كليدواژه :
جامعه‌شناسي اقتصادي , جامعه‌شناسي اقتصادي نوماركسيستي , سرمايه‌داري انحصاري , كنش اقتصادي و پديده‌هاي اقتصادي , گونه شناسي جامعه شناسي اقتصادي
چكيده فارسي :
با توجه به شرايط اجتماعي و دانشگاهي دهه 1970، گروهي از جامعه‌شناسان مبتكر و خلاق و با سنت‌هاي فكري مختلف، در شكل‌گيري جامعه‌شناسي اقتصادي جديد سهم و نقش بسزايي داشتند. آن‌ها سعي كردند كه پديده‌هاي اقتصادي را متمايز از رويكرد اقتصاد نوكلاسيك تحليل كنند. دراين‌ميان، برخي از پژوهشگران حوزه جامعه‌شناسي اقتصادي را به دو گونه قديم و جديد تقسيم‌بندي كردند و پيشگام جامعه‌شناسي اقتصادي جديد را «گرانووتر» معرفي كردند؛ درحالي‌كه سنت‌هاي فكري متعددي در پديدآمدن حوزه جامعه‌شناسي اقتصادي جديد نقش داشته‌اند؛ ازجمله رويكرد تحليل شبكه، حوزه جامعه‌شناسي اقتصادي جديد و ديدگاه جامعه‌شناسي تحول‌يافته فرهنگي. حك‌شدگي، محوري‌ترين مفهوم درميان سنت‌هاي فكري جديد است كه براساس آن، پديده‌هاي اقتصادي متفاوت از علم اقتصاد متعارف تبيين شده‌اند. در اين مقاله با بررسي انتقادي اين تقسيم‌بندي در حوزه جامعه‌شناسي اقتصادي نشان داده مي‌شود كه جامعه‌شناسي نوماركسيستي احياشده در دهه 1970، ازنظر مفهومي و تجربي دستاوردهاي مهمي در حوزه جامعه‌شناسي اقتصادي داشته است كه از سهم و نقش آن در شكل‌گيري اين حوزه غفلت شده است. يافته‌ها نشان مي‌دهند كه در تعامل و ارتباط ميان جامعه‌شناسي اقتصادي و رويكرد جامعه‌شناسي اقتصادي نوماركسيستي، جهت‌گيري و تحليل‌هاي چندجانبه و جديدي ايجاد مي‌شوند. همان‌گونه‌كه جامعه‌شناسي نوماركسيستي احياشده در دهه 1970 در جامعه‌شناسي متعارف پذيرفته شده است و از دستاوردهاي آن بهره گرفته مي‌شود، در جامعه‌شناسي اقتصادي نيز چنين تعاملي با جامعه‌شناسي نوماركسيستي سازنده است.
چكيده لاتين :
The concept of economic sociology and its development goes back to the late 19th century, when the social sciences were created as an academic discipline and the founders of social sciences such as Weber, Durkheim and Simmel developed the boundaries of this discipline. In the 1980s, Granovetter historically divided economic sociology into two periods in his article "Old and New Economic Sociology: A History and Agenda." Using this distinction in his various works, Swedberg divided economic sociology into two old and new histories and introduced Granovetter as the pioneer of the new economic sociology. This classification of economic sociology has become popular among economic sociology researchers. In this formulation, neo-Marxist economic sociologists and various fields of sociology are not considered in the formation and development of this field. In this paper, we have tried to extract concepts that exist in theories of neo-Marxist economic sociology and can be useful in analyzing economic behaviors and institutions and linking them to conventional economic sociology. The purpose of this article is to introduce neo-Marxist economic sociology as one of the theoretical traditions in the field of economic sociology.
Review of Literature
The analysis of the views of new economic sociologists shows that economic sociologists have been less concerned with analyzing the reproductive structures of the capitalist system, and most of all have been examining the economic practice of network, firm, and market analysis. In other words, economic sociologists have been active within the framework of the capitalist system and have failed to expand the critical sociology of capitalism. The analysis of the dynamics and reproduction of capitalism has been neglected. Neo-Marxist economic sociology has attempted to explain the relations of production, class relations, class status, and the deformation of economic institutions and, consequently, of exploitation in various forms of capitalism. Marxist economic sociologists have mostly analyzed the dynamics and reproduction of capitalism and examined the status of classes under monopoly capitalism.
Method
Documentary research has been used to answer the research question. The technique of gathering the data needed for analysis, themes and recurring concepts in the works of economic sociology.
Results and Discussion
The neo-Marxist economic sociology approach has made important strides in complementing the field of economic sociology in general and has provided new insights in this area, including:The sociology of capitalist firm: The approach of neo-Marxist economic sociology calls into question the principle of complete competition. According to this approach, monopoly economics should be considered instead of competitive economics. In the new economy there is much less competition between capitalists and producers than in the past, and the type of competition is different. Competition is about selling, not price. Baran and Sweezy (1966) have called this kind of competition a growing rationality. 2. The Problem of Action and its Motives: The approach of the neo-Marxist economic sociology questions the principle of maximizing the profits of economics. Nineteenth-century individual capitalist action sought to maximize the profit in the short run, while corporate executives sought to sacrifice short-term profit for long-term profit. 3. Analyzing corporate economic management and the type of interaction with the workforce is an important part of the achievements of the neo-Marxist economic sociology approach. 4. Workflow: Analyzing the status of the workforce, including blue-collar workers and office workers (white-collar) in large corporations, and the labor and employment skills under the monopoly capitalist system is another important point to be analyzed in this approach. The discussion of skills in the new society is one of the most challenging issues that cannot be addressed without a neo-Marxist economic sociology approach. 5. The absorption of economic surplus by the social institutions governing society and its results is an important issue in the field of economic sociology that has been considered and analyzed in this approach and can be discussed in the field of economic sociology.
Conclusion
The revival of sociological Marxism in the 1970s has had a profound effect on American sociology. In some specialized fields of sociology, this revival has had more effects, including in the fields of economics and sociology. The effects of neo-Marxist economic sociology have not only been at the macro level but also at the micro level with the initiative of authors such as Elaine Wright and Elster (2000). A more useful analysis can be made by combining neo-Marxist economic sociology and economic sociology. By reinforcing market-oriented thinking and neoclassical economic theory, neo-Marxist economic sociologists and other economic sociology researchers who are influenced by Weber's, Durkheim's, and Simmel's views can achieve a common goal of criticizing market fundamentalism. Marxist economic sociology, with its critiques of various forms of capitalism and the neoclassical view of economics, can be a complement to theories of economic sociology. The neglect of neo-Marxist analyzes renders economic sociology reductive. Marxist analyzes of economics, especially those more closely linked to sociology, must be taken seriously in economic sociology because it is essential for economic sociology.
