State capitalism has recently come to the fore as a transversal research object in the social sciences. Renewed interest in the notion is evident across several disciplines, in scholarship addressing government interventionism in economic life in major developing countries. This emergent field of study on state capitalism, however, consistently bypasses the remarkable conceptual trajectory of the notion from the end of the 19th century to the present. This article proposes an intellectual-historical survey of state capitalism’s many lives across different ensembles (...) of writing: early Marxist pronouncements on state capitalism at the time of the Second International; theories of state capitalism evolved in the first half of the 20th century in response to the European experience of war and fascism; dissident portrayals of the Soviet Union as state-capitalist; post-Second World War theories of state-monopoly capitalism in the Western Bloc; examinations of state capitalism as a development strategy in ‘Third World’ nations in the 1970s and 1980s; and finally, today’s scholarship on new patterns of state capitalism in emerging economies. Having contextualized each of these strands of writing, the article goes on to interrogate definitional and conceptual boundaries of state capitalism. It then maps out essential institutional features of state-capitalist configurations as construed in the literature. In sharp contrast to 20th-century theories of state capitalism, present-day scholarship on the topic tends to retreat from the integrated critique of political economy, shifting its problematics of state-market relations to meso- and micro-levels of analysis. (shrink)

A lo largo de la última década, China ha asumido un creciente protagonismo con respecto a la reforma de las estructuras de la gobernanza global. Su discurso e iniciativas revelan su preferencia por un orden que reconozca un mayor peso a los países en desarrollo frente a Occidente, pero que al mismo tiempo resulte favorable a sus específicos intereses nacionales. Las dimensiones adquiridas por la economía china y las cada vez más explícitas ambiciones internacionales de sus dirigentes obligan a preguntarse (...) por sus intenciones y agenda, así como por el impacto de la transformación que pretende. Aunque no resulta plausible que China suceda a Estados Unidos al frente del sistema multilateral, sí puede emerger un nuevo orden híbrido o pluralista. (shrink)