Introduction

Adam Przeworski

    Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapter

    Abstract

    The three articles included in this part reflect the intellectual preoccupations of the time when they were written. But they approached classical questions with new instruments of analysis and generated new answers. The first puzzle they address concerns the strategies of labor movements under democratic conditions. What motivated this puzzle was the belief, held in the nineteenth century by thinkers across the entire political spectrum, from Thomas Macaulay to Karl Marx, that if workers were to gain political rights in the form of suffrage, they would use this right to confiscate property. Alternatively, if they were to win the right to freely associate, they would destroy productive property by making confiscatory wage demands. The conflict between capital and labor, Marx maintained, was irreconcilable. Even if the economy grew, “profit and wages remain as before in inverse proportions” (Marx 1952a: 37). In turn, Marx (1934, 1952b) and most of his followers expected that, faced with the threat of confiscation by the working class, the bourgeoisie would inevitably turn for protection to arms, and thus subvert democracy. Capitalism and democracy, therefore, could not coexist. Capitalist democracy could be “only the political form of revolution of bourgeois society and not its conservative form of life” (Marx 1934: 18), “only a spasmodic, exceptional state of things … impossible as the normal form of society” (Marx 1971: 198). Yet they did coexist, uneasily in some countries at times, but quite peacefully and smoothly in several countries of Europe.

    Original languageEnglish (US)
    Title of host publicationSelected Works of Michael Wallerstein: The Political Economy of Inequality, Unions, and Social Democracy
    PublisherCambridge University Press
    Pages9-17
    Number of pages9
    ISBN (Electronic)9780511619793
    ISBN (Print)9780521886888
    DOIs
    StatePublished - Jan 1 2008

    Fingerprint

    democracy
    wage
    bourgeois society
    suffrage
    bourgeoisie
    labor movement
    political right
    follower
    working class
    capitalist society
    profit
    nineteenth century
    threat
    labor
    worker
    economy
    Society
    time

    ASJC Scopus subject areas

    • Social Sciences(all)

    Cite this

    Przeworski, A. (2008). Introduction. In Selected Works of Michael Wallerstein: The Political Economy of Inequality, Unions, and Social Democracy (pp. 9-17). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511619793.003

    Introduction. / Przeworski, Adam.

    Selected Works of Michael Wallerstein: The Political Economy of Inequality, Unions, and Social Democracy. Cambridge University Press, 2008. p. 9-17.

    Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapter

    Przeworski, A 2008, Introduction. in Selected Works of Michael Wallerstein: The Political Economy of Inequality, Unions, and Social Democracy. Cambridge University Press, pp. 9-17. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511619793.003
    Przeworski A. Introduction. In Selected Works of Michael Wallerstein: The Political Economy of Inequality, Unions, and Social Democracy. Cambridge University Press. 2008. p. 9-17 https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511619793.003
    Przeworski, Adam. / Introduction. Selected Works of Michael Wallerstein: The Political Economy of Inequality, Unions, and Social Democracy. Cambridge University Press, 2008. pp. 9-17
    @inbook{d09440f1044c4255959687c0f0e53d0e,
    title = "Introduction",
    abstract = "The three articles included in this part reflect the intellectual preoccupations of the time when they were written. But they approached classical questions with new instruments of analysis and generated new answers. The first puzzle they address concerns the strategies of labor movements under democratic conditions. What motivated this puzzle was the belief, held in the nineteenth century by thinkers across the entire political spectrum, from Thomas Macaulay to Karl Marx, that if workers were to gain political rights in the form of suffrage, they would use this right to confiscate property. Alternatively, if they were to win the right to freely associate, they would destroy productive property by making confiscatory wage demands. The conflict between capital and labor, Marx maintained, was irreconcilable. Even if the economy grew, “profit and wages remain as before in inverse proportions” (Marx 1952a: 37). In turn, Marx (1934, 1952b) and most of his followers expected that, faced with the threat of confiscation by the working class, the bourgeoisie would inevitably turn for protection to arms, and thus subvert democracy. Capitalism and democracy, therefore, could not coexist. Capitalist democracy could be “only the political form of revolution of bourgeois society and not its conservative form of life” (Marx 1934: 18), “only a spasmodic, exceptional state of things … impossible as the normal form of society” (Marx 1971: 198). Yet they did coexist, uneasily in some countries at times, but quite peacefully and smoothly in several countries of Europe.",
    author = "Adam Przeworski",
    year = "2008",
    month = "1",
    day = "1",
    doi = "10.1017/CBO9780511619793.003",
    language = "English (US)",
    isbn = "9780521886888",
    pages = "9--17",
    booktitle = "Selected Works of Michael Wallerstein: The Political Economy of Inequality, Unions, and Social Democracy",
    publisher = "Cambridge University Press",
    address = "United Kingdom",

    }

    TY - CHAP

    T1 - Introduction

    AU - Przeworski, Adam

    PY - 2008/1/1

    Y1 - 2008/1/1

    N2 - The three articles included in this part reflect the intellectual preoccupations of the time when they were written. But they approached classical questions with new instruments of analysis and generated new answers. The first puzzle they address concerns the strategies of labor movements under democratic conditions. What motivated this puzzle was the belief, held in the nineteenth century by thinkers across the entire political spectrum, from Thomas Macaulay to Karl Marx, that if workers were to gain political rights in the form of suffrage, they would use this right to confiscate property. Alternatively, if they were to win the right to freely associate, they would destroy productive property by making confiscatory wage demands. The conflict between capital and labor, Marx maintained, was irreconcilable. Even if the economy grew, “profit and wages remain as before in inverse proportions” (Marx 1952a: 37). In turn, Marx (1934, 1952b) and most of his followers expected that, faced with the threat of confiscation by the working class, the bourgeoisie would inevitably turn for protection to arms, and thus subvert democracy. Capitalism and democracy, therefore, could not coexist. Capitalist democracy could be “only the political form of revolution of bourgeois society and not its conservative form of life” (Marx 1934: 18), “only a spasmodic, exceptional state of things … impossible as the normal form of society” (Marx 1971: 198). Yet they did coexist, uneasily in some countries at times, but quite peacefully and smoothly in several countries of Europe.

    AB - The three articles included in this part reflect the intellectual preoccupations of the time when they were written. But they approached classical questions with new instruments of analysis and generated new answers. The first puzzle they address concerns the strategies of labor movements under democratic conditions. What motivated this puzzle was the belief, held in the nineteenth century by thinkers across the entire political spectrum, from Thomas Macaulay to Karl Marx, that if workers were to gain political rights in the form of suffrage, they would use this right to confiscate property. Alternatively, if they were to win the right to freely associate, they would destroy productive property by making confiscatory wage demands. The conflict between capital and labor, Marx maintained, was irreconcilable. Even if the economy grew, “profit and wages remain as before in inverse proportions” (Marx 1952a: 37). In turn, Marx (1934, 1952b) and most of his followers expected that, faced with the threat of confiscation by the working class, the bourgeoisie would inevitably turn for protection to arms, and thus subvert democracy. Capitalism and democracy, therefore, could not coexist. Capitalist democracy could be “only the political form of revolution of bourgeois society and not its conservative form of life” (Marx 1934: 18), “only a spasmodic, exceptional state of things … impossible as the normal form of society” (Marx 1971: 198). Yet they did coexist, uneasily in some countries at times, but quite peacefully and smoothly in several countries of Europe.

    UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84926088613&partnerID=8YFLogxK

    UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84926088613&partnerID=8YFLogxK

    U2 - 10.1017/CBO9780511619793.003

    DO - 10.1017/CBO9780511619793.003

    M3 - Chapter

    SN - 9780521886888

    SP - 9

    EP - 17

    BT - Selected Works of Michael Wallerstein: The Political Economy of Inequality, Unions, and Social Democracy

    PB - Cambridge University Press

    ER -