No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Capital, Social Reproduction, and the Rise of Inequality
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 04 April 2017
Abstract
Thomas Piketty’s book has the great merit of implementing a global analysis of inequality that compares countries and periods. However, he adopts a definition of social class that overlooks the importance of cultural capital. Furthermore, the role of social movements is relatively marginalized in his account, which also focuses on fiscal tools to the detriment of other forms of regulation. Nonetheless, this innovative and important book opens up new avenues of research in the field of political sociology.
- Type
- Reading Thomas Piketty’s Capital in the Twenty-First Century
- Information
- Annales. Histoire, Sciences Sociales - English Edition , Volume 70 , Issue 1 , March 2015 , pp. 57 - 64
- Copyright
- Copyright © Les Éditions de l’EHESS 2015
References
1. Piketty, Thomas, Capital in the Twenty-First Century, trans. Goldhammer, Arthur (Cambridge/London: Harvard University Press, 2014), 573 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed.
2. Ibid., 278ff.
3. Ibid., 252.
4. Bourdieu, Pierre, “The Forms of Capital,” trans. Nice, Richard, in Handbook of Theory and Research for the Sociology of Education, ed. Richardson, John G. (New York: Greenwood Press, 1986), 241–58 Google Scholar.
5. Wagner, Anne-Catherine, Les classes sociales dans la mondialisation (Paris: La Découverte, 2007)Google Scholar.
6. Bourdieu, Pierre and Passeron, Jean-Claude, The Inheritors: French Students and Their Relation to Culture [1964], trans. Nice, Richard (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1979)Google Scholar.
7. Butler, Tim and Van Zanten, Agnès, “School Choice: A European Perspective,” Journal of Education Policy 22, no. 1 (2007): 1–5 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; François, Jean-Christophe and Poupeau, Franck, “Les déterminants socio-spatiaux du placement scolaire. Essai de modélisation statistique appliquée aux collèges parisiens,” Revue française de sociologie 49, no. 1 (2008): 93–126 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
8. Piketty, Capital, 314.
9. Ibid., 332 and 512.
10. Steinmo, Sven, Thelen, Kathleen Ann, and Longstreth, Franck, eds., Structuring Politics: Historical Institutionalism in Comparative Analysis (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
11. Hacker, Jacob S. and Pierson, Paul, Winner-Take-All Politics: How Washington Made the Rich Richer – And Turned its Back on the Middle Class (New York: Simon and Schuster, 2010)Google Scholar.
12. Bonica, Adam et al, “Why Hasn’t Democracy Slowed Rising Inequality?,” Journal of Economic Perspectives 27, no. 3 (2013): 103–23 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
13. Piketty, Capital, 378.
14. Ibid., 241.
15. Ibid., 646, n. 42.
16. Even if we account for the amounts collected by the property tax, such a tax on capital would constitute a major upheaval, especially in countries that have entirely given up on taxing large fortunes.
17. Landais, Camille, Piketty, Thomas, and Saez, Emmanuel, Pour une révolution fiscale. Un impôt sur le revenu pour le XXIe siècle (Paris: Le Seuil, 2011)Google Scholar.
18. See the accusatory article by the editorial writer Chris Giles in the May 23, 2014 edition, and the convincing response Piketty published on his site a few days later: http://piketty.pse.ens.fr/files/capital21c/en/Piketty2014TechnicalAppendixResponsetoFT.pdf.
19. Bartels, Larry, Unequal Democracy: The Political Economy of the New Gilded Age (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2008)Google Scholar; Martin, Isaac, Rich People’s Movements: Grassroots Campaigns to Untax the One Percent (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
20. Gramsci, Antonio, “Letter to Carlo, December 19, 1929,” in Letters From Prison, ed. Rosengarten, Frank, trans. Rosenthal, Raymond (New York: Columbia University Press, 1994), 299 Google Scholar.
Linked content
This is a translation of: Capital, reproduction sociale et fabrique des inégalités