Abstract

The current crisis has marked a profound rift in the world of advanced capitalism, strongly questioning the system of globalisation and the paradigm of orthodox liberalism. As a result, it has triggered a lively theoretical debate on the limits and prospects of the free market. Such a debate builds on the economic policy authorities’ response to the economic crisis with the aim of reaching a more balanced view of the role of the State and the Market, but, and maybe most importantly, it also seek to highlight how the economic recipes of neo-liberalism have contributed to make the world economy more fragile and the crisis itself inevitable. Rethinking these theories and trying to define an alternative paradigm to «Manchesterian» liberalism is therefore a necessary condition to achieve an economic system that is more resilient and closer to people’s real needs. At the beginning of the new millennium, it was thought that globalisation would bring unprecedented benefits to all, while today it is being blamed for distortions in every part of the world. Western countries feel threatened by outsourcing; developing countries fear that advanced industrialised countries will turn against them in the global economic regime; ordinary people see that corporate interests systematically trump other more important values. However, a handful of economists have long been suggesting the need to curb excessive optimism on the subject of globalisation, as it appeared to them as a phenomenon that was difficult to govern, highlighting the dangers in terms of increasing inequalities, both globally and within individual countries and between different social classes. The analysis of the most significant literature, both national and international, on the topics of social economy and globalisation has allowed us to make a summary judgement on the prospects of capitalism