In the Marxist tradition, capitalism is understood as a commodified society based on markets. The article argues that the ultimate justification of this position does not lie in any ‘materialistic’ approach, but in the disembedding of markets that was the result of the historical ‘Great Transformation’ analysed by Karl Polanyi. Disembedded markets are not an economic subsystem within society but take the place of the most encompassing social system, which Durkheim had reserved for religion. The article distinguishes between spatial, social, (...) material and temporal dimensions of disembedding, thereby elaborating and correcting the analysis of Karl Polanyi. As a genuine form of society, disembedded markets give rise to the epistemological dilemma, which, as Luhmann had shown, is fundamental to any encompassing social theory: Society as a whole cannot be viewed by any observer. According to this viewpoint, economic theories take on ‘theological’ functions, as they provide rationality and legitimacy to a reality that is unknowable. (shrink)

The inner affinity of money and religion has been a central issue of the `classical' theories of money, in particular of Georg Simmel and Karl Marx. The paper argues that the conceptualizations of money in current economic sociology and mainstream economic theory are deficient, and that a more promising approach can be developed by referring to those classical authors, whose thinking was not yet dominated by the institutionalized academic division of labour between sociology and economics of today. It is shown, (...) how the concept of money as `Vermögen' (Simmel) or as `capital' (Marx) can be combined with current constructivist theories of economic `myths' and `visions', thus opening a new perspective for sociological analysis of entrepreneurship, innovation, economic growth and social change. (shrink)

This article explores parallels between Marx's and Schumpeter's theories of capitalist development, and discusses the relationship of these classical approaches to later constructivist theories of technological and organizational changes. It is suggested that Marxian and Schumpeterian ideas could be combined in a way which remedies the weaknesses of both sides, and provides a better understanding of the innovative dynamics of capitalism; such a synthesis could then be linked to a constructivist model of the rise and fall of economic `myths'.

In his fragment on `capitalism as a religion', Walter Benjamin characterizes capitalism not only as a phenomenon that is `influenced' by religion, as conventional sociological interpretations assume, but as one of `essentially religious' character. This article takes up and elaborates Benjamin's idea, drawing mainly on Simmel, Marx and the constructivist concept of economic `myths'. Referring to Simmel's idea of money as `absolute means' and Marx's concept of capital, it is argued that money is a non-observable and basically paradox phenomenon, comparable (...) to religion. But capitalism differs from traditional religion in that it is no longer based on a fixed distinction between the mundane and the transcendent world. Rather, the promises of capital have to be redeemed in a continuous process of constructing and deconstructing economic `myths'. The article argues that such an interpretation of capitalism `as' a religion could be capable of synthesizing the results of contemporary research on innovation, entrepreneurship and economic growth. (shrink)

This article develops an assessment of the present-day European crisis management, referring to Wolfgang Streeck’s recent interpretation of the European ‘consolidation state’ as an attempt to install a ‘Hayekian’ regime of liberalized transnational markets. This article arrives at a diagnosis different from Streeck’s: if there has been a ‘Hayekian’ regime, it had already developed after the collapse of the Bretton Woods system in 1973 and the subsequent dismantling of capital controls in the USA and Europe. As it appeared in the (...) financial crisis of 2007–2008, the ultimate practical test of the Hayekian vision was dramatically negative. European crisis management, as it is still largely occupied with the imperative to maintain the solvency of troubled Euro states vis-à-vis the capital markets, is not following a Hayekian script. Rather, it is confronted with the challenge of removing the debris of the collapse of the former Hayekian regime, taking the form of zombie banks and large uncovered capital claims. To master this challenge, not only intact European institutions and transnational cooperation in Europe would be required, but also much more democratic pressure from below. (shrink)