Guy Standing, [Work after Globalization - Building Occupational Citizenship] - 폴라니의 현재성

가이 스탠딩은 폴라니의 현재성을 최전선에서 밀고 가고 있다. 그러나 그의 기본소득론에 대해서는 이견이 있다.

Guy Standing, [Work after Globalization - Building Occupational Citizenship]

Chapter 2: Fictitious Decommodification: The Failure of Industrial Citizenship

INTRODUCTION Polanyi’s Great Transformation was a story about the initial thrust of industrial capitalism, in which the spread of market mechanisms and the associated insecurities were followed by state reactions – a ‘double movement’ – that tried to prevent market forces becoming socially destructive. Roughly speaking, the disembedded phase lasted into the early twentieth century, whereas the embedded phase occurred in the three decades following the Second World War. The essence of the Transformation was that mechanisms of protection, regulation and redistribution were used to embed the economy in society. It was a very specific form of embeddedness, in which the main policies and institutions focused on labour, not work or wider notions of living and citizenship. It deserves to be called a period of ‘fictitious decommodification’, since most of the social rights advanced were made dependent on performing labour or the demonstrated willingness to do so. SOCIAL DEMOCRACY: LABOUR EMBEDDED Polanyi’s Transformation was about the creation of national markets, for capital and labour. He saw the destabilizing influence of finance as the primary problem, and had witnessed the hubris of financial markets in the 1920s. He foresaw a post-1945 world as consisting of national economic systems coexisting via managed inter-regional exchanges (Polanyi, 1945). This was based on ‘relational capitalism’, in which stability was preserved by long-term relationships between firms and banks. Potentially destabilizing capital mobility was restricted. There was control over holdings of foreign exchange, ceilings on interest rates, no interest paid on demand deposits and in the USA a separation...

Chapter 10: Economic Rights: The Progressive Agenda
I refuse to renounce the great classical discourse of emancipation. INTRODUCTION No transformation can occur unless there is a progressive redistribution of some sort and an agenda of equality. What is it that should be equalized in the Good Society of the twenty-first century? Put differently, each transformation is resolved through a struggle over the strategic assets of the economic system. In feudalism, the struggle was mainly over land and water; in national industrial capitalism it was mainly over ownership of the means of production. The key assets in a tertiary economy are less tangible and include time, ecological space, information and financial capital. The progressive challenge is complicated by three fundamentalisms – the moralistic ‘religification’ of social policy based on invisible hands from above, the neo-liberal faith in invisible hands in markets and the paternalistic faith in guiding hands, which come together in the constructivism of the surveillance society. This chapter has nothing to say about the moralistic challenge, other than to state that it is a form of paternalism and that the separation of church and state should be restored. It is implicit that paternalism should be checked. As for markets, while essential, they must be embedded in society, used for allocative purposes and subject to social control. They must not be a rationalization for rejecting egalitarianism. Before considering how the strategic assets can be redistributed, recall that the objective is to enable people to pursue their own sense of occupation, combining work, labour, play...