The strong form of the Say's law stated that the "costs of output are always covered in the aggregate by the sale-proceeds resulting from demand". Keynes argues that this can only hold true if the individual savings exactly equal the aggregate investment. While Classical economics believes in the theory of the invisible hand, where any imperfections in the economy get corrected automatically, Keynesian economics refuses the idea. Keynesian economics does not believe that price adjustments are possible easily and so the self-correcting market mechanism based on flexible prices also obviously doesn't. The Keynesian economists actually explain the determinants of saving, consumption, investment, and production differently than the classical economists.
Capitalism brought about the industrialisation of modern society, this idea is favoured by Marxists but postmodernists argue that society is not as simple as this. Postmodernism has emerged since the 1970s, in a postmodern society we are defined by what we consume society is not simply one thing but an unstable, fragmented, media saturated global village where image and reality are indistinguishable. Foucault argues that there are no objective criteria that we can use to prove whether a theory is true or false and if we cannot guarantee if knowledge is correct we cannot use it to improve society this view is known as anti foundationalism. Anti foundationalism is based on two key concepts, the enlightenment of achieving progress through true scientific knowledge and any all embracing theory that claims to have the absolute truth about how to create a better society such as Marxism however it is a meta- narrative and is just someone’s version of reality and it is not necessarily the truth so there is no need to accept the claims that the theory makes Postmodernists a reject meta narratives such as Marxism because they have helped create oppressive totalitarian states that have impose their version of the truth on people for example the former soviet union in Russia. Because they believe that all accounts of reality are equally valid so we should therefore recognise and celebrate diversity rather than imposing one
Karl Marx’s negative connotation to the word i.e. “delusion and mystification” also plays a big part. Marx applied ideology as a critical notion whose use is to expose a course of systematic perplexity. Engels referred to ideology as “false consciousness” Marx distinguished his ideas as scientific as they were constructed precisely to unmask the workings of history and society (encyclopaedia of philosophy 2005 p100). The difference between ideology and science, "false and truth’ is highlighted and therefore crucial to his usage of the term.
The continued power grab will destroy the capitalist system shackling the limbs of the free market. The regulation imposed creates factions limiting the ease of market entry. The environment that our American business calls home must remain competitive assuring quality goods to consumers while encouraging technological advancements. The path our federal government is currently on is a path of non-democratic regulation that is a threat to the growth and prosperity of our country. It is simply a matter of the true meaning of the Constitution, specifically the commerce clause that must be addressed.
In fact, the tenets of the Revolution are betrayed. This great experiment will prove that central power does not always entail a betrayal of individual liberty; The United States transcends that standard. ALEXANDER HAMILTON: He does not understand that we must live for the future or the greater good of the nation, as Benjamin established in June
In some respects, this revision follows the lead of historian William Appleman Williams who developed the notion of an American informal empire, growing out of nineteenth-century "Manifest Destiny," aggressive protection of free trade and open markets, and finally, into direct confrontation with the old empires of Europe in the twentieth century. [1] Bender's view is slightly different, emphasizing the very long history of American engagement with European Empires--the successful American Revolution was, after all, partly a consequence of the enmity of France and Britain. As Bender concludes: the "American way of empire was even presented as anti-imperialism because it guaranteed openness, in contrast to the exclusivity of the old empires" (p. 233). This statement is an important argument because it links the visionary perspectives of Thomas Jefferson, for example, to the much later engagement of the United States with European colonial empires. It also illustrates an essential point, which is the moral center of the work.
It rejected past ideals of conservative realism. Modernists believed that the weight of outdated philosophies and systems were holding back potential cultural development. For many, modernism opposes the hierarchical structures of society and is characterised by innovation and dynamism There are many discourses of modernity, as there is with post-modernity. As theorized by Marx, “the modern is the epoch that follows the middles ages, or feudalism”[3]. Post-modernism is widely believed to have been born at the end of the second world war, however, historians David Somervell and Arnold Toynbee in their writing 'A study of histoy'[4], suggested the concept of the post-modern period began as early as around 1875, to delineate a fourth stage of Western history, and the 'modern'.
Fundamentally, Rousseau and Marx refuted the theories of their predecessors; namely Hobbe’s insistence that man’s original state of nature was terrifying and disadvantageous to individuals and Locke’s championing of the protection of an individual’s right to private property. Rousseau precisely writes, “[A]ll the subsequent progress has been in appearance so many steps toward the perfection of the individual, and in fact toward the decay of the [human]species” (Rousseau 65). Both argued for what they considered to be best for the community of humanity, not the specific interests of a minority collective of wealthy individuals (Marx 168). Both find the establishment and exploitation of private property, as well as labor, to be the origins of social inequality (Marx 162-163) (Rousseau 65). In his Discourse on the Origin of Inequality, Rousseau states that the origin of inequality was the foundation of a political system that gave “new forces to the rich,” and thus, “destroyed natural liberty, [and] established forever the law of property and of inequality” (Rousseau 70).
Social action theorists believe that illusion of a stable and constant society is slightly more than hundreds of individual interactions each carried out by choice and interpretation. Max Weber a famous social action theorist put forward his view that humans are fundamentally different from the subject of matter of the natural sciences, due to the fact that they have free-will; in that they make decisions, attach meanings, hold intents and harbour motives. Therefore, the ultimate aim of sociology should be inevitably to individual decision and thoughts, rather than social structure. Weber takes on a completely different viewpoint from Durkheim, who put forward his theory that individual behaviour is constrained by determined by natural laws. Nevertheless, one major criticism of these structuralist approaches, i.e.
As a political philosopher, Marx disapproved of the capitalist system; particularly on the way how production was run. Therefore along with other economists, Karl Marx created communism. Marx’s communism is described to have no class structure and the wealth of production is served to reach the needs of common good. Both Adam Smith and Karl Marx were writing in different socio- economic times, hence it is not surprising that their ideas conflicted with each other. Adam Smith lived through a mercantile system, which he highly opposed therefore the idea of a free market system seemed to be the best solution in a time period before the industrial revolution.