Abstract
In Karl Polanyi’s Political and Economic Thought: A Critical Guide, Gareth Dale, Christopher Holmes, and Maria Markantonatou have produced a useful edited volume on Karl Polanyi’s contributions to economy and society. Its thirteen contributors do not simply acknowledge Polanyi’s enduring insights but shine a light on his misconceptions and gaps. The editors add heft to the project with Dale producing several well-received books on Polanyi along with Christopher Holmes’s recent addition. Those contributions inform this volume. Soundly organized, the chapters examine ten specific topics requiring closer inspection. These topics are Polanyi’s economic ideas, international political economy, the state, class, the gold standard, money, commodification, fascism, democracy, and knowledge. Michael Burawoy provides an afterword.
Holmes and David Yarrow begin with a review of Polanyi’s economic ideas. Drawing from a variety of Polanyi’s writings, they set up nicely the chapters that follow. The authors argue that Polanyi failed to appreciate sufficiently the historical background of laissez-faire ideology and Homo economicus, starting with Adam Smith, providing updates to the formalist versus substantivist debate.
Randall Germain demonstrates how scholars of international political economy have extended Polanyi’s work on fictitious commodities, especially money, as it is the most internationally scalable. Germain notes that Polanyi underestimated the expansive role played by powerful states and their central banks in shaping international markets and capitalism’s global rise as well as in the democratic countermovement following World War II.
In one of my favorite chapters, Markantonatou and Dale discuss Polanyi’s fragmented thoughts on the state. Those puzzled by Polanyi’s theoretical pieces and inconsistencies may be comforted to learn that Polanyi failed to articulate a fully coherent state theory. No, it was not hiding somewhere. Garnered from various writings, Polanyi’s conceptions evolved from a utopian “guild socialism” to one pushed and pulled by popular democratic and antidemocratic forces for and against greater commodification. His greatest contribution remains, however, his observation of the self-regulating market as a state project.
Most readers of Polanyi, especially of The Great Transformation, grow bewildered over his failure to discuss coherently class dynamics, given the double movement. He seems to view society as a collective, rising or falling by an ill-defined “internal logic.” Sandra Halperin argues that Polanyi’s de-emphasis of class influences came from a failure to comprehend fully the intense international class struggles raging at the time.
Another puzzle is Polanyi’s fixation on the gold standard as the linchpin of a global self-regulating market. Samuel Knafo states that it has escaped with surprisingly little critique. The author outlines Polanyi’s misunderstandings of the gold standard, including the idea that it was never a full expression of market fundamentalism and was at times detrimental to its advancement. Again, states and their central banks played key roles in implementing the gold standard, addressing problems that were more domestic but with international ripples. The fun part: Polanyi may have simply misread David Ricardo.
I struggled to understand the nuances in the chapter by Kurtuluş Gemici on money, including the gap he attempts to fill. Still, Gemici remains impressed with Polanyi’s comprehensive understanding of money’s role in economy and society. Polanyi argued money is fictitious and hence at least partially socially embedded but maintains distinct functions in market and non-market societies that continue to have relevance.
The editors might have labeled Hüseyin Özel’s chapter on commodification “Marx versus Polanyi.” While appreciating Polanyi’s contributions as a thinker in political economy rather than economic theory, Özel states that Marx’s concept of commodity fetishism leads to the same inhumane ends as Polanyi’s fictitious commodities. The key difference is Marx’s use of the labor theory of value compared to Polanyi’s adoption of the neoclassical marginalism. To Özel labor theory of value offers a seamless explanation of capitalism as a continuous process of attempting to commodify everything for the market.
In another insightful chapter, Dale and Mathieu Desan explore Polanyi’s extensive writings on fascism. Polanyi’s analyses of market fundamentalism and the double movement lead to only two possible outcomes—fascism or socialism, unless opposing forces can find a rare power-sharing compromise between capitalists and worker coalitions, as found in Bauer’s Vienna. The authors provide a sweeping account of the historical and philosophical underwritings of Polanyi’s conclusion that democracy leads ultimately to socialism and fascism saves capitalism. The intense conflict that followed resulted, as we know, in anti-democratic fascism during the interwar years.
In a smart companion to the chapter on fascism, Paula Valderrama explores Polanyi’s conceptualization of democracy as both a form of government and an ideal form of society. To keep people at the center of society, instead of the market, requires constructing supportive values. To overcome the obstacle of preserving individual freedom, a central element in market liberalism, citizens’ groups figure prominently. Valderrama encourages us to broaden our understanding of Polanyi’s democracy beyond simply the democratic welfare state. Citizen groups must push for decommodification from the bottom, not through more democratic state power from the top.
In perhaps the most unexpected chapter, Tilman Reitz discusses knowledge, a topic Polanyi covered only lightly. As a form of postindustrial labor, it falls within Polanyi’s category of fictitious commodities. Commodifying knowledge remains slippery. Patents and Silicon Valley provide evidence of privatization, but there are also public investments in education, requiring a distinction between fictitious commodities and fictitious commodities production.
Michael Burawoy ends the volume. After reviewing the contributions of each author, he presents Polanyi’s paradox: his failure to appreciate fully the powerful economic forces leading the current resurgence in market fundamentalism. Polanyi focused on the power of ideas instead of powerful interests politically engaged in accumulation. Burawoy correctly points out that the current third wave of marketization occurred under liberal democracy; democracy is not a guarantee. Successful countermovements require a fuller appreciation of the forces at play.
In spite of flaws in Polanyi’s conceptualizations, his political and economic thought remain remarkably relevant today. Polanyi comes under criticism for failing to predict neoliberalism’s return; I have viewed the double movement as more of a pendulum, swinging back and forth, with outcomes temporary. Yet, another prediction that pursuing market fundamentalism ends in either fascism or democratic socialism at extremes appears particularly percipient. Although discussed by some authors, I would have enjoyed a discrete chapter on the double movement. There is much to investigate, including the scale and degree required to determine success. Future writings might explore also Polanyi’s deep sense of morality. His work clearly conveys a strong moral concern for humane social and economic relationships among people, nations, and nature. Were the contours formed by his Jewish upbringing yet expressed by his interest in Christian socialism? Finally, illustrating Polanyi’s enduring relevance to nature and society, the 2020 pandemic exposes the peril of commodification, with viruses jumping across species from environmental dislocation. Will this shock provide the opportunity for a renewed social protection countermovement, given the failed leadership so far by market fundamentalists?
While the editors designed the volume for graduate students as introductions to essential topics, all but the most seasoned Polanyi scholars will glean insights from this engaging addition.