Abstract
Introduction
In many countries people debate the relative merits of economic systems at dinner tables, in bars, barber shops, and on street corners. In the U.S. such conversations are exceedingly rare. In the country held up by many as the exemplar of capitalism, most people can’t talk about it because they don’t know what it is. In common discourse the word doesn’t describe an economic system; it’s a verbal placeholder for admired (or rejected) values and political allegiances. Capitalism is also glaringly absent in mainstream U.S. management discourse. From 1978 to 2021 the Academy of Management Review published 14 papers with “capitalism” in the title (vs 81 papers in Organization in half that period, 2001–2021) (EBSCO search 8/20/21). Capitalism is generally not a topic in U.S. business schools.
Paul Adler is an important exception. A U.S.-based (Australian-born and European-trained) management scholar, he has persisted in putting capitalism on the academic table. Since the 1980s, Paul has written about capitalism alongside his extensive research on corporate business practice. An early proponent of Critical Management Studies in the Academy of Management, as Program Chair of the whole Academy, he used his prerogative to define the annual theme for 2013 as “Capitalism in Question” (which made the Meeting at Disney World much more interesting.) Adler’s (2019) book, The 99 Percent Economy: How Democratic Socialism Can Overcome The Crises of Capitalism, builds on this history of work, combining an insider’s look at mainstream management practices with a sharp critique of U.S. political economy. The book is a departure from his past work in being written primarily for a non-academic, U.S. audience. The book is intended to foment the kinds of dinner table/bar discussions we lack in this country. For this reason, that the book is overtly U.S.-focused is not, I would argue, a limitation.
The short review essays in this collection echo the constructive spirit of Paul’s book. As contributions to the debate, they focus on key aspects of capitalism’s failures, what changes are needed and how to make them happen. Ali Mir highlights the fundamentally racialized nature of U.S. capitalism, questioning whether “a socialist society will automatically ensure racial and gender justice” and arguing for incorporation of the Black Lives Matter platform as necessary for true democracy. Richard Marens casts doubt on Paul’s “Whiggish optimism” about the technological advances of contemporary capitalist management and their applicability to questions of social organization. Martin Parker questions another pillar of Paul’s argument, his faith in the state, calling attention to the dangers of “giganticism” and of discouraging a wide range of “human scale” and local forms of organizing. In a similar vein, Stephen Carpenter considers the history and structure of U.S. agriculture to conclude that “small-scale independent production” is the most feasible alternative for a democratic and socialist future. My own contribution addresses the importance of consciousness, both in perpetuating capitalism’s hegemony and in cultivating the solidarity and creativity necessary for change.
Paul’s book is an invitation to envision and map a path toward a more just, sustainable, and democratic society. As a group, we are grateful for his persistent commitment to highlighting capitalism’s failures and for his belief that somehow, talking and writing about the issues, we can make steps toward that better future.