STATE CAPITALISM: A Comparative And Historical Outlook

States and capitalisms have coevolved and formed contrasted configurations from feudalism to contemporary configurations. Under the same label of state capitalism, economic history exhibits some definite mixes of various components: economic nationalism, public ownership of firms and banks, planning or large public spending, and income redistribution. The French state capitalism variant is one of these configurations. The coordination among public entities from industry to finance, an indicative planning as an anti-uncertainty device and complementary economic policy instruments used to define a rather coherent and dynamic regime. The large opening to European and world competition and the financial deregulation have progressively eroded the performance of this successful modernization. The early twenty-first century evolution raises an intriguing issue: are not the nation-states and the transnational platform capitalism trading place? Governments react to price signals whereas GAFAM exert the strategic leadership in the redeployment of contemporary capitalism. Will the COVID-19 mean a reversal and the revival of various brands of state capitalism? © Oxford University Press 2022.

Where is the world in the new state capitalism?

Alami and Dixon instead treat state capitalism not as a well-defined analytical category but rather a "flexible means of problematising...trajectories of state intervention and the role that it plays in the (geo) political re-organisation of global capitalism" ([1]: xx). One way this query might be posed is where in the world the phenomena described under the rubric of state capitalism are most pronounced or perhaps newly apparent;in which countries or in what parts of the world do we see a more muscular or interventionist state? Keywords: State capitalism;hegemonic cycles;macrohistorical sociology EN State capitalism hegemonic cycles macrohistorical sociology 770 773 4 05/16/23 20230501 NES 230501 The term "state capitalism" dates from the late nineteenth century, when it was coined by Marxists seeking to understand the growing role of the state as an owner of capital and orchestrator of production in European countries. [Extracted from the article] Copyright of Environment & Planning A is the property of Sage Publications Inc. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full . (Copyright applies to all s.)

A very British state capitalism: Variegation, political connections and bailouts during the COVID-19 crisis.

The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in governments playing increasingly prominent roles as active economic agents. However, state capitalism does not necessarily serve broad developmental purposes, and rather can be directed to supporting sectional and private interests. As the literature on variegated capitalism alerts us, governments and other actors regularly devise fixes in response to a systemic crisis, but the focus, scale, and scope of the interventions vary considerably, according to the constellation of interests. Rapid progress with vaccines notwithstanding, the UK government's response to COVID-19 has been associated with much controversy, not only because of an extraordinarily high death rate, but also because of allegations of cronyism around the granting of government contracts and bailouts. We focus on the latter, investigating more closely who got bailed out. We find that badly affected sectors (e.g. hospitality, transportation) and larger employers were more likely to get bailouts. However, the latter also favored the politically influential and those who had run up debt profligately. Although, as with state capitalism, crony capitalism is most often associated with emerging markets, we conclude that the two have coalesced into a peculiarly British variety, but one that has some common features with other major liberal markets. This might suggest that the eco-systemic dominance of the latter is coming to an end, or, at the least, that this model is drifting towards one that assumes many of the features commonly associated with developing nations.

Introduction: Emerging Market Economies and Alternative Development Paths

In the twenty-first century many latecomer emerging economies are embarking on development paths that are fundamentally different from the well-known classical models and are shaped by historical and socio-political conditions peculiar to their modernization experiences. We explore the new perspectives on latecomer development in this post-crisis period of global capitalism, as the ways these statist economic systems are organized and coordinated, hence their operational logic still lacks a systematic exploration and explanation. This chapter provides an overview on recent tendencies of state capitalism, present existing theoretical approaches and offer novel perspectives to analyse contemporary capitalist varieties and alternative development trajectories of the Global South and East. We focus on the post-crisis cycle, and especially highlight the need to reconsider and revise existing theories and assumptions in the light of the most recent—and ever-changing—global circumstances paved first by the COVID-19 pandemic, and by the Russian invasion in Ukraine. © 2023, The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG.

Building Trust and Advancing U.S. Geoeconomic Strength Through Public-Private Partnership Stakeholder Capitalism

The United States and China are currently engaged in a struggle for global influence and critical resources known as the Great Power Competition (GPC). Strategic access to key populations, geographies and supply chains, largely built on trust, will be the deciding factor in determining a competitive advantage. The global devastation of the COVID-19 pandemic has demonstrated that no one wins in a power struggle that overlooks human security for shareholder interests. This chapter explores a new way for the U.S. to engage within the modern GPC that increases competitiveness while better supporting the dignity of human constituents: specifically, to employ stakeholder capitalism rather than shareholder capitalism to win the hearts and minds of global citizens. This chapter will demonstrate that traditional national security policies, based primarily on the state, are less effective geopolitically and should no longer drive foreign policy or U.S. industrial policy. In order for the U.S. to compete in the current global arena, its policy must prioritize human and business security. Additionally, the chapter will explore the interdependent and complex relationship between the U.S. and China within the context of the modern GPC and the effects of this relationship on U.S. economy and industry. Finally, the chapter prescribes Public-Private Partnerships (PPPs), both at home and abroad, as an effective means to bolster U.S. and foreign institutions. Such a strategy will better serve all stakeholders in a post-COVID-19 global society while positioning U.S. security interests uniquely within the modern GPC. © The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2022.

Unpacking the Black Box of China's State Capitalism

Much ink has been splashed on the ideological, conceptual, and practical challenges that China's state capitalism has posed to global trade rules. There is a growing perception that the current international trade rules are neither conceptually coherent nor practically effective in tackling China's state capitalism. This perception has not only led to the emergence of new trade rules in regional trade agreements, but also culminated in the US-China trade war, only further aggravated by the Covid-19 pandemic. This Article contributes to the debate of what trade rules may be needed to counteract China's state capitalism by unpacking the black box of China's state capitalism. Based on an analysis of the nature of China's state capitalism, this Article provides a preliminary evaluation of current trade rules taken to counteract China's state capitalism, in particular the new rules in the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership, and explain why they are unlikely to be successful.

Is There a Chinese “Code of Capital”?

[...]the question: is there a Chinese “Code of Capital”? In posing the question of whether Professor Pistor’s analysis provides an explanatory lens for understanding comparative law and development and, specifically, Chinese law and development (Erie 2021, 54–55), I recognize that the litmus test of any theory is its ability to explain cases that may have been outside the purview of its original formulation. Professor Pistor’s paradigm helps explains the contemporary topography of global capitalism: the concentration of financial and legal expertise in London and New York, as well as the roles of tax havens, which function, respectively, to transform and shield capital accumulation as financial assets. [...]one of the core attributes of state capitalism is the nature of law that underlies and enables that system, and critically, unlike the UK or US, China is not a rule-of-law state, but a Party-State.

The closing of a historical cycle and the reconfiguration of the international system in a multi-order

Covid-19 accelerated the transformations that have been taking place in the international life since 2008. These have been materialized in, a competition between economic giants, a weakening in the world governance, a reconfiguration of capitalism with technology and a breakdown of the trust of societies in democracy This has led to a new reconfiguration of material capacities, institutions and ideas, and demonstrates that what the world is currently experiencing is the closing of a historical cycle and the weakening of the hegemonic structure of the United States. Based on this panorama, the opportunities and challenges presented by the new emerging countries are analyzed in the light of the concept of power, illustrated by critical theory.