Display options
Cite
Savage M, Waitkus N. Property, wealth, and social change: Piketty as a social science engineer. Br J Sociol. 2021;72(1):39-51doi: 10.1111/1468-4446.12817.
Savage, M., & Waitkus, N. (2021). Property, wealth, and social change: Piketty as a social science engineer. The British journal of sociology, 72(1), 39-51. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-4446.12817
Savage, Mike, and Waitkus, Nora. "Property, wealth, and social change: Piketty as a social science engineer." The British journal of sociology vol. 72,1 (2021): 39-51. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-4446.12817
Savage M, Waitkus N. Property, wealth, and social change: Piketty as a social science engineer. Br J Sociol. 2021 Jan;72(1):39-51. doi: 10.1111/1468-4446.12817. PMID: 33764518.
Copy Download .nbib Format: NLM
Share it on

Br J Sociol. 2021 Jan;72(1):39-51. doi: 10.1111/1468-4446.12817.

Property, wealth, and social change: Piketty as a social science engineer.

The British journal of sociology

Mike Savage, Nora Waitkus

Affiliations

  1. Department of Sociology, London School of Economics, London, UK.
  2. International Inequalities Institute, London School of Economics, London, UK.

PMID: 33764518 DOI: 10.1111/1468-4446.12817

Abstract

This paper applauds the vision and originality of Piketty's Capital and Ideology. We draw attention to the distinctive methodological perspective which he adopts, which we liken to call "social science engineering." This allows a problem oriented perspective on long-term global social change which sidesteps siloed disciplinary debates in social science and history about the meaning of modernity, the rise of capitalism, the formation of social groups, and the primacy of nations. We bring out how his theory of property permits him to take forward his overarching insight that economic growth leads to wealth accumulation. This, therefore, challenges long standing sociological perspectives by insisting that modernity is a conservative, rather than a revolutionary and transformative process. We build on this essential contribution by noting some areas where his work can push forward even further, notably that his focus on shifting relativities obscures qualitative historical changes, and more particularly means his analysis of the 20th century is not as provocative as that of the 19th century.

© 2021 London School of Economics and Political Science.

Keywords: Matthew effect; Piketty; inequality; property & wealth

References

  1. Abbott, A. (2001). Time matters: On theory and method. University of Chicago Press. - PubMed
  2. Ansell, B. (2014). The political economy of ownership: Housing markets and the welfare state. American Political Science Review, 108(2), 383-402. - PubMed
  3. Bayly, S. (2001). Caste, society and politics in India from the eighteenth century to the modern age. Cambridge University Press. - PubMed
  4. Bhambra, G. (2007). Rethinking modernity: Postcolonialism and the sociological imagination. Springer. - PubMed
  5. Blackwell, T., & Kohl, S. (2018). The origins of national housing finance systems: A comparative investigation into historical variations in mortgage finance regimes. Review of International Political Economy, 25(1), 49-74. - PubMed
  6. Bourdieu, P., & Passeron, J. C. (1979). The inheritors: French students and their relation to culture. University of Chicago Press. - PubMed
  7. Esping-Andersen, G. (1990). The three worlds of welfare capitalism. Princeton University Press. - PubMed
  8. Guldi, J. O., & Armitage, D. (2014). The history manifesto. Cambridge University Press. - PubMed
  9. Hall, P. A., &. Soskice, D. (2001). Varities of capitalism-The institutional foundations of comparative advantage. Oxford University Press. - PubMed
  10. Hall, P., & Soskice, D. (2001). Varieties of Capitalism, Oxford: Oxford UP. - PubMed
  11. Jordà, Ò., Knoll, K., Kuvshinov, D., Schularick, M., & Taylor, A. M. (2019). The rate of return on everything, 1870-2015. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 134(3), 1225-1298. - PubMed
  12. Knoll, K., Schularick, M., & Steger, T. (2017). No price like home: Global house prices, 1870-2012. American Economic Review, 107(2), 331-353. - PubMed
  13. Koselleck, R. (2004). Futures past: on the semantics of historical time, Columbia University Press. - PubMed
  14. Krause, M. (2019). What is zeitgeist? Examining period-specific cultural patterns. Poetics, 76. - PubMed
  15. Neckel, S. (2020). The refeudalization of modern capitalism. Journal of Sociology, 56(3), 472-486. - PubMed
  16. Osterhammel, J. (2014). Transformation of the World: A global history of the Nineteenth Century. Princeton University Press. - PubMed
  17. Pfeffer, F. T., & Waitkus, N. (2020). The wealth inequality of nations. LWS Working Paper Series, 33. - PubMed
  18. Said, E. W. (1979). Orientalism. Vintage. - PubMed
  19. Savage, M. (2009). Against epochalism: An analysis of conceptions of change in British sociology. Cultural Sociology, 3(2), 217-238. - PubMed
  20. Savage, M. (2014). Piketty's challenge for sociology. The British Journal of Sociology, 65(4), 591-606. - PubMed
  21. Savage, M. (2021). The return of inequality: Social change and the weight of the past. Harvard University Press. - PubMed
  22. Schwartz, H., & Seabrooke, L. (2008). Varieties of residential capitalism in the international political economy: Old welfare states and the new politics of housing. Comparative European Politics, 6, 237-261. - PubMed
  23. Tilly, C. (1998). Durable inequality. University of California Press. - PubMed

MeSH terms

Publication Types