cost of raw goods would decrease supply and shift costs up, while a discount would increase supply and shift costs down, hurting producers as producer surplus decreases.
By its very nature, conceptualising a supply curve requires the firm to be a perfect competitor (i.e. to have no influence over the market price). This is true because each point on the supply curve is the answer to the question “If this firm is faced with this potential price, how much output will it be able to and willing to sell?”. If a firm has market power, its decision of how much output to provide to the market influences the market price, therefore the firm is not “faced with” any price and the question becomes less relevant.
Economists distinguish between the supply curve of an individual firm and the market supply curve. The market supply curve is obtained by summing the quantities supplied by all suppliers at each potential price, thus in the graph of the supply curve individual firms’ supply curves are added horizontally to obtain the market supply curve.
Economists also distinguish the short-run market supply curve from the long-run market supply curve. In this context, two things are assumed constant by definition of the short run: the availability of one or more fixed inputs (typically physical capital) and the number of firms in the industry. In the long-run, firms can adjust their holdings of physical capital, enabling them to better adjust their quantity supplied at any given price. Furthermore, in the long-run potential competitors can enter or exit the industry in response to market conditions. For both of these reasons, long-run market supply curves are generally flatter than their short-run counterparts.
The determinants of supply are:
- Production costs: how much a good costs to be produced. Production costs are the cost of the inputs; primarily labor, capital, energy and materials. They depend on the technology used in production and/or technological advances (productivity).
- Firms’ expectations about future prices.
- Number of suppliers.
Demand schedule[[[[edit]
A demand schedule, depicted graphically as the demand curve, represents the amount of some goods that buyers are willing and able to purchase at various prices, assuming all determinants of demand other than the price of the good in question, such as income, tastes and preferences, the price of substitute goods and the price of complementary goods, remain the same. According to the law of demand, the demand curve is almost always represented as downward-sloping, meaning that as price decreases, consumers will buy more of the good.[111]
Just like the supply curves reflect marginal cost curves, demand curves are determined by marginal utility curves.[112] Consumers will be willing to buy a given quantity of a good at a given price, if the marginal utility of additional consumption is equal to the opportunity cost determined by the price—that is, the marginal utility of alternative consumption choices. The demand schedule is defined as the willingness and ability of a consumer to purchase a given product in a given frame of time.
While the aforementioned demand curve is generally downward-sloping, there may be rare examples of goods that have upward-sloping demand curves. Two different hypothetical types of goods with upward-sloping demand curves are Giffen goods (an inferior, but staple good) and Veblen goods (goods made more fashionable by a higher price).
By its very nature, conceptualising a demand curve requires that the purchaser be a perfect competitor—that is, that the purchaser has no influence over the market price. This is true because each point on the demand curve is the answer to the question “If this buyer is faced with this potential price, how much of the product will it purchase?”. If a buyer has market power, so its decision of how much to buy influences the market price, then the buyer is not “faced with” any price and the question is meaningless.
Like with supply curves, economists distinguish between the demand curve of an individual and the market demand curve. The market demand curve is obtained by summing the quantities demanded by all consumers at each potential price, thus in the graph of the demand curve individuals’ demand curves are added horizontally to obtain the market demand curve. The determinants of demand are:
- Income.
- Tastes and preferences.
- Prices of related goods and services.
- Consumers’ expectations about future prices and incomes that can be checked.
- Number of potential consumers.
Equilibrium[[[[edit]
In the context of supply and demand, economic equilibrium refers to a state where economic forces such as supply and demand are balanced and in the absence of external influences the (equilibrium) values of economic variables will not change. For example, in the standard text-book model of perfect competition equilibrium occurs at the point at which quantity demanded and quantity supplied are equal.[113] Market equilibrium, in this case, refers to a condition where a market price is established through competition such that the amount of goods or services sought by buyers is equal to the amount of goods or services produced by sellers. This price is often called the competitive price or market clearing price, and will tend not to change unless demand or supply changes. The quantity is called “competitive quantity” or market clearing quantity.
Partial equilibrium[[[[edit]
Partial equilibrium, as the name suggests, takes into consideration only a part of the market to attain equilibrium. Jain proposes (attributed to George Stigler): “A partial equilibrium is one which is based on only a restricted range of data, a standard example is price of a single product, the prices of all other products being held fixed during the analysis”.[114]
The supply and demand model is a partial equilibrium model of economic equilibrium, where the clearance on the market of some specific goods is obtained independently from prices and quantities in other markets. In other words, the prices of all substitutes and complements as well as income levels of consumers are constant. This makes analysis much simpler than in a general equilibrium model which includes an entire economy.
The dynamic process is that prices adjust until supply equals demand. It is a powerfully simple technique that allows one to study equilibrium, efficiency and comparative statics. The stringency of the simplifying assumptions inherent in this approach make the model considerably more tractable, but it may produce results which while seemingly precise do not effectively model real world economic phenomena.
Partial equilibrium analysis examines the effects of policy action in creating equilibrium only in that particular sector or market which is directly affected, ignoring its effect in any other market or industry assuming that they being small will have little impact if any. Hence, this analysis is considered to be useful in constricted markets.
Léon Walras first formalised the idea of a one-period economic equilibrium of the general economic system, but it was French economist Antoine Augustin Cournot and English political economist Alfred Marshall who developed tractable models to analyse an economic system.
Empirical estimation[[[[edit]
Demand and supply relations in a market can be statistically estimated from price, quantity and other data with sufficient information in the model. This can be done with simultaneous-equation methods of estimation in econometrics. Such methods allow solving for the model-relevant “structural coefficients”, the estimated algebraic counterparts of the theory. The parameter identification problem is a common issue in “structural estimation”. Typically, data on exogenous variables (that is, variables other than price and quantity, both of which are endogenous variables) are needed to perform such an estimation. An alternative to “structural estimation” is reduced-form estimation, which regresses each of the endogenous variables on the respective exogenous variables.
Macroeconomic uses of demand and supply[[[[edit]
Demand and supply have also been generalised to explain macroeconomic variables in a market economy, including the quantity of total output and the general price level. The Aggregate Demand–Aggregate Supply model may be the most direct application of supply and demand to macroeconomics, but other macroeconomic models also use supply and demand. Compared to microeconomic uses of demand and supply, different (and more controversial) theoretical considerations apply to such macroeconomic counterparts as aggregate demand and aggregate supply. Demand and supply are also used in macroeconomic theory to relate money supply and money demand to interest rates and to relate labor supply and labor demand to wage rates.
History[[[[edit]
According to Hamid S. Hosseini, the “power of supply and demand” was discussed to some extent by several early Muslim scholars, such as fourteenth-century Mamluk scholar Ibn Taymiyyah, who wrote: “If desire for goods increases while its availability decreases, its price rises. On the other hand, if availability of the good increases and the desire for it decreases, the price comes down”.[115]

John Locke’s 1691 work Some Considerations on the Consequences of the Lowering of Interest and the Raising of the Value of Money[116] includes an early and clear description of supply and demand and their relationship. In this description, demand is rent: “The price of any commodity rises or falls by the proportion of the number of buyer and sellers” and “that which regulates the price… [of goods] is nothing else but their quantity in proportion to their rent”.
The phrase “supply and demand” was first used by James Denham-Steuart in his Inquiry into the Principles of Political Economy, published in 1767.
Adam Smith used the phrase in his 1776 book The Wealth of Nations. Dans The Wealth of Nations, Smith generally assumed that the supply price was fixed, but that its “merit” (value) would decrease as its “scarcity” increased, in effect what was later also called the law of demand .
David Ricardo titled one chapter of his 1817 work Principles of Political Economy and Taxation “On the Influence of Demand and Supply on Price”.[117]
Dans Principles of Political Economy and Taxation, Ricardo more rigorously laid down the idea of the assumptions that were used to build his ideas of supply and demand.
Antoine Augustin Cournot first developed a mathematical model of supply and demand in his 1838 Researches into the Mathematical Principles of Wealth, including diagrams.
During the late 19th century, the marginalist school of thought emerged. This field mainly was started by Stanley Jevons, Carl Menger and Léon Walras. The key idea was that the price was set by the most expensive price—that is, the price at the margin. This was a substantial change from Adam Smith’s thoughts on determining the supply price.
In his 1870 essay “On the Graphical Representation of Supply and Demand”, Fleeming Jenkin in the course of “introduc[ing] the diagrammatic method into the English economic literature” published the first drawing of supply and demand curves therein,[118] including comparative statics from a shift of supply or demand and application to the labor market.[119] The model was further developed and popularized by Alfred Marshall in the 1890 textbook Principles of Economics.[117]
Role of government[[[[edit]
In a capitalist system, the government protects private property and guarantees the right of citizens to choose their job. In most cases, the government does not prevent firms from determining what wages they will pay and what prices they will charge for their products. However, many countries have minimum wage laws and minimum safety standards.
Under some versions of capitalism, the government carries out a number of economic functions, such as issuing money, supervising public utilities, and enforcing private contracts. Many countries have competition laws that prohibit monopolies and cartels. Despite anti-monopoly laws, large corporations can form near-monopolies in some industries. Such firms can temporarily drop prices and accept losses to prevent competition from entering the market and then raise them again once the threat of competition is reduced. In many countries, public utilities such as electricity, heating fuel and communications are able to operate as a monopoly under government regulation due to high economies of scale.
Government agencies regulate the standards of service in many industries, such as airlines and broadcasting, as well as financing a wide range of programs. In addition, the government regulates the flow of capital and uses financial tools such as the interest rate to control such factors as inflation and unemployment.[120]
There are many variants of capitalism in existence that differ according to country and region.[[[[citation needed] They vary in their institutional makeup and by their economic policies. The common features among all the different forms of capitalism is that they are predominantly based on the private ownership of the means of production and the production of goods and services for profit; the market-based allocation of resources; and the accumulation of capital.
They include advanced capitalism, corporate capitalism, finance capitalism, free-market capitalism, mercantilism, social capitalism, state capitalism and welfare capitalism. Other variants of capitalism include anarcho-capitalism, community capitalism, humanistic capitalism, neo-capitalism, state monopoly capitalism, supercapitalism and technocapitalism.[[[[citation needed]
Avancée[[[[edit]
Advanced capitalism is the situation that pertains to a society in which the capitalist model has been integrated and developed deeply and extensively for a prolonged period. Various writers identify Antonio Gramsci as an influential early theorist of advanced capitalism, even if he did not use the term himself. In his writings, Gramsci sought to explain how capitalism had adapted to avoid the revolutionary overthrow that had seemed inevitable in the 19th century. At the heart of his explanation was the decline of raw coercion as a tool of class power, replaced by use of civil society institutions to manipulate public ideology in the capitalists’ favour.[121][122][123]
Jürgen Habermas has been a major contributor to the analysis of advanced-capitalistic societies. Habermas observed four general features that characterise advanced capitalism:
- Concentration of industrial activity in a few large firms.
- Constant reliance on the state to stabilise the economic system.
- A formally democratic government that legitimises the activities of the state and dissipates opposition to the system.
- The use of nominal wage increases to pacify the most restless segments of the work force.[124]
Corporate[[[[edit]
Corporate capitalism is a free or mixed-market capitalist economy characterized by the dominance of hierarchical, bureaucratic corporations.
Finance[[[[edit]
Finance capitalism is the subordination of processes of production to the accumulation of money profits in a financial system. In their critique of capitalism, Marxism and Leninism both emphasise the role of finance capital as the determining and ruling-class interest in capitalist society, particularly in the latter stages.[125][126]
Rudolf Hilferding is credited[[[[by whom?] with first bringing the term finance capitalism into prominence through Finance Capital, his 1910 study of the links between German trusts, banks and monopolies—a study subsumed by Vladimir Lenin into Imperialism, the Highest Stage of Capitalism (1917), his analysis of the imperialist relations of the great world powers.[127] Lenin concluded that the banks at that time operated as “the chief nerve centres of the whole capitalist system of national economy”.[128] For the Comintern (founded in 1919), the phrase “dictatorship of finance capitalism”[129] became a regular one.
Fernand Braudel would later point to two earlier periods when finance capitalism had emerged in human history—with the Genoese in the 16th century and with the Dutch in the 17th and 18th centuries—although at those points it developed from commercial capitalism.[130][[[[need quotation to verify] Giovanni Arrighi extended Braudel’s analysis to suggest that a predominance of finance capitalism is a recurring, long-term phenomenon, whenever a previous phase of commercial/industrial capitalist expansion reaches a plateau.[131]
Free-market[[[[edit]
A capitalist free-market economy is an economic system where prices for goods and services are set entirely by the forces of supply and demand and are expected, by its adherents, to reach their point of equilibrium without intervention by government policy. It typically entails support for highly competitive markets and private ownership of the means of production. Laissez-faire capitalism is a more extensive form of this free-market economy, but one in which the role of the state is limited to protecting property rights. In anarcho-capitalist theory, property rights are protected by private firms and market-generated law. According to anarcho-capitalists, this entails property rights without statutory law through market-generated tort, contract and property law, and self-sustaining private industry.
Mercantile[[[[edit]

Mercantilism is a nationalist form of early capitalism that came into existence approximately in the late 16th century. It is characterized by the intertwining of national business interests with state-interest and imperialism. Consequently, the state apparatus is utilized to advance national business interests abroad. An example of this is colonists living in America who were only allowed to trade with and purchase goods from their respective mother countries (e.g. Britain, France and Portugal). Mercantilism was driven by the belief that the wealth of a nation is increased through a positive balance of trade with other nations—it corresponds to the phase of capitalist development sometimes called the primitive accumulation of capital.
Social[[[[edit]
A social market economy is a free-market or mixed-market capitalist system, sometimes classified as a coordinated market economy, where government intervention in price formation is kept to a minimum, but the state provides significant services in areas such as social security, health care, unemployment benefits and the recognition of labor rights through national collective bargaining arrangements.
This model is prominent in Western and Northern European countries as well as Japan, albeit in slightly different configurations. The vast majority of enterprises are privately owned in this economic model.
Rhine capitalism is the contemporary model of capitalism and adaptation of the social market model that exists in continental Western Europe today.
State[[[[edit]
State capitalism is a capitalist market economy dominated by state-owned enterprises, where the state enterprises are organized as commercial, profit-seeking businesses. The designation has been used broadly throughout the 20th century to designate a number of different economic forms, ranging from state-ownership in market economies to the command economies of the former Eastern Bloc. According to Aldo Musacchio, a professor at Harvard Business School, state capitalism is a system in which governments, whether democratic or autocratic, exercise a widespread influence on the economy either through direct ownership or various subsidies. Musacchio notes a number of differences between today’s state capitalism and its predecessors. In his opinion, gone are the days when governments appointed bureaucrats to run companies: the world’s largest state-owned enterprises are now traded on the public markets and kept in good health by large institutional investors. Contemporary state capitalism is associated with the East Asian model of capitalism, dirigisme and the economy of Norway.[132] Alternatively, Merriam-Webster defines state capitalism as “an economic system in which private capitalism is modified by a varying degree of government ownership and control”.[133]
Dans Socialism: Utopian and Scientific, Friedrich Engels argued that state-owned enterprises would characterize the final stage of capitalism, consisting of ownership and management of large-scale production and communication by the bourgeois state.[134] In his writings, Vladimir Lenin characterized the economy of Soviet Russia as state capitalist, believing state capitalism to be an early step toward the development of socialism.[135][136]
Some economists and left-wing academics including Richard D. Wolff and Noam Chomsky, as well as many Marxist philosophers and revolutionaries such as Raya Dunayevskaya and C.L.R. James, argue that the economies of the former Soviet Union and Eastern Bloc represented a form of state capitalism because their internal organization within enterprises and the system of wage labor remained intact.[137][138][139][140][141]
The term is not used by Austrian School economists to describe state ownership of the means of production. The economist Ludwig von Mises argued that the designation of state capitalism was simply a new label for the old labels of state socialism and planned economy and differed only in non-essentials from these earlier designations.[142]
The debate between proponents of private versus state capitalism is centered around questions of managerial efficacy, productive efficiency and fair distribution of wealth.
Welfare[[[[edit]
Welfare capitalism is capitalism that includes social welfare policies. Today, welfare capitalism is most often associated with the models of capitalism found in Central Mainland and Northern Europe such as the Nordic model, social market economy and Rhine capitalism. In some cases, welfare capitalism exists within a mixed economy, but welfare states can and do exist independently of policies common to mixed economies such as state interventionism and extensive regulation.
A mixed economy is a largely market-based capitalist economy consisting of both private and public ownership of the means of production and economic interventionism through macroeconomic policies intended to correct market failures, reduce unemployment and keep inflation low. The degree of intervention in markets varies among different countries. Some mixed economies such as France under dirigisme also featured a degree of indirect economic planning over a largely capitalist-based economy.
Most modern capitalist economies are defined as mixed economies to some degree.
Capital accumulation[[[[edit]
The accumulation of capital is the process of “making money”, or growing an initial sum of money through investment in production. Capitalism is based on the accumulation of capital, whereby financial capital is invested in order to make a profit and then reinvested into further production in a continuous process of accumulation. In Marxian economic theory, this dynamic is called the law of value. Capital accumulation forms the basis of capitalism, where economic activity is structured around the accumulation of capital, defined as investment in order to realize a financial profit.[143] In this context, “capital” is defined as money or a financial asset invested for the purpose of making more money (whether in the form of profit, rent, interest, royalties, capital gain or some other kind of return).[144]
In mainstream economics, accounting and Marxian economics, capital accumulation is often equated with investment of profit income or savings, especially in real capital goods. The concentration and centralisation of capital are two of the results of such accumulation. In modern macroeconomics and econometrics, the phrase “capital formation” is often used in preference to “accumulation”, though the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) refers nowadays to “accumulation”. The term “accumulation” is occasionally used in national accounts.
Arrière-plan[[[[edit]
Accumulation can be measured as the monetary value of investments, the amount of income that is reinvested, or the change in the value of assets owned (the increase in the value of the capital stock). Using company balance sheets, tax data and direct surveys as a basis, government statisticians estimate total investments and assets for the purpose of national accounts, national balance of payments and flow of funds statistics. The Reserve Banks and the Treasury usually provide interpretations and analysis of this data. Standard indicators include capital formation, gross fixed capital formation, fixed capital, household asset wealth and foreign direct investment.
Organisations such as the International Monetary Fund, the UNCTAD, the World Bank Group, the OECD and the Bank for International Settlements use national investment data to estimate world trends. The Bureau of Economic Analysis, Eurostat and the Japan Statistical Office provide data on the United States, Europe and Japan respectively. Other useful sources of investment information are business magazines such as Fortune, Forbes, The Economist, Business Week and so on as well as various corporate “watchdog” organisations and non-governmental organisation publications. A reputable scientific journal is the Review of Income & Wealth. In the case of the United States, the “Analytical Perspectives” document (an annex to the yearly budget) provides useful wealth and capital estimates applying to the whole country.
In Karl Marx’ economic theory, capital accumulation refers to the operation whereby profits are reinvested increasing the total quantity of capital. Capital is viewed by Marx as expanding value, that is, in other terms, as a sum of capital, usually expressed in money, that is transformed through human labor into a larger value, extracted as profits and expressed as money. Here, capital is defined essentially as economic or commercial asset value in search of additional value or surplus-value. This requires property relations which enable objects of value to be appropriated and owned, and trading rights to be established. Capital accumulation has a double origin, namely in trade and in expropriation, both of a legal or illegal kind. The reason is that a stock of capital can be increased through a process of exchange or “trading up”, but also through directly taking an asset or resource from someone else without compensation. David Harvey calls this accumulation by dispossession.
The continuation and progress of capital accumulation depends on the removal of obstacles to the expansion of trade and this has historically often been a violent process. As markets expand, more and more new opportunities develop for accumulating capital because more and more types of goods and services can be traded in. However, capital accumulation may also confront resistance when people refuse to sell, or refuse to buy (for example a strike by investors or workers, or consumer resistance).
Concentration and centralisation[[[[edit]
According to Marx, capital has the tendency for concentration and centralization in the hands of the wealthy. Marx explains: “It is concentration of capitals already formed, destruction of their individual independence, expropriation of capitalist by capitalist, transformation of many small into few large capitals. […] Capital grows in one place to a huge mass in a single hand, because it has in another place been lost by many. […] The battle of competition is fought by cheapening of commodities. The cheapness of commodities demands, caeteris paribus, on the productiveness of labour, and this again on the scale of production. Therefore, the larger capitals beat the smaller. It will further be remembered that, with the development of the capitalist mode of production, there is an increase in the minimum amount of individual capital necessary to carry on a business under its normal conditions. The smaller capitals, therefore, crowd into spheres of production which Modern Industry has only sporadically or incompletely got hold of. Here competition rages […] It always ends in the ruin of many small capitalists, whose capitals partly pass into the hands of their conquerors, partly vanish”.[145]
Rate of accumulation[[[[edit]
In Marxian economics, the rate of accumulation is defined as the value of the real net increase in the stock of capital in an accounting period and the proportion of realised surplus-value or profit-income which is reinvested, rather than consumed. This rate can be expressed by means of various ratios between the original capital outlay, the realised turnover, surplus-value or profit and reinvestments (e.g. the writings of the economist Michał Kalecki).
Other things being equal, the greater the amount of profit-income that is disbursed as personal earnings and used for consumptive purposes, the lower the savings rate and the lower the rate of accumulation is likely to be. However, earnings spent on consumption can also stimulate market demand and higher investment. This is the cause of endless controversies in economic theory about “how much to spend, and how much to save”.
In a boom period of capitalism, the growth of investments is cumulative, i.e. one investment leads to another, leading to a constantly expanding market, an expanding labor force and an increase in the standard of living for the majority of the people.[[[[citation needed]
In a stagnating, decadent capitalism, the accumulation process is increasingly oriented towards investment on military and security forces, real estate, financial speculation and luxury consumption. In that case, income from value-adding production will decline in favour of interest, rent and tax income, with as a corollary an increase in the level of permanent unemployment. The more capital one owns, the more capital one can also borrow. The inverse is also true and this is one factor in the widening gap between the rich and the poor.[[[[citation needed]
Ernest Mandel emphasised that the rhythm of capital accumulation and growth depended critically on the division of a society’s social product between “necessary product” and “surplus product”; and the division of the surplus product between investment and consumption. In turn, this allocation pattern reflected the outcome of competition among capitalists, competition between capitalists and workers and competition between workers. The pattern of capital accumulation can therefore never be simply explained by commercial factors as it also involved social factors and power relationships.
Circuit of capital accumulation from production[[[[edit]
Strictly speaking, capital has accumulated only when realised profit income has been reinvested in capital assets. As suggested in the first volume of Marx’ Das Kapital, the process of capital accumulation in production has at least seven distinct but linked moments:
- The initial investment of capital (which could be borrowed capital) in means of production and labor power.
- The command over surplus-labour and its appropriation.
- The valorisation (increase in value) of capital through production of new outputs.
- The appropriation of the new output produced by employees, containing the added value.
- The realisation of surplus-value through output sales.
- The appropriation of realised surplus-value as (profit) income after deduction of costs.
- The reinvestment of profit income in production.
All of these moments do not refer simply to an “economic” or commercial process. Rather, they assume the existence of legal, social, cultural and economic power conditions, without which creation, distribution and circulation of the new wealth could not occur. This becomes especially clear when the attempt is made to create a market where none exists, or where people refuse to trade.
Simple and expanded reproduction[[[[edit]
In the second volume of Das Kapital, Marx continues the story and shows that with the aid of bank credit capital in search of growth can more or less smoothly mutate from one form to another, alternately taking the form of money capital (liquid deposits, securities and so on), commodity capital (tradable products, real estate and the like), or production capital (means of production and labor power).
His discussion of the simple and expanded reproduction of the conditions of production offers a more sophisticated model of the parameters of the accumulation process as a whole. At simple reproduction, a sufficient amount is produced to sustain society at the given living standard; the stock of capital stays constant. At expanded reproduction, more product-value is produced than is necessary to sustain society at a given living standard (a surplus product); the additional product-value is available for investments which enlarge the scale and variety of production.
According to Marx, the bourgeois claim that there is no economic law according to which capital is necessarily re-invested in the expansion of production, that instead this depends on anticipated profitability, market expectations and perceptions of investment risk. Such statements only explain the subjective experiences of investors and ignore the objective realities which would influence such opinions. As Marx states in the second volume of Das Kapital, simple reproduction only exists if the variable and surplus capital realised by Dept. 1—producers of means of production—exactly equals that of the constant capital of Dept. 2, producers of articles of consumption (p. 524). Such equilibrium rests on various assumptions, such as a constant labor supply (no population growth). Accumulation does not imply a necessary change in total magnitude of value produced, but can simply refer to a change in the composition of an industry (p. 514).
Ernest Mandel introduced the additional concept of contracted economic reproduction, i.e. reduced accumulation where business operating at a loss outnumbers growing business, or economic reproduction on a decreasing scale, for example due to wars, natural disasters or devalorisation.
Balanced economic growth requires that different factors in the accumulation process expand in appropriate proportions. However, markets themselves cannot spontaneously create that balance and in fact what drives business activity is precisely the imbalances between supply and demand: inequality is the motor of growth. This partly explains why the worldwide pattern of economic growth is very uneven and unequal, even although markets have existed almost everywhere for a very long-time. Some people argue that it also explains government regulation of market trade and protectionism.
Capital accumulation as social relation[[[[edit]
“Accumulation of capital” sometimes also refers in Marxist writings to the reproduction of capitalist social relations (institutions) on a larger scale over time, i.e. the expansion of the size of the proletariat and of the wealth owned by the bourgeoisie.
This interpretation emphasises that capital ownership, predicated on command over labor, is a social relation: the growth of capital implies the growth of the working class (a “law of accumulation”). In the first volume of Das Kapital, Marx had illustrated this idea with reference to Edward Gibbon Wakefield’s theory of colonisation:
Wakefield discovered that in the Colonies, property in money, means of subsistence, machines, and other means of production, does not as yet stamp a man as a capitalist if there be wanting the correlative—the wage-worker, the other man who is compelled to sell himself of his own free-will. He discovered that capital is not a thing, but a social relation between persons, established by the instrumentality of things. Mr. Peel, he moans, took with him from England to Swan River, West Australia, means of subsistence and of production to the amount of £50,000. Mr. Peel had the foresight to bring with him, besides, 3,000 persons of the working-class, men, women, and children. Once arrived at his destination, ‘Mr. Peel was left without a servant to make his bed or fetch him water from the river.’ Unhappy Mr. Peel, who provided for everything except the export of English modes of production to Swan River!
–Das Kapital, vol. 1, ch. 33
In the third volume of Das Kapital, Marx refers to the “fetishism of capital” reaching its highest point with interest-bearing capital because now capital seems to grow of its own accord without anybody doing anything:
The relations of capital assume their most externalised and most fetish-like form in interest-bearing capital. We have here
, money creating more money, self-expanding value, without the process that effectuates these two extremes. In merchant’s capital,
, there is at least the general form of the capitalistic movement, although it confines itself solely to the sphere of circulation, so that profit appears merely as profit derived from alienation; but it is at least seen to be the product of a social relation, not the product of a mere thing. […] This is obliterated in
, the form of interest-bearing capital. […] The thing (money, commodity, value) is now capital even as a mere thing, and capital appears as a mere thing. The result of the entire process of reproduction appears as a property inherent in the thing itself. It depends on the owner of the money, i.e., of the commodity in its continually exchangeable form, whether he wants to spend it as money or loan it out as capital. In interest-bearing capital, therefore, this automatic fetish, self-expanding value, money generating money, are brought out in their pure state and in this form it no longer bears the birth-marks of its origin. The social relation is consummated in the relation of a thing, of money, to itself. Instead of the actual transformation of money into capital, we see here only form without content.
–Das Kapital, vol. 1, ch. 24
Wage labour[[[[edit]
Wage labour refers to the sale of labour under a formal or informal employment contract to an employer.[146] These transactions usually occur in a labour market where wages are market determined.[147] Individuals who possess and supply financial capital to productive ventures often become owners, either jointly (as shareholders) or individually.[[[[citation needed] In Marxist economics, these owners of the means of production and suppliers of capital are generally called capitalists. The description of the role of the capitalist has shifted, first referring to a useless intermediary between producers, then to an employer of producers, and finally to the owners of the means of production.[87] Labor includes all physical and mental human resources, including entrepreneurial capacity and management skills, which are needed to produce products and services. Production is the act of making goods or services by applying labor power.[148][149]
Critics of the capitalist mode of production see wage labour as a major, if not defining, aspect of hierarchical industrial systems. Most opponents of the institution support worker self-management and economic democracy as alternatives to both wage labour and capitalism. While most opponents of the wage system blame the capitalist owners of the means of production for its existence, most anarchists and other libertarian socialists also hold the state as equally responsible as it exists as a tool utilised by capitalists to subsidise themselves and protect the institution of private ownership of the means of production. As some opponents of wage labour take influence from Marxist propositions, many are opposed to private property, but maintain respect for personal property.
Types[[[[edit]
The most common form of wage labour currently is ordinary direct, or “full-time”, employment in which a free worker sells their labour for an indeterminate time (from a few years to the entire career of the worker) in return for a money-wage or salary and a continuing relationship with the employer (which it does not in general offer contractors or other irregular staff). However, wage labour takes many other forms and explicit as opposed to implicit (i.e. conditioned by local labour and tax law) contracts are not uncommon. Economic history shows a great variety of ways in which labour is traded and exchanged. The differences show up in the form of:
- Employment status: a worker could be employed full-time, part-time, or on a casual basis. The worker could be employed for example temporarily for a specific project only, or on a permanent basis. Part-time wage labour could combine with part-time self-employment. The worker could be employed also as an apprentice.
- Civil (legal) status: the worker could for example be a free citizen, an indentured labourer, the subject of forced labour (including some prison or army labour); a worker could be assigned by the political authorities to a task, they could be a semi-slave or a serf bound to the land who is hired out part of the time. So the labour might be performed on a more or less voluntary basis, or on a more or less involuntary basis, in which there are many gradations.
- Method of payment (remuneration or compensation): the work done could be paid “in cash” (a money-wage) or “in kind” (through receiving goods and/or services), or in the form of “piece rates” where the wage is directly dependent on how much the worker produces. In some cases, the worker might be paid in the form of credit used to buy goods and services, or in the form of stock options or shares in an enterprise.
- Method of hiring: the worker might engage in a labour-contract on their own initiative, or the worker might hire out their labour as part of a group. However, they may also hire out their labour via an intermediary (such as an employment agency) to a third party. In this case, the worker is paid by the intermediary, but works for a third party which pays the intermediary. In some cases, labour is subcontracted several times, with several intermediaries. Another possibility is that the worker is assigned or posted to a job by a political authority, or that an agency hires out a worker to an enterprise together with the means of production.
Critique[[[[edit]

Criticism of capitalism comes from various political and philosophical approaches, including anarchist, socialist, religious and nationalist viewpoints. Some believe that capitalism can only be overcome through revolution while others believe that structural change can come slowly through political reforms. Some critics believe there are merits in capitalism and wish to balance it with some form of social control, typically through government regulation (e.g. the social market movement).
Prominent among critiques of capitalism are accusations that capitalism is inherently exploitative, alienating, unstable, unsustainable, inefficient, creates massive economic inequality, commodifies people, degrades the environment, is anti-democratic and leads to an erosion of human rights while it incentivizes imperialist expansion and war.
See also[[[[edit]
Les références[[[[edit]
- Remarques
- ^ Zimbalist, Sherman and Brown, Andrew, Howard J. and Stuart (October 1988). Comparing Economic Systems: A Political-Economic Approach. Harcourt College Pub. pp. 6–7. ISBN 978-0-15-512403-5.
Pure capitalism is defined as a system wherein all of the means of production (physical capital) are privately owned and run by the capitalist class for a profit, while most other people are workers who work for a salary or wage (and who do not own the capital or the product).
- ^ Rosser, Mariana V.; Rosser, J Barkley (23 July 2003). Comparative Economics in a Transforming World Economy. MIT Press. p. 7. ISBN 978-0-262-18234-8.
In capitalist economies, land and produced means of production (the capital stock) are owned by private individuals or groups of private individuals organized as firms.
- ^ Chris Jenks. Core Sociological Dichotomies. “Capitalism, as a mode of production, is an economic system of manufacture and exchange which is geared toward the production and sale of commodities within a market for profit, where the manufacture of commodities consists of the use of the formally free labor of workers in exchange for a wage to create commodities in which the manufacturer extracts surplus value from the labor of the workers in terms of the difference between the wages paid to the worker and the value of the commodity produced by him/her to generate that profit.” London; Thousand Oaks, CA; New Delhi. Sage. p. 383.
- ^ Gilpin, Robert (5 June 2018). The Challenge of Global Capitalism : The World Economy in the 21st Century. ISBN 978-0-691-18647-4. OCLC 1076397003.
- ^ Heilbroner, Robert L. “Capitalism” Archived 28 October 2017 at the Wayback Machine. Steven N. Durlauf and Lawrence E. Blume, eds. The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics. 2nd ed. (Palgrave Macmillan, 2008) doi:10.1057/9780230226203.0198.
- ^ Louis Hyman and Edward E. Baptist (2014). American Capitalism: A Reader Archived 22 May 2015 at the Wayback Machine. Simon & Schuster. ISBN 978-1-4767-8431-1.
- ^ Gregory, Paul; Stuart, Robert (2013). The Global Economy and its Economic Systems. South-Western College Pub. p. 41. ISBN 978-1-285-05535-0.
Capitalism is characterized by private ownership of the factors of production. Decision making is decentralized and rests with the owners of the factors of production. Their decision making is coordinated by the market, which provides the necessary information. Material incentives are used to motivate participants.
- ^ Gregory and Stuart, Paul and Robert (28 February 2013). The Global Economy and its Economic Systems. South-Western College Pub. p. 107. ISBN 978-1-285-05535-0.
Real-world capitalist systems are mixed, some having higher shares of public ownership than others. The mix changes when privatization or nationalization occurs. Privatization is when property that had been state-owned is transferred to private owners. Nationalization occurs when privately owned property becomes publicly owned.
- ^ une b c d Macmillan Dictionary of Modern Economics, 3rd Ed., 1986, p. 54.
- ^ Bronk, Richard (Summer 2000). “Which model of capitalism?”. OECD Observer. Vol. 1999 no. 221–22. OECD. pp. 12–15. Archived from the original on 6 April 2018. Retrieved 6 April 2018.
- ^ Stilwell, Frank. “Political Economy: the Contest of Economic Ideas”. First Edition. Oxford University Press. Melbourne, Australia. 2002.
- ^ une b Michael Joff (2011). “The root cause of economic growth under capitalism”. Cambridge Journal of Economics. 35 (5): 873–896. doi:10.1093/cje/beq054.
The tendency for capitalist economies to grow is one of their most characteristic properties.
- ^ Mandel, Ernst (2002). An Introduction to Marxist Economic Theory. Resistance Books. p. 24. ISBN 978-1-876646-30-1. Archived from the original on 15 February 2017. Retrieved 29 January 2017.
- ^ Werhane, P.H. (1994). “Adam Smith and His Legacy for Modern Capitalism”. The Review of Metaphysics. 47 (3).
- ^ une b c “Free enterprise”. Roget’s 21st Century Thesaurus, Third Edition. Philip Lief Group 2008.
- ^ une b c Capitalism. Encyclopædia Britannica. 10 November 2014. Archived from the original on 29 June 2011. Retrieved 24 March 2015.
- ^ www.mutualist.org Archived 17 June 2019 at the Wayback Machine. “… based on voluntary cooperation, free exchange, or mutual aid.”
- ^ Barrons Dictionary of Finance and Investment Terms, 1995; p. 74.
- ^ “Market economy”, Merriam-Webster Unabridged Dictionary
- ^ “About Cato”. Cato Institute • cato.org. Archived from the original on 1 December 2012. Retrieved 6 November 2008.
- ^ “The Achievements of Nineteenth-Century Classical Liberalism”. Archived from the original on 11 February 2009.
Although the term “liberalism” retains its original meaning in most of the world, it has unfortunately come to have a very different meaning in late twentieth-century America. Hence terms such as “market liberalism,” “classical liberalism,” or “libertarianism” are often used in its place in America.
- ^ Gérard, Duménil (30 March 2010). “The crisis of neoliberalism” (Transcript). Interviewed by Paul Jay. The Real News. Archived from the original on 6 April 2018. Retrieved 6 April 2018.
When we speak of neoliberalism, we speak of contemporary capitalism. Neoliberalism, it’s a new stage of capitalism which began around 1980. It began in big countries like United Kingdom and the United States. Then it was implemented in Europe, and later in Japan, and later around the world in general. So this is a new phase of capitalism.
- ^ Shutt, Harry (2010). Beyond the Profits System: Possibilities for the Post-Capitalist Era. Zed Books. ISBN 978-1-84813-417-1.
- ^ une b c d Braudel, Fernand. The Wheels of Commerce: Civilization and Capitalism 15th–18th Century, Harper and Row, 1979
- ^ une b c James Augustus Henry Murray. “Capital”. A New English Dictionary on Historical Principles. Oxford English Press. Vol. 2. p. 93.
- ^ E.g., “L’Angleterre a-t-elle l’heureux privilège de n’avoir ni Agioteurs, ni Banquiers, ni Faiseurs de services, ni Capitalistes ?” in [Étienne Clavier] (1788) De la foi publique envers les créanciers de l’état : lettres à M. Linguet sur le n° CXVI de ses annales p. 19 Archived 19 March 2015 at the Wayback Machine
- ^ Arthur Young. Travels in France.
- ^ Ricardo, David. Principles of Political Economy and Taxation. 1821. John Murray Publisher, 3rd edition.
- ^ Samuel Taylor Coleridge. Tabel The Complete Works of Samuel Taylor Coleridge Archived 23 February 2020 at the Wayback Machine. p. 267.
- ^ Karl Marx. Chapter 16: “Absolute and Relative Surplus-Value.” Das Kapital: “The prolongation of the working-day beyond the point at which the laborer would have produced just an equivalent for the value of his labor-power, and the appropriation of that surplus-labor by capital, this is the production of absolute surplus-value. It forms the general groundwork of the capitalist system, and the starting point for the production of relative surplus-value.”
- ^ Karl Marx. Chapter Twenty-Five: “The General Law of Capitalist Accumulation”. Das Kapital.
- ^ Saunders, Peter (1995). Capitalism. University of Minnesota Press. p. 1.
- ^ James Augustus Henry Murray. “Capitalism” p. 94.
- ^ “Cradle of capitalism”. The Economist. 16 April 2009. Archived from the original on 18 January 2018. Retrieved 9 March 2015.
- ^ Warburton, David. Macroeconomics from the beginning: The General Theory, Ancient Markets, and the Rate of Interest. Paris, Recherches et Publications, 2003. p. 49.
- ^ Koehler, Benedikt. Early Islam and the Birth of Capitalism, “In Baghdad, by the early tenth century a fully-fledged banking sector had come into being…” p. 2, (Lexington Books, 2014).
- ^ Brenner, Robert (1 January 1982). “The Agrarian Roots of European Capitalism”. Past & Present (97): 16–113. doi:10.1093/past/97.1.16. JSTOR 650630.
- ^ “The Agrarian Origins of Capitalism”. July 1998. Archived from the original on 11 December 2019. Retrieved 17 December 2012.
- ^ An Introduction to Marxist Economic Theory. Resistance Books. 1 January 2002. ISBN 978-1-876646-30-1. Archived from the original on 11 December 2016. Retrieved 27 August 2016 – via Google Books.
- ^ une b Burnham, Peter (2003). Capitalism: The Concise Oxford Dictionary of Politics. Oxford University Press.
- ^ une b Scott, John (2005). Industrialism: A Dictionary of Sociology. Oxford University Press.
- ^ Burnham (2003)
- ^ Encyclopædia Britannica (2006)
- ^ Polanyi, Karl. The Great Transformation. Beacon Press, Boston. 1944. p. 87.
- ^ David Onnekink; Gijs Rommelse (2011). Ideology and Foreign Policy in Early Modern Europe (1650–1750). Ashgate Publishing. p. 257. ISBN 978-1-4094-1914-3. Archived from the original on 19 March 2015. Retrieved 27 June 2015.
- ^ Quoted in Sir George Clark, The Seventeenth Century (New York, Oxford University Press, 1961), p. 24.
- ^ Om Prakash, “Empire, Mughal”, History of World Trade Since 1450, edited by John J. McCusker, vol. 1, Macmillan Reference USA, 2006, pp. 237–240, World History in Context. Retrieved 3 August 2017
- ^ Indrajit Ray (2011). Bengal Industries and the British Industrial Revolution (1757–1857). Routledge. pp. 57, 90, 174. ISBN 978-1-136-82552-1. Archived from the original on 29 May 2016. Retrieved 20 June 2019.
- ^ une b Banaji, Jairus (2007). “Islam, the Mediterranean and the rise of capitalism” (PDF). Journal Historical Materialism. 15: 47–74. doi:10.1163/156920607X171591. Archived from the original (PDF) on 29 March 2018. Retrieved 20 April 2018.
- ^ Economic system:: Market systems. Encyclopædia Britannica. 2006. Archived from the original on 24 May 2009. Retrieved 4 January 2009.
- ^ Watt steam engine image located in the lobby of the Superior Technical School of Industrial Engineers of the UPM[[[[clarification needed] (Madrid).
- ^ Hume, David (1752). Political Discourses. Edinburgh: A. Kincaid & A. Donaldson.
- ^ Burnham, Peter (1996). “Capitalism”. In McLean, Iain; McMillan, Alistair (eds.). The Concise Oxford Dictionary of Politics. Oxford Quick Reference (3 ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press (published 2009). ISBN 978-0-19-101827-5. Archived from the original on 27 July 2020. Retrieved 14 September 2019.
Industrial capitalism, which Marx dates from the last third of the eighteenth century, finally establishes the domination of the capitalist mode of production.
- ^ “laissez-faire”. Archived from the original on 2 December 2008.
- ^ Burnham, Peter (1996). “Capitalism”. In McLean, Iain; McMillan, Alistair (eds.). The Concise Oxford Dictionary of Politics. Oxford Quick Reference (3 ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press (published 2009). ISBN 978-0-19-101827-5. Archived from the original on 27 July 2020. Retrieved 14 September 2019.
For most analysts, mid- to late-nineteenth century Britain is seen as the apotheosis of the laissez-faire phase of capitalism. This phase took off in Britain in the 1840s with the repeal of the Corn Laws, and the Navigation Acts, and the passing of the Banking Act.
- ^ une b James, Paul; Gills, Barry (2007). Globalization and Economy, Vol. 1: Global Markets and Capitalism. London: Sage Publications. p. xxxiii.
- ^ “Impact of Global Capitalism on the Environment of Developing Economies” (PDF). Impact of Global Capitalism on the Environment of Developing Economies: The Case of Nigeria: 84. Archived (PDF) from the original on 20 March 2020. Retrieved 31 July 2020.
- ^ James Fulcher, Capitalism, A Very Short Introduction. “In one respect there can, however, be little doubt that capitalism has gone global and that is in the elimination of alternative systems”. p. 99. Oxford University Press, 2004. ISBN 978-0-19-280218-7.
- ^ Thomas, Martin; Thompson, Andrew (1 January 2014). “Empire and Globalisation: from ‘High Imperialism’ to Decolonisation”. The International History Review. 36 (1): 142–170. doi:10.1080/07075332.2013.828643. ISSN 0707-5332. S2CID 153987517.
- ^ “Globalization and Empire” (PDF). Globalization and Empire. Archived (PDF) from the original on 23 September 2020. Retrieved 31 July 2020.
- ^ “Europe and the causes of globalization” (PDF). Europe and the Causes of Globalization, 1790 to 2000. Archived (PDF) from the original on 7 December 2017. Retrieved 31 July 2020.
- ^ “PBS.org”. PBS.org. 24 October 1929. Archived from the original on 30 March 2010. Retrieved 31 July 2010.
- ^ Michael D. Bordo, Barry Eichengreen, Douglas A. Irwin. Is Globalization Today Really Different than Globalization a Hundred Years Ago? NBER[[[[clarification needed] Working Paper No. 7195. June 1999.
- ^ Barnes, Trevor J. (2004). Reading economic geography. Blackwell Publishing. p. 127. ISBN 978-0-631-23554-5.
- ^ Fulcher, James. Capitalism. 1st ed. New York, Oxford University Press, 2004.
- ^ Powles, Julia (2 May 2016). “Google and Microsoft have made a pact to protect surveillance capitalism”. Le gardien. Archived from the original on 11 February 2017. Retrieved 9 February 2017.
- ^ une b Zuboff, Shoshana (5 March 2016). “Google as a Fortune Teller: The Secrets of Surveillance Capitalism”. Faz.net. Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung. Archived from the original on 11 February 2017. Retrieved 9 February 2017.
- ^ Sterling, Bruce (8 March 2016). “Shoshanna Zuboff condemning Google “surveillance capitalism““. Wired. Archived from the original on 11 February 2017. Retrieved 9 February 2017.
- ^ Zuboff, Shoshana (9 April 2015). “Big other: surveillance capitalism and the prospects of an information civilization”. Journal of Information Technology. 30 (1): 75–89. doi:10.1057/jit.2015.5. S2CID 15329793. SSRN 2594754.
- ^ Rodrik, Dani (2009), Hemerijck, Anton; Knapen, Ben; van Doorne, Ellen (eds.), “Capitalism 3.0”, Aftershocks, Amsterdam University Press, pp. 185–193, ISBN 978-90-8964-192-2, JSTOR j.ctt46mtqx.23, retrieved 14 January 2021
- ^ Kaminski, Joseph. “Capitalism and the Industrial Revolution”. Archived from the original on 28 January 2015.
- ^ “The Winners And Losers in Chinese Capitalism”. Forbes. Archived from the original on 5 November 2015. Retrieved 28 October 2015.
- ^ “The rise of state capitalism”. The Economist. ISSN 0013-0613. Archived from the original on 15 June 2020. Retrieved 24 October 2015.
- ^ Mesquita, Bruce Bueno de (September 2005). “Development and Democracy”. Foreign Affairs. Archived from the original on 20 February 2008. Retrieved 26 February 2008.
- ^ Siegle, Joseph; M. Weinstein, Michael; Halperin, Morton (1 September 2004). “Why Democracies Excel” (PDF). Foreign Affairs. 83 (5): 57. doi:10.2307/20034067. JSTOR 20034067. Archived (PDF) from the original on 12 April 2019. Retrieved 26 August 2018.
- ^ Iversen, Torben; Soskice, David (2019). Democracy and Prosperity: Reinventing Capitalism through a Turbulent Century. Princeton University Press. ISBN 978-0-691-18273-5. JSTOR j.ctv4g1r3n.
- ^ Korstanje, M. E. (2019). Terrorism, technology and apocalyptic futures. Springer.
- ^ Friedrich Hayek (1944). The Road to Serfdom. Nature. 154. University of Chicago Press. pp. 473–74. Bibcode:1944Natur.154..473C. doi:10.1038/154473a0. ISBN 978-0-226-32061-8. S2CID 4071358.
- ^ Bellamy, Richard (2003). The Cambridge History of Twentieth-Century Political Thought. Cambridge University Press. p. 60. ISBN 978-0-521-56354-3.
- ^ Adrian Karatnycky. Freedom in the World: The Annual Survey of Political Rights and Civil Liberties. Transaction Publishers. 2001. ISBN 978-0-7658-0101-2. p. 11.
- ^ Piketty, Thomas (2014). Capital in the Twenty-First Century. Belknap Press. ISBN 0-674-43000-X p. 571.
- ^ “Transparency International Corruption Measure 2015”. Transparency International Corruption Measure 2015 – By Country / Territory. Transparency International. Archived from the original on 31 March 2016. Retrieved 20 September 2016.
- ^ Klein, Naomi (2008). The Shock Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Capitalism. Picador. ISBN 0-312-42799-9 p. 105 Archived 19 March 2015 at the Wayback Machine.
- ^ Farid, Hilmar (2005). “Indonesia’s original sin: mass killings and capitalist expansion, 1965–66”. Inter-Asia Cultural Studies. 6 (1): 3–16. doi:10.1080/1462394042000326879. S2CID 145130614.
- ^ Robinson, Geoffrey B. (2018). The Killing Season: A History of the Indonesian Massacres, 1965–66. Princeton University Press. p. 177. ISBN 978-1-4008-8886-3. Archived from the original on 19 April 2019. Retrieved 1 August 2018.
- ^ ““capitalism, n.2″. OED Online”. Archived from the original on 23 September 2020. Retrieved 19 January 2013.
- ^ une b Williams, Raymond (1983). “Capitalism”. Keywords: A vocabulary of culture and society, revised edition. Oxford University Press. p. 51. ISBN 978-0-19-520469-8.
- ^ “Althusser and the Renewal of Marxist Social Theory”. Archived from the original on 2 April 2015. Retrieved 24 March 2015.
- ^ une b Marx, Karl. “Economic Manuscripts: Capital Vol. I – Chapter Thirty Two”. Archived from the original on 21 February 2015. Retrieved 24 March 2015.
- ^ une b “The contradictions of capitalism – Democratic Socialist Perspective”. dsp.org.au. Archived from the original on 6 April 2015.
- ^ Foundation, Internet Memory (20 August 2014). “[ARCHIVED CONTENT] UK Government Web Archive – The National Archives”. Archived from the original on 10 September 2015. Retrieved 5 July 2015.
- ^ James Fulcher, Capitalism A Very Short Introduction, “the investment of money in order to make a profit, the essential feature of capitalism”, p. 14, Oxford, 2004, ISBN 978-0-19-280218-7.
- ^ Reisman, George (1998). Capitalism: A complete understanding of the nature and value of human economic life. Jameson Books. ISBN 0-915463-73-3.
- ^ Hunt, E.K.; Lautzenheiser, Mark (2014). History of Economic Thought: A Critical Perspective. PHI Learning. ISBN 978-0-7656-2599-1.
- ^ Reisman, George (1998). Capitalism: A complete understanding of the nature and value of human economic life. Jameson Books. ISBN 978-0-915463-73-2.
- ^ James Fulcher, Capitalism A Very Short Introduction, “…in the wake of the 1970 crisis, the neoliberal model of capitalism became intellectually and ideologically dominant”, p. 58, Oxford, 2004, ISBN 978-0-19-280218-7.
- ^ Staff, Investopedia (24 November 2003). “Monopoly”. Investopedia. Archived from the original on 22 February 2017. Retrieved 2 March 2017.
- ^ Hazlitt, Henry. “The Function of Profits”. Economics in One Lesson. Ludwig Von Mises Institute. Web. 22 April 2013.
- ^ Hernando de Soto. “The mystery of capital”. Archived from the original on 8 February 2008. Retrieved 26 February 2008.
- ^ Karl Marx. “Capital, v. 1. Part VIII: primitive accumulation”. Archived from the original on 3 March 2008. Retrieved 26 February 2008.
- ^ N.F.R. Crafts (April 1978). “Enclosure and labor supply revisited”. Explorations in Economic History. 15 (2): 172–83. doi:10.1016/0014-4983(78)90019-0.
- ^ “Definition of COMPETITION”. Archived from the original on 4 July 2008. Retrieved 24 March 2015.
- ^ George J. Stigler, 2008. ([1987][[[[clarification needed] 2008[[[[clarification needed]. “competition”, The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics. Abstract. Archived 15 February 2015 at the Wayback Machine
- ^ Mark Blaug, 2008. “Invisible hand”, The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics, 2nd Edition, v. 4, p. 565. Abstract Archived 5 June 2013 at the Wayback Machine.
- ^ une b Heyne, Paul; Boettke, Peter J.; Prychitko, David L. (2014). The Economic Way of Thinking (13th ed.). Pearson. pp. 102–06. ISBN 978-0-13-299129-2.
- ^ Warsh, David (2007). Knowledge and the Wealth of Nations. W.W. Norton. p. 42.
- ^ Lippit, Victor (2005). Capitalism. ProQuest: Taylor & Francis Group. p. 2.
- ^ Warsh, David (2007). Knowledge and the Wealth of Nations. W.W. Norton. p. 42.
- ^ Encyclopedia of Marxism at marxism.org. “Capitalism”. marxists.org. Archived from the original on 7 May 2019. Retrieved 8 July 2011.
- ^ Besanko, David; Braeutigam, Ronald (2010). Microeconomics (4th ed.). Wiley.
- ^ Note that unlike most graphs, supply & demand curves are plotted with the independent variable (price) on the vertical axis and the dependent variable (quantity supplied or demanded) on the horizontal axis.
- ^ “Marginal Utility and Demand”. Archived from the original on 6 November 2006. Retrieved 9 February 2007.
- ^ Varian, Hal R. (1992). Microeconomic Analysis (Third ed.). New York: Norton. ISBN 978-0-393-95735-8.
- ^ Jain, T.R. (2006). Microeconomics and Basic Mathematics. New Delhi: VK Publications. p. 28. ISBN 978-81-87140-89-4.
- ^ Hosseini, Hamid S. (2003). “Contributions of Medieval Muslim Scholars to the History of Economics and their Impact: A Refutation of the Schumpeterian Great Gap”. In Biddle, Jeff E.; Davis, Jon B.; Samuels, Warren J. (eds.). A Companion to the History of Economic Thought. Malden, Massachusetts: Blackwell. pp. 28–45 [28 & 38]. doi:10.1002/9780470999059.ch3. ISBN 978-0-631-22573-7. (citing Hamid S. Hosseini, 1995. “Understanding the Market Mechanism Before Adam Smith: Economic Thought in Medieval Islam,” History of Political Economy, Vol. 27, No. 3, 539–61).
- ^ John Locke (1691) Some Considerations on the consequences of the Lowering of Interest and the Raising of the Value of Money Archived 24 March 2015 at the Wayback Machine
- ^ une b Thomas M. Humphrey, 1992. “Marshallian Cross Diagrams and Their Uses before Alfred Marshall”, Economic Review, Mar/Apr, Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond, pp. 3–23 Archived 19 October 2012 at the Wayback Machine.
- ^ A.D. Brownlie and M.F. Lloyd Prichard, 1963. “Professor Fleeming Jenkin, 1833–1885 Pioneer in Engineering and Political Economy”, Oxford Economic Papers, 15(3), p. 211.
- ^ Fleeming Jenkin, 1870. “The Graphical Representation of the Laws of Supply and Demand, and their Application to Labour”, in Alexander Grant, ed., Recess Studies, Edinburgh. Ch. VI, pp. 151–85. Edinburgh. Scroll to chapter link Archived 16 July 2020 at the Wayback Machine.
- ^ “Capitalism.” World Book Encyclopedia. 1988. p. 194.
- ^ Lears, T.J. Jackson (1985) “The Concept of Cultural Hegemony”
- ^ Holub, Renate (2005) Antonio Gramsci: Beyond Marxism and Postmodernism
- ^ Boggs, Carl (2012) Ecology and Revolution: Global Crisis and the Political Challenge
- ^ Habermas, 1988: 37, 75.
- ^ Imperialism, the Highest Stage of Capitalism ibid. Finance Capital and the Finance Oligarchy Archived 2 April 2015 at the Wayback Machine
- ^ Foster, John Bellamy; Financialization, Robert W. McChesney Topics; Crisis, Global Economic; Economy, Political (1 October 2009). “Monopoly-Finance Capital and the Paradox of Accumulation”. Monthly Review. Archived from the original on 28 August 2016. Retrieved 27 August 2016.
- ^ Frederic Jameson, ‘Culture and Finance Capital’, in The Jameson Reader (2005) p. 257
- ^ Quoted in E.H. Carr, The Bolshevik Revolution 2 (1971) p. 137
- ^ Quoted in F.A Voight, Unto Caesar (1938) p. 22
- ^ C. J.Calhoun/G. Derluguian, Business as Usual (2011) p. 57
- ^ Jameson, pp. 259–60
- ^ Musacchio, Aldo. “Economist Debates: State capitalism: Statements”. The Economist. Archived from the original on 16 July 2012. Retrieved 20 June 2012.
- ^ State capitalism Archived 3 July 2015 at the Wayback Machine. Merriam-Webster. Retrieved 7 July 2015.
- ^ Frederick Engels. “Socialism: Utopian and Scientific (Chpt. 3)”. Marxists.org. Archived from the original on 9 May 2020. Retrieved 8 January 2014.
- ^ V.I. Lenin. The Tax in Kind Archived 7 September 2015 at the Wayback Machine. Lenin’s Collected Works, 1st English Edition, Progress Publishers, Moscow, 1965, vol. 32, pp. 329–65.
- ^ V.I. Lenin. To the Russian Colony in North America Archived 18 June 2015 at the Wayback Machine. Lenin Collected Works, Progress Publishers, 1971, Moscow, vol. 42, pp. 425c–27a.
- ^ “State capitalism” in the Soviet Union Archived 28 July 2019 at the Wayback Machine, M.C. Howard and J.E. King
- ^ Noam Chomsky (1986). The Soviet Union Versus Socialism Archived 24 September 2015 at the Wayback Machine. Our Generation. Retrieved 9 July 2015.
- ^ Richard D. Wolff (27 June 2015). Socialism Means Abolishing the Distinction Between Bosses and Employees Archived 11 March 2018 at the Wayback Machine. Truthout. Retrieved 9 July 2015.
- ^ Raya Dunayevskaya (1941) The Union of Soviet Socialist Republics is a Capitalist Society Archived 7 December 2019 at the Wayback Machine
- ^ C.L.R. James, Raya Dunayevskaya, and Grace Lee Boggs (1950) State Capitalism and World Revolution Archived 19 June 2020 at the Wayback Machine
- ^ Von Mises, Ludwig (1979). Socialism: An Economic and Sociological Analysis. Indianapolis: LibertyClassics. ISBN 978-0-913966-63-1. Retrieved 31 May 2007.
The socialist movement takes great pains to circulate frequently new labels for its ideally constructed state. Each worn-out label is replaced by another which raises hopes of an ultimate solution of the insoluble basic problem of Socialism—until it becomes obvious that nothing has been changed but the name. The most recent slogan is ‘State Capitalism.’ It is not commonly realized that this covers nothing more than what used to be called Planned Economy and State Socialism, and that State Capitalism, Planned Economy, and State Socialism diverge only in non-essentials from the “classic” ideal of egalitarian Socialism.
- ^ “Economics A–Z: Capital“. The Economist. Archived from the original on 7 August 2017. Retrieved 25 March 2015.
- ^ “Encyclopedia of Marxism – Glossary of terms: Capital“. Marxists Internet Archive. Archived from the original on 18 June 2015. Retrieved 25 March 2015.
- ^ Marx, Karl. “Economic Manuscripts: Capital Vol. I – Chapter Twenty-Five”. Archived from the original on 18 March 2016. Retrieved 24 March 2015.
- ^ Steinfeld 2009, p. 3: “All labor contracts were/are designed legally to bind a worker in one way or another to fulfill the labor obligations the worker has undertaken. That is one of the principal purposes of labor contracts.”
- ^ Deakin & Wilkinson 2005.
Marx 1990, p. 1005, defines wage labour succinctly as “the labour of the worker who sells his own labour-power.” - ^ Christopher T.S. Ragan and Richard G. Lipsey. Microeconomics. Twelfth Canadian Edition ed. Toronto, Pearson Education Canada, 2008. Print.
- ^ Robbins, Richard H. Global problems and the culture of capitalism. Boston: Allyn & Bacon, 2007. Print.
- Bibliography
- Bacher, Christian (2007). Capitalism, Ethics and the Paradoxon of Self-Exploitation. Munich: GRIN Verlag. p. 2. ISBN 978-3-638-63658-2. Archived from the original on 1 November 2015. Retrieved 27 June 2015.
- Boldizzoni, Francesco (2020). Foretelling the End of Capitalism: Intellectual Misadventures since Karl Marx. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. ISBN 978-0-674-91932-7.
- Carsel, Wilfred (1940). “The Slaveholders’ Indictment of Northern Wage Slavery”. Journal of Southern History. 6 (4): 504–20. doi:10.2307/2192167. JSTOR 2192167.
- Deakin, Simon; Wilkinson, Frank (2005). The Law of the Labour Market: Industrialization, Employment, and Legal Evolution. Oxford: Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-815281-1.
- De George, Richard T. (1986). Business Ethics. New York: Macmillan. p. 104. ISBN 978-0-02-328010-8.
- Elkins, Caroline (2005). Britain’s Gulag: The Brutal End of Empire in Kenya. London: Jonathan Cape. ISBN 978-0-224-07363-9.
- Fitzhugh, George (1857). Cannibals All! or, Slaves Without Masters. Richmond, VA: A. Morris. ISBN 978-1-4290-1643-8. Archived from the original on 18 October 2015. Retrieved 27 June 2015.
- Fulcher, James (2004). Capitalism A Very Short Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-280218-7.
- Graeber, David (2004). Fragments of an Anarchist Anthropology. Prickly Paradigm Press. ISBN 978-0-9728196-4-0.
- Graeber, David (2007). Possibilities: Essays on Hierarchy, Rebellion and Desire. AK Press. ISBN 978-1-904859-66-6.
- Hallgrimsdottir, Helga Kristin; Benoit, Cecilia (2007). “From Wage Slaves to Wage Workers: Cultural Opportunity Structures and the Evolution of the Wage Demands of the Knights of Labor and the American Federation of Labor, 1880–1900”. Social Forces. 85 (3): 1393–411. doi:10.1353/sof.2007.0037. JSTOR 4494978. S2CID 154551793.
- James, Paul; Gills, Barry (2007). Globalization and Economy, Vol. 1: Global Markets and Capitalism. London: Sage Publications. Archived from the original on 23 September 2020. Retrieved 17 May 2014.
- Krahn, Harvey J., and Graham S. Lowe (1993). Work, Industry, and Canadian Society. Second ed. Scarborough, Ont.: Nelson Canada. xii, 430 p. ISBN 0-17-603540-0
- Lash, Scott; Urry, John (2000). “Capitalism”. In Abercrombie, Nicholas; Hill, Stephen; Turner, Bryan S (eds.). The Penguin Dictionary of Sociology (4th ed.). London: Penguin Books. pp. 36–40. ISBN 978-0-14-051380-6.
- McCraw, Thomas K. (August 2011). “The Current Crisis and the Essence of Capitalism”. The Montreal Review. ISSN 0707-9656. Archived from the original on 8 September 2011. Retrieved 14 August 2011.
- Nelson, John O. (1995). “That a Worker’s Labour Cannot Be a Commodity”. Philosophy. 70 (272): 157–65. doi:10.1017/s0031819100065359. JSTOR 3751199.
- Obrinsky, Mark (1983). Profit Theory and Capitalism. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press – via Questia (subscription required). p. 1. ISBN 978-0-8122-7863-7.
- Olusoga, David; Erichsen, Casper W. (2010). The Kaiser’s Holocaust: Germany’s Forgotten Genocide. London: Faber and Faber. ISBN 978-0-571-23141-6.
- Marx, Karl (1847). Wage Labour and Capital. Archived from the original on 6 September 2019. Retrieved 25 March 2015.
- Marx, Karl (1990) [1867]. Capital, Volume I. London: Penguin Classics. ISBN 978-0-14-044568-8.
- Roediger, David (2007a) [1991]. The Wages of Whiteness: Race and the Making of the American Working Class (revised and expanded ed.). London & New York: Verso. ISBN 978-1-84467-145-8.
- Roediger, David (2007b). “An Outmoded Approach to Labour and Slavery”. Labour/Le Travail. 60: 245–50. JSTOR 25149808.
- Steinfeld, Robert (2009). “Coercion/Consent in Labor” (PDF). COMPAS Working Paper No. 66. Oxford: University of Oxford. Archived from the original (PDF) on 1 March 2014. Retrieved 3 March 2013.
- Wolf, Eric R. (1982). Europe and the People Without History. Berkeley: University of California Press. ISBN 978-0-520-04459-3.
- Wood, Ellen Meiksins (2002). The Origin of Capitalism: A Longer View. London: Verso. ISBN 978-1-85984-392-5. Archived from the original on 28 November 2015. Retrieved 27 June 2015.
- Young, John (1997). Peasant Revolution in Ethiopia: The Tigray People’s Liberation Front, 1975–1991. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-0-521-02606-2.
Lectures complémentaires[[[[edit]
- Alperovitz, Gar (2011). America Beyond Capitalism: Reclaiming Our Wealth, Our Liberty, and Our Democracy, 2nd Edition. Democracy Collaborative Press. ISBN 0-9847857-0-1.
- Altvater, Elmar; Crist, Eileen; Haraway, Donna; Hartley, Daniel; Parenti, Christian; McBrien, Justin; Moore, Jason (2016). Anthropocene or Capitalocene? Nature, History, and the Crisis of Capitalism. PM Press. ISBN 978-1-62963-148-6.
- Ascher, Ivan. Portfolio Society: On the Capitalist Mode of Prediction. Zone Books, 2016. ISBN 978-1935408741
- Baptist, Edward E. The Half Has Never Been Told: Slavery and the Making of American Capitalism. New York, Basic Books, 2014. ISBN 0-465-00296-X.
- Barbrook, Richard (2006). The Class of the New (paperback ed.). London: OpenMute. ISBN 978-0-9550664-7-4. Archived from the original on 1 August 2018. Retrieved 11 June 2019.
- Block, Fred; Somers, Margaret R. (2014). The Power of Market Fundamentalism: Karl Polyani’s Critique. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. ISBN 978-0-674-05071-6.
- Boldizzoni, Francesco (2020). Foretelling the End of Capitalism: Intellectual Misadventures since Karl Marx. Harvard University Press. ISBN 978-0-674-91932-7.
- Braudel, Fernand. Civilization and Capitalism.
- Callinicos, Alex. “Wage Labour and State Capitalism – A reply to Peter Binns and Mike Haynes”, International Socialism, second series, 12, Spring 1979.
- Case, Anne; Deaton, Angus (2020). Deaths of Despair and the Future of Capitalism. Princeton University Press. ISBN 978-0-691-19078-5. Archived from the original on 7 March 2020. Retrieved 6 March 2020.
- Farl, Erich. “The Genealogy of State Capitalism”. In: International London, vol. 2, no. 1, 1973.
- Gough, Ian. State Expenditure in Advanced Capitalism Archived 7 February 2012 at the Wayback Machine New Left Review.
- Habermas, J. [1973] Legitimation Crisis (eng. translation by T. McCarthy). Boston, Beacon. From Google books Archived 20 November 2015 at the Wayback Machine; excerpt.
- Harvey, David (2014). Seventeen Contradictions and the End of Capitalism. Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-936026-0.
- Hyman, Louis and Edward E. Baptist (2014). American Capitalism: A Reader. Simon & Schuster. ISBN 978-1-4767-8431-1.
- James, Paul; Patomäki, Heikki (2007). Globalization and Economy, Vol. 2: Global Finance and the New Global Economy. London: Sage Publications. Archived from the original on 23 September 2020. Retrieved 28 January 2018.
- James, Paul; Palen, Ronen (2007). Globalization and Economy, Vol. 3: Global Economic Regimes and Institutions. London: Sage Publications. Archived from the original on 23 September 2020. Retrieved 28 January 2018.
- James, Paul; O’Brien, Robert (2007). Globalization and Economy, Vol. 4: Globalizing Labour. London: Sage Publications. Archived from the original on 23 September 2020. Retrieved 28 January 2018.
- Jameson, Fredric (1991). Postmodernism, or, the Cultural Logic of Late Capitalism.
- Kotler, Philip (2015). Confronting Capitalism: Real Solutions for a Troubled Economic System. AMACOM. ISBN 978-0814436455
- Mandel, Ernest (1999). Late Capitalism. ISBN 978-1859842027
- Mander, Jerry (2012). The Capitalism Papers: Fatal Flaws of an Obsolete System. Counterpoint. ISBN 978-1-61902-158-7.
- Marcel van der Linden, Western Marxism and the Soviet Union. New York, Brill Publishers, 2007.
- Mayfield, Anthony. “Economics”, in his On the Brink: Resource Depletion, Debt Collapse, and Super-technology ([Vancouver, B.C., Canada]: On the Brink Publishing, 2013), pp. 50–104.
- Musacchio, Aldo; Lazzarini, Sergio G. (2014). Reinventing State Capitalism: Leviathan in Business, Brazil and Beyond. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. ISBN 978-0-674-72968-1.
- Newitz, Annalee (2006). Pretend We′re Dead: Capitalist Monsters in American Pop Culture. Durham, NC: Duke University Press. ISBN 978-0-8223-3745-4. Archived from the original on 26 October 2016. Retrieved 26 October 2016.
- Panitch, Leo, and Sam Gindin (2012). The Making of Global Capitalism: the Political Economy of American Empire. London, Verso. ISBN 978-1-84467-742-9.
- Piketty, Thomas (2014). Capital in the Twenty-First Century. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press. ISBN 978-0-674-43000-6.
- Piketty, Thomas (2020). Capital and Ideology. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press. ISBN 978-0-674-98082-2.
- Polanyi, Karl (2001). The Great Transformation: The Political and Economic Origins of Our Time. Beacon Press; 2nd ed. ISBN 0-8070-5643-X
- Reisman, George (1998). Capitalism: A complete understanding of the nature and value of human economic life. Jameson Books. ISBN 978-0-915463-73-2.
- Richards, Jay W. (2009). Money, Greed, and God: Why Capitalism is the Solution and Not the Problem. New York: HarperOne. ISBN 978-0-06-137561-3
- Roberts, Paul Craig (2013). The Failure of Laissez-faire Capitalism: towards a New Economics for a Full World. Atlanta, Ga.: Clarity Press. ISBN 978-0-9860362-5-5
- Robinson, William I. Global Capitalism and the Crisis of Humanity. Cambridge University Press, 2014. ISBN 1-107-69111-7
- Schram, Sanford F. (2015). The Return of Ordinary Capitalism: Neoliberalism, Precarity, Occupy. Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-025302-8. Archived from the original on 23 September 2020. Retrieved 12 February 2017.
- Shaikh, Anwar. “Capital as a Social Relation” (New Palgrave article)
- Sombart, Werner (1916) Der moderne Kapitalismus. Historisch-systematische Darstellung des gesamteuropäischen Wirtschaftslebens von seinen Anfängen bis zur Gegenwart. Final edn. 1916, repr. 1969, paperback edn. (3 vols. in 6): 1987 Munich: dtv. (Also in Spanish; no English translation yet.)
- Wallerstein, Immanuel (1983). Historical Capitalism. Verso Books. ISBN 978-0-86091-761-8.
- Wolff, Richard D. (2012). Democracy at Work: A Cure for Capitalism. Haymarket Books. ISBN 978-1-60846-247-6.
- Wood, Ellen Meiksins (2002). The Origin of Capitalism: A Longer View. Verso. ISBN 978-1-85984-392-5.
- Korstanje, Maximiliano Korstanje (2016). The Rise of Thana-Capitalism and Tourism. Routledge. ISBN 9781138209268.
External links[[[[edit]
![]() |
Wikimedia Commons has media related to Capitalism. |
![]() |
Look up capitalism in Wiktionary, the free dictionary. |