by The Financialisation Hypothesis (FH) is very popular nowadays as a purportently radical explanation of contemporary capitalism. My lecture argues to the contrary. First, FH is not an exclusively radical perspective; on the contrary, there is a very vibrant mainstream economics’ financialisation current. Second, FH miscomprehends capitalism’s modus operandi because it fails to grasp properly its class structure and its mechanisms of exploitation. Third, FH erroneously rejects the Marxist Labour Theory of Value (LTV) and its surplus-value theory of exploitation. Finally, I argue that classical Marxism (meaning following Marx and Engels as opposed to neo-Marxism and Radical Political Economy) explains better the modus operandi of capitalism and its novel financial features (shadow
Topics:
Stavros Mavroudeas considers the following as important: Video από συνέδρια. τηλεοπτικές εκπομπές κλπ.- Videos from conferences, lectures, tv etc., Ομιλίες & Διαλέξεις - Speeches & Lectures, Χρήσιμο διδακτικό υλικό - Useful teaching material
This could be interesting, too:
Stavros Mavroudeas writes ‘Economic Crisis and the crisis of Economics: Political Economy as a realistic and credible alternative’ – S.Mavroudeas (video and supporting material)
Stavros Mavroudeas writes Ημερίδα για τον Λένιν – 12 Οκτωβρίου 2024, Πάντειο Πανεπιστήμιο
Stavros Mavroudeas writes «Πολιτική και οικονομία στη δημοκρατία» – Στ.Μαυρουδέας, podcasts του ΕΚΚΕ
Stavros Mavroudeas writes “Κοινωνική Ασφάλιση – Συνταξιοδοτικό & Αμοιβές της εργασίας στο Δημόσιο” – Ρέθυμνο 11/3/2024
The Financialisation Hypothesis (FH) is very popular nowadays as a purportently radical explanation of contemporary capitalism. My lecture argues to the contrary. First, FH is not an exclusively radical perspective; on the contrary, there is a very vibrant mainstream economics’ financialisation current. Second, FH miscomprehends capitalism’s modus operandi because it fails to grasp properly its class structure and its mechanisms of exploitation. Third, FH erroneously rejects the Marxist Labour Theory of Value (LTV) and its surplus-value theory of exploitation. Finally, I argue that classical Marxism (meaning following Marx and Engels as opposed to neo-Marxism and Radical Political Economy) explains better the modus operandi of capitalism and its novel financial features (shadow banking, derivatives, repos etc.). Classical Marxism’s distinction between money-dealing capital (MDC) and interest-bearing capital (IBC) and its concept of fictitious capital – both of which are rejected by FH) are the crucial cornerstones of its explanatory superiority.
The video lecture follows:
This video lecture is based on two journal articles (open access links included):
Mavroudeas S. & Papadatos F. (2018), ‘Is the Financialisation Hypothesis a theoretical blind alley?’, World Review of Political Economy vol.9 no.4. https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.13169/worlrevipoliecon.9.4.0451#metadata_info_tab_contents
Mavroudeas S. & Subasat T. (2023), ‘Financialization Hypothesis: A Theoretical and Empirical Critique’, World Review of Political Economy vol.14 no.2.
Also, a more concise paper – Greek – revealing the inapplicability of FH for the case of Greece (contrary to the superficial declarations of Varoufakis, Lapavitsas and others) follows:
The notes of the video lecture follow:
The full paper follows:
My older and more analytical lecture on financialisation, at Queen Mary College (University of London) can be accessed here: https://stavrosmavroudeas.wordpress.com/2018/11/24/qmul-lecture-video-recording/