I was intrigued by Stavros M.'s contribution to the discussion on
Aglietta. As regards his fundamental critique of Regulation Theory,
he will find much the same will apply to my own work and SSA theory
in general. (Plug: Social Structures of Accumulation: The Political
Economy of Growth and Crisis, Ed. Kotz, McDonough, Reich esp. SSA's
Contingent History, and Stages of Capitalism, by T. McDonough). I
tend to agree with him on some points and disagree on others.
Agreement: I have always been uncomfortable with this notion of
"intermediate concepts". It has always struck me that the existing
levels are those of abstract theoretical conceptualization and the
application of theory to concrete historical analysis. I do think
however that there are intermediate periods in capitalist history.
There are tendencies in capitalism which operate over its entire
history and then there are institutional structures which are
peculiar to particular periods of capitalist history, finally there
is the conjuncture which is a particular point in history. The
institutional structures are produced as a result of historical class
struggle and in turn condition that struggle. The conflictual nature
of capitalism and the need for security of return for longterm
investment creates the need for relatively stable institutions of an
economic, political and ideological/cultural nature. Hence these are
not intermediate concepts but are necessitated by and hence part of the
Marxian analysis of the historical dynamics of the capitalist mode of
production. This kind of approach is not peculiar to the post-60's
crisis, but originates with the work of Hilferding, Bukharin and
Lenin. (Another plug: see my Lenin, Imperialism, and the Stages of
Capitalist Development, S&S Fall 95), and thus dates from the start
of the Marxist tradition after Marx. (Interestingly Aglietta rejects
continuity with Lenin's tradition arguing that it is not Marxist
enough.) Thus while I agree that intermediate concepts have no
theoretical status and may lead to the problems described by
Stavros, the intermediate periodization of capitalism is necessitated by the
conjunction of the basic Marxian concepts and concrete history.
Disagreement: Contingency is not an intensification of the
problem of intermediate concepts but the way out of the dilemma. If
the specifics of a particular period cannot be explained by the
overarching laws of capitalist development, this implies that there
are contingent factors at play. Contingent factors are influences outside
of the fundamental factors which provide the overall motion of
historical change. This dichotomy between contingent and fundamental
factors allows for concrete historical explanation without the
introduction of a "multicausal framework" at the highest level of
theory. A similar view of Darwinian evolution is propounded by the
paleontologist Stephen Jay Gould in 'Wonderful Life.'
Terry McDonough
