Neoclassical economics as a logic of subversion

3Citations
Citations of this article
4Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

Instead of reducing subversion to secret plotting for the violent undermining of established powers and authorities, this chapter starts from the presumption that we today, all of us, inside the advanced, democratic world, live inside subversion. In order to explore how such a situation could have emerged, the paper starts from similar diagnoses by Goethe and Dostoevsky, and then introduces a series of concepts from political anthropology, like trickster, imitation and liminality, to analyse the processes resulting in subversion. Focussing on the modern economy as a central modality of subversion, it argues that we do not live inside a market economy that developed gradually out of small-scale exchanges, but rather this economy should be conceived as a fairground that has become permanent. The chapter evokes three historical moments, and related trickster figures, central for such permanentisation of liminality. It finishes by presenting four concepts, utility, marginalism, interest and opportunity cost, which illustrate the trickster terminology of modern economics.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Szakolczai, A. (2018). Neoclassical economics as a logic of subversion. In Divinization and Technology: The Political Anthropology of Subversion (pp. 165–186). Taylor and Francis. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781351119627-10

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free