Search

This paper argues that exploitation is a form of domination, domination for self-enrichment. In a slogan, exploitation is a dividend of servitude—a benefit the powerful extract by converting the vulnerable into their servants. The paper argues that what makes exploitation wrong is that it constitutes domination-induced unilateral service to others; that this form of servitude is necessarily cashed out in terms of labour time or effort; that competing accounts of exploitation fail to do justice to the servitude dimension; and that what distinguishes capitalism historically is the way it reproduces a structural dilemma between dominated work and no work. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper clarifies the usage of Albert Hirschman's categories of market behaviour as of exit and voice in debates about workplace democracy by taking seriously his critique of the neoclassical analysis of competition. Pro-market liberals are generally hostile to the idea of workplace democracy and tend to favour top-down hierarchies as a way of organising labour. This hostility is generally inspired by the neoclassical analysis of exploitation and efficiency, which leads them to defend distributions achieved through exit-based competitive equilibria. Following Hirschman, I propose to consider a hypothetical alternative: a democratic equilibrium, reached through the use of voice. I show that it would present the same appealing characteristics than its competitive counterpart while also accounting for the non-ideal conditions in which markets operate. Support for free markets should entail support for workplace democracy minimally understood as a strengthening of voice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

On contemporary standard accounts exploitation is of man by man: One individual exploits another through a particular transaction. This paper offers a departure from the individualist transactional paradigm of exploitation by formulating an account of anonymous exploitation. The departure is threefold. Anonymous exploitation may occur as non-individual exploitation in cases where exploiter, exploited or both are not individuals but group agents, it may occur as non-agential exploitation in cases where exploiter, exploited or both are not agents but non-agential groups and it may occur as structural exploitation in cases where structures are exploitative. I shall argue that anonymous exploitation in its three variants is a real, independent and non-mysterious phenomenon. To miss its significance is to miss the 'genius' or even to remain blind to important instances of exploitation. My argument proceeds in seven steps. In section 1, I offer a brief analysis of the concept of exploitation and spell out the desiderata that a successful theory of exploitation would have to satisfy. In section 2, I explain what I mean by anonymous exploitation. Section 3 explores the idea of non-individual exploitation; section 4 presents an account of non-agential exploitation and section 5 proceeds likewise with the idea of structural exploitation. Section 6 puts the individual steps of my argument together and I conclude in section 7. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper argues (a) that while a no-fraud legal requirement does not follow from libertarian first principles, it is not only permitted – but also mandated – by them under certain conditions, and (b) that the claim that some fraudulent exchanges are morally invalid need not appeal to a theory of moral permissibility that is external to those principles. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper uses a computational framework to analyse the equilibrium dynamics of exploitation and inequality in accumulation economies with heterogeneous labour. A novel index is presented which measures the intensity of exploitation at the individual level and the dynamics of the distribution of exploitation intensity is analysed. Various taxation schemes are analysed which may reduce exploitation or inequalities in income and wealth. It is shown that relatively small taxation rates may have significant cumulative effects on wealth and income inequalities. Further, taxation schemes that eliminate exploitation also reduce disparities in income and wealth but in the presence of heterogeneous skills, do not necessarily eliminate them. The inegalitarian effects of different abilities need to be tackled with a progressive education policy that compensates for unfavourable circumstances. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]