Karl Polanyi's Argumentative Analysis

Economic theorists will often highlight their “right” opinions and while refuting the ideas of others—welcome to academia. Austro-Hungarian economist Karl Polanyi did just that. However, he was more than just an economic theorist, he was an economic historian, economic anthropologist, economic sociologist, political economist, historical sociologist, social philosopher, and author. These various backgrounds contribute and help build one of Polanyi’s most famous overarching explanations in his book “The Great Transformation, The Political and Economic Origins of Our Time.” Polanyi argues that the idea of laissez-faire economics is a utopian idea, never actually existing in a natural state.

To understand why Polanyi argued the idea that laissez-faire

Once Polanyi establishes the basis of the economy is unnatural, he then argues the concept as a whole is a human utopian creation. There are multiple mentions of the utopian philosophy behind laissez-faire throughout the text. It is clear that their “view the concept of a self-regulating market was utopian (pg 148).” But how exactly does he go about explaining this? One way he explains this is that it is born from “the utopian springs of the dogma of laissez-faire (pg 146),” meaning the vision was unattainable and destructive. This is seen throughout his argument particularly the collapse of the 19th Century as he highlights in chapter one or how he explains “while the imagination of the 19th century engaged in constructing the liberal utopia (pg 220)”. Another aspect of Polanyi’s argument of the utopian vision is that it is “enforced by the state (pg 145).” The state had to create this ideal system in order for it to work, but eventually says then the state had to take action to restrict the negatives. There was one instance where Polanyi is highlighting how the 1930s were lacking regulation and uses this to explain, “to the typical utilitarian, economic liberalism was a social project which should be put into effect for the greatest happiness of the greatest number; laissez-faire was not a method to achieve a thing, it was the thing to be achieved.” This in sense, achieved, or achievement, implies a goal to be working for—which means, laissez-faire was not natural, but also an application for a utopia. This comes to Polanyi’s point of “laissez-faire was planned; planning was not (pg 147).” This is the understanding that the origins of laissez-faire was planned, and was always a utopian idea. The reaction to what was to come to laissez-faire was “spontaneous (pg 147).” After the realizing the utopian idea of laissez-faire was not working, there was an attempt to correct