论文部分内容阅读
有关去工业化的分析一直由一些非主流的经济学家们——尤其是那些结构主义经济学家和卡尔多传统理论的支持者——所主导,且这些分析均建立在行业特殊性的概念以及制造业对经济增长的拉动作用的基础之上。行业的概念并非马克思经济学分析的理论单位,然而,马克思经济学中关于行业的内涵的思考使得对有关行业结构变化的内涵和意义的分析出现了。去工业化指的是近几十年来最为突出的行业的转换,可能对资本主义的未来有着重要的意义。本文是对去工业化的马克思主义元理论的进一步发展。这一概念化过程包含了对两种形式的去工业化的区分。除了考虑行业结构的变化,文中所提出的类型学分析也将考虑此类变化是否与产生剩余价值的生产活动和不产生剩余价值的生产活动之间的转化有关,或者只是一种剩余价值生产活动的构成的变化。不同形式的去工业化之间的本质区别丰富了针对此种现象的分析,而不再采用较为狭隘的基于行业的分析方法。
The analysis of de-industrialization has been dominated by a few non-mainstream economists-especially those who are structuralist economists and supporters of Caldo’s traditional theory- and these analyzes are based on the concept of industry specificity and Manufacturing industry on the basis of stimulating economic growth. The concept of industry is not the theoretical unit of Marx’s economic analysis. However, the thinking on the connotation of industry in Marx’s economics has led to the analysis of the connotation and significance of the change of the structure of the industry. De-industrialization refers to the transformation of the most prominent industries in recent decades and may have important implications for the future of capitalism. This article is a further development of Marxist meta-theory of de-industrialization. This conceptualization involved the distinction between the two forms of de-industrialization. In addition to considering changes in the structure of the industry, the typological analysis proposed in the paper will also consider whether such changes are related to the conversion between productive activities that produce the surplus-value and those that produce no-surplus-value, or simply a surplus-value production activity The composition of the change. The essential distinction between different forms of de-industrialization enriches the analysis of such phenomena, rather than the more narrow-based industry-based analysis.