Home > Research > Publications & Outputs > The fetishism of divergence

Associated organisational unit

Electronic data

  • Fetishism_of_Divergence (1)

    Rights statement: This is an Accepted Manuscript of an article published by Taylor & Francis Group in Journal of Corporate Law Studies on 04/08/2015, available online: http://www.tandfonline.com/10.5235/14735970.15.1.183

    Accepted author manuscript, 254 KB, PDF document

    Available under license: CC BY: Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License

Links

Text available via DOI:

View graph of relations

The fetishism of divergence: a critique of Piketty

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articlepeer-review

Published

Standard

The fetishism of divergence : a critique of Piketty. / Campbell, David.

In: Journal of Corporate Law Studies, Vol. 15, No. 1, 01.09.2015, p. 183-216.

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articlepeer-review

Harvard

Campbell, D 2015, 'The fetishism of divergence: a critique of Piketty', Journal of Corporate Law Studies, vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 183-216. https://doi.org/10.5235/14735970.15.1.183

APA

Vancouver

Author

Campbell, David. / The fetishism of divergence : a critique of Piketty. In: Journal of Corporate Law Studies. 2015 ; Vol. 15, No. 1. pp. 183-216.

Bibtex

@article{8e6d525ffb59451088e53eccda3481af,
title = "The fetishism of divergence: a critique of Piketty",
abstract = "“the strength and weakness of that kind of criticism which knows how to judge and condemn the present, but not how to comprehend it”Thomas Piketty's Capital in the Twenty First Century has enjoyed a reception comparable only to that of Hayek's The Road to Serfdom or Galbraith's The Affluent Society. It restates Piketty and colleagues{\textquoteright} statistical history of capitalist inequality and advances an explanation of this based on the operation of pernicious economic forces of capitalism. The book obviously invites comparison with Marx's Capital. However, Piketty's “capital” is entirely divorced from any concrete conception of capitalist production, and his critique of capitalism is merely moralistic in a way which Marx would have scorned. Piketty's explanation of the growth of inequality since 1980, particularly of the growth of managerial “supersalaries”, displays a failure to grasp the character of the economic and legal institutions of corporate capitalism.",
author = "David Campbell",
note = "This is an Accepted Manuscript of an article published by Taylor & Francis Group in Journal of Corporate Law Studies on 04/08/2015, available online:http://www.tandfonline.com/10.5235/14735970.15.1.183",
year = "2015",
month = sep,
day = "1",
doi = "10.5235/14735970.15.1.183",
language = "English",
volume = "15",
pages = "183--216",
journal = "Journal of Corporate Law Studies",
issn = "1473-5970",
publisher = "Routledge",
number = "1",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - The fetishism of divergence

T2 - a critique of Piketty

AU - Campbell, David

N1 - This is an Accepted Manuscript of an article published by Taylor & Francis Group in Journal of Corporate Law Studies on 04/08/2015, available online:http://www.tandfonline.com/10.5235/14735970.15.1.183

PY - 2015/9/1

Y1 - 2015/9/1

N2 - “the strength and weakness of that kind of criticism which knows how to judge and condemn the present, but not how to comprehend it”Thomas Piketty's Capital in the Twenty First Century has enjoyed a reception comparable only to that of Hayek's The Road to Serfdom or Galbraith's The Affluent Society. It restates Piketty and colleagues’ statistical history of capitalist inequality and advances an explanation of this based on the operation of pernicious economic forces of capitalism. The book obviously invites comparison with Marx's Capital. However, Piketty's “capital” is entirely divorced from any concrete conception of capitalist production, and his critique of capitalism is merely moralistic in a way which Marx would have scorned. Piketty's explanation of the growth of inequality since 1980, particularly of the growth of managerial “supersalaries”, displays a failure to grasp the character of the economic and legal institutions of corporate capitalism.

AB - “the strength and weakness of that kind of criticism which knows how to judge and condemn the present, but not how to comprehend it”Thomas Piketty's Capital in the Twenty First Century has enjoyed a reception comparable only to that of Hayek's The Road to Serfdom or Galbraith's The Affluent Society. It restates Piketty and colleagues’ statistical history of capitalist inequality and advances an explanation of this based on the operation of pernicious economic forces of capitalism. The book obviously invites comparison with Marx's Capital. However, Piketty's “capital” is entirely divorced from any concrete conception of capitalist production, and his critique of capitalism is merely moralistic in a way which Marx would have scorned. Piketty's explanation of the growth of inequality since 1980, particularly of the growth of managerial “supersalaries”, displays a failure to grasp the character of the economic and legal institutions of corporate capitalism.

U2 - 10.5235/14735970.15.1.183

DO - 10.5235/14735970.15.1.183

M3 - Journal article

VL - 15

SP - 183

EP - 216

JO - Journal of Corporate Law Studies

JF - Journal of Corporate Law Studies

SN - 1473-5970

IS - 1

ER -