季刊経済理論
Online ISSN : 2189-7719
Print ISSN : 1882-5184
ISSN-L : 1882-5184
41 巻, 4 号
選択された号の論文の17件中1~17を表示しています
  • 原稿種別: 表紙
    2005 年 41 巻 4 号 p. Cover1-
    発行日: 2005/01/20
    公開日: 2017/04/25
    ジャーナル フリー
  • 佐藤 隆
    原稿種別: 本文
    2005 年 41 巻 4 号 p. 3-12
    発行日: 2005/01/20
    公開日: 2017/04/25
    ジャーナル フリー
    In section I of this paper I present the interpretation of exploitation as a criticism for socialists in nineteenth century. Indeed the phenomenal surface of the market mechanism, as socialists of those days thought ingenuously, may obey the law of equivalent exchange in correspondence with commutative justice, but the existence of exploitation in the essential depth of production sphere indicates that there exists unfairness in capitalism according to distributive justice concerns. There is no description, reading Capital constatively, of exploitation as social injustice, but performativly Marx's literary style leads us to normative judgment that exploitation in capitalism is against distributive justice. Section II places the modern egalitarian theories of distributive justice proposed by Dworkin, Cohen and Roemer. Dworkin distinguished between preferences and resources of individuals. He suggested that the resources should be equalized but the differences as a consequence of different preferences should not be equalized, because people should be hold responsible for their preferences but not for the resources. Cohen and Roemer are relocating Dworkins cut. They propose that the right cut is between responsibility and bad luck, not between preferences and resources. Egalitarianism insists that people exercise their responsibility and bear the consequences of such exercise, but also advocates equality over the non-responsible outcomes across the agent. Proletariat, viewed from this perspective of egalitarian ethics, should never be held responsible for being proletariat, because they became free laborer in the double sense not from their own initiative but from the stress of circumstances. More generally, we, human beings, may not hold ourselves responsible for being us, because we did not choose to be born. Therefore we can claim the right or compensation to the equal access to the advantages in economic spheres, especially property rights in the means of production from which workers were separated. In the last section this paper investigates the relation between property rights and alternative societies. To have a property is to have a bundle of rights in the sense of an enforceable claim to some use, disposal or benefit of something. One of the aims of alternative societies is the unbundling such a bundle of property rights. Two examples are enumerated in illustration of alternatives; basic income and market socialism. Firstly, basic income is universal income paid by a government, at a uniform level and at regular intervals, to each adult member of society. By increasing the capacity of workers to refuse employment, basic income generates a much more egalitarian distribution than ordinary capitalism with little choice to work for wages. This proposal is interpreted as indirect unbundling property rights of labor power. Secondly, Roemer proposes coupon socialism for distributing ownership equally which relies on a stock market. Coupons, which are given to each adult member of society, are used in only one market for shares of corporations. The ownership of shares, then, gives people the usual rights of share owning in a capitalist economy. The exclusion of direct producers from ownership of the means of production has been largely overcome through this proposal. We can, therefore, conclude the sine qua non of alternative societies is deconstruction of property rights.
  • 山口 拓美
    原稿種別: 本文
    2005 年 41 巻 4 号 p. 13-24
    発行日: 2005/01/20
    公開日: 2017/04/25
    ジャーナル フリー
    According to Marxian political economy, exploitation means extracting surplus labor. But Marx himself used the term "exploitation" in more general sense also. In his Capital,Volume III, Marx wrote that workers are exploited when capitalists save labor conditions at the expense of the workers. So we can find in Capital two definitions of exploitation: the narrow definition as extracting surplus labor and the broad definition as treating workers badly. With respect to the broad definition of exploitation, I think it is based on Kantian moral principle that obligates us not to treat other people merely as means for our own ends. Kant limited his moral principle to human beings. However, philosophers in today's society extend the principle to nonhuman beings, especially to animals. I think this view of exploitation is important for criticizing contemporary capitalism, because it has relevance for contemporary problems, such as sexual exploitation of women and children, exploitation of nature, and exploitation of animals. Among these problems, animal exploitation is the hottest topic on the political agenda in Europe. The European Treaties recognize animals as sentient beings, and the European Community has been improving animal welfare standard for the past two decades. Moreover the EC made a specific submission to the WTO Committee on Agriculture on "Animal welfare and agricultural trade". Today, animal exploitation is an issue of growing importance in global capitalism. This paper explores the moral basis of Marx's view of exploitation, considers the exploitation of nature, and then discusses the exploitation of animals in today's commercial agriculture.
  • 青木 孝平
    原稿種別: 本文
    2005 年 41 巻 4 号 p. 25-36
    発行日: 2005/01/20
    公開日: 2017/04/25
    ジャーナル フリー
    Communitarianism is a social philosophy that M.J.Sandel, A.Maclntire, Ch.Taylor and others have advocated in England and America since the end of 20th century. It has severely opposed liberalism which is the main current of contemporary normative theory argued by J.Rowls. The aim of this paper is to reexamine the socalled Uno theory of economics which seems to have no connection with communitarianism, and to reveal that Uno theory is not only the methodology of scientific economics but also the text of social philosophy. At first, we try to extract the proper normative theory from Uno theory and show that it has a character similar to communitarianism. Moreover, the deductive logic developed by Uno is totally different from the historical materialism by Marx and also from the ideal dialectic by Hegel, or rather similar to socialism as a categorical imperative proposed by the neo-Kantianism. Secondly, we investigate the substance of normative theory included in Uno theory. As a result, in discussions about the theories of value form and of the fetishism considered by Uno, we find the same argument as communitarian's criticism against "the unencumbered-self" or "the self-ownership" liberalism premised. In the social contract theory, the subject is considered to construct the social relations, but in Uno theory, the relations construct the subject. Lastly, we think about the abolition of "the commodification of labor-power" and "the law of value". Thus we conclude that the purpose of Uno' theory is not a realization of freedom, equality and individuality, but a recovery of social collaborated relations. We are sure it is not besides the mark to discover a communitarian normative theory in Uno's political economy.
  • 赤間 道夫
    原稿種別: 本文
    2005 年 41 巻 4 号 p. 37-47
    発行日: 2005/01/20
    公開日: 2017/04/25
    ジャーナル フリー
    What this paper treats is utilitarianism made into the object of criticism and conquest in present age normative theory. Next, it is argued how it was criticized by Marx. We analyze how utilitarianism has been received and begin to scoop out the feature of classic utilitarianism and market equilibrium theory utilitarianism. Classic utilitarianism is collectively arranged to the maximum happy principle, harmony, economical liberalism, morality, legislation, and philosophical radicalism. As compared with classic utilitarianism, a change and common point of argument of utilitarianism are extracted for market equilibrium theory utilitarianism. Then, we decide having discussed utilitarianism criticism of Marx at the key and having criticized "freedom, equality, possession, and Bentham" with deployment of his economics criticism system, and the close relation in it. Moreover, we decide that it is what scoops out the limit of the bourgeois democracy shown in these keywords. Classic utilitarianism was premised on the bourgeois principle. Moreover, it formed the origin of movement of philosophical and connected with reform of a system or many unreasonable systems. Classic utilitarianism proposed improvement. It left many subjects to other solution subjects. Marx had spent the brush in putting into practice and criticizing the Bentham's world which covers bourgeois society, when face to face was stood against Bentham and utilitarianism. For Marx, it has not left one phrase which leads to evaluation on the level which is based on his "Capital" and criticizes the Bentham's world, either. Thoughts, such as receiving utilitarianism correctly in process of the theory which criticizes a bourgeois-organization principle, were not depended, either. The keyword of the bourgeois society shown to "freedom, equality, possession, and Bentham" was also specialized by "Bentham" that usually nominalized. What do we learn from Bentham and utilitarianism based on confrontation with Marx and Bentham? We cannot deposit from the analysis of it, but the solution continues being our subject even now.
  • 守 健二
    原稿種別: 本文
    2005 年 41 巻 4 号 p. 48-58
    発行日: 2005/01/20
    公開日: 2017/04/25
    ジャーナル フリー
    Since 1980s the theoretical discussion in the economic ethics has been activated in the German-speaking area, which dimension can be illustrated by the volume and diversity of its contributions. Its recent developmet seems to show a tendency to converge into several types of argument according to their methodological standpoints. This paper aims at comparing and characterizing them especially from such methodological viewpoints as the fundamental relation of the moral norms to the economy, the criterion for their legitimation, the place of their implementation and so on. In this way we can make up a typology of the German-speaking economic-ethical discourse with three theoretical species. First, the economic and institutionalist theory of moral represented typically by Karl Homann. This approach founds the moral norms on the economic rationality and intends to reduce the ethics itself to the economics. Secondly, the Aristotelian material ethics which should be applied to the economy in order to correct it on demand. This standpoint is represented by Peter Koslowski. Thirdly, the consensus-oriented discourse-ethics which radically questions normative conditions of the economic rationality and brings it forward for the public discourse. In this way of the reflexion and internal criticism, the St.Galler School of the economic ethics initiated by Peter Ulrich intends to integrate the economic and ethical rationality in order to transform the former to a broader rationality.
  • 李 康國, 表 正賢
    原稿種別: 本文
    2005 年 41 巻 4 号 p. 59-65
    発行日: 2005/01/20
    公開日: 2017/04/25
    ジャーナル フリー
  • 張 忠任
    原稿種別: 本文
    2005 年 41 巻 4 号 p. 66-71
    発行日: 2005/01/20
    公開日: 2017/04/25
    ジャーナル フリー
  • 瀬戸岡 紘
    原稿種別: 本文
    2005 年 41 巻 4 号 p. 72-77
    発行日: 2005/01/20
    公開日: 2017/04/25
    ジャーナル フリー
    This report introduces about the International Conference, "The Works of Karl Marx and the Challenges of the 21^<st> Century" held at Havana, Cuba on May 4-8,2004. This was a considerably big conference with 450 participants, 130 speakers and panelists from more than 40 countries of all over the world. Conference was continued for five days with plenary sessions and workshops. The main topics of the conference were on "Imperialism in the 21^<st> century", "Neo-Fascism", "Class struggles", "Social movements" and "Revolution". All these terms were related to the works of Karl Marx or Marxian key concepts. This conference tried to re-examine these terms at the time of the early years of 21^<st> century and investigate into the ways to revolutionize the world as well as each society opposing imperialism and neo-fascist movements. One of the most impressing problems in this conference appeared on the different understandings of key concepts for Marxian theories. The differences were not only in the key terms of "democracy", "socialism", "communism" and "proletarian dictatorship", but also in the direction toward revolution/reformation. For example, speakers/panelists from developed countries insisted that such reformations as to promote democracy and more affluent welfare society are now required, and emphasized that this is the very way to succeed the works of Karl Marx. On the contrary, speakers/panelists from developing countries insisted that such reformations itself as the peoples in the developed countries expecting are reducing the working and living conditions of the peoples in the developing countries. Then they emphasized that such reformations/revolutions even by force, if it is necessary, as to change the situation of the state for developed countries are essential. While everybody joined the conference recognized the great contributions of Karl Marx, no effective ways for the 21^<st> century seemed to be found. Moreover, speakers/panelists among the developing countries seemed not to have much interest in situations in other developing countries to one another. For example, Latin American activists have prides of their movements against US Imperialism, and therefore they have lesser interests to the movements in the Middle East. On the other hand, the activists in the Middle East have not much interest in what is happening in Latin American countries. They seemed not to have much ability to understand each other. This might be one of the big conditions US imperialism can control contemporary globalized world relatively easily. Two participants from Japan, Iida Yumiko and Setooka Hiroshi, made presentations that caused not a few responses. The responses of attendants came from developed countries were quite different compared with that of attendants came from developing countries. No people presented the conference seemed to know the desirable way to overcome the gap of understandings between the developed and developing countries.
  • 吉村 信之
    原稿種別: 本文
    2005 年 41 巻 4 号 p. 78-89
    発行日: 2005/01/20
    公開日: 2017/04/25
    ジャーナル フリー
    The aim of this paper reconsiders Marx's concept of Money-Dealing Capital (Geldhandlungskapital) in his work Das Kapital. Money-Dealing capital is analyzed only a few small Chapter XIX. But the importance in genesis of credit system has great weight. This paper clarifies; (1)money-Dearing Trade plays a important rule in formation of credit system, (2)pits theoretical range is broad, which implies analysis of contemporary capitalism. In Marxian Economics, the Credit System has been discussed with two factors. In his "Capital" vol.III, Marx analyzes Credit System. Marx says in Chapter XIV, "Credit and Fictitious Capital", in one place, "Just as these mutual advances of producers and merchants make up the real foundation of credit, so does the instrument of their circulation, the bill of exchange, form the basis of credit-money paper, of bank-notes, etc." (Capital, Vol.III, 1958, Progress Publishers, pp.401-403). But he also says like this, "The other side of credit system is connected with the development of money-dealing, which, of course, keep step under capitalist production the development of dealing in commodity…. The Other side of Credit System-the Management of Interest-bearing Capital, or Money Capital, develops alongside this Money-Dealing as a special Function of Money-Dealers" (op.cit., p.402). Most of studies-including Theory of Kozo Uno, who is a Japanese Marxian economist-place important point the former factor-the bill of exchange is the basis of bank credit. But we point out the importance of the latter factor, especially Money-Dealing trade-not autonomous money-Dealing Capital which Marx thought-in the Credit System. To revise the concept of money-Dealing Capital, and to focus vital standpoint money-Dealing trade and money-Dearing cost in banking occupation or merchant trade, Marxcian Credit Theory will have a more effective analysis to the Capitalistic Crisis and, further more, contemporary currency system.
  • 二宮 健史郎
    原稿種別: 本文
    2005 年 41 巻 4 号 p. 90-97
    発行日: 2005/01/20
    公開日: 2017/04/25
    ジャーナル フリー
    The Japanese economy has suffered from the cumulative interest-bearing debt since the bubble economy collapsed. The non-performing loan is pointed out as one of the main reasons for the prolonged recession in Japan. The Bank of Japan adopted what we called the zero-interest rate policy and now adopts the quantitative easing policy. The Reserve Bank of New Zealand adopted the inflation target in 1990. Some economists insist that the Bank of Japan should adopt the inflation target. Ninomiya (2001.a) examined the effect of the interest rate target when the economy is in financial instability. Taylor and Dalziel (2002) presented a basic model of inflation target. However, they did not consider the interest-bearing debt. We can point out the cumulative interest-bearing debt as an aspect of financial instability. If the lenders' risk enhances by the increase in debt burden and so on, the interest rate would rise in spite of a recession. The rise in interest rate increases the interest payment burden. As a result, there is a possibility that firms can not help issuing a new debt for the purpose of the payment and so on. In other words, the cumulative interest-bearing debt occurs in the economy. Some economists took the interest-bearing debt into account and discussed the financial instability (Jarsulic (1990), Keen(1995)). However, the interest-bearing debt did not have an important role and the effect of monetary policy was not examined in their models. In this paper, we construct a macro dynamic model which considers the interest-bearing debt. The dynamic equation of debt burden considering the interest-bearing debt has an important role in our model. We discuss the financial instability by the cumulative interest-bearing debt and examine the effect of the interest rate target for the financial instability in the dynamic model. We also show a financial cycle by applying Hopf bifurcation theorem. The main result of this paper is that the interest rate target has an effect when the cumulative interest-bearing debt makes the economy unstable. The result means that the zero-interest rate policy is very useful if the cumulative interest-bearing debt produces the prolonged recession in Japan.
  • 岡部 洋實
    原稿種別: 本文
    2005 年 41 巻 4 号 p. 98-100
    発行日: 2005/01/20
    公開日: 2017/04/25
    ジャーナル フリー
  • 角田 修一
    原稿種別: 本文
    2005 年 41 巻 4 号 p. 101-103
    発行日: 2005/01/20
    公開日: 2017/04/25
    ジャーナル フリー
  • 伊藤 誠
    原稿種別: 本文
    2005 年 41 巻 4 号 p. 104-106
    発行日: 2005/01/20
    公開日: 2017/04/25
    ジャーナル フリー
  • 小黒 正夫
    原稿種別: 本文
    2005 年 41 巻 4 号 p. 107-109
    発行日: 2005/01/20
    公開日: 2017/04/25
    ジャーナル フリー
  • 馬渡 尚憲
    原稿種別: 本文
    2005 年 41 巻 4 号 p. 110-111
    発行日: 2005/01/20
    公開日: 2017/04/25
    ジャーナル フリー
  • 和田 豊
    原稿種別: 本文
    2005 年 41 巻 4 号 p. 112-114
    発行日: 2005/01/20
    公開日: 2017/04/25
    ジャーナル フリー
feedback
Top