This article is devoted to Thomas Piketty’s latest book, Capital and Ideology (2019). We begin by placing the book within the argument developed by the author in his previous works, before pointing out a number of limitations. We first question Piketty’s way of thinking about capitalism, before coming to his theory of ideology. Finally, we will try to define the contours and limits of Piketty’s project of overcoming capitalism, ie. his vision of a just society, of a “participative socialism”, as it is presented in the last chapter of the book.
Abstract Empirical analyses of inequality generally focus on resources, whereas philosophical theories of justice are divided between those that focus on resources and opportunities on the one hand, and those that focus on social relations, on the other hand. This paper proposes a model of society that embeds both resources and social relations into a … Continue reading Inequalities, social justice and the web of social interactions
About social justice, Hayek’s position gives rise to ambivalent remarks : on one hand, as a by-product of evolutionist thought process, his conclusions are coherent and realistic and it is hard to catch him out ; on the other hand, strong liberal convictions induce Hayek to choose provocative words. Concerning the “mirage of social justice”, we try to show in the paper that Hayek’standpoint is less radical than at the first sight. To begin with, abstract rules of just conduct are quite impartial and express a real conception of justice in society ; moreover, Hayek supports a form of minimum income so as to reduce the risk of market, but this goal could be more easily reached by application of a real basic income.
The aim of this paper is twofold: to argue that the theory of justice of left-libertarianism implies that the entrepreneur—a notion rarely mentioned and yet central to understand this theory of justice—is a “gray eminence,” and to challenge the criticisms aimed at this theory.
We advocate the application of a specific positive social time preference, consisting in giving a relative priority to the attainment of social justice within generations. According to us, it allows us to better reconcile both requirements of social justice between generations and within them. Such a priority is possible and desirable for the living and for future individuals when it is applied within a scheme of intergenerational cooperation, whose terms we specify.
Levinas thinks of justice from the event of the Other, which appears and tears the self away from its interiority. The interiority of the self enjoying nourishment constitutes the economy as a Totality. The economic agent becomes oneself only through this questioning, which subjects him to a requirement of justice for the Other. What happens to the economy when the relationship with the Other is thought of with the radicality that is characteristic of Levinas’s philosophy? What are the limits of the theories of social justice under this perspective? This article aims to discuss the relevance of the theories of justice under Levinas’s assumptions and questions the possibility of economic justice.