...with the alternate system, "this belongs to the state" (which often just meant "this belongs to the king who will use it to maximize *his* self-benefit" since if the history of modern economic systems has shown us anything, it is that state control != community control.)
-
So, uh, 1) I am self-taught at twittering, and therefore very bad at it. I am generally bad at social media. Or social anything (as you well know!). But second: I think your short version is essentially what I carved out as 'the modern form of this thing.' and that's fair.
I guess my caution is that a lot of modern theory about that comes from a time when it was assumed that the ancient world emphatically did not have institutions that looked like early modern capitalism. Your Polanyi/Weber/Marx, etc. But...
-
-
...we now know that many similar institutions did exist in the ancient world - this is the modernist/primitavist debate in the ancient economy, and it's fair to say the modernists have largely won. And I don't get the impression that the theories have been revised to reflect...
-
...that their ancient basis - which esp. for Marx and Polanyi is quite important! - have functionally collapsed. In that context, I think it is possible to argue that early modern capitalism is just one form of a very common, largely non-contingent form of human organization.
- Näytä vastaukset
Uusi keskustelu -
Lataaminen näyttää kestävän hetken.
Twitter saattaa olla ruuhkautunut tai ongelma on muuten hetkellinen. Yritä uudelleen tai käy Twitterin tilasivulla saadaksesi lisätietoja.