Primacy of the economy

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The or the primacy of the economy is a term used mainly in the social sciences to denote the thesis of the dominance of the economy over the rest of society or its priority over politics.

In social theory it is assumed that “ economy ” and “ society ” can be conceptually separated and contrasted, whereby two versions of the relationship between them are mainly possible:

  1. The economy takes precedence over the other subsystems of society.
  2. The economy has priority over politics. (= Reversal of the primacy of politics )

"Economy of Society"

Niklas Luhmann speaks of the “economy of society”. He wants to express that in his system-theoretical conception the economy is a sub-system of society. He considers the comparison of "economy" and "society" to be impractical.

In addition, Luhmann firmly rejects thesis (1).

“Instead, we start from an understanding of society from which functional systems for politics and economics, along with many others, are only differentiated for specific functions and therefore neither priority nor overriding importance, even [...] not even representative or control functions of society Can claim. "

Uwe Schimank counters this, also arguing in the theoretical frame of reference of functional differentiation, that the social subsystem capitalist economy "occupies a prominent position [...] in the structure of the all-round performance interdependencies" of the subsystems. He attributes the primacy of the economy, among other things, to the ubiquitous dependence on money of the individual members of society (as employees) and the performance organizations of other subsystems. In contrast to other media (such as power, truth, love), money as the specific medium of the economic system can be used objectively and socially more universally.

economy and society

In his new theoretical view of society, according to Luhmann, there is a “radical break with the centuries-old tradition of political economy”. Their basic principle was namely that the development of society should be understood from the perspective of the economy.

This view of the history of political economy can be traced back to Montesquieu . In his famous work On the Spirit of Laws , Book XVIII, Montesquieu sees the differences in customs and social institutions depending on the different modes of economic subsistence (hunting, livestock farming, agriculture and trade). Later authors such as Quesnay , Mirabeau , Turgot and James Denham-Steuart took up these ideas and put them in a chronological order. To fully unfold as a "four-stage theory" of social development, based on the idea that society must eke out its economic subsistence, this theory finally came in the "Scottish Historical School": Adam Ferguson , William Robertson , Adam Smith and John Millar .

According to the materialistic view of history of Karl Marx , later called " Historical Materialism " by Friedrich Engels , the economy (in Marxist terminology: the mode of production ) is understood as a "base" that has a determining influence on the rest of society ("superstructure"). It is precisely this assumption, which is fundamental to the materialistic understanding of history, that today's sociologists such as Stefan Kühl and Uwe Schimank use the expression “primacy of the economy”, although Marx and Engels themselves did not know this expression. (see base and superstructure )

Karl Polanyi's historical account of the triumphant advance of economic liberalism in England in the 19th century is also interpreted as the real-historical enforcement of the primacy of the economy over the rest of society. In his historical analysis of the emergence of the capitalist market economy, Polanyi himself speaks of a process of liberating ( unbundling ) economic institutions and economic action from the normative context of a traditional society and moral economy . As a consequence, he states that the laws of the self-regulated market brought about the “transformation of the natural and human substance of society into goods” and treated “society as an appendage to the market”. Mainly work , but also land and money are only fictitious goods . Achievement of profit became a new fundamental motive for action, which took the place of the vital security of existence.

Werner Sombart also criticized the fact that the “capitalist drive to earn” spills over into “other areas of human culture” and tends to subject “the entire world of values” to a “primacy of business interests” .

Theodor W. Adorno , however, uses this term in the Negative Dialectic with the critical reference to the Marxist conception of history:

“The primacy of the economy should justify the happy ending as inherent in it with historical stringency; the economic process creates the political relations of domination and overturns them until the inevitable liberation from the constraints of the economy. "

In recent years, various authors have used the primacy of the economy as a synonym for the restriction of national possibilities for action in the age of globalization and the independence of the financial markets . According to their analyzes, according to Helmut Voelzkow, “the globalization trend is to be equated with a surrender of politics to a new primacy of the economy”.

Political science

In political science, the primacy of the economy also stands for a normative idea of ​​the relationship between the economy and the state.

Hermann Adam differentiates between four types and gives examples:

Josef Schmid makes a different classification . He assigns planned economy, welfare state and Keynesian concepts to the primacy of politics . He contrasts this with positions based on the primacy of the economy. This includes neoclassical (state interventions mostly counterproductive) and systems-theoretical approaches (lack of control by the state). Between the primacy of the economy and the primacy of politics stand approaches that emphasize the interdependence of both areas.

See also

literature

  • Karl S. Althaler, (Ed.): Primat der Ökonomie? About freedom of action of social politics in the age of globalization. Metropolis, Marburg 1999. ISBN 3-89518-145-5 .
  • Stefan Kühl: primacy of economy vs. functional differentiation. The debate about the working and industrial society . Chapter II in: ders .: Work and industrial sociology , transcript Verlag, Bielefeld 2004, p. 13ff.
  • Ronald L. Meek : Smith, Marx, & after. Chapman & Hall: London 1977. ISBN 0-470-99161-5 .
  • Manfred Prisching: In the 21st Century - Primacy of the Economy? In: Heinrich Schmidinger (Ed.): The resources of the future . Tyrolia, Innsbruck-Vienna 2002.
  • Gerhard Willke : Capitalism . Campus, Frankfurt am Main 2006. google
  • Die Neue Gesellschaft / Frankfurter Hefte, issue 6/1998: Main topic: Primacy of the economy?

Web links

Individual evidence

  1. ↑ A number of social and economic scientists have recently taken up this thesis, sometimes with different names, including: a. Theodor W. Adorno, Niklas Luhmann, Helmut Willke, Uwe Schimank, Stefan Kühl, Gerhard Willke, Helmut Voelzkow. karl S-Althaler. See also the following individual proofs.
  2. ^ Richard Swedberg: The Critique of the 'Economy and Society' Perspective During the Paradigm Crisis: From the United States to Sweden. Acta Sociologica, 29: 91-112 (1986).
  3. ^ Niklas Luhmann: The economy of society. 1st edition. Suhrkamp, ​​Frankfurt am Main 1988, ISBN 3-518-57883-9 , p. 8.
  4. ^ Niklas Luhmann: The economy of society. 1st edition. Suhrkamp, ​​Frankfurt am Main 1988, ISBN 3-518-57883-9 , p. 10 f. / " Because of the primacy of the economy in an epoch of the political system's further differentiation, rationalization and development, ... " (A. Arato: Civil Society and Political Theory in the Work of Luhmann and Beyond. 1994.)
  5. ^ Niklas Luhmann: The economy of society . 1st edition. Suhrkamp, ​​Frankfurt am Main 1988, ISBN 3-518-57883-9 , p. 11.
  6. ↑ Uwe Schimank: Die Moderne: a functionally differentiated capitalist society. In: Berlin Journal for Sociology . Vol. 19/2009, H. 3, pp. 327-351.
  7. ^ Niklas Luhmann: The economy of society. 1st edition. Suhrkamp, ​​Frankfurt am Main 1988, ISBN 3-518-57883-9 , p. 10 f.
  8. ^ Smith, Turgot, and the 'Four Stages' Theory. In: Ronald L. Meek: Smith, Marx, & after . Chapman & Hall, London 1977, ISBN 0-470-99161-5 , p. 18 ff.
  9. ↑ Meek, p. 29.
  10. ^ Robertson: subsistence , see Ronald L. Meek: Smith, Marx, & after. Chapman & Hall, London 1977. ISBN 0-470-99161-5 . P. 19
  11. ^ Roy Pascal: Property and Society: The Scottish Historical School of the Eighteenth Century. Modern Quarterly, 1, 1938.
  12. ^ Stefan Kühl : Economy and Society - Neo-Marxist Theory Approaches . In: Andrea Maurer (Ed.): Handbuch der Wirtschaftssoziologie , VS-Verlag, 2008, pp. 124–151.
  13. ^ Stefan Kühl: Economy and Society - Neo-Marxist Theory Approaches . In: Andrea Maurer (ed.): Handbuch der Wirtschaftssoziologie , VS-Verlag, 2008, S. 143. Roland Springer: Return to Taylorism. Labor policy in automobile production at a crossroads . Campus, Frankfurt am Main 1999, p. 75.
  14. ^ Karl Polanyi: The Great Transformation. Political and economic origins of societies and economic systems . Suhrkamp, ​​Frankfurt am Main 1978, p. 70 u. P. 88.
  15. ^ Karl Polanyi: The Great Transformation. Political and economic origins of societies and economic systems . Suhrkamp, ​​Frankfurt am Main 1978, p. 182 ff.
  16. ^ Gerhard Willke: Capitalism . Campus, Frankfurt am Main 2006, p. 9.
  17. ^ Theodor W. Adorno Negative Dialectic (Collected Writings, Volume 6). 5th edition. Frankfurt am Main 1996, p. 315f.
  18. ↑ Christoph Henning: Narratives of globalization. On the Marx renaissance in globalism and globalization criticism . Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung , Bonn 2006, p. 17; fes.de (PDF; 216 kB)
  19. ↑ Helmut Voelzkow: From functional differentiation to globalization: New challenges for democratic theory . in: Raimund Werke / Uwe Schimank (Hrsg.): Social complexity and collective agency . Campus, Frankfurt am Main 2000, p. 278. See also Dieter Nohlen (Hrsg.): Lexikon der Politikwissenschaft. Theories, methods, terms . Volume 2 NZ. CH Beck, Munich 2006, p. 607.
  20. ^ Hermann Adam: Building blocks of politics: An introduction. Springer, 2007, ISBN 3-531-15486-9 , pp. 215f.
  21. ^ Josef Schmid: Economic Policy for Political Scientists. ISBN 3-8252-2804-5 , p. 18 f.