Erasmus Journal for Philosophy and Economics

Freedom, State, and Market

Angus Hebenton, Martin O'Neill — Mon, 09 Dec 2024 00:00:00 +0100

The complexity of the real history of economic planning in practice, as well as the variety of rationales that have been offered in theory for various (more or less comprehensive) forms of planning, both suggest that political philosophy would benefit from a more nuanced and less simplistic approach to the discussion of state planning of the economy. The aim of our article is to clear some ground for a discussion of markets and democratic economic planning within normative political philosophy that takes a less stark and dichotomous approach in considering the relationship between markets and state planning, and takes more account of the complexities of both the theory and historical practice of economic planning. The article considers some of the different varieties of democratic economic planning, and the rationales for different forms of imperative and indicative planning regimes, as well as other alternative planning mechanisms. In particular the article looks to bring renewed attention to the theoretical rationales for planning offered by two important theorists of the mixed economy: James Meade and Stuart Holland. We close by revisiting the powerful normative case for economic planning provided by Barbara Wootton, whose rejection of F. A. Hayek’s critique of planning, as well as her positive case for planning on grounds of freedom, democracy, and social equality, deserves to be much better known, and whose work is ripe for reintegration into contemporary normative discussions of social justice and political economy.

Democratic Theory and Economic Planning

Jan Philipp Dapprich — Sat, 18 Jan 2025 00:00:00 +0100

The participatory economics model (ParEcon) of Michael Albert and Robin Hahnel represents an important contribution to the debate about feasible alternatives to capitalism. What distinguishes the model from other proposals, like market socialism or cybersocialism, is the central role given to the participation of citizens in economic planning. Citizens form workers’ and neighbourhood consumers’ councils which develop production and consumption proposals. These councils form federations responsible for the coordination of planning. An Iteration Facilitation Board plays a mere perfunctory role in the facilitation of the planning process. This way, economic planning is done entirely by the citizens themselves rather than planners at a central planning agency. The ParEcon model is thereby supposed to be more democratic than historical central planning.
In this paper, I consider whether three possible justifications for democracy can also be used to support this kind of participatory economy. These justifications can be referred to as (1) the protection of citizens’ interests, (2) the revealing of preferences and (3) liberty. In my paper, I show that these three justifications of democracy do not in fact support democratic participation in concrete economic plans in the way envisaged by Albert and Hahnel. Instead of individual plans, citizens should choose general planning procedures. This prevents citizens from being subjected to the arbitrary power of their co-workers or neighbours. Such an algorithmic planning process also prevents central planners from holding arbitrary power since, much like the Iteration Facilitation Board in the ParEcon model, they simply facilitate the prescribed planning process without retaining significant discretion. As I elaborate in the case of consumption planning, citizens can still participate in planning, however they do so through their individual choices rather than a democratic vote. Individual citizens should not require the approval of their neighbours for their personal consumption.

Centralization Tendencies in Participatory Planning

Hannes Kuch — Mon, 09 Dec 2024 00:00:00 +0100

In the new debate about economic planning, the question of whether new forms of comprehensive planning might inadvertently encourage a relapse into authoritarianism must be central. The article analyzes the proposal of a “Participatory Economy” because it is the most sophisticated model for comprehensive planning without the need for centralized institutions. Planning is carried out in a participatory manner, enabling worker and consumer councils to coordinate their interrelated economic activities themselves. The danger of a relapse into authoritarianism appears to be averted. However, the paper argues that the Participatory Economy doesn’t live up to the goal it set for itself to a satisfying degree, because it requires more centralized institutions than it initially suggests. Centralization tendencies arise for strong normative reasons and are therefore difficult to avoid. Even worse, council-democratic remedies to centralization tendencies don’t offer an easy answer, as these remedies come with their own set of problems.

Why Taxes Need Not Treat Equals Equally

Kristoffer Berg — Sat, 18 Jan 2025 00:00:00 +0100

Horizontal equity is the principle that similarly situated persons should be treated similarly. While the principle is often invoked in tax policy debates, I demonstrate that the principle lacks a firm normative foundation. The paper presents a thought experiment to argue that neither an entitlement to pre-tax income, nor the presence of effort in generating pre-tax income, can provide the necessary foundation for such a principle. Then, I explore whether a concern for equal treatment and avoiding statistical discrimination can support horizontal equity even when there is no entitlement to pre-tax income. I show that tax discrimination can be objectionable, but because discrimination requires a relevant pre-tax benchmark, it follows that non-discrimination cannot support a general principle of horizontal equity without an entitlement to pre-tax income. In conclusion, despite the intuitive appeal of horizontal equity, I argue that its basis as a normative principle in tax policy is weak.

Review of Branko Milanovic’s Visions of Inequality: From the French Revolution to the End of the Cold War. Cambridge (Mass.), Harvard University Press, 2023, 368 pp.

Ulysse Lojkine — Wed, 11 Dec 2024 00:00:00 +0100

Review of Jon D. Wisman’s The Origins and Dynamics of Inequality: Sex, Politics, and Ideology. New York: Oxford University Press, 2022, ix + 507 pp.

Gulzaar Barn — Mon, 09 Dec 2024 00:00:00 +0100

Economics, Pluralism and Democracy

Ha-Joon Chang, Teemu Lari — Wed, 11 Dec 2024 00:00:00 +0100

How To Leap Without Looking

Soroush Marouzi — Mon, 13 Jan 2025 00:00:00 +0100