Search

The 2008 great financial crisis brought the question of the cyclical development of capitalism back to the center of political economy. To understand the nature of post-crisis capitalism, it is inevitable to evaluate the literature on the temporal phases of capitalism. This article presents four theories about the periodization of capitalism: the social structure of accumulation theory, regulation theory, techno-economic paradigm approach and systemic cycles of accumulation school. The article shows that, despite the different perspectives, each of the phasing approaches leads to similar results about the periods of capitalism. Moreover, the article concludes that every phase of capitalism has four elements: techno-economic paradigm, socio-institutional structures, demand regime and hegemonic state. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Max-Planck-Institut für Gesellschaftsforschung Discussion Papers is the property of Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Critical Theory in the 1940s contributed a significant modification of the classic idea of ‚progress‘ by arguing that development of the means of production implies development of the means of domination at the same time. This does not (against Habermas) necessarily lead into hopeless historical pessimism, but to a minimalist idea of progress: avoid the self-destruction of humanity and stop hunger and fear. The potential of the other radical implication of Critical Theory, namely that progress = liberation cannot necessarily be expected from a new mode of production. That there can be new modes of production inside a capitalist structure, is not fully realized by Horkheimer/Adorno due to their limited model of the development of capitalism: from „liberalism“ to „monopoly capitalism“. Post-war developments had to be „explained away“ as new forms of domination of the same old capitalism. Assuming that capitalism moved through the phases of Industrialism to Fordism to Neo-liberalism provides a better framework for Critical Theory and its idea of ‚progress‘.

The article discusses changes to concepts of progress in critical theory. The authors discuss the theory that development of production leads to domination and suggest this theory promotes progress as the prevention of self-destruction, fear and hunger in human civilization. They comment that a critical theory concept that progress equates to liberation is not reflected through the development of production and discuss how models of capitalism developed by philosophers Max Horkheimer and Theodor Adorno focused on capitalism after World War II as a method of domination.