Flexibility and security? ‘Flexicurity’ and its implications for lifelong guidance

This article sets out to trigger research and policy attention among the career guidance community to the increasingly important notion of ‘flexicurity’. It first explores the different meanings of the term, particularly as these have evolved in discussions across the European Union. It then goes on to consider why ‘flexicurity’ has attracted so much policy interest, particularly in its promise to both support labour market competitiveness and increase economic efficiency on the one hand, while protecting the interests of workers on the other. Next, the article documents some of the key debates around the notion of flexicurity, highlighting the fact that any consideration of ‘flexicure’ arrangements needs to be empirically grounded in time and space, and carefully contextualised. The article concludes by making a series of critical reflections on the need to ‘insert’ career guidance in the European discourse on ‘flexicurity’.     

The Turning of the Tide: Theology,Religion, and Economics1

Abstract : Although capitalist free market economics is in crisis, its assumptions continue to shape not only how we do business or politics but also how we think and feel, and even what we believe. For theologians and scholars of religion this means that we can no longer do our work without taking into consideration what is happening in the economy and how it affects us; before religion can become part of the solution we need to understand how it has become part of the problem. This article investigates how economics has shaped religion and theology and develops alternative perspectives.     

The Next American Revolution？ Reflections on Gar Alperovitz,What Then Must We Do？

Marx is concerned with theory that not only interprets but also changes the world. A central issue is thus the transition from capitalism to communism, a topic rarely considered by critics of capitalism today. An important exception is Gar Alperovitz, who, although eschewing the word ＂communism,＂ argues that we need ＂a new system＂ and sketches a transition strategy for moving ＂beyond capitalism.＂ This paper elaborates and evaluates this strategy.     

MARKETS AND MORALITY

For most of human history, economic systems were personal in nature—people normally interacted with people they knew personally and knew well. Today's modern market economies are impersonal—people normally interact with people they do not know personally. The historical movement from personal to impersonal systems was necessary for societies to develop the specialization of labor needed for modern production technologies. That is, the high standards of living in the developed world are due to these impersonal systems. However, the ethical systems theologians apply to modern market systems were developed for personal societies and are often inappropriate for impersonal societies. In this article, we develop the differences between personal and impersonal systems, examine the writings of a number of theologians who are very critical of market economies, and attempt to show how a different ethical approach is needed.     

From Consumerism to Stewardship: The Troublesome Ambiguities of an Attractive Option1

Abstract : Problems with consumerism may lead Christians to project the idea of responsible stewardship as an alternative. But this would be highly problematic. Although a part of many American Christians’ experience, and apparently bolstered by the authority of Jesus himself, the construct resists normative theological definition. It is too closely allied in our culture with “the spirit of capitalism” and tends to re‐enforce secular understandings of private property. The construct stewardship, therefore, should be used sparingly, if at all, in church circles.     

A sorrowful farewell to a Utopia

Born 1931, professor of the history of philosophy at the University of ódz. Specialist in German philosophy, with numerous publications on Schelling, Hegel, and Marx and their influence on political and social theories.     

Piketty,Marxian Political Economy,and the Law of the Falling Rate of Profit

This article examines two views about the capitalism that lies at the heart of modern industrial society. We owe to Marx and Piketty two large‐scale, hugely important, but very different studies of the nature of modern industrial capitalism. In Capital, Marx provides a complex analysis of the anatomy of modern industrial capitalism, which he regards not as stable but rather as over time unstable and tending toward internal collapse on several grounds, of which the most important is apparently the so‐called tendency of the falling rate of profit. The falling rate of profit supposedly threatens its continued existence. Piketty criticizes the latter view in the context of his theory of contemporary capitalism. The article suggests, first, that Marx's view of the falling rate of interest is empirically implausible but Piketty's rival claim is empirically plausible. Second, a successful transition from capitalism to communism on Marxian grounds is unlikely in practice. And finally, despite Marx's intentions, it is unlikely to realize itself in practice, and is in this respect a traditional theory.     

A New Social Contract: Substituting the Neoliberal Public Policy Paradigm with a Participatory Public Policy Paradigm

Peter Hall introduced the concept of paradigm shifts into the public policy discourse. His account explains the seismic transition the world experienced in the 1980s. With this neoliberal paradigm the former social contract between the public leadership and the people unraveled and the future of humanity has been put at risk. To steer humanity back in the direction of a sustainable future, the author argues for a participatory public policy paradigm instituted as a reinvention of Rousseau’s social contract theory with tree distinct features that respond to the complexity of life in modern times.     

Communication Rights in a Divided World

This article explores the implications of advances in communication technology for communication rights and the political, economic, and cultural challenges at global, national, and local levels. It argues that digital transformation cannot be left to market forces or to a benign vision of a world in which all governments are sufficiently liberal minded to permit dissent and peaceful revolution. Rather, digital transformation needs to be driven by the needs of peoples and communities who help construct communication and information ecosystems that are firmly rooted in principles of justice, freedom, equality, and mutual solidarity. To that extent, people and communities must be enabled to reach their own consensuses around their needs and what should be done, and they must be regularly and constructively consulted by those charged with implementing, regulating, and monitoring such ecosystems.