What do you think?
Rate this book
Capitalism: A Conversation in Critical Theory
A scintillating conversation on capitalism and crisis from two of our most incisive political philosophers
Capitalism, by the twenty-first century, has brought us an era of escalating, overlapping crisis–ecological, political, social–which we may not survive.
In this brilliant, wide-ranging conversation, political philosophers Nancy Fraser and Rahel Jaeggi identify capitalism as the source of the devastation and examine its in-built tendency to crisis. In an exchange that ranges across history, critical theory, ecology, feminism and political theory, Fraser and Jaeggi find that capitalism's tendency to separate what is connected–human from non-human nature, commodity production and social reproduction–is at the heart of its crisis tendency.
These "boundary struggles," Fraser and Jaeggi conclude, constitute capitalism's most destructive power but are also the sites where a fighting left movement might be able to halt the destruction and build the non-capitalist future we so desperately need.
A crucial text for students of political theory, economic theory, and social change, Capitalism offers an invigorated critique of twenty-first century capitalism and an incisive study of our current conjuncture.
Capitalism, by the twenty-first century, has brought us an era of escalating, overlapping crisis–ecological, political, social–which we may not survive.
In this brilliant, wide-ranging conversation, political philosophers Nancy Fraser and Rahel Jaeggi identify capitalism as the source of the devastation and examine its in-built tendency to crisis. In an exchange that ranges across history, critical theory, ecology, feminism and political theory, Fraser and Jaeggi find that capitalism's tendency to separate what is connected–human from non-human nature, commodity production and social reproduction–is at the heart of its crisis tendency.
These "boundary struggles," Fraser and Jaeggi conclude, constitute capitalism's most destructive power but are also the sites where a fighting left movement might be able to halt the destruction and build the non-capitalist future we so desperately need.
A crucial text for students of political theory, economic theory, and social change, Capitalism offers an invigorated critique of twenty-first century capitalism and an incisive study of our current conjuncture.
256 pages, Paperback
Published July 4, 2023
81 people are currently reading
1388 people want to read
About the author
Nancy Fraser
148 books448 followersNancy Fraser is an American critical theorist, currently the Henry A. and Louise Loeb Professor of Political and Social Science and professor of philosophy at The New School in New York City. Fraser earned her PhD in philosophy from the CUNY Graduate Center and taught in the philosophy department at Northwestern University for many years before moving to the New School.
Librarian Note: There is more than one author with this name in the Goodreads database.
Librarian Note: There is more than one author with this name in the Goodreads database.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 24 of 24 reviews
August 27, 2023
Nancy Fraser is a preeminent feminist philosopher known for arguments for socialism (or rather what she refers to as “global trans-ecological socialism”) and her critical work on capitalism (or rather what she refers to as “cannibal capitalism”).
Broadly speaking, Fraser critiques cannibal capitalism (and neoliberalism) for its role in perpetuating social inequalities, particularly in relation to race, gender, LGBTQ identity, and disability, class and other forms of oppression.
Fraser emphasizes that capitalism isn’t only an economic model, but rather a social order that enables (and is enabled) systemic oppression including as patriarchy, racism, homophobia, ableism heteronormativity, class discrimination and exploitation of the natural environment.
Rahel Jaeggi is a contemporary German social critic and political philosophy. Jaeggi has engaged with various topics, including critical theory, ethics, and social policy. Jaeggi emphasizes ways in which "alienation” in the context of capitalism (see Marx) and its impact on the sense of self, other and community relationships.
"Capitalism: A Conversation in Critical Theory" is a book written by Nancy Fraser and Rahel Jaeggi, two prominent feminist philosophers and critical theorists. The book is structured as a dialogue between the two authors, exploring the various dimensions of capitalism and its relationship to critical theory.
Throughout the book, Fraser and Jaeggi discuss how capitalism intersects with other forms of oppression, such as gender, race, and class inequalities. They delve into the concept of "capitalist society" and its impact on social relationships, individual identity, and collective well-being. The authors also examine the tensions between capitalism and democracy, questioning whether capitalism hinders the realization of democratic ideals.
In Capitalism: A Conversation in Critical Theory
Fraser and Jeagg engage in a nuanced, and at times conflicting dialectical conversation regarding the complexities, problems and benefits of capitalism/neoliberalism, drawing on various philosophical and critical theories.
Fraser and Jeaggi discuss capitalism's multifaceted effects on self and society, including its historical development, ethical implications, and potential alternatives.
Capitalism: A Conversation in Critical Theory is deep, profound, edifying and engaging (even its a bit prolix and academic at times).
Great book.
Great conversation.
Great moment we’re having.
Let’s hope against all odds (and common sense) that it’s not too late to come back from the brink.
5/5 stars ⭐️ (probably more like 4.5, but the urgency of the subject and the sheer brilliance and fearless ferocity of Fraser and Jeaggi make me feel like rounding up).
Broadly speaking, Fraser critiques cannibal capitalism (and neoliberalism) for its role in perpetuating social inequalities, particularly in relation to race, gender, LGBTQ identity, and disability, class and other forms of oppression.
Fraser emphasizes that capitalism isn’t only an economic model, but rather a social order that enables (and is enabled) systemic oppression including as patriarchy, racism, homophobia, ableism heteronormativity, class discrimination and exploitation of the natural environment.
Rahel Jaeggi is a contemporary German social critic and political philosophy. Jaeggi has engaged with various topics, including critical theory, ethics, and social policy. Jaeggi emphasizes ways in which "alienation” in the context of capitalism (see Marx) and its impact on the sense of self, other and community relationships.
"Capitalism: A Conversation in Critical Theory" is a book written by Nancy Fraser and Rahel Jaeggi, two prominent feminist philosophers and critical theorists. The book is structured as a dialogue between the two authors, exploring the various dimensions of capitalism and its relationship to critical theory.
Throughout the book, Fraser and Jaeggi discuss how capitalism intersects with other forms of oppression, such as gender, race, and class inequalities. They delve into the concept of "capitalist society" and its impact on social relationships, individual identity, and collective well-being. The authors also examine the tensions between capitalism and democracy, questioning whether capitalism hinders the realization of democratic ideals.
In Capitalism: A Conversation in Critical Theory
Fraser and Jeagg engage in a nuanced, and at times conflicting dialectical conversation regarding the complexities, problems and benefits of capitalism/neoliberalism, drawing on various philosophical and critical theories.
Fraser and Jeaggi discuss capitalism's multifaceted effects on self and society, including its historical development, ethical implications, and potential alternatives.
Capitalism: A Conversation in Critical Theory is deep, profound, edifying and engaging (even its a bit prolix and academic at times).
Great book.
Great conversation.
Great moment we’re having.
Let’s hope against all odds (and common sense) that it’s not too late to come back from the brink.
5/5 stars ⭐️ (probably more like 4.5, but the urgency of the subject and the sheer brilliance and fearless ferocity of Fraser and Jeaggi make me feel like rounding up).
August 3, 2018
A very compelling, accessible, and engaging introduction to intersectional critiques of capitalism/critical theory.
Fraser and Jaeggi structure the book as a conversation, making for an unintimidating and accessible starting place for those new to thinking about capitalism critically. That said, the books main three chapters are sufficiently sourced and edited that I would feel comfortable citing this academically.
This book consists mainly of overviews of Fraser’s recent work on capitalism as an “institutionalized” social order and Jaeggi’s critique of capitalism as a “form of life,” with a greater focus on Fraser’s work. The merit of Fraser’s account is that it integrates struggles against racial, gender, and imperial oppression and for environmental protection and political democracy into a structural critique of capitalism as an economic system. As such, we have a basis for understanding the ways in which patriarchy, racism, etc are central to capitalism’s continued functioning. While this work is not wholly new by any means (see eg Bhattacharya, Vogel, Federici, Mies), Fraser’s does an admirable job of systematizing and synthesizing a range of other work into a single, coherent critical theory of capitalism.
Jaeggi’s work is less developed here, although I must admit I am not sufficiently intrigued to be motivated to pick up her new book when it comes out in English.
The book loses one star for two reasons. First, as the title states this book is structured like a conversation. This means that many points are not as thoroughly developed as one might hope. I hope that Fraser will write a monograph of her own expounding her theory of capitalist society to remedy this. Second, the final chapter of the book is much less well written and argued than the first three, to the point where it felt like padding. It includes many uninformed and misguided comments on many issues, particularly in its superficial dismissal of anarchism. In making these comments, Fraser and Jaeggi contradict much of what they have more carefully argued in the first three chapters. For example, they rightly critique Habermas’ conservative “system/lifeworld” distinction, only to insist that the boundaries constitutive of capitalism society (eg production/reproduction) must not be breached. This is despite that fact that according to Fraser, these boundaries only have meaning within capitalism.
In sum, the first 3 chapters are quite good, while the fourth is needless filler and can be skipped.
Fraser and Jaeggi structure the book as a conversation, making for an unintimidating and accessible starting place for those new to thinking about capitalism critically. That said, the books main three chapters are sufficiently sourced and edited that I would feel comfortable citing this academically.
This book consists mainly of overviews of Fraser’s recent work on capitalism as an “institutionalized” social order and Jaeggi’s critique of capitalism as a “form of life,” with a greater focus on Fraser’s work. The merit of Fraser’s account is that it integrates struggles against racial, gender, and imperial oppression and for environmental protection and political democracy into a structural critique of capitalism as an economic system. As such, we have a basis for understanding the ways in which patriarchy, racism, etc are central to capitalism’s continued functioning. While this work is not wholly new by any means (see eg Bhattacharya, Vogel, Federici, Mies), Fraser’s does an admirable job of systematizing and synthesizing a range of other work into a single, coherent critical theory of capitalism.
Jaeggi’s work is less developed here, although I must admit I am not sufficiently intrigued to be motivated to pick up her new book when it comes out in English.
The book loses one star for two reasons. First, as the title states this book is structured like a conversation. This means that many points are not as thoroughly developed as one might hope. I hope that Fraser will write a monograph of her own expounding her theory of capitalist society to remedy this. Second, the final chapter of the book is much less well written and argued than the first three, to the point where it felt like padding. It includes many uninformed and misguided comments on many issues, particularly in its superficial dismissal of anarchism. In making these comments, Fraser and Jaeggi contradict much of what they have more carefully argued in the first three chapters. For example, they rightly critique Habermas’ conservative “system/lifeworld” distinction, only to insist that the boundaries constitutive of capitalism society (eg production/reproduction) must not be breached. This is despite that fact that according to Fraser, these boundaries only have meaning within capitalism.
In sum, the first 3 chapters are quite good, while the fourth is needless filler and can be skipped.
August 5, 2020
Das Gespräch dass Fraser und Jaeggi zum „Kapitalismus“ führen ist interessant und lesenswert - überzeugend ist es aber wohl nur, wenn man ihre Sichtweise bereits vorher teilt.
In erster Linie Nancy Fraser baut hier ein Theoriegebäude auf, dass den Kapitalismus definiert, ihn historisiert, kritisiert und schließlich darlegt wie und warum er zu bekämpfen ist. Ihre Theorie orientiert sich sowohl an Marx als auch Polanyi, geht aber darüber hinaus um ein „holistischeres“ Bild zu zeichnen und emanzipatorische Kämpfe (insb. Frauen-, Indigenen-, Umwelt- und Minderheitenrechte) stärker zu würdigen.
Die größte Stärke (auf gewissen Weise aber auch die größte Schwäche) des Buches ist die analytische Schärfe mit der Fraser ihr Konzept des Kapitalismus als „institutionelle Gesellschaftsform“ darlegt: Die Grundzüge davon ist ein Verständnis des Kapitalismus aus einem wirtschaftlichen „Vordergrund“ und einem „Hintergrund“ aus institutionellen „Spaltungen“ zwischen (1) ökonomischer Produktion vs sozialer Reproduktion (grob: Familie & Erziehung); (2) Wirtschaft vs Gemeinwesen/Politik; (3) Mensch vs Natur; (4) Ausbeutung vs Enteignung.
Dazu identifiziert Fraser eine „dreifache Bewegung“ (die sich eng an Polanyi anlehnt, mit einer zusätzlichen Dimension) als gesellschaftlich-historische Triebkraft: Vermarktlichung („Marketisation“); Sozialschutz („Social Protection“); Emanzipation („Emancipation“).
Es ist dieses Theoriegebäude, zusammen mit der spannenden Diskussion zur Strategie linker Bewegungen im letzten Kapitel, die das Buch sehr lesenswert machen, auch für jene die politisch ganz woanders stehen und mit marxistischen Ideen sonst wenig anfangen können.
Darin liegt aber auch die größte Schwäche des Buches: es ist praktisch rein theoretisch, ohne auch nur den Versuch zu machen die Thesen durch empirische, oder zumindest anekdotische, Evidenz zu belegen. Man mag das verzeihen, weil das schlicht nicht Ziel des Buchs ist, einige der Thesen sind aber prima facie wenig überzeugend: ist eine Trennung von „Produktion und Reproduktion“ und „Mensch und Natur“ wirklich spezifisch und einzigartig für den Kapitalismus? (Es ist nicht schwer Gegenbeispiele zu finden); sind niedrige Löhne nicht nur „Ausbeutung“ sondern „Enteignung“?
Tiefer als dieser Aspekt ist die zweite Schwäche: Fraser/Jaeggi sind in ihrer ökonomischen Analyse gefangen im engen marxistischen Rahmen des „Mehrwerts“, das (spätestens seit der Grenznutzenschule ab den 1870er Jahren) weder theoretisch noch empirisch haltbar ist. An einem solchen überholten und in der Praxis irrelevanten Theoriegebäude festzuhalten ist die wohl größte Schwächer radikaler linker Theorie der letzten 100 Jahre - da sind Fraser/Jaeggi keineswegs alleine.
Überzeugender ist die Analyse des „progressiven Neoliberalismus“, in dem sich emanzipatorische Strömungen mit marktwirtschaftlichen Verbunden haben - grob die Politik von Clinton, Blair, Schröder bis zu Merkel und Obama. Jaeggi ist angesichts der Bedrohung durch den reaktionären Populismus (Trump, Brexit) skeptisch ob die Linke zu dieser Politik wirklich in harte Opposition gehen sollte. Fraser meint ja, und setzt einen linken Populismus aus kultureller Emanzipation und linker Sozial/Wirtschaftspolitik dagegen: die Agenda von Sanders, Corbyn, Podemos, Syriza. Zumindest aus liberaler, wahrscheinlich aber auch sozialdemokratischer Sicht ist das eher keine attraktive Aussicht.
Ein Wort zum Sozialismus (der im Buch aber nur eine Nebenrolle spielt): es ist klar, dass Fraser/Jaeggi dem Realsozialismus wenig abzugewinnen haben. Sie definieren (demokratischen) Sozialismus als gesellschaftliche Kontrolle über die Investitionen des „gesellschaftlichen Überschuss“ (der wohl grob der Kapitalrendite entspricht). Dabei argumentiert insbesondere Fraser (trotz des Scheiterns vergangener Experimente) für eine „wichtige Rolle“ für die wirtschaftliche Planung und spricht gar von „globale[r] Planung im Großmaßstab“. Im Bewusstsein der Kritik von Hayek, Popper und vielen anderen sowie dem historischen Scheitern solcher Ansätze ist das der vielleicht gruseligster Punkt des Buches.
Lesenswert ist es, trotz dieser klaren Schwächen und Probleme, dennoch - und sei es nur für eine „Innenansicht“ moderner linker Theorie und Strategie.
In erster Linie Nancy Fraser baut hier ein Theoriegebäude auf, dass den Kapitalismus definiert, ihn historisiert, kritisiert und schließlich darlegt wie und warum er zu bekämpfen ist. Ihre Theorie orientiert sich sowohl an Marx als auch Polanyi, geht aber darüber hinaus um ein „holistischeres“ Bild zu zeichnen und emanzipatorische Kämpfe (insb. Frauen-, Indigenen-, Umwelt- und Minderheitenrechte) stärker zu würdigen.
Die größte Stärke (auf gewissen Weise aber auch die größte Schwäche) des Buches ist die analytische Schärfe mit der Fraser ihr Konzept des Kapitalismus als „institutionelle Gesellschaftsform“ darlegt: Die Grundzüge davon ist ein Verständnis des Kapitalismus aus einem wirtschaftlichen „Vordergrund“ und einem „Hintergrund“ aus institutionellen „Spaltungen“ zwischen (1) ökonomischer Produktion vs sozialer Reproduktion (grob: Familie & Erziehung); (2) Wirtschaft vs Gemeinwesen/Politik; (3) Mensch vs Natur; (4) Ausbeutung vs Enteignung.
Dazu identifiziert Fraser eine „dreifache Bewegung“ (die sich eng an Polanyi anlehnt, mit einer zusätzlichen Dimension) als gesellschaftlich-historische Triebkraft: Vermarktlichung („Marketisation“); Sozialschutz („Social Protection“); Emanzipation („Emancipation“).
Es ist dieses Theoriegebäude, zusammen mit der spannenden Diskussion zur Strategie linker Bewegungen im letzten Kapitel, die das Buch sehr lesenswert machen, auch für jene die politisch ganz woanders stehen und mit marxistischen Ideen sonst wenig anfangen können.
Darin liegt aber auch die größte Schwäche des Buches: es ist praktisch rein theoretisch, ohne auch nur den Versuch zu machen die Thesen durch empirische, oder zumindest anekdotische, Evidenz zu belegen. Man mag das verzeihen, weil das schlicht nicht Ziel des Buchs ist, einige der Thesen sind aber prima facie wenig überzeugend: ist eine Trennung von „Produktion und Reproduktion“ und „Mensch und Natur“ wirklich spezifisch und einzigartig für den Kapitalismus? (Es ist nicht schwer Gegenbeispiele zu finden); sind niedrige Löhne nicht nur „Ausbeutung“ sondern „Enteignung“?
Tiefer als dieser Aspekt ist die zweite Schwäche: Fraser/Jaeggi sind in ihrer ökonomischen Analyse gefangen im engen marxistischen Rahmen des „Mehrwerts“, das (spätestens seit der Grenznutzenschule ab den 1870er Jahren) weder theoretisch noch empirisch haltbar ist. An einem solchen überholten und in der Praxis irrelevanten Theoriegebäude festzuhalten ist die wohl größte Schwächer radikaler linker Theorie der letzten 100 Jahre - da sind Fraser/Jaeggi keineswegs alleine.
Überzeugender ist die Analyse des „progressiven Neoliberalismus“, in dem sich emanzipatorische Strömungen mit marktwirtschaftlichen Verbunden haben - grob die Politik von Clinton, Blair, Schröder bis zu Merkel und Obama. Jaeggi ist angesichts der Bedrohung durch den reaktionären Populismus (Trump, Brexit) skeptisch ob die Linke zu dieser Politik wirklich in harte Opposition gehen sollte. Fraser meint ja, und setzt einen linken Populismus aus kultureller Emanzipation und linker Sozial/Wirtschaftspolitik dagegen: die Agenda von Sanders, Corbyn, Podemos, Syriza. Zumindest aus liberaler, wahrscheinlich aber auch sozialdemokratischer Sicht ist das eher keine attraktive Aussicht.
Ein Wort zum Sozialismus (der im Buch aber nur eine Nebenrolle spielt): es ist klar, dass Fraser/Jaeggi dem Realsozialismus wenig abzugewinnen haben. Sie definieren (demokratischen) Sozialismus als gesellschaftliche Kontrolle über die Investitionen des „gesellschaftlichen Überschuss“ (der wohl grob der Kapitalrendite entspricht). Dabei argumentiert insbesondere Fraser (trotz des Scheiterns vergangener Experimente) für eine „wichtige Rolle“ für die wirtschaftliche Planung und spricht gar von „globale[r] Planung im Großmaßstab“. Im Bewusstsein der Kritik von Hayek, Popper und vielen anderen sowie dem historischen Scheitern solcher Ansätze ist das der vielleicht gruseligster Punkt des Buches.
Lesenswert ist es, trotz dieser klaren Schwächen und Probleme, dennoch - und sei es nur für eine „Innenansicht“ moderner linker Theorie und Strategie.
May 25, 2020
Um livro filosófico em formato de debate. O volume propõem novas formas de entender o mundo, baseadas na Teoria Crítica do Capitalismo (Escola Neo-Fraknkfurtiana). Sua leitura é essencial para qualquer pessoa que pretenda criticar o sistema atual e/ou propor novas formas políticas de existir no mundo.
A visão do capitalismo como ordem social institucionalizada e as críticas normativas, funcionais e éticas elaboradas pelas autoras me conduziram uma reflexão profunda sobre minha forma de existência no mundo e a como elaborar meu discurso crítico, a dar voz a minha insatisfação.
A parte final do texto, onde as autoras refletem sobre o neoliberalismo hiper-reacionário, relacionando o governo Trump nos EUA ao sentimento de ressentimento social, é facilmente transposto para a realidade brasileira. Também creio que seja importante para fundamentar uma crítica sólida ao bolsonarismo.
Uma leitura que deixa marcas e ideias rondando na mente do leitor. Essencial nos nossos tempos, especialmente se o leitor deseja viver uma postura emancipatória e crítica.
Vale!
A visão do capitalismo como ordem social institucionalizada e as críticas normativas, funcionais e éticas elaboradas pelas autoras me conduziram uma reflexão profunda sobre minha forma de existência no mundo e a como elaborar meu discurso crítico, a dar voz a minha insatisfação.
A parte final do texto, onde as autoras refletem sobre o neoliberalismo hiper-reacionário, relacionando o governo Trump nos EUA ao sentimento de ressentimento social, é facilmente transposto para a realidade brasileira. Também creio que seja importante para fundamentar uma crítica sólida ao bolsonarismo.
Uma leitura que deixa marcas e ideias rondando na mente do leitor. Essencial nos nossos tempos, especialmente se o leitor deseja viver uma postura emancipatória e crítica.
Vale!
January 22, 2024
Jaeggi and Fraser make a great effort to pull at the strings of their arguments - informative and accessible. This is Nancy Fraser at her best.
September 13, 2020
It is a profound and thought-provoking book. One piece of work that cannot be fully understood by just one reading.
Nancy Fraser and Rahel Jeggi discuss how capitalism' functionality relies on hidden abodes (e.g. reproduction, polity, and nature), which are in constant conflict and contradiction. After clarifying these border struggles, they engage in an argument about how the critique of capitalism should be done, and what are the future prospects for the Left.
I would say that the book has helped me understand how many social struggles are intertwined, and cannot be solved without challenging neoliberal capitalism. I found the authors to be too pessimistic about this aspect, whereas they are optimistic about the capacities and willingness of the Left to tackle this issue.
That said, I strongly recommend this reference for understanding the crisis of neoliberal hegemony, the political background we face and what the Left should do in order to benefit from it.
P.S.: You have to know Polanyi and Marx to understand even the introduction of this discussion.
Nancy Fraser and Rahel Jeggi discuss how capitalism' functionality relies on hidden abodes (e.g. reproduction, polity, and nature), which are in constant conflict and contradiction. After clarifying these border struggles, they engage in an argument about how the critique of capitalism should be done, and what are the future prospects for the Left.
I would say that the book has helped me understand how many social struggles are intertwined, and cannot be solved without challenging neoliberal capitalism. I found the authors to be too pessimistic about this aspect, whereas they are optimistic about the capacities and willingness of the Left to tackle this issue.
That said, I strongly recommend this reference for understanding the crisis of neoliberal hegemony, the political background we face and what the Left should do in order to benefit from it.
P.S.: You have to know Polanyi and Marx to understand even the introduction of this discussion.
September 1, 2024
In brief— I’ve never learned more reading a single book EVER! Mind-blowing, comprehensive, and so well done. I highly recommend, but it comes with a warning that reading it might take forever. Rome wasn’t built in a day, neither was a comprehensive understanding of capitalism and neoliberal hegemony.
May 13, 2024
Insightful but very academic and dense
January 14, 2019
This book is an engaging, relatively approachable introduction to recent analyses of capitalism in critical social and political theory. The book is organized as a conversation between Nancy Fraser and Rahel Jaeggi, although Fraser's conceptualization of capitalism as an "institutionalized social order" clearly takes center stage. The first chapter of the book is concerned with the social ontology of capitalism, asking what are the "things" that society is composed of, and what configuration of these 'things' makes a society capitalist? The second chapter concerns the historical development of capitalist societies, focusing on the distinct 'regimes of accumulation' that have existed over the course of the history of capitalism and the crisis tendencies that cause transitions from one regime to the next. The third chapter concerns how to go about criticizing capitalism, focusing on functional, moral, and ethical critiques of capitalism. And the final chapter addresses strategies for combatting capitalism and bringing about deep structural changes to society.
As somebody who is more familiar who comes from a background of empirical political science and economics, and who only dabbles in critical theory, I found this book to be a helpful introduction to contemporary critical theorizing about capitalism. I find Fraser's concept of boundary conflicts between capitalism and social reproduction, ecology, and democracy to be a useful way of thinking about the political economy of capitalist societies. Conflicts between the imperative of economic growth, on the one hand, and social reproduction and ecology, on the other, are sources of political conflict and drivers of political outcomes that mainstream political scientists tend to downplay or ignore. That being said, I find her analysis of the relationship between exploitation and expropriation to be muddled (in chapter 1, she speaks of the division between expropriation and exploitation as overlapping and being entwined with racial hierarchies, but in chapter 2 she talks about how the "two exes" can happen to the same group at the same time). I can also quibble with her analysis of the historical development of capitalism -- for example, the idea that the transition from state-managed capitalism to neoliberalism was a "stealth transition" is Eurocentric, as it wasn't very stealthy outside of the advanced capitalist core. But overall I found the discussion in the first three chapters to be thought-provoking and compelling, and I'm interested in diving deeper into Fraser's work and using it to inform my own research in comparative politics.
I agree with another reviewer that the final chapter on socialist strategy was considerably weaker than the preceding chapters. I'm no Clinton partisan, but Fraser repeated the conservative lie that Clinton was referring to all of Trump's supporters with her infamous "deplorables" comment, instead of the few hardcore racists among them -- a distinction that Fraser later insists that socialists should make. But on a deeper level, I found Fraser's analysis of the Trump phenomenon to be naive with respect to race, overlooking the importance of psychological 'wages of whiteness' for white workers and opportunity hoarding by middle-class whites as drivers of racial polarization. In the previous three chapters, she discusses how capitalism entwines with and deepens racial hierarchies, but her analysis of the political situation in chapter 4 doesn't adequately reflect that theoretical perspective.
Regarding the conversation format: readers who are already deeply engaged with critical theorizing about capitalism would likely feel that the format hinders a full development of either Fraser or Jaeggi's perspective. But as somebody who is less engaged with normative political theory, I found the conversation format helpful. Jaeggi's questions and comments frequently pointed to potential critiques of Fraser's perspective that I would not have thought about.
As somebody who is more familiar who comes from a background of empirical political science and economics, and who only dabbles in critical theory, I found this book to be a helpful introduction to contemporary critical theorizing about capitalism. I find Fraser's concept of boundary conflicts between capitalism and social reproduction, ecology, and democracy to be a useful way of thinking about the political economy of capitalist societies. Conflicts between the imperative of economic growth, on the one hand, and social reproduction and ecology, on the other, are sources of political conflict and drivers of political outcomes that mainstream political scientists tend to downplay or ignore. That being said, I find her analysis of the relationship between exploitation and expropriation to be muddled (in chapter 1, she speaks of the division between expropriation and exploitation as overlapping and being entwined with racial hierarchies, but in chapter 2 she talks about how the "two exes" can happen to the same group at the same time). I can also quibble with her analysis of the historical development of capitalism -- for example, the idea that the transition from state-managed capitalism to neoliberalism was a "stealth transition" is Eurocentric, as it wasn't very stealthy outside of the advanced capitalist core. But overall I found the discussion in the first three chapters to be thought-provoking and compelling, and I'm interested in diving deeper into Fraser's work and using it to inform my own research in comparative politics.
I agree with another reviewer that the final chapter on socialist strategy was considerably weaker than the preceding chapters. I'm no Clinton partisan, but Fraser repeated the conservative lie that Clinton was referring to all of Trump's supporters with her infamous "deplorables" comment, instead of the few hardcore racists among them -- a distinction that Fraser later insists that socialists should make. But on a deeper level, I found Fraser's analysis of the Trump phenomenon to be naive with respect to race, overlooking the importance of psychological 'wages of whiteness' for white workers and opportunity hoarding by middle-class whites as drivers of racial polarization. In the previous three chapters, she discusses how capitalism entwines with and deepens racial hierarchies, but her analysis of the political situation in chapter 4 doesn't adequately reflect that theoretical perspective.
Regarding the conversation format: readers who are already deeply engaged with critical theorizing about capitalism would likely feel that the format hinders a full development of either Fraser or Jaeggi's perspective. But as somebody who is less engaged with normative political theory, I found the conversation format helpful. Jaeggi's questions and comments frequently pointed to potential critiques of Fraser's perspective that I would not have thought about.
September 18, 2023
The conversation being between Fraser and her fellow critical theorist, Rahel Jaeggi. But the subject is definitely Fraser's work and the ways it has developed critical theory building on the foundations laid by Adorno, Horkheimer, From, Marcuse and others.
While remaining Marxist, Fraser theory is heavily influenced by Polyani and his account of a contradiction between the workings of the capitalist economy and its drive towards the commodification of all aspects of life and the effect this have of undermining the social factors that form the context in which capitalism exists. The destablisation of public power by capitalist accumulation is a key theme of the work but the conversation elaborates on this by identifying realms of public power not made explicit in Polyani's work. Critical here are the realms of reproduction - the processes which bring a fresh generation of human beings into society - and nature. For the latter, capitalism assumes that the ecological framework which sustains life is a free gift which can be exploited by the property-owning classes.
The idea of 'boundary struggles' is considered. This happens when the logic of one realm - say capital accumulation - invades another and sets up conflicts which have political, moral and ethical dimensions. The tendency to discount the impact of accumulation on the environment, which produces despoliation and climate change, is the obvious example. The conversation does beyond a simplistic view of 'good' nature versus 'bad' economy with a review of the value systems which are distinct to the contending realms. Reproduction is a place associated with caring and affective relations; nature supports notions of sustainability and stewardship; the economy productivity and cooperation - all on the positive side. But equally important is the tension generated by associating reproduction with the work of women, the economy with exploitation and the natural world with anti-human nihilism. Critical theory has to brings the potential for emancipation into its consideration of these tensions, meaning sharp criticism when it is needed of the values and social practices associated with each realm and what is at stake when they rub against each other in boundary struggles.
Fraser's large theme of capitalism as a total social system, rather than merely an expression of economic workers, is present through all the discussions. Her insistence of expropriation running alongside exploitation as one of the drivers of accumulation is central. Expropriation is dominant whenever the subjects who experience loss are not compensated in accordance with the market standard of equal exchange. Financialisation has enabled exploitation and expropriate to be joined in a single system, albeit one operating as a market mechanism (capitalists appropriating the surplus generated by labour power at a price determined by market principles) whilst at the same time generating the social power which extracts resources and under-compensated labour power from weaker actors.
Jaeggi probes Fraser on these issues, general in agreement with her position, but finding grounds for disagreement on issues like the creation of hegemonic power and the capacity for creating resistance at the subjective level. Much more to be said and I'm confident I'll be flicking through the sections of this book on future occasions when trying to work out what is responsible for the production of conflict and the direction it is taking us.
While remaining Marxist, Fraser theory is heavily influenced by Polyani and his account of a contradiction between the workings of the capitalist economy and its drive towards the commodification of all aspects of life and the effect this have of undermining the social factors that form the context in which capitalism exists. The destablisation of public power by capitalist accumulation is a key theme of the work but the conversation elaborates on this by identifying realms of public power not made explicit in Polyani's work. Critical here are the realms of reproduction - the processes which bring a fresh generation of human beings into society - and nature. For the latter, capitalism assumes that the ecological framework which sustains life is a free gift which can be exploited by the property-owning classes.
The idea of 'boundary struggles' is considered. This happens when the logic of one realm - say capital accumulation - invades another and sets up conflicts which have political, moral and ethical dimensions. The tendency to discount the impact of accumulation on the environment, which produces despoliation and climate change, is the obvious example. The conversation does beyond a simplistic view of 'good' nature versus 'bad' economy with a review of the value systems which are distinct to the contending realms. Reproduction is a place associated with caring and affective relations; nature supports notions of sustainability and stewardship; the economy productivity and cooperation - all on the positive side. But equally important is the tension generated by associating reproduction with the work of women, the economy with exploitation and the natural world with anti-human nihilism. Critical theory has to brings the potential for emancipation into its consideration of these tensions, meaning sharp criticism when it is needed of the values and social practices associated with each realm and what is at stake when they rub against each other in boundary struggles.
Fraser's large theme of capitalism as a total social system, rather than merely an expression of economic workers, is present through all the discussions. Her insistence of expropriation running alongside exploitation as one of the drivers of accumulation is central. Expropriation is dominant whenever the subjects who experience loss are not compensated in accordance with the market standard of equal exchange. Financialisation has enabled exploitation and expropriate to be joined in a single system, albeit one operating as a market mechanism (capitalists appropriating the surplus generated by labour power at a price determined by market principles) whilst at the same time generating the social power which extracts resources and under-compensated labour power from weaker actors.
Jaeggi probes Fraser on these issues, general in agreement with her position, but finding grounds for disagreement on issues like the creation of hegemonic power and the capacity for creating resistance at the subjective level. Much more to be said and I'm confident I'll be flicking through the sections of this book on future occasions when trying to work out what is responsible for the production of conflict and the direction it is taking us.
March 28, 2022
Overview:
There are many different types of capitalist societies. The form of capitalism that has existed, created many crises within society. Crisis stems not just from a part of the economy, but a pervasive crisis. More than an economic crisis, as social order is breaking down, and environmental problems are being exacerbated. Capitalism is described as a class division between owners and producers, has institutional markets for wage labor, accumulation of capital, and market allocation of inputs and surplus. Exchange occurs not through voluntary exchange, but through exploitation. Creating various inequalities. This book is a conversation between the authors, and what they try to discuss is how the economy works, rather than just the outcomes of the economy. They do not want to blame everything ill on capitalism. Nor do the author want to get rid of all capitalisms functions as that has led to disaster when tried.
Capitalism requires constant accumulation. Ever expanding capital. Not expanding leads to falling prey to competition. Accumulation is achieved via exploitation. Not voluntary exchange, but by non-compensation of those less powerful. But the authors do not want to return to pre-capitalist’s world, removing all capitalistic functions. As capitalism had many advantages over its predecessors. Economic systems might create the status of people, but states forge politically the status of peoples. It is states that codify the inequalities.
Part of the story is inequality. As few have stable lives and sense of well-being, but the majority do not. They point out many contradictions in capitalistic ideas such as free workers. Able to choose whether to work or not, but vulnerable in how they get and retain work.
Caveats?
The authors recognize many limitations of their work such as a lack of multidisciplinary studies, the need to engage with the opposition on legitimate claims, not blame everything on capitalism, and that the alternatives can be worse than capitalism. The problem is that the authors recognize these limitations, but do not do much to address them. Spending more time and addressing these known limitations would have strengthened the arguments and made them more accessible to a broader audience.
The book’s audience are people who already agree with many of the claims that the author have on the problems with capitalism. In its polarizing way, the book is going to have a hard time convincing those who disagree with the claims. Using a lot of Marx’s language limited the reach of the views as well.
As the authors focus on the problems of capitalism, they missed historical similar features in a pre-capitalism world, that would have been recognized in a multidisciplinary study. Even before capitalism, there were trends for accumulation, such as with empires and religion. Empires and religion need to expand, or be overtaken by competitors, which ad caused a lot of wars.
The book described many social divisions and blame them on capitalism, but they have existed before capitalism. There is a very human want to belong to a certain group, and identify with it. Which creates the problem of favoritism, that has the consequence of making others worse off. Non-capitalistic societies have these features of inequality as well, and worse.
There are many different types of capitalist societies. The form of capitalism that has existed, created many crises within society. Crisis stems not just from a part of the economy, but a pervasive crisis. More than an economic crisis, as social order is breaking down, and environmental problems are being exacerbated. Capitalism is described as a class division between owners and producers, has institutional markets for wage labor, accumulation of capital, and market allocation of inputs and surplus. Exchange occurs not through voluntary exchange, but through exploitation. Creating various inequalities. This book is a conversation between the authors, and what they try to discuss is how the economy works, rather than just the outcomes of the economy. They do not want to blame everything ill on capitalism. Nor do the author want to get rid of all capitalisms functions as that has led to disaster when tried.
Capitalism requires constant accumulation. Ever expanding capital. Not expanding leads to falling prey to competition. Accumulation is achieved via exploitation. Not voluntary exchange, but by non-compensation of those less powerful. But the authors do not want to return to pre-capitalist’s world, removing all capitalistic functions. As capitalism had many advantages over its predecessors. Economic systems might create the status of people, but states forge politically the status of peoples. It is states that codify the inequalities.
Part of the story is inequality. As few have stable lives and sense of well-being, but the majority do not. They point out many contradictions in capitalistic ideas such as free workers. Able to choose whether to work or not, but vulnerable in how they get and retain work.
Caveats?
The authors recognize many limitations of their work such as a lack of multidisciplinary studies, the need to engage with the opposition on legitimate claims, not blame everything on capitalism, and that the alternatives can be worse than capitalism. The problem is that the authors recognize these limitations, but do not do much to address them. Spending more time and addressing these known limitations would have strengthened the arguments and made them more accessible to a broader audience.
The book’s audience are people who already agree with many of the claims that the author have on the problems with capitalism. In its polarizing way, the book is going to have a hard time convincing those who disagree with the claims. Using a lot of Marx’s language limited the reach of the views as well.
As the authors focus on the problems of capitalism, they missed historical similar features in a pre-capitalism world, that would have been recognized in a multidisciplinary study. Even before capitalism, there were trends for accumulation, such as with empires and religion. Empires and religion need to expand, or be overtaken by competitors, which ad caused a lot of wars.
The book described many social divisions and blame them on capitalism, but they have existed before capitalism. There is a very human want to belong to a certain group, and identify with it. Which creates the problem of favoritism, that has the consequence of making others worse off. Non-capitalistic societies have these features of inequality as well, and worse.
October 10, 2021
Nancy Fraser and Rahel Jaeggi, the two most leading figures in the critical-theoretical tradition besides Hartmut Rosa, explore in this book the nature of capitalism. “Capitalism” as a notion is widely used throughout left-leaning thinking. The wide application of this notion pushes these thinkers towards giving highly-detailed explanations of the notion of capitalism. I for my part found these detailed explanations tiring at times, but valuable at others. A good example of when it was valuable is Fraser’s discussion on the relation between exploitation and expropriation in capitalism; how formal “freeing” of groups, land, gender-roles, reproductive activities and worker’s rights are strategies towards the total marketization of our life. With gender roles, for example, one can think how much of feminism actually is neo-liberal ideology, standing in the way of using time on things such as family, strong relationships and everything that seems to make you “dependent” on someone.
With this point, as with many others, there is always a dialectic between freedom and the lack of it; equality and it’s opposite. Fraser and Jaeggi are here having a sincere conversation, always moving in the dialectic between radicalism and conservatism; freedom and the possibility of sacrificing it in favour of other political achievements.
Jaeggi: “These notions are ideological in the deep sense that Adorno invoked, when he said that ideologies are true and false at the same time. The point is that freedom and equality are actually realized in capitalism and in fact must be realized in order for the system to work. And yet at the same time they are not realized: the reality of capitalist work relations seems to undermine and contradict these norms — and not accidentally so.”
I especially enjoyed the concrete dynamic which the combination of Jaeggi and Fraser created; Jaeggi always being a little to critical and brave in the possibilities she poses in her questions; Fraser actively using concrete cases to exemplify how the desire for her specific thoughts are moulded.
With this point, as with many others, there is always a dialectic between freedom and the lack of it; equality and it’s opposite. Fraser and Jaeggi are here having a sincere conversation, always moving in the dialectic between radicalism and conservatism; freedom and the possibility of sacrificing it in favour of other political achievements.
Jaeggi: “These notions are ideological in the deep sense that Adorno invoked, when he said that ideologies are true and false at the same time. The point is that freedom and equality are actually realized in capitalism and in fact must be realized in order for the system to work. And yet at the same time they are not realized: the reality of capitalist work relations seems to undermine and contradict these norms — and not accidentally so.”
I especially enjoyed the concrete dynamic which the combination of Jaeggi and Fraser created; Jaeggi always being a little to critical and brave in the possibilities she poses in her questions; Fraser actively using concrete cases to exemplify how the desire for her specific thoughts are moulded.
August 27, 2025
This is a fresh discussion presented as a conversation, which allows the material to flow.
One of their claims is that capitalism should not be understood only as an economic system but as an institutionalised social order that reaches into ecology, politics, reproduction, and social hierarchies.
I loved the discussion overall, but I was also surprised by how dismissive they were of Baudrillard’s body of work, which follows a similar direction to the well-known theoretical rejection of capitalism as a form of productivism.
They examine how exploitation and oppression are central to capitalism, despite having taken different forms throughout history. What makes capitalism distinctive is that it conceals its exploitative core under the appearance of freedom and equality.
Wage labour and contract relations present themselves as voluntary, while in reality they are structured by systemic compulsion. The authors show this through several dichotomies: exploitation / expropriation, production / reproduction, economy / polity, human / non-human.
Intersectionality, feminism, racism, ecology, and LGBT issues are part of this analysis, since the authors criticise the idea of treating the economy as the structure for all other “superstructures.”
The book situates struggles over feminism, racism, ecology, and democracy as integral to the functioning of capitalism rather than external to it. This builds on and synthesises earlier feminist and Marxist critiques (Bhattacharya, Federici, Vogel, Mies) into a more systematic account.
In the third chapter, the authors argue that there cannot be a definitive definition of capitalism’s function because of the qualitative and volatile nature of such an answer. But human desires, beyond basic needs, have shaped social formations throughout history, as in feudalism, for example, the desire for power and expansion, which still follows us nowadays.
I appreciated the discussion, but I would not be as dismissive of Baudrillard or Foucault.
Reading it was very enjoyable, and I am grateful for the discussions it generated among my friends and family.
One of their claims is that capitalism should not be understood only as an economic system but as an institutionalised social order that reaches into ecology, politics, reproduction, and social hierarchies.
I loved the discussion overall, but I was also surprised by how dismissive they were of Baudrillard’s body of work, which follows a similar direction to the well-known theoretical rejection of capitalism as a form of productivism.
They examine how exploitation and oppression are central to capitalism, despite having taken different forms throughout history. What makes capitalism distinctive is that it conceals its exploitative core under the appearance of freedom and equality.
Wage labour and contract relations present themselves as voluntary, while in reality they are structured by systemic compulsion. The authors show this through several dichotomies: exploitation / expropriation, production / reproduction, economy / polity, human / non-human.
Intersectionality, feminism, racism, ecology, and LGBT issues are part of this analysis, since the authors criticise the idea of treating the economy as the structure for all other “superstructures.”
The book situates struggles over feminism, racism, ecology, and democracy as integral to the functioning of capitalism rather than external to it. This builds on and synthesises earlier feminist and Marxist critiques (Bhattacharya, Federici, Vogel, Mies) into a more systematic account.
In the third chapter, the authors argue that there cannot be a definitive definition of capitalism’s function because of the qualitative and volatile nature of such an answer. But human desires, beyond basic needs, have shaped social formations throughout history, as in feudalism, for example, the desire for power and expansion, which still follows us nowadays.
I appreciated the discussion, but I would not be as dismissive of Baudrillard or Foucault.
Reading it was very enjoyable, and I am grateful for the discussions it generated among my friends and family.
May 8, 2019
When people ask me where to start reading to understand capitalism, I typically list Estranged Labor, and Wage, Labor, and Capitalism, two short essays by Karl Marx. Though these do not provide the full picture he develops through the three volumes of Capital, they are an excellent starting point, and they're not that difficult. However, now that Capitalism: A Conversation In Critical Theory has been released, I am always sure to mention this amazingly short, accessible, and concise work.
Fraser and Jaeggi think that critical theory has been preoccupied with other aspects of social life for the last few decades and that it is high time we renew the conversation concerning capitalism. They point out that this is a word people throw a around a lot more these days, which is good, though it's not obvious that people always know what they are talking about. Capitalism must be understood systematically and rigorously if it is to be resisted effectively. So what is it? And how does capitalist economy relate to non-economic forms of life or ecology?
Fraser has developed a useful system for understanding the ways different forms of oppression interlock and relate to capitalism. She conceives capitalist economy as the "foreground," whereas social and ecological reproduction constitute the "background conditions" that make the economy operable.
Capitalist exploitation occurs when workers are paid little more than enough to reproduce themselves, what Marx called "subsistence wages," meaning the money for food, shelter, and cheap distractions. Fraser juxtaposes this concept of exploitation, underpaid labor, with expropriation, which is unpaid labor in the social realm, typically done by women. In an ecological sense, expropriation occurs when we continuously plunder nature's resources beyond her ability to rejuvenate and replenish what has been taken.
To sum it up:
Economy/Society and Ecology
Foreground/Background
Production/Reproduction
Exploitation/Expropriation
Fraser and Jaeggi think that critical theory has been preoccupied with other aspects of social life for the last few decades and that it is high time we renew the conversation concerning capitalism. They point out that this is a word people throw a around a lot more these days, which is good, though it's not obvious that people always know what they are talking about. Capitalism must be understood systematically and rigorously if it is to be resisted effectively. So what is it? And how does capitalist economy relate to non-economic forms of life or ecology?
Fraser has developed a useful system for understanding the ways different forms of oppression interlock and relate to capitalism. She conceives capitalist economy as the "foreground," whereas social and ecological reproduction constitute the "background conditions" that make the economy operable.
Capitalist exploitation occurs when workers are paid little more than enough to reproduce themselves, what Marx called "subsistence wages," meaning the money for food, shelter, and cheap distractions. Fraser juxtaposes this concept of exploitation, underpaid labor, with expropriation, which is unpaid labor in the social realm, typically done by women. In an ecological sense, expropriation occurs when we continuously plunder nature's resources beyond her ability to rejuvenate and replenish what has been taken.
To sum it up:
Economy/Society and Ecology
Foreground/Background
Production/Reproduction
Exploitation/Expropriation
Read
June 3, 2020Problem with hustle dialectics is the the failure to talk thoroughly on complex topics. The book nonetheless marked some traits of change in defining capitalism. From Marx critique to institutionalized alienation, the work points at more topics like ecologies and social leftist concern into the critical framework.
This is more clumsy than inclusive. Trying to push the term into hyperobjects without strong platform building for third-order correlation, is somehow irresponsible to the suffering subjects. I do not deny its academic value in historicising the progress of resources allocation and relationship of works, but maybe it's better to push the conversation further that mix with researches of solid data, for readers to have a better grasp.
This is more clumsy than inclusive. Trying to push the term into hyperobjects without strong platform building for third-order correlation, is somehow irresponsible to the suffering subjects. I do not deny its academic value in historicising the progress of resources allocation and relationship of works, but maybe it's better to push the conversation further that mix with researches of solid data, for readers to have a better grasp.
December 12, 2020
Tal vez el mejor libro de teoría (crítica) que leí este año. El libro es apasionante, claro, profundo y una gran (tal vez la mejor) introducción a la crítica del capitalismo. Logra conjugar -en el formato de una conversación- capacidad de síntesis, sencillez y profundidad.
Capitalism se trata efectivamente de una conversación entre Nancy Fraser y Rahel Jaeggi, por lo que algunas veces los temas van y vienen y se pierde el debate más detallado (lo que no deja de ser una ventaja y una desventaja en ciertos aspectos). Sin embargo, el título que alude a una conversación es algo engañoso, ya que el centro de atención está puesto en la perspectiva de Fraser, y mucho menos en la perspectiva de Jaeggi, quien parece tener un rol casi de entrevistadora. Si bien Jaeggi tiene una obra con peso propio (su teoría de las “formas de vida”, muy poco interesante para mí gusto), aquí su teoría aparece apenas mencionada.
En esta “conversación”, entonces, se trata de definir qué es el capitalismo y qué hay de malo con él. Algo muy básico, pero nada sencillo por supuesto. La idea central del libro es que el capitalismo es un “orden social institucionalizado” que funciona estableciendo e institucionalizando una división entre explotación/expropiación, producción/reproducción, sociedad/naturaleza y economía/política. De ese modo, las diferentes luchas sociales -como el feminismo, el ecologismo, la lucha de clases o las diferentes políticas de identidad- son comprendidas como “luchas de fronteras” que buscan hacer visible y desmontar esas divisiones institucionalizadas. Pero además de esto, el texto aborda diferentes debates actuales de la izquierda como el del papel de la crítica social, el nuevo giro autoritario, las diferentes tradiciones políticas, el racismo y el patriarcado, la singularidad del neoliberalismo, las posibilidades de la acción, etc., etc., siempre de una forma accesible, profunda y motivadora.
All in all, no solo recomiendo leer este libro, sino también releerlo una vez leído 😊
Capitalism se trata efectivamente de una conversación entre Nancy Fraser y Rahel Jaeggi, por lo que algunas veces los temas van y vienen y se pierde el debate más detallado (lo que no deja de ser una ventaja y una desventaja en ciertos aspectos). Sin embargo, el título que alude a una conversación es algo engañoso, ya que el centro de atención está puesto en la perspectiva de Fraser, y mucho menos en la perspectiva de Jaeggi, quien parece tener un rol casi de entrevistadora. Si bien Jaeggi tiene una obra con peso propio (su teoría de las “formas de vida”, muy poco interesante para mí gusto), aquí su teoría aparece apenas mencionada.
En esta “conversación”, entonces, se trata de definir qué es el capitalismo y qué hay de malo con él. Algo muy básico, pero nada sencillo por supuesto. La idea central del libro es que el capitalismo es un “orden social institucionalizado” que funciona estableciendo e institucionalizando una división entre explotación/expropiación, producción/reproducción, sociedad/naturaleza y economía/política. De ese modo, las diferentes luchas sociales -como el feminismo, el ecologismo, la lucha de clases o las diferentes políticas de identidad- son comprendidas como “luchas de fronteras” que buscan hacer visible y desmontar esas divisiones institucionalizadas. Pero además de esto, el texto aborda diferentes debates actuales de la izquierda como el del papel de la crítica social, el nuevo giro autoritario, las diferentes tradiciones políticas, el racismo y el patriarcado, la singularidad del neoliberalismo, las posibilidades de la acción, etc., etc., siempre de una forma accesible, profunda y motivadora.
All in all, no solo recomiendo leer este libro, sino también releerlo una vez leído 😊
April 15, 2023
Um livro em formato de discussão entre duas grandes pensadoras/filósofas da atualidade conversando sobre o capitalismo: seus problemas, maneiras para lutarmos contra e até mesmo possíveis alternativas para o futuro.
Gostei muito de tudo que o livro trouxe, mas acho que alguns temas poderiam ter sido melhor explorados para dar uma compreensão maior ao leitor - não tive problemas de compreensão, mas achei que algumas respostas eram muito extensas enquanto outras eram bem curtas, penso que faltou um equilíbrio. De qualquer maneira, vale demais a leitura para compreender melhor o capitalismo e as suas inconsistências. Recomendo muito!
Gostei muito de tudo que o livro trouxe, mas acho que alguns temas poderiam ter sido melhor explorados para dar uma compreensão maior ao leitor - não tive problemas de compreensão, mas achei que algumas respostas eram muito extensas enquanto outras eram bem curtas, penso que faltou um equilíbrio. De qualquer maneira, vale demais a leitura para compreender melhor o capitalismo e as suas inconsistências. Recomendo muito!
May 25, 2025
Nancy Fraser is Professor of Political & Social Science at the New School for Social Research and Rahel Jaeggi is professor of practical and social philosophy at the Humboldt University, Berlin. This highly academic book, framed as a conversation between the authors uses (and assumes that the reader is grounded in) critical theory to explore what capitalism is, how it’s been viewed in history, how it can be capitalised and how it can be defeated.
August 19, 2025
Well it’s really hard to rate a book that simply wasn’t for my level of education on the topic🙃 So for now (as I’m thinking of revisiting this book at some point) I’ll give it 4 stars simply because I didn’t understand enough but what I did understand made me realise connections I didn’t see before and also made me think. Still sometimes this book seemed a little too vague and I kind of hoped for more detailed answers especially in the final chapter.
January 6, 2023
Trata-se de fato de um diálogo, na verdade mais uma entrevista de Nancy Fraser conduzida por Rahel Jaeggi, acerca dos principais temas da teoria critica. O livro apresenta mais a análise crítica de Nancy Fraser sobre as questões contemporâneas. É um excelente livro para compreender um pouco da trajetória da teoria crítica, seu estado da arte e quais são os desafios contemporâneos.
March 29, 2024
Overall a brisk but exciting discussion. Came away less than impressed with jaeggi, but Fraser has a compelling framework for thinking about the tensions generated by capitalism. The chapter on the foundations for normative critiques was under developed, but still useful.
Read
February 6, 2021read for my capitalism/anti-capitalism/post-capitalism class
January 4, 2024
Holy crap this took me forever!!! I didn’t really enjoy the interview style of this book. Also the final two parts were so much more accessible than the first two. 3.5 stars (verso book club ebook)
May 30, 2025
Well delivered conversational critique of capitalism today. With this book you get an insight into two critical theories and can trace their overlapping and disagreements.
Displaying 1 - 24 of 24 reviews