Search

This article draws on fieldwork form Delhi’s garment and electronics bazaars to articulate an alternative perspective on the role of brands in the global bazaar economy. Knockoffs and counterfeit brands have mostly been viewed as problematic manifestations of counterfeiting and piracy, or framed in terms of authenticity or marginal practices of imitation. In this article, we suggest that bazaar brands also function as central to a growing popular innovation system able to provide material goods as well as immaterial experiences to the world’s poorer consumers in ways that stay in close contacts with the mediated fluctuations of popular affects. Bazaar brands develop a unique relationship with consumers based on an ability to seize the moment rather than the creation of enduring loyalties. We suggest that bazaar brands can be understood as central to an emerging postcapitalist consumer economy that has been substantially empowered by the spread of digital technologies.

Corporate violence is a form of organised violence motivated or caused by material interest, profit-seeking or economic expansion. It is inflicted on human beings or ecosystems. Complementing a Marxist theoretical frame with literature on ecosocialism and degrowth, we examine how corporate violence is inherent to and has been consistently encouraged by the capitalist mode of production. By drawing on the concepts of primitive accumulation and social metabolism, we visibilise how such violence is manifested within the productive forces of capitalism – natural resources, labour, technology and money. Corporate violence, we argue, may only be countered in a post-capitalist society where the productive forces are radically transformed. We build on degrowth principles to articulate how corporate violence may be countered and how post-growth organising of productive forces may look.

This article presents a systematic and scientific literature review of the topic ‘zero growth’. Since its origins in the late 18th century, growth economics has expanded significantly in recent decades, leading to the development of ecological economics, political economics and growth and degrowth economics. It is apparent that humankind is now running out of time to develop a global consensus as to what approaches should be taken to transition from growth to zero growth and degrowth. Zero growth is the grand challenge of this century, particularly for the Asia-Pacific region where economic growth has been an imperative for emerging economies. Using Japan as an illustrative example, this article explores the scenario of a no-growth economy that is now confronted with potentially a zero-growth or even a degrowth future. The grand challenge for not just Japan but the entire Asia-Pacific region is how to survive a zero-growth future. Furthermore, this article also identifies emerging themes for future research to progress the zero-growth and degrowth discussions. JEL Classification: F64, N5, Q32, Q5

The rise of the gig economy and the prospect of increased automation has led to renewed calls for the implementation of a Universal Basic Income scheme from a variety of spokespeople on the left, including notable journalists, academics and politicians. Weeks, Mason, Srnicek and Williams and others suggest that such a re-orientation of welfare distribution would not only mitigate the effects of these tectonic changes to the nature of labour, but it might in fact facilitate a break away from neoliberal capitalism and towards a post-work condition. Building upon the work of Universal Basic Income detractors such as Pitts and Dinerstein, this article brings into question the likelihood of these claims. Universal Basic Income’s advocates speak of the freedom to be unlocked by Universal Basic Income: but the freedom to do what and for whom? The article addresses the increasing significance for the process of valorisation today of digital ‘free labour’, and thus explores the idea that Universal Basic Income might have presented itself at this current juncture less to be a vehicle to a utopian future and more to be a handmaid for capitalism as its mode of production evolves. After utilising Charlie Brooker’s Black Mirror to depict a dystopian imaginary of what a Universal Basic Income-future might thus really look like, the article concludes by questioning how we might rescue the scheme as a leftist project: attending to Guattari’s insights into how to resist capitalism’s subjectivation, as well as Fuchs’ vision for an ‘alternative Internet’.

Any inclusive comprehension of the inner nature, deep structures, and conflictual dynamism of capitalism is potentially a transformative cognitive Commons. Likewise, to achieve an inclusive understanding of the existing post-capitalist praxes and the imaginary visions of utopian futures require cumulative, collective, and cooperative learning. Thus, theories of capital and the post-/counter-capital alternatives can be generated and treated as the Commons. In this paper, I argue that although there is no single/exclusive line of historical progress beyond Capital, it is possible to create integral theoretical frameworks for orchestrating common actions across different alternative praxes. This becomes a strong possibility if our knowledge of the existing or imminent post-capitalist experiences is liberated from the disintegrating forces of the corporatized Eurocentric intellectual institutions. A transformative scholarship in collaboration with communities of struggle is therefore vitally needed today to generate educational Commons as a means for establishing organic unities among alternative praxes. This in itself is a prefigurative movement. The political goal should then be to go beyond the localized fragmented radical struggles without reducing their multiformity to challenge the totalizing effects of the capitalist markets and states. The process of building organic unities or what we may call ‘Commoning the alternatives’ requires ‘organic intellectuals’ to help post-capitalist initiatives to self-reflectively explore and address their limitations. Therefore, Commoning the knowledge and experiences of alternatives is a self-rectifying endeavor that translates paralyzing assortments into collective learning processes through which each movement becomes capable of traversing (rather than transcending) their self-inflicted ideological boundaries and thereby of developing integral macro-political projects to transcend capitalism; i.e. a Commonist project.

In 1995 George Marcus wrote on the ‘emergence of multi-sited ethnography’, contrasting ethnography in the world and ethnography of the world. He seemed to anticipate that with increasing globalization, technological advances, and new economic conditions, multi-sited methods would become the hallmark of ethnography for the nascent age. More than two decades later, I reflect on Marcus’s forecast. Anna Tsing has written perhaps the first monograph to fulfill Marcus’s ‘follow the thing’ model, as a style of ethnography of the world, while June Nash exemplifies his description of ethnography in the world system. Here I compare the merits and challenges of the two ethnographic styles through their works. I consider whether Marcus’s prediction has proven true. I conclude that both approaches are still relevant and, in fact, necessary complements to one another, just as post-capitalist and classic Marxist theories, far from being mutually exclusive, are vital tools for describing and understanding the world.

Digital commons such as Wikipedia, open-source software, and hospitality exchanges are frequently seen as forms of resistance to capitalist modes of production and consumption, as elements of alternative economies. In this article, however, we argue that the digital commons cannot by themselves constitute genuine forms of resistance for they are vulnerable to what we call ‘the illusion of the digital commons’, which leads to a form of ‘false consciousness’ that Sloterdijk designates as deep-rooted cynicism. This cynicism, we argue, ties in with the contemporary discontent with practices in the ‘sharing economy’, in which we pay particular attention to the practice of hospitality exchange on platforms such as BeWelcome, Couchsurfing, and Airbnb. We utilize Georg Simmel’s theory of money to explicate how exchange relations are mediated by technologically enabled explicit and implicit price mechanisms. Accordingly, we argue that the technologically mediated practice of digital commoning can constitute the ‘illusion of the commons’, an apparent form of commoning through digital exchanges that is inherently vulnerable to foster non-emancipatory practices. We argue that this results in a form of cynicism: of commoners that are disillusioned by ‘the power of things’. Only a ‘politics of the digital commons’, a democratic governance that keeps a check on the vulnerability of digital exchanges, and a free relation to technologies can help in avoiding the illusion of the digital commons.

If symbolic language, collective learning, and the means by which we use technology are humanity’s “fundamental, non-genetic, adaptive capacity,” then how these are extended and modified in the next few decades will fundamentally define what it means to be human in the twenty-first century. The scale and scope of that determination is, in turn, dependent on how cognitive framings or “gazes,” shaped by shared conceptions of time, are constructed, for these gazes bound conversation, available knowledge, and the contextualizing of decisions. This article argues that the dominant linear orientation with its present-future emphasis has a direct causal relationship with the existential issues contemporary society faces. It postulates their resolution requires going beyond existing constraints in language and learning together with the need to fundamentally rethink many explicit and tacit understandings, including those that inform futures thinking. If this were to occur, then the scope of symbolic language is broadened, thus, allowing a wider range of options to become available. However, it must be recognized at the same time that these same elements must morph to reflect both the inclusion, yet incompleteness, of all knowledge systems into a new ecology of understanding. Such propositions lead to a question: does contemporary society have sufficient awareness of its present situation to put aside (even for a while) what has made it successful thus far, to even consider possibilities that exist beyond the conventions it now accepts as axiomatic?

This paper examines the economic practices of maker spaces – open workshops that have increased in number over recent years and that aim to provide access to tools, materials and skills for small-scale manufacturing and repair. Scholarly interest in such spaces has been increasing across the social sciences more broadly, parallel to a growing interest in craft and making in economic geography. However, to rectify the ‘capitalocentrism’ of much existing work, the paper examines the case of a workshop in Edinburgh, Scotland, through the dual theoretical lens of diverse economies and social practice theory. This conceptual approach sees the space as a novel form of economic ‘being-in-common’, providing diverse and contradictory opportunities for post-capitalist practice. The paper draws conclusions regarding the limits and potential of such spaces for sowing the prefigurative seeds for a more inclusive, sustainable and democratic urbanism.

This article interrogates the performative effects of mutualist ideas in the context of market-making. Mutualism is a variety of anarchism associated with the work of Pierre-Joseph Proudhon, who argued for the centrality of market exchanges and mutual credit as a means for emancipating workers from capitalist exploitation. The discussion is informed by an ethnographic inquiry within a Local Exchange Trading System in Spain – the Moneda Social Puma – which illustrates how actors put mutualist ideas to work. This research makes three contributions: first, it frames a view of market multiplicity and plasticity that broadens the current scope of market studies beyond a managerialist focus. Second, it reveals how actors mobilise anarchist theories to shape – rather than escape – markets. Third, this work elucidates how actors negotiate and stabilise conflicting forms of valuation as mutualist ideas are implemented. In particular, we draw attention to a set of infrastructural practices and mutual credit arrangements whereby the market is cooperatively managed as a common. We conclude by reflecting on the implications of our work for extant debates concerning post-capitalist politics, markets and anarchism.

This article critiques post-operaist conceptualisations of immaterial labour from the perspective of Marxian value-form theory. Critiquing the idea of the ‘crisis of measurability’ created by immaterial labour and the contention that this makes redundant the law of value, it contests the novelty, immediate abstractness and immeasurable productivity post-operaists attribute to contemporary labour using the New Reading of Marx. The first part explores this theoretical conflict, asserting that post-operaismo refutes Marx’s value theory only insofar as it holds a productivist understanding of value to begin with. The second reflects upon the political implications through a consideration of the post-operaist advocacy of a universal basic income. Appeals to reward, recompense and redistribution rest upon the veracity of the claims made in the post-operaist treatment of labour, value and their immateriality and immeasurability. A value-form analysis exposes flaws in the assumptions about value and labour that support their case for a universal basic income.

The global financial crisis beginning in 2008 has encouraged the revitalization of a wide spectrum of leftist theorizing, but arguably the most audacious is that of ‘accelerationism’. Left-accelerationism sees the intensification of certain tendencies in late capitalist society as a way to escape its gravitational orbit and ‘repurpose’ the very material infrastructure of capitalism itself, to universally emancipatory ends. The central task here is to engage accelerationism with a thinker of the post-Autonomist tradition, Franco ‘Bifo’ Berardi. Contrary to Williams and Srnicek, co-authors of the #Accelerate manifesto, Bifo asserts that acceleration per se only augments the power and dynamism of capital, and posits instead a ‘post-politics’ of ironic detachment, aesthetic cultivation, and ‘therapy’. Contrasting Bifo and accelerationism clarifies each of their assumptions and core arguments, and points the way to a more nuanced perspective on these issues, in a contemporaneous moment marked in equal measure by inestimable threat and liberatory promise.

In contemporary discourse, cooperatives are often considered as vehicles for post-capitalist social transformation. However, theorists affiliated with the first, second, and third Internationals groupings of socialist parties suggested that cooperative potential was circumscribed by market coercion, leaving co-ops with limited pedagogical value and subordinating them to political movements. Their experience suggests it is important to avoid conflating cooperatives’ demonstration of post-capitalist labor norms with the strategic problems of creating a post-capitalist society.JEL classification: B14, J54

Acequias are a form of commons used to share scarce surface water for agricultural purposes. They have existed in the arid southwestern United States for centuries. In this paper I will argue that acequias are pre-capitalist organizations that convey important lessons for a post-capitalist world. The paper will also discuss La Vega, a grazing commons supported by the Hispanic culture. Both forms of the commons help to sustain low-income households many of whose members do not have regular or full-time wage-labor jobs, and they provide examples of sustainable agriculture in a fragile, high altitude environment. Within the study of political economy, they are an example of political struggles in the arena of material production and reproduction.

Some of the most compelling explanations for the current crisis reasoning comes from a Marxist understanding of how rising inequality and accumulation by dispossession during the neoliberal era led to economic instability. Other arguments put forward tend to ignore the inappropriateness of stimulating aggregate demand in an era when we have already grown beyond the planetary boundary, as evidenced by the crises of land use, climate change, and resource depletion. It may not be possible to address these problems within a reformed capitalism; rather, such a goal can only be met within a post-capitalist ecological economy geared to production for need, not for profit. This paper sets out a post-capitalist alternative drawing from green economics and Marxian economics and applied at a local and regional level.

A variety of pessimistic economic forecasts predicts a long period of poor growth and continued high levels of unemployment even as the stock market has reached new highs. Trend extrapolation suggests we can expect continued rising inequality in income, wealth and political influence. Because these developments are so visible there was widespread positive reaction to Occupy Wall Street and its analysis of the causal factors at work shaping the political economy of the contemporary conjuncture. This article argues that these developments should inform the work of social movements and considers the strengths and weaknesses of the Social Forum/Occupy activists and the socialist/Marxist wings of the broad left movement and drawing on contributions of selected European theorists suggests a perspective enabling these poles of the movement to work together while maintaining, as they must, their different foci and political philosophy priors.

This article engages with Peter Barnes’s work on commons trusts as a model to confront mounting social and ecological crises. The authors begin by locating Barnes’s model within the context of other approaches to this issue and by describing the main elements of his work and applying them to the case of carbon reduction strategies. Throughout, the article highlights the key strengths, limitations, and implications of Barnes’s model. Although Barnes offers a proposal for institutional change that could democratize decision making with a view to protecting the ecosphere, it does not go far enough to challenge the current capitalist order or in explaining how commons trusts would be protected from corporate influence. Implications include the connections between Barnes’s institutional model and a confederal model of global governance, as well as the potential of commons trusts to alter the practice of law and create new channels for ecological literacy and grassroots activism.

Against the complex economic backdrop of a deep-impact recession, rising public debt, and national austerity measures, this paper revisits LETS as one example of an alternative economic system and perhaps a more relevant operating mechanism for some communities in the months and years ahead. Drawing on the case study of the Totnes Acorn, this paper considers the continued relevance of LETS in a contemporary, perhaps even post-capitalist context, and against competing initiatives such as local currencies, resurging time banks, and the Big Society campaign. It is argued in this paper that the changing economic and political landscape of the last decade, which has coincided with rises in personal wealth, coupled with the celebrity status of the Transition Towns Initiative, the dated image and administration of some LETS may explain their decline during a period of economic decline. Yet their potential economic role could be reinvigorated and prove invaluable as a mechanism to stimulate and maximise local economic activity in the years ahead, as the full effects of expenditure cuts and a possible double-dip recession begin to take hold.