Abstract:
In the West, human exchange is defined by most economists as a matter of competition and scarcity, and by most exchange theorists as a matter of reciprocity and equivalence. In such definitions, there is no excess in exchange; there are no gifts; the economy is closed and restricted. This thesis explores the alternative discourses of exchange offered by four exceptional intellectuals of the early twentieth century: Marcel Mauss, Raymond Firth, John Maynard Keynes, and Georges Bataille. The thesis begins by introducing the interdisciplinary debate on the effect of conceptual or ideational systems on discourses, thoughts, languages, politics, and behaviours; and develops the theory and method of critical discourse analysis applied in Part Two to each of the selected texts. Mauss constructs the gift as a polite fiction, and equivalent exchange as the total social fact. In contrast, Firth argues that early Oceanic exchange involves excess in the return gift, a deliberate disequilibrium precluding closure. Keynes implies that collaborative human exchange produces a surplus, an excess that could benefit all. In Bataille’s text, Keynes's surplus is the second gift, while the first is the excess of free energy in the biosphere, particularly from the sun. "General economy" is Bataille's useful term for this alternative economy which contrasts with and contains the neoclassical "restricted" economy. Finally, a comparative study of the four texts shows how critical analysis makes their commonalities available. In place of scarcity, competition, and closure, their discourses of exchange involve excess, complexity, and collaboration, contributing to an exchange of ideas in search of a practical elsewhere. The two external examiners were Dr Tom Ryan, senior lecturer in Anthropology at Waikato University, and Dierdre McCloskey, Distinguished Professor of Economics, History, English, and Communication, University of Illinois at Chicago, and Professor of Economic History, Gothenburg University, Sweden. Ryan commented particularly on the recognition of Firth’s contribution to economic anthropology. McCloskey wrote: “The book is quite obviously an acceptable, even very good, in some ways startling and excellent, PhD thesis.”
