Navigating the Polycrisis – mapping the futures of capitalism and of the earth Michael Albert (2024) I thought this was by the famous political scientist who wrote about participatory democracy but it turns out to be by a British environmentalist from London who has recently been appointed by the University of Edinburgh. Well worth the read...
The
2020s have gotten off to a rocky start (to put it mildly). Words like
“permacrisis” and “polycrisis” have become common currency,
reflecting a broadening awareness that ours is an age of
interconnected systemic crises with no clear end in sight. The
year 2021 was already a year of stress in global energy and food
markets, ratcheting geopolitical rivalries, record levels of global
military spending, and accumulating risks for the world
economy—trends that were all turbocharged by Vladimir Putin’s
February 2022 invasion of Ukraine. It remains far from certain
how these ongoing crises will unfold. But we know that deeper
challenges loom on the horizon, from the climate and mass extinction
crises to future pandemics, “net energy decline” for fossil
fuels, an unsustainable and unstable global food system, the brewing
new cold war between the United States and China, the simmering
specter of far-right populism, the nascent threat of weaponized
synthetic biology, and the destabilizing impacts of artificial
intelligence on work, war, and human freedom. This book asks where
the world-system is headed as a result of these intersecting
challenges. It makes three overarching arguments.
First,
I argue that that we must devote more systematic attention to the
question of possible futures. “Business-as-usual” will come to
an end—whether by choice or by disaster. Thus we need more
future-oriented scholarship that can illuminate the possible roads
ahead, their branching pathways, the dangers
that lurk, and the opportunities that may emerge for progressive
transformation.
Second,
I argue that to illuminate the space of possible planetary futures,
we need a holistic approach that highlights the relations and
feedbacks between the numerous challenges that compose our planetary
predicament. As more and more analysts recognize, we confront not
simply a climate crisis, nor simply a collection of numerous
isolatable problems that can be studied by separate disciplines, but
rather a “polycrisis” or nexus of reciprocally entwined crises
characterized by complex feedback loops, blurred boundaries,
cascade effects, and (in many cases) mutual amplification.
Third,
I argue that a theoretical framework informed by complexity theory
and world-systems theory can provide a new form of critical-futures
analysis capable of grappling with the polycrisis condition. But the
point here is not to claim superiority for a single theoretical
approach, but rather to develop a conceptual framework that can
facilitate synthesis across numerous disciplines and theoretical
traditions—including international relations (IR), critical
political economy, ecological economics, energy studies, the earth
system sciences, critical security studies, and many others.
The
goal of this book is thus to develop a new way of thinking about
planetary futures that can help us create more useful and
comprehensive maps of the possibility space. Such an approach
must be planetary in scope, voraciously synthetic, and utterly
indifferent toward disciplinary boundaries. In a word, it must
be “transdisciplinary,” in the sense of pragmatist scholarship
that emerges directly from problems in the world demanding response
(rather than from stale disciplinary debates) and that synthesizes
knowledge across numerous disciplinary, theoretical, and
methodological traditions.
In
this sense, as Sanders van der Leeuw writes, transdisciplinary
research analyzes “that which is at once between the disciplines,
across the different disciplines, and beyond each individual
discipline.” Transdisciplinary research has its risks (as I
elaborate below). But
it is also the necessary precondition of rigorous futures analysis
that can inform contemporary strategies for progressive
socioecological transformation. As the late Immanuel Wallerstein
wrote more than forty years ago, our “ability to participate
intelligently in the evolution” of the world-system is “dependent
on [our] ability to perceive the whole. The more difficult we
acknowledge the task to be, the more urgent it is that
we start sooner rather than later.” In short, if we think the task
is daunting, this is all the more reason to get started now.
Adam Smith’s America – how a Scottish philosopher became an icon of America
Gloria Liu (2022)
Smith’s
reputation as an economist is towering. Economists across different
subfields have laid claim to Smith’s legacy in behavioral
economics, development
economics, “mainline” economics, and most recently “humanomics.”
The Wealth of Nations has been assigned on over 5,000 college
syllabi nationwide, primarily in economics, but also in history,
political science,
business, philosophy, literature, sociology, anthropology, religion,
and law. In 2021, The Wealth of Nations ranked forty-fourth among
millions of books assigned in college courses, putting it ahead of
John Stuart Mill’s On Liberty, Alexis De Tocqueville’s Democracy
in America, and even Shakespeare’s Hamlet. Meanwhile, Smith’s
first work, The Theory of Moral Sentiments, ranked far below,
appearing on just over 1,000 syllabi
Despite
all this, a persistent theme of Smith scholarship of the last several
decades has been that Adam Smith was not an economist, or at least
not merely an economist. Rather, he is remembered as an ambitious
social scientist of the Enlightenment, whose The Wealth of Nations
was but one part of a larger “science of man.” This science
sought to reveal and explain the hidden forces that governed human
behavior and human society. In The Theory of Moral Sentiments,
published in 1759, seventeen years before The Wealth of Nations,
Smith explored how and why people learn moral behavior through
the process of imaginative projection and sympathetic exchange. Smith
also planned a work on the general principles of law and government,
as well as a history of literature, philosophy, poetry, and rhetoric,
both of which he never completed and ultimately had destroyed before
his death in 1790. However, Smith did save a few essays for
posthumous publication. Moreover, with the later discovery of student
notebooks in 1895 and 1958, readers have been able to access Smith’s
lost ideas as they were recorded by his students in his lectures on
rhetoric and jurisprudence. Today, readers can appreciate the immense
range of Smith’s teaching and writings, which were not limited only
to economics and moral philosophy, but also included topics such as
theories of language, polite learning, the history of science, literary
and artistic criticism, poetry, law, and government. Given the
breadth and richness of Smith’s oeuvre, it is hardly surprising
that intellectual historians, political theorists, and social
scientists often complain that distorted notions of self-interest,
free markets, and “the invisible hand” have eclipsed Smith’s
moral philosophy, jurisprudence, and more, and that Smith has become
little more than an emblem for think tanks or a historical sound bite
in textbooks. Yet few scholars have asked—let alone answered—the question
of how and why these reductive, sloganized, and often politicized
versions of Smith came about in the first place. This
book is about who Adam Smith was and who he became in America. It
charts how Americans have read, taught, debated, and used Smith’s
ideas throughout history. It shows how Smith’s reputation as the
“father of economics” is an historical invention and that the
foundational status of The Wealth of Nations is a belated
construction. More importantly, though, this book tries to make sense
of the political work that engaging with Smith has done throughout
history and what the implications for our political and economic
thinking are. Repeated contestation over Smith’s original
intentions, his method, and the contemporary import of his ideas has
provided opportunities for past and present readers to define the
relationship between ethics and economics, between politics and the
economy, between past thought and present action.
Weimar – life on the edge of catastrophe Katja Hoyer (2026)
Hoyer is an anglo-german historian and here evokes the reality of life in a
German town from the start of WW1
Fool’s Gold – how the bold dream of a small tribe at JP Morgan was corrupted
by Wall Street Greed and unleashed a catastrophe Gillian Tett (2009)
This by the famous financial journalist who just happens to be an
anthropologist
The
story of the great credit boom and bust is not a saga that can be
neatly
blamed on a few greedy or evil individuals. It is a story of how an
entire
financial system went wrong as a result of flawed incentives within
banks
and investment funds, as well as the ratings agencies; warped
regulatory
structures; and a lack of oversight. It is a tale best understood
through
the observation of human foibles, as much through economic or
financial
analysis. And though plenty of greedy bankers—and perhaps a
few
mad, or evil, ones, too—play crucial parts in the drama, the
tragedy of
this
story is that so many of those swept up in the lunacy were not acting
out
of deliberately bad motives.
On
the contrary, in the case of the J.P. Morgan team members who form
the
backbone of this tale, the bitter irony is that they first developed
their
derivatives
ideas in the hope that they would be good for the financial
system
(as well, of course, for their bank and their bonuses). Even today,
after
all the devastation, some of the tools and innovations developed
during
the credit boom should be seen as potentially valuable for
twentyfirst-
century
finance. In order to understand how that could be, though, a
deep
understanding of how and precisely why they came to be so abused is
vital.
I offer this journey through the story as one attempt to begin to
come
to
grips with the answers to that crucial question