History 311

Fall 2007

Bogazici University

Huricihan Islamoglu

Wednesday 3 pm-4 pm, 5pm-7pm

Making of Market Societies in the 19th and 20th centuries in Western Eurasia

The course is premised on the argument that historically emergence of market societies since the 18th century have been inextricably linked to certain forms of governing practices. These practices shaped by power configurations or relations that prevailed in different historical periods and in different regions shaped the very nature of market societies and the relations that characterized these societies. The course will focus on the governing environments that shaped the capitalist market societies since mid -18th centuries. The first had been the governing environments of central bureaucratic states which over time and in relation to societal struggles of varying intensity and character took on the character of welfare , corporatist or developmentalist states. The second part of the course will focus on the making of market societies in relation to such governing environments from Bismarckian welfarism go American progressivism of the 1910s and 1920s unto fascist corporatism and Stalinist socialism to Keynesian welfarism of the post-Depression and post WWII eras. This mode of governing markets prevailed until the 1980s.

The first part of the course will briefly look at the ways early modern statecraft shaped non-capitalist economic activity.

In the third part of the course will focus on the post-1980s when an understanding of ‘free markets’ with ideas of governance imagining a subsumption of governing or political agency to the dictates of self-governing markets, came to prevail. The course will attempt to trace the changes in power relations(including the collapse of socialist regimes in eastern Europe and the Soviet Union) which facilitated and enabled the shifts in understandings and the practices of governing. Simply, the recent shift in nature of market societies refers to a shift in the ways societies are governed, in the nature of state powers, in the ways legitimation is sought for the new ways of governing markets. For instance, new governance bodies and their practices , say, the boards for regulating production in a given sector, seek legitimation in their ability to generate growth(or profits for investors in that sector and such profits are expected to have trickle down effects for the groups including workers as well as the society at large). This signaled a shaping of , for instance, of labour markets and setting of wages at levels which would enable economic growth. Governing practices of welfare administrations, on the other hand, sought legitimation in their ability to distribute benefits of market activity- in terms of jobs, of wages , profits hence did not have priority of augmenting entrepreneurial gains.

Governing practices of welfarist or developmentalist administrations , however, presupposed power configurations both within and outside of individual territorial state units , pointing to the primacy of central bureaucracies and armies. Such primacy is challenged since the 1980s and new forms of administration and new understandings of law suggest the makings of new hegemonies which extend beyond the former territorial boundaries , rendering problematic the issue of political accountability of market-making processes . Governance practices of new market environments are ascribed a technical character to differentiate them from those of former central administrations that fell prey to politics or were taken over by particular interests(as opposed to the general interest represented by those engaged in market activity).

In particular, this section will explore the ways economic reform packages issued alternatively by the World Bank- International Monetary Fund and the European Union, are shaping these societies. Modern central administrations and their practices were largely constitutive of ‘national’ market societies; as P.Chatterjee has shown in the case of India , central colonial administrations also laid the groundwork for the making national society or the economy. Governing bodies (most notably, the multiple and autonomous boards) and their practices , introduced in reform packages, however, seek to constitute regional units such as the European Union, or to ‘localize’ the former ‘national’ economic area in relation to a global economy.

The course will study such processes of globalization or Europeanization from the perspective of new rules of governance . New governing practices lean on law understood as a technique of governance or as ‘rule according to law ‘, or according to a certain kind of ‘law’ the primary goal of which to promote private enterprise and remove obstacles on the way to capital’s mobility. We will look at different regulations or laws as loci for the ‘politics’ of new market making just as the administrative practices of central states have been arenas in which different actors confronted each other or entered into alliances to survive or dominate under conditions of the new order of the market . The multiplicity of these arenas point to the problematic , that is, contested, conflicted character of market-making and suggest a diversity of global market environments as these are shaped by politics specific to different regions.

Requirements :

The ideal size for the class would be 35 students. Students are expected to write a take-home mid-term examination and take-home final examination.

Weekly Schedule and Readings

PART I

I.

Introductory Lecture (state- society differentiation, markets and civil society, absence of bourgeois revolutions)

II.

Are markets natural or are they man-made? If the latter, who or what makes them and how?

K. Polanyi, The Great Transformation ,chpts. Chpts.12-13

R.K. Kanth, Political Economy of Laissez-Faire: Economics and Ideology in the Ricardian Era (Rowman&Littlefield,1986),chpt1,2.

Douglass C.North and R.Thomas,’An Economıc Theory of the Growth of the Western World’,The Economıc History Review,vol.23,no.1(1970)

III.

Markets and States : Early modern statecraft to modern administration (accommodative-redistributive states to security states) or from Moral Economies to to prioritization of Security of Property

K. Tribe, ‘Cameralism and the Science of Government’, Journal of Modern History, Vol. 56, No. 2, 1984, pg: 263-284

D. Parker,’ Sovereignty , Absolutism and Function of Law in Seventeenth-Century France ‘, Past and Present, no. 122( Feb.1989)(optional)

Steve Hindle,’Exhortation and Entitlement:negotiating inequality in english rural communities,1550-1650’ in M.Braddick and J.Walker (eds) Negotiating power in Early Modern Society:Order, Hierarchy and subordination in Britain and Ireland(Cambridge:CUP,2001).

Michael J.Braddick, ‘Administrative performance:the representation ofpolitical aurthority in early modern England’ in Braddick and Walker.

H. Islamoglu, ‘ Modernities Compared: State Transformations and Constitutions of Property in the Qing and Ottoman Empires’, Journal of Early Modern History,vol.5,no.4(2001)

IV

Passages:Modern Administration/ Developmentalism/ Welfarism/ Constitutionalism and the Rule of Law

C. Moores, The Making of Bourgeois Europe:Absolutism, Revolution and the Rise of Capitalism in England, France and Germany(London,1991)

J. Singelmann, P. Singelmann, ‘Lorenz von Stein and the Paradigmatic Bifurcation of Social Theory in the Nineteeth Century’, The British Journal of Sociology, Vol. 37 no.3, 1986, pg: 431-452

D.Senghaas,’Frederich List and the New International Order’

Social Reform in Germany 1864-1894

G.Steinmetz, Regulating the Social:the Wefare State and Local Politics in Imperial Germany(Princeton,1993),chpts.2 (optional)

Axel R.Schafer,’German Historicism, Progressive Social Thought and interventionist State in the US since the 1880s’ in m.Bevir & F. Trentmann (eds), Markets in Historical contexts

V

D.Eastwood,’Tories and Markets:Britain 1800-1850’ in Bevir & Trentman

Heinz-Gerhard Haupt,’Guild Theory and Guild organization in France and Germant during the 19th Century’, in Bevir & Trentman

VI

Modern State and Securing of Private Property (1)

D.R. Kelley, ‘What was Property Legal Dimensions of the Social Question in France(1789-1848) , Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society,vol.128,no.3(1984)

Isser Wolloch, ‘State Intervention in Village Life’,The New Regime: Transformations of the French Civic Order (New York,1994)

H. Islamoglu,’ Property as a Contested Domain: A Re-Evaluation of the Ottoman Land Code of 1858 ,’ R.Owen (ed.), New Perspectives on Property and Land in the Middle East (Harvard U Press,2000)

John Rule, Albion’s People: English Society,1714-1815, cht 5 and 8

H. Islamoglu , ‘ Politics of Administering Property :Law and Statistics in the 19th Century Ottoman Empire’ in H. Islamoglu(ed.) Constituting Modernity: Private Property in the East and West(I.B.Tauris,2004)

VII

Administering People or Making of Workers , Soldiers, of the Social –Taylorism

M. Neocleus, Administering Civil Society (New York,1996) – Optional (Look it up in the Library)

Isser Wolloch ,’Napoleonic Conscription: State Power and Civil Society’ , Past & Present,no.111(May 1986).

K. Fahmy, All the Pasha’s Men: Mehmed Ali,His Army and the making of Modern Egypt(CUP,1997) , chpts 2-3.

PART II:

I

Constituting Empire or Empire as Reproduction of National Economy

E. Hobsbawn, ‘An Economy Changes Gear” in Age of Empires (1987), 34-56, also chpts. 2-7.

D. Blackbourne ,The Long Nineteenth Century: A History of Germany, 1780-1918, chpt 9 (The Old Politics and the New)

Novel recommended:
Amitvar Gosh, Glass Palace.

II

First Half of the 20th Century: Crisis of liberal universalism, war, corporatism (lobor discipline, centralized regulatory states), economic collapse; consolidating the national economies –market- non market alternatives

Great Depression in Europe, 1929-1939

Economic History of 20th Century Europe

J.M.Keynes, The Economic Consequences of Peace,chpt.4-7.

E.Hobsbawn,Into the Economic Abyss’,’The Fall of Liberalism’, in The Age of Etremes:A History of the World ,1914-1991

Arndt, Economic Lessons of Nineteen thirties

Film: Ford Documentary – 1920s USA –mass culture / Valentino

R. Hughes, Technology, Cubism

F. Lang, Metropolis (1927)

R.Clair, A Nous la Liberte (1931) poetic realism

Film: J. Ford, Grapes of Wrath

III.

Rebuilding Germany: The Creation of the Social Market Economy

Barry Eichengreen, European Economy since 1945: Coordinated Capitalism and Beyond (2006)

A.Glyn, A.Hughes et al’The rise and Fall of the Golden Age’ in S.A.Marglin&J.B.Schor(eds),The Golden age of Capitalism: Re-interpreting the Postwar Experience (1990) pp. 39-125

David Cameron, ‘Social Democracy, corporatism, Labour Quiescence and the Representation of economic Interest in Advanced Capitalist Societies’in J.H.Goldthorpe(ed), Order and conflict in Contemporary Capitalism(Oxford,1984)

R. Skidelsky, ‘The Decline of Keynesian Politics’ in C. Crouch, State and Economy in contemporary Capitalism

E. Hobsbawn, ‘The Crisis Decades’ in The Age of Extremes pp. 403-32

IV

A New Capitalism : End of Civilized Capitalism?? Retreat of states or a new formation; from cemtalized administration to localized governance

Colin Crouch & W.Streeck, ‘The Future of capitalist Diversity’ in C. Crouch & W.Streeck(eds), Political economy of Modern Capitalism(1997)

W.Streeck, ‘German Capitalism:Does it Exist? Can it Survive?’ in Crouch & Streeck