The difference between local and national capitalism, and why local capitalisms differ from one another: A Marxist approach

Abstract

This paper develops a notion of ‘local capitalisms’. Starting from a particular, Marxist theorisation of capitalism and of the state, local capitalism is analysed as a nexus of production, reproduction of people, and the state within a locality. The latter construct, and are constructed by, specific relations of class, gender, ethnicity and age, themselves internally related. On this basis one can specify the ‘vertical difference’ of local from national capitalisms. Combined and uneven development leads to both commonalities and differentiation between localities, enabling us to understand the nature and origins of ‘horizontal’ differences between local capitalisms. Both capitalism and the state are understood as riven by contradictions, some centrally involving space, place and scale. Consequent disruptions to local capitalisms, and the bases for local struggle by the oppressed and exploited, are discussed. The paper concludes by reflecting on the differences between my theorisation and mainstream approaches to ‘comparative capitalisms’.

Gambling and Political Economy, Revisited

“…In particular, as some Marxist scholars have noted, without attentiveness to power work on diverse economies can descend into pluralism, eliding the reality of capitalism as a structured whole. For Bob Jessop, 'not everything that is individually possible is compossible' (2014, 54), meaning that some varieties of capitalism can coexist in the same economic space but others cannot (see also Gough 2014). He points to the 'differential capacity of the state and political forces to use soft power, force, and domination to impose specific patterns of valorisation, appropriation and dispossession' (54)a reality that can sometimes drop out of celebratory accounts of local cooperatives.…”

Conspicuous production: Wine, capital and status

“…Most economic theory and policy is predicated on the evolution of productive economic systems and institutions that valorise a rational, economically efficient system: the putative neoliberal free market is the epitome of this imaginary. There is also a tendency to see capital as relatively homogenous and solely concerned with seeking out least-cost locations and maximising profit (although see the recent critiques framed around ‘varieties of capitalism’ in this journal, including Weiss 2014, Jessop 2014 and Gough 2014). While the contribution of the informal sector and small-scale, family owned and operated businesses which offer more than economic value to the participants are recognised as important contributors to non-market-driven production (see de Soto 1989; Gerxhani 2004; Friedman 1978), the role of different forms of status-seeking productive activities receives little attention in connection with economic growth and development.…”

“…Locally produced wines become part of this new wine consumption culture, for there is also often a parochial loyalty to wineries in which the vineyards can be visited as part of a local tourist experience, where certain wineries gain reputations for quality or sophistication or, of particular interest to this paper, where a particular local celebrity is involved. This attachment to local products and producers has been noted as a counter-tendency alongside the broader processes of globalisation (Jackson 2004), and as an element in understanding the importance of locality in the comparative capitalism literature (Gough 2014).…”

Introduction to the special section: Urban neoliberalism, strategies for urban struggles, and ‘the right to the city’

“…The valorisation of investment in the built environment is in the end wholly dependent on these other forms of commodity production and state services. And this production and reproduction in the city is labour, the exploitation of labour power, and unpaid domestic work, in modes specific to particular localities (Gough 2014). But Harvey's work gives little attention to capital-labour relations and domestic work.…”