Buying time : Where now for capitalism and democracy? [Part 1] | 28 comments (28 topical, editorial, 0 hidden)

It should be noted (4.00 / 8)

that, no doubt because Streeck is not an economist, he does not challenge the orthodox interpretations of economic history that he presents (though I don't doubt that some here will do that). However, he does challenge, very strongly, the moral and ethical transformations imposed by the colonisation of public discourse by standard economics. Hayek, who reduces the notion of social justice to a quasi-religious superstition, has triumphed... "market justice" is what we get. This notion seems to me to be both redundant (if "perfect market" outcomes are defined to be just, it's hardly worth keeping the archaic notion of justice at all) and tautological.

_{It is rightly acknowledged that people of faith have no monopoly of virtue
- Queen Elizabeth II}

by eurogreen on Fri Aug 15th, 2014 at 01:05:57 PM EST

Re: It should be noted (4.00 / 4)

eurogreen:

if "perfect market" outcomes are defined to be just, it's hardly worth keeping the archaic notion of justice at all

That reminds me of Erhard's view of the Soziale MarktWirtschaft: "The market is social".

However, the Social Market Economy was based on strong institutions with legal guarantees. And marketista liberals today live happily with the notion (and fact) of powerful corporate litigation.

Of course, Hayek would agree with your conclusion about the "archaic notion of justice". I think he would say that what the market does is neither just nor injust, that the concept of justice is inapplicable. Presumably, only charity is. See philanthropic billionaires.

by afew (afew(a in a circle)eurotrib_dot_com) on Sat Aug 16th, 2014 at 02:42:16 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: It should be noted (none / 1)