Show Less
You do not have access to this content

Corporate Governance, The Firm and Investor Capitalism

Alexander Styhre

The shift from managerial capitalism to investor capitalism, dominated by the finance industry and finance capital accumulation, is jointly caused by a variety of institutional, legal, political, and ideological changes, beginning with the 1970s’ downturn of the global economy. This book traces how the incorporation of businesses within the realm of the state leads to both certain benefits, characteristic of competitive capitalism, and to the emergence of new corporate governance problems emerges. Contrasting economic, legal, and managerial views of corporate governance practices in contemporary capitalism, the author examines how corporate governance has been understood and advocated differently during the New Deal era, the post-World War II economic boom, and the after 1980 in the era of free market advocacy.
Show Summary Details
You do not have access to this content

Epilogue: neoclassical economic theory and ideology

Alexander Styhre

Extract



In Karl Mannheim’s Ideology and Utopia (1936), a seminal work in the field of the sociology of knowledge (see, for example, Merton, 1957), Mannheim reserves the term ideology for ideas that support the interests of privileged social groups and strata. Utopian ideas, in contrast, support underprivileged classes, and for the proponents of ideological ideas, utopian ideas are of necessity unattainable scenarios that violate the key propositions of ideological ideas, and therefore utopian ideas need to be marginalized and disarmed. In addition, Mannheim’s (1936) sociological theory of ideological and utopian ideas underlines the constitutive nature of such ideas and how they create a shared sense of community and joint understanding, which is what Ludwik Fleck once referred to as a thought collective:

We belong to a group not only because we are born into it, not merely because we profess to belong to it, nor finally because we give it our loyalty and allegiance, but primarily because we see the world and certain things in the world the way it does (i.e., in terms of the meanings of the group in question). (Mannheim, 1936: 19, emphasis added)

‘An economist by training think of himself as a guardian of rationality, the ascriber of rationality to others, and the prescriber of rationality to the social world’, the renowned economist Kenneth Arrow (1974: 16) admits.1 This declaration is revealing as it indicates how economists tend to think of themselves as defenders not of specific ideological ideas but of...

You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.

Elgaronline requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books or journals. Please login through your library system or with your personal username and password on the homepage.

Non-subscribers can freely search the site, view abstracts/ extracts and download selected front matter and introductory chapters for personal use.

Your library may not have purchased all subject areas. If you are authenticated and think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.


Further information

or login to access all content.