After Capitalism. A presentation of the main points of the book by David Schweickart Schweickart’s ‘Successor System Theory’. □ It should be concrete . After Capitalism by David Schweickart (Rowman & Littlefield, Lanham, MD, ) pages, $70 hardcover, $ paperback. ARE TODAY’S MOVEMENTS. Liberal, democratic capitalism as the end of history? Not necessarily. After Capitalism argues that there are forces developing in the world today that might.
|Published (Last):||7 March 2006|
|PDF File Size:||2.23 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||14.62 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
Goodreads helps you keep track of books you want to read. Want to Read saving…. Want to Read Currently Reading Read. Refresh and try again.
David Schweickart – Wikipedia
Open Preview See a Problem? Thanks for telling us about the problem. Return to Book Page. Preview — After Capitalism by David Schweickart. In After Capitalism, David Schweickart moves beyond the familiar arguments against globalizing capitalism to contribute something absolutely necessary and long overdue a coherent vision of a viable, desirable alternative to capitalism.
He names this system Economic Democracy, a successor-system to capitalism which preserves the efficiency strengths of a market economy whil In After Capitalism, David Schweickart moves beyond the familiar arguments against globalizing capitalism to contribute something absolutely necessary and long overdue a coherent vision of a viable, desirable alternative to capitalism. He names this system Economic Democracy, a successor-system to capitalism which preserves the efficiency strengths of a market economy while extending democracy to the workplace and to the structures of investment finance.
Drawing on both theoretical and empirical research, Schweickart shows how and why this model is efficient, dynamic, and superior to capitalism along a range of values. Paperback1stpages. To see what your friends thought of this book, please sign up.
To ask other readers questions about After Capitalismplease sign up. Is this book meant for a layman as well? Does Schweickart address the ideas of the Austrian School in this book? See 2 questions about After Capitalism…. Lists with This Book.
David Schweickart was my favorite professor in the philosophy program at Loyola University Chicago. The courses all had something to do with ethics and with political economy.
Owing to David’s doctoral training in both mathematics and philosophy as well as his extensive teaching experience, he was particularly authoritative about capittalism good at the demystification David Schweickart was my favorite professor in the philosophy program at Loyola University Chicago.
Owing to David’s doctoral training in both mathematics and philosophy as well as his extensive teaching experience, he was particularly authoritative about and good at the demystification of economics.
Unlike most professors, he was visibly enthusiastic about what he taught and conveyed that enthusiasm to his students so effectively that he was–and remains–one of the most popular faculty members at the university–and this despite his unapologetic Marxist proclivities.
Of all my teachers at Loyola, David is the only one I’ve remained actively friendly with. Indeed, he gave me After Capitalism on the occasion of my most recent birthday.
After Capitalism is, he said recently, one of the more recent incarnations of a book which he began as his second doctoral dissertation and continued in Capitalism and Worker Control? I haven’t read the dissertation yet, that’s next, but of the other two, this is the most readable.
The others were written more with the classroom in mind. This one is written with the general public as its intended audience. It is also the most personal, its author and his experiences explictly present in the text.
Normally, I’d say “too present”, but in this case the repeated self-reference serves as a kind of personable witness to David’s life-work.
He writes here as he speaks: I thought of myself as being a socialist long before I met David, but my vision of socialism has been significantly clarified by the years of interaction with him and his work. Others, generations of them now, less politically involved in childhood, have told me that studying him made them into socialists. The pity is that his visionary work, all of which is supremely relevant and quite plausibly practical, is so little broadcast to the public outside of the academy.
This accessible book, which should be soon appearing in an updated edition, would make an excellent gift for pretty much anyone. Sep 11, Carl rated it it was amazing Recommends it for: There Is An Alternative: He convincingly shows there is at least one There Is An Alternative: He uses all these as resources, but he returns to American soil to work out his basic ideas and proposals For a full review, go to www.
Jan 24, Andrew rated it it was amazing Shelves: Next time someone tells you the left doesn’t have any ideas after the Soviets crashed point them this way.
I loved how concise and readable this book is too–in that sense it’s very much like the Communist Manifesto quoted. What is presented is more or less the best of Soviet economy and modern Social Democratic economies.
We humans are pragmatic beings and when life throws a problem at us we don’t submit to it easily but try to solve it, and often, after many failures, we find a solution, though, usually, one that brings with it new problems, which we then in turn try to solve, and so on it goes, an endless, dialectical existence that moves us from one problem to another, the latest of which happens to be capitalism.
Although Marx’s critique of capitalism was, for the most part, powerful, he famously failed to pro We humans are pragmatic beings and when life throws a problem at us we don’t submit to it easily but try to solve it, and often, after many failures, we find a solution, though, usually, one that brings with it new problems, which we then in turn try to solve, and so on it goes, an endless, dialectical existence that moves us from one problem to another, the latest of which happens to be capitalism.
Although Marx’s critique of capitalism was, for the most part, powerful, he famously failed to provide a system that could replace it, and so the socialists that came after him had to blindly improvise with only small success.
The most successful were the Bolsheviks with their totalitarian brand of socialism, but their success came at the price of human suffering. Socialists, afterward, had to take a step back and reconsider their options and most arrived at the conclusion that democracy is imperative if the horrors of the past are to be prevented.
Were the lessons and experiments of the past enough to provide us with a better capitaljsm, though? Do we have a humane alternative to capitalism yet? Schweickart seems to think so, and I confess this book largely convinced me that his system, which he calls Economic Democracy, is a plausible and a pluralistic solution.
Here’s a quick outline of how it works: Investment funds are generated through a capital assets tax. In other words, there’s no centralized planning. Economic Democracy remains just an abstract hypothesis, though, and no matter how plausible it may look on paper we can’t be sure it will actually work until we try it and test it. The bigger problem isn’t in finding a workable solution, though, but in implementing it.
As long as capitalists and corporations are allowed the power they currently have over governments, no solution, no matter how good it seems, can be tried, let alone implemented. Jan 24, Solidarity rated it it was amazing Recommends it for: He uses all these as resources, but he returns to American soil to work out his basic ideas and proposals. If it schwdickart offer a plausible projection as to how we might get from here to there, successor-system theory remains an intellectual exercise in model building-interesting in its own right, perhaps, and capable of providing a rejoinder to the smug apologists for capital, but useless to people trying to change the world.
The core idea is that the workers themselves democratically elect the managers of their firms. They also share the wealth they create by sharing the profit among themselves. They make their money the old-fashioned way: But how are things like costs, prices, new products and production goals determined?
Here Schweickart departs from traditional socialist conceptions; he affirms the primary role of the market rather than relying on nationally centralized planning. Each Economic Schweickkart plant or workplace is controlled by each respective group of workers, but the firm is not owned by each particular group.
The firms are socially owned by schwdickart public at large. Because of this public ownership, the local workers are also required to meet the cost of paying into two funds: In a sense, the favid is leased by the workers from the government. The capital assets taxes that scuweickart government takes in is used to finance new enterprises, to maintain and develop infrastructure projects, and other costs spread across the whole of society.
In the course of the book, Schweickart addresses a good deal of these problems; but for some issues, he has only hints or open possibilities For the full review, go to carldavidson. Sep 06, Rob rated it really liked it. In ‘After Capitalism’, Schweickart is proposing a form of ‘market socialism’, whereby worker owned companies will compete in a market economy. Schweickart presents a compelling case for such a system, and if we were to create such a system de novo, I have every confidence that it would work admirably.
Schweickart’s presentation of likely scenarios all suffer from the In ‘After Capitalism’, Schweickart is proposing a form of ‘market socialism’, whereby worker owned companies will compete in a market economy.
Schweickart’s presentation of likely scenarios all suffer from the fatal flaw of being top-down solutions originating from within the political system. Which is to say, it requires a left-wing political party to win sufficient control as to be able to legislate such a system from the top of the national political apex, while glossing over the inevitable resistance parties with a vested interest in the maintenance of the present system would put up.
David Schweickart’s ‘After Capitalism’
In short, Schweickart’s proposal suffers from the flaws every Marxist oriented system in requiring the seizure of political power before the revolution can capitaliism implemented, universally, upon everybody. Needless to say, such an approach is a futile endeavor. Short of an extraordinary set of circumstances, it will never happen.
I stand by the approach of the 19th century ‘utopian socialists. Their goal was to build worker-owned communities within the existing social order.
Communities which only affected their own members and did not disturb the established power structures. As such, they do not provoke a backlash from the established powers, as would any movement aiming for nation-wide change.
They would operate ‘beneath the radar’ of the capitalist order, so to speak. As such communities would change the social relations of only the people voluntarily joining them, there is no imposition of wills upon unwilling parties, either of workers being forced to live under capitalist despotism, or of capitalists being shorn of their dominance of the political shcweickart. Such an arrangement would be free to grow unhindered until a certain critical mass has been reached, at which point worker owned businesses would be the norm, instead of the exception.
As an economist, it is evident that the author is not an economist. That isn’t necessarily a bad thing. But chapter 2 is the crux of his book for it details why capitalism is problematic. The argument appears circular to me though: He describes capitalism as positive-sum because “investment income, the reward to those who have “risked” their money by channeling it into financial institutions This is the key critique of the capitalist system, and I believe it is ignorant of the contribution to “production” that capitalists play.
I know it is tempting to consider lending money a passive act, capktalism in dqvid cases it is, but that is partly because of FDIC insurance as he points out. But there is risk involved, and there are plenty of capitalists who fail, and if they fail and lose money, they don’t go back and extract the losses from the workers they used.