{"title":"“幸运之国”的资本积累:澳大利亚从“羊背经济”到“采石场经济”。第二部分:联邦时期","authors":"N. Grinberg","doi":"10.1080/00472336.2022.2065335","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The Australian economy went from being amongst the most promising areas of “new settlement,” to producing one of the most “mediocre” rich-country performances, only to later enjoy a “miraculous” revival. This is the second part of a two-part article that presents an account of this Australian trajectory that is critical of mainstream traditions. Drawing on key insights of Marx’s critique of political economy, this article argues that Australia’s role in the production of surplus-value on global scale has specifically determined its pattern of long-term economic and political development. Since its creation by British capital, the Australian economy became not only a source of cheap raw materials but also of ground-rent for appropriation by competing social subjects. Part I examined the colonial period. This second part analyses the Commonwealth period. It is argued that the process of inwards-oriented industrialisation, in place until the mid-1980s, was the state-mediated economic form through which capital invested in manufacturing managed to appropriate the largest share of the Australian ground-rent. It also argues that during the neo-liberal era that followed that process, manufacturing capital was increasingly displaced by industrial capital invested in mining and public services.","PeriodicalId":47420,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Contemporary Asia","volume":"53 1","pages":"2 - 27"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Capital Accumulation in the “Lucky Country”: Australia from the “Sheep’s Back” to the “Quarry Economy.” Part II: The Commonwealth Period\",\"authors\":\"N. Grinberg\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/00472336.2022.2065335\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract The Australian economy went from being amongst the most promising areas of “new settlement,” to producing one of the most “mediocre” rich-country performances, only to later enjoy a “miraculous” revival. This is the second part of a two-part article that presents an account of this Australian trajectory that is critical of mainstream traditions. Drawing on key insights of Marx’s critique of political economy, this article argues that Australia’s role in the production of surplus-value on global scale has specifically determined its pattern of long-term economic and political development. Since its creation by British capital, the Australian economy became not only a source of cheap raw materials but also of ground-rent for appropriation by competing social subjects. Part I examined the colonial period. This second part analyses the Commonwealth period. It is argued that the process of inwards-oriented industrialisation, in place until the mid-1980s, was the state-mediated economic form through which capital invested in manufacturing managed to appropriate the largest share of the Australian ground-rent. It also argues that during the neo-liberal era that followed that process, manufacturing capital was increasingly displaced by industrial capital invested in mining and public services.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47420,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Contemporary Asia\",\"volume\":\"53 1\",\"pages\":\"2 - 27\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Contemporary Asia\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/00472336.2022.2065335\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"AREA STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Contemporary Asia","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00472336.2022.2065335","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"AREA STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
Capital Accumulation in the “Lucky Country”: Australia from the “Sheep’s Back” to the “Quarry Economy.” Part II: The Commonwealth Period
Abstract The Australian economy went from being amongst the most promising areas of “new settlement,” to producing one of the most “mediocre” rich-country performances, only to later enjoy a “miraculous” revival. This is the second part of a two-part article that presents an account of this Australian trajectory that is critical of mainstream traditions. Drawing on key insights of Marx’s critique of political economy, this article argues that Australia’s role in the production of surplus-value on global scale has specifically determined its pattern of long-term economic and political development. Since its creation by British capital, the Australian economy became not only a source of cheap raw materials but also of ground-rent for appropriation by competing social subjects. Part I examined the colonial period. This second part analyses the Commonwealth period. It is argued that the process of inwards-oriented industrialisation, in place until the mid-1980s, was the state-mediated economic form through which capital invested in manufacturing managed to appropriate the largest share of the Australian ground-rent. It also argues that during the neo-liberal era that followed that process, manufacturing capital was increasingly displaced by industrial capital invested in mining and public services.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Contemporary Asia is an established refereed publication, it appears quarterly and has done so since 1970. When the journal was established, it was conceived as providing an alternative to mainstream perspectives on contemporary Asian issues. The journal maintains this tradition and seeks to publish articles that deal with the broad problems of economic, political and social development of Asia. Articles on economic development issues, political economy, agriculture, planning, the working class, people"s movements, politics and power, imperialism and empire, international financial institutions, the environment, and economic history are especially welcomed.