What is required for (r)evolutions? — the case of economics
İktisatta (d)evrim için neler gereklidir?
- Tez No: 522304
- Danışmanlar: DOÇ. DR. KORAY AKAY, PROF. DR. ASAF SAVAŞ AKAT
- Tez Türü: Doktora
- Konular: Ekonomi, Economics
- Anahtar Kelimeler: Belirtilmemiş.
- Yıl: 2016
- Dil: İngilizce
- Üniversite: İstanbul Bilgi Üniversitesi
- Enstitü: Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü
- Ana Bilim Dalı: Aile Sağlığı Ana Bilim Dalı
- Bilim Dalı: Belirtilmemiş.
- Sayfa Sayısı: 232
Özet
Bu tez iktisatta (d)evrim için gerekli şartların incelendiği dört bölümden oluşmaktadır. I. Bölümde, konunun öne çıkan iki problemi, yani dünya ekonomisinde var olan aşırı fakirlik ve aşırı zenginlik ve güç dengesizliği ele alınmakta ve iktisatta bir devrimin gerçekleşmesinin önemi vurgulanmaktadır. II. Bölümde, iktisadı dönüştürmek için gereken şartlar felsefi ve tarihi bir perspektiften, ele alınmakta ve bulgular bizi iktisatta bir (d)evrim gerçekleştirmek için karşılanması gereken beş kapsamlı kriter olduğu sonucuna götürmektedir; kritik dönemeç, benzeşmezlik, duyarlılık, akademik doğrulama ve en önemlisi elitlerin uyarlaması ve kullanması. III. Bölümde, bu beş kriter günümüz iktisadına uygulanmakta ve kritik dönemeç ve benzeşmezlik şartları yeterince karşılanmış görünürken, duyarlılık ve akademik doğrulama kriterlerinin kısmen karşılandığı; elitlerin uyarlaması ve kullanması kriterinin ise karşılanmadığı sonucuna varılmaktadır. IV. Bölümde, önceki bölümlerde ortaya konan sonuçlar tartışılmakta ve yeni bir kriter dizisi oluşturularak analitik çerçeve revize edilmektedir. Bunun nedeni günümüz şartlarının ve hedeflerinin 1970'lerde gerçekleştirilen iktisatta (d)evrim projesine ters olmasıdır. Eklenen iki yeni kriter: plutokratların güçsüzleştirilmesi ve özgürleştirmedir.
Özet (Çeviri)
This thesis consists of four parts, all of which concern one topic: (r)evolutions in economics. Part I, entitled Problem context, involves an analytical and critical description of the dominant discourse in economics, juxtaposed with an overview of the contemporary world economy and humanity. The main findings are as follows: • The dominant economic discourse provides the intellectual backbone to a world economy in which severe economic imbalances are re-generated and widened, mainly in the forms of extreme poverty, extreme wealth and associated inequality. • The dominant economic discourse provides the intellectual backbone to an elite-oriented, subjugated humanity, mainly by encouraging ethical behaviour based on destructive selfishness and competition. • The economic and human imbalances re-generate severe power imbalances so that societies suffer from lower quality of democracy, well-being and further human polarisations, as well as more plutocracy and economic inequality. • The three subjugatory channels generate societies that oscillate within a vicious cycle of development towards even more subjugatory and destructive imbalances in terms of economy, ethics and power. Moreover, since the outcomes seem to be quickly worsening, (r)evolutions are imperative. The final conclusion to Part I is, therefore: (r)evolutionise economics, the sooner the better. PART II, entitled Solution orientation: How to (r)evolutionise economics?, employs two lines of enquiry in order to assemble inferences on what possible requirements are necessary to actually (r)evolutionise economics. The first involves a philosophical appraisal, which attempts to outline important perspectives, approaches and accounts to transform an academic field such as economics. The second line of enquiry involves a historical appraisal, which attempts to outline the economic history of an acknowledged (r)evolution in economics: the neoclassical economics take-over during the 1970s. The findings lead us to conclude that there are five overarching criteria that need to be fulfilled in order to realise a (r)evolution in economics: critical juncture; dissimilarity; sensibility; scholar validation; and most importantly, elite appropriation. In relation, Part II concludes that an academic field such as economics cannot be changed simply by intra-scientific support, but must be coupled with extra-scientific factors since economics is significantly value-, interest- and ideologyladen. Part III, entitled Solution assessment: To (r)evolutionise economics today!, appraises the criteria from Part II within the context of the contemporary state of economics. It comprises of five sections, corresponding to the five criteria identified in Part II. Each criterion is assessed through relevant research findings and, when applicable, economic indicators and other statistics. The first criterion 'Critical Juncture' is fulfilled because the GFC and its aftermath form a major economic crisis, and a significant crisis in economics. Furthermore, it is widely seen that the dominant economics has not, and cannot, (re)solve the continued repercussions of the GFC. The 'Dissimilarity' criterion was also found to have been fulfilled, given the number of well-researched alternative discourses. The 'Sensibility' criterion was found to be only partly fulfilled given, for instance, the limited success in dissemination and exposure while failing to make a significant impact on the mantra that 'There is No Alternative.' However, sensibility is a particular challenge in the face of elite appropriation, which involves obstructing exposure to alternative ideas, as well as the existence of prevailing cognitive maps, to the audience. The fourth criterion, 'Scholar validation', has also been only partly fulfilled, since dissimilar discourses continue to face major hurdles in the face of entrenched scholarship structures and mechanisms favouring the dominant discourse, such as university education, funding, citations, journal rankings, etc. However, we were able to show the growing interactions and collaboration among heterodox economists, as well as the existence of dissenting economics students. The final criterion, elite appropriation, has certainly not been fulfilled. The dominant elites continue to support the dominant discourse in various ways, particularly in terms of funding, but also through the processes of domination (political power, corporate power, ethical power and through the economics profession). Part IV provides the aggregated conclusions, recommendations and a discussion based on the previous three Parts. The accounts in Part III lead to a revised analytical framework for (r)evolutions in economics, consisting of a new set of criteria. This is because our contemporary circumstances and objectives stand in contrast to the (r)evolutionary project that materialised in the 1970s. This time, we are attempting to emancipate economics from the dominant discourse that was established over that period and which has generated many of the problems elaborated upon in this thesis. In particular, the contemporary (r)evolutionary project needs to involve a process in which economics, the economy and democratic power, as well as cognitive maps, are emancipated from elite appropriation. It is for this reason two further criteria are added: plutocrat disempowerment and emancipation. Note, however, that they are all overlapping, and that reflections upon each one of them may also be applicable to other criteria. i. Critical juncture ii. Dissimilarity iii. Sensibility iv. Scholar validation v. Plutocrat disempowerment vi. Elite appropriation vii. Emancipation. Since the GFC has not meant an actualised critical juncture, it is recommended that one be established. There are a large number of crises around the world today, which are all, more or less, linked together to form one massive, overarching crisis, i.e. there is a global crisis, consisting of numerous different crises (economy, ethics, and power, but also the environment, conflicts, etc) to remedy. However, in light of sensibility, it may be worthwhile showcasing such various dimensions of a holistic crisis at the regional, national or even local levels, so as to garner sufficient attention to the issues at hand. In brief, for the following three criteria (Dissimilarity, Sensibility, and Scholar Validation), it is suggested that it is essential to transcend interests, values and ideology so as to shift cognitive frameworks towards alternative, or rather emancipatory, ethics, economics and economy. In this endeavour, it is again crucial to implement one line of argumentation against the current economic system and economic discourse, while a complementary line of argumentation for alternative economic systems and dissimilar discourses. The more the subjugatory structures and mechanisms are made visible, the better for the (r)evolutionary project, as our findings suggest that power is most effective when invisible. Our fifth criterion this time around is plutocrat disempowerment. The findings in Part I and II show that our contemporary world consists of widespread plutocracies; societies significantly ruled by the wealthy or dominant economic elites. This state of affairs has been generated as an outcome of the economic elite-oriented (r)evolution of the 1970s. Elite appropriation processes since then have continuously been allowed to go so far as to create the powerful plutocrat classes of today. Therefore, given the problem context at hand, it is necessary to disempower the plutocrats in order to have a chance of bringing about a (r)evolution in economics today. This is, of course, the most difficult challenge of the (r)evolutionary project. Dominant economic elites have managed to generate an excessive form of capitalism, in which capital is almost entirely equal to power. This means economic inequality is likely continue to widen even further, in the absence of (r)evolutions, to the extent that the outcome can only be described as fascism. This governance structure would be based on elitism and its specific polarising values, interests and ideas. In other words, excessive capitalism leads to plutocracy which is equal to the absence of real democracy — a situation which is likely to proceed towards fascism, or other totalitarian governance forms, given the presence of human polarisations. Note that the intellectual backbone to excessive capitalism (which leads to fascism) is also capital-, corporate- and elitist-oriented. Therefore, we may conclude that the dominant economic discourse helps to generate ever more totalitarian governance systems, including fascism. The circle is complete. The way out is through emancipation of individuals and institutions. Power imbalances can be remedied by material and immaterial emancipation. The dominant discourse has forwarded the idea that freedom occurs through market mechanisms. But this idea is not being realised, mainly due to two chains of events. Firstly this is done by ignoring unequal points of departure, from which inequalities are exacerbated; and secondly by ignoring the risk of elite appropriation, in which markets are not free, but instead subjugated under capital power. In this manner, the economic discourse stands on a false premise: that freedom will be produced proportional to the expansion of free markets. But 'free' markets require 'free agents', and in order to become free, one needs to be emancipated. Emancipation is the process of taking someone or something from the state of being subjugated to the state of being free. As such, emancipation precedes freedom. (R)evolutions involve the start of a change process going from subjugation and embarking on transitional pathways toward freedom.
Benzer Tezler
- Sigortacılık sisteminde aktif-pasif yönetimi ve Türkiye hayat sigortası örneğinde portföy performansının boyutlarını belirleyen faktörlerin irdelenmesine ilişkin bir model denemesi
Assets and liablity management in the insurance sector and investigating sectors that are determinating dimensions of the portfolio performance by relating to model testing in the Turkish life insurance sector
ALİ İHSAN DOĞAN
Doktora
Türkçe
2001
SigortacılıkMarmara ÜniversitesiBankacılık Ana Bilim Dalı
PROF.DR. ABDÜLGAFFAR AĞAOĞLU
- Döviz kurunu belirleyen faktörler ve kur riski
Determination of foreign exchange rates and foreign exchange risk
MEHMET COŞKUN ÖZAVNİK
- Yükseköğretimde girişimcilik eğitiminin Endüstri 4.0'a adaptasyonu: Türkiye örneği
Adaptation of entrepreneurship education in higher education to Industry 4.0: The case of Turkey
GONCA DEMİREL
Yüksek Lisans
Türkçe
2022
İşletmeTrakya ÜniversitesiGirişimcilik Ana Bilim Dalı
PROF. DR. İLKNUR KUMKALE
- Şişeboynu kesimlerde doruk saat akımı için dinamik model yaklaşımı
Başlık çevirisi yok
SEVGİ ERDOĞAN
Yüksek Lisans
Türkçe
1998
İnşaat Mühendisliğiİstanbul Teknik Üniversitesiİnşaat Mühendisliği Ana Bilim Dalı
PROF. DR. ERGUN GEDİZLİOĞLU
- Anonim ortaklıklarda mali yapının bozulması
The deterioration of joint stock company's financial situation
SELİN GÜREL
Yüksek Lisans
Türkçe
2011
HukukGalatasaray ÜniversitesiTicaret Hukuku Ana Bilim Dalı
PROF. DR. HAMDİ YASAMAN