Introduction 7

significant research results, which we now present and set in perspective. Economic sociology has peaked twice since its birth: in 1890-1920 with die classic theorists (who were all interested in and wrote on the economy), and today, from the early 1980s onwards. A small number of important works in economic sociology—by economists as veil as sociologists—were also produced during the period in between. A major thread in the tra­ction of economic sociology is that investigation must combine the analysis of economic interests with analysis of social relations.

Classical Economic Sociology and Its Predecessors

The first use of the term economic sociology seems: o have been in 1879, when it appears in a work by British economist W. Stanley Jevons ([1879] 1965). The term was taken over by the sociologists and appears, for example, in the works of Durkheim and Weber during the years 1890-1920 (sociologie economique, Wirtschaftssoziologie). It is also during these decades that classical economic soci­ology is born, as exemplified by such works as The Division of Labor in Society (1893) by Durkheim, The Philosophy of Money (1900) by Simmel, and Economy and Society (produced 1908-20) by Weber. These classics of economic sociology arc remarkable for the following characteristics. First, Weber and others shared the sense that they were pioneers, building up a type of analysis that had not existed before. Second, they focused on the most fundamental questions of the field: What is the role of the economy in society? How does the sociological analysis of the economy differ from that of the economists? What is an economic action? To this should be added that the classical figures were preoccupied with understanding capi­talism and its impact on society—" the great trans­formation" that it had brought about.

In hindsight it is clear that several works published before the 1890-1920 period in one way or mother prefigure some of the insights of economie sociology. Important reflections on, for example, the role of trade can be found in The Spirit of the Laws by Montesquieu, as well as a pioneer comparative analysis of the role of various economic phe­nomena in republics, monarchies, and despotic states (Montesquieu [1748] 1989). The role of labor in society is emphasized in the work of Saint- Simon (1760-1825), who also helped to popular­ize the term industrialism (cf. Saint-Simon 1964). That the work of Alexis de Tocqueville (1805- 1859) is full of sharp, sociological observations is

something that most sociologists would agree on. That he also made contributions to economic soci­ology is, however, less known (Tocqueville [1835- 40] 1945, [1856] 1955; cf. Swedberg 2003, 6-8). Of these various precursors we will concentrate only on Karl Marx, a towering figure in nineteenth- century thought, even though he was active before the birth of modern sociology.

Karl Marx

Karl Marx (1818-1883) was obsessed with the role of the economy in society and developed a theory according to which the economy deter­mined society's general evolution. What drives people in their everyday lives, Marx also argued, are material interests, and these also determine the structures and processes in society. While Marx wanted to develop a strictly scientific approach to society, his ideas were equally infused by his polit­ical desire to change the world (e. g., [1843] 1978, 145). The end result was what we know as " Marx­ism" —a mixture of social science and political statements, welded into a single doctrine.

For a variety of reasons much of Marxism is er­roneous or not relevant to economic sociology. It is far too tendentious and dogmatic to be adopted as a whole. The task that confronts economic soci­ology today is to extract those aspects of Marxism that are useful. In doing so, it is useful to follow the suggestion of Schumpeter, and distinguish be­tween Marx as a sociologist, Marx as an economist, and Marx as a revolutionary (Schumpeter [1942] 1994, 1-58). We now turn to a preliminary effort to pull out the relevant ingredients for economic sociology.

Marx's point of departure is labor and produc­tion. People have to work in order to live, and this fact is universal (Marx [1867] 1906, 50). Material interests are correspondingly universal. Labor is social rather than individual in nature, since people have to cooperate in order to produce. Marx se­verely criticized economists for their use of the iso­lated individual; and he himself sometimes spoke of " social individuals" (e. g., [1857-58] 1973, 84- 85). The most important interests are also of a col­lective nature—what Marx calls " class interests. " These interests will, however, only be effective if people become aware that they belong to a certain class (" class for itself, " as opposed to " class in it­self; Marx [1852] 1950, 109).

Marx severely criticized Adam Smith's idea that individual interests merge and further the general interest of society (" the invisible hand" ). Rather, according to Marx, classes typically oppress and