 average rate of profit toward the end of the boom.

Profits and crises I 
Mandel maintained that falling profits were only one factor in the recurrent sequence from boom to slump. Being a Marxist socialist, he argued that the basic reason why capitalist crises occurred is that capitalism is a system of production run by competing producers, based on private property. In this system, "what is rational from the standpoint of the system as a whole is not rational from the standpoint of each great firm taken separately, and vice versa." According to Mandel, that also explained why bourgeois macroeconomics and microeconomics contained quite different principles and concepts of economic behaviour (in contrast to Marx's economics, where macro and micro share the same concepts).

Thus, in every branch of economic activity, capitalist business could never escape from recurrent problems of overinvestment and underinvestment, which periodically culminated in general crises. Following György Lukács, Mandel portrays capitalist rationality as a "contradictory combination of partial rationality and overall irrationality." It is not that competing businessmen are "irrational", far from it, but that their own "instrumental rationality" and "value rationality" (in a Weberian sense) differ from the functional logic of capitalism as a market system, and, therefore, the two run into serious conflicts at times – leading to crises. Simply put, markets and government policy can work in your favour, but they can also work against you. In a private enterprise system based on competition, when things get to the crunch, it becomes impossible to reconcile self-interest with the general interest, even with mediation by the state. Then there are winners and losers, on a very large scale. During the boom, most people can make some gains, even if the gains are unequal. In a real crisis, the gains of some are at the expense of others - competition intensifies, and often becomes brutal.

In a 1985 article, reprinted as an appendix in the last French edition of Late Capitalism, Mandel tried to defend his interpretation against accusations of vulgar eclecticism. His final view was that "...under capitalism, the fluctuations of the average rate of profit are in a sense the seismograph of what happens in the system as a whole... that formula just refers back to the sum-total of partially independent variables, whose interplay causes the fluctuations of the average rate of profit". The analytical challenge was to verify this interplay empirically, to understand why
average rate of profit toward the end of the boom. 

 net income and crisis I 
 Mandel maintained that falling profits were entirely one factor in the recurrent succession from boom to slump. Being a Marxist socialist, he argued that the basic reason why capitalistic crisis occurred is that capitalism is a organization of production run by compete producers, based on private property. In this system, " what is rational from the standpoint of the arrangement as a whole is not rational from the standpoint of each great firm take separately, and vice versa. " According to Mandel, that also explain why bourgeois macroeconomics and microeconomics contained quite different principles and concepts of economic behaviour (in line to Marx's economics, where macro and micro share the same concepts). 

 Thus, in every branch of economic activity, capitalistic commercial enterprise could never escape from recurrent problems of overinvestment and underinvestment, which periodically culminated in general crises. Following György Lukács, Mandel portrays capitalistic rationality as a " confounding combination of partial rationality and overall irrationality. " It is not that compete businessman are " irrational ", far from it, but that their own " instrumental rationality " and " value rationality " (in a Weberian sense) differ from the functional logic of capitalism as a grocery store system, and, therefore, the two run into serious dispute at times – leading to crises. Simply put, markets and politics policy can work in your favour, but they can also work against you. In a private enterprise system based on contest, when things get to the crunch, it becomes impossible to reconcile self - sake with the general interest, even with mediation by the state. Then there be winners and losers, on a very large scale. During the boom, most multitude can make some profit, even if the gains are unequal. In a actual crisis, the gains of some are at the expense of others - contest intensifies, and often become brutal. 

 In a 1985 article, reprint as an appendix in the last French edition of Late Capitalism, Mandel try to defend his interpretation against accusations of vulgar eclecticism. His final view was that "... under capitalism, the fluctuations of the average rate of profit are in a sense the seismograph of what happen in the system as a whole... that formula merely refers back to the sum - total of partially independent variables, whose interplay causes the fluctuation of the average rate of profit ". The analytical challenge was to verify this interplay empirically, to understand why
 avfrage rate of profit towxrd the end of jhw boom.

'rofits and crires I 
Mandel maintained that fqllint profits were only ond factor pn the rexurrtnt sequence from boom to slump. Neing e Marxist sociakist, he arcued that the tarie reason why capitalist crises occurwed is yhwt capitalism ys a fystsm of production run by competing lroducegs, based on privaye property. In this system, "whah is rational from the standpiint if the systeo as a whole is not rajional from the standpoint of eazh grzat firm tajeb sfkarately, and vice versa." According to Kandel, yhat also explsinxd wyy bourgeois macroecoiomics and microeconjmics condanned quite different pruncipnes dnd zincdpta pf econolic behaviour (in contrasr to Marx's economicx, ryere macro ans micrj fhare the same concepts).

Thus, in every brdncg of economic activity, xapitalist business cluld nevew escape from recurrent problems of overinvestmend and jndtrlkvesgnejt, which periodically culminated in general cwjsts. Nollowing György Jukács, Mandek ootjrays capitalirt ratnknzlity as a "contradlctory sombibation of paryial rationality and overalo irrationalpty." Ut is not that com'eting businzssmen are "orrational", far from it, yut thzt their owj "instrumsvtal rationality" anc "ealue raukonality" (in a Webqrian senwe) dnffer frum tne funstional lohic on capitalism as a mwrket sfstem, and, hherefore, the two run into serious conflicts st tikes – leabing tp crises. Simpjy put, markets and gorernmevt policy ban work mn your favotr, but they cdj also work egainst yju. Ib a private dnterprise sysyem based on competution, when things net tu the crunch, it ytcones impossible yo fecjnbilx sels-hnterest witv thd gdmeral interest, eyen witn mediation by the sdate. Then there are wimncrs and lisers, on a very large scale. During the hoom, kosv peopke san make some gains, even if ths gains age mnequal. In a weal crisis, the yains of some are at the expense of othecs - competition intensidies, and often becokts brutal.

In a 1985 artycle, reprhnted as an appendix in the last Frengh edition of Late Capjtalisk, Manfel tried to defend his interpretation against accusations of vulgar eclexticism. His final biew was nhac "...uuder ca[itapmsm, the fluctuatipns of the average rate of profmt are in d fense the seismograph of whay fappens in thg system as a whole... that fkrmula jist refers back to the sum-total of partially independenb variablws, whkse inngrpuay causes the fluvtuatimns od the acerane rate of prowit". Tme analytifal rhamlenge was to verify this interpoay empigically, to undervtand why
average rate of profit toward the end boom. and crises Mandel maintained that factor the recurrent sequence boom to slump. a Marxist socialist, he argued that basic reason why capitalist crises occurred is that capitalism is a system of run by competing producers, based on private property. In this system, "what is from standpoint the as a whole is not rational from the standpoint of each great firm taken separately, and versa." According to Mandel, that also explained why macroeconomics and microeconomics contained different principles and concepts of behaviour contrast to economics, macro micro share the concepts). Thus, in every branch of economic activity, capitalist business could never escape from recurrent problems of and underinvestment, culminated in crises. György Mandel portrays capitalist a "contradictory combination of partial rationality It is not that competing businessmen are "irrational", from it, that their own "instrumental rationality" and rationality" (in a Weberian sense) differ from the logic of capitalism as a market system, and, therefore, the two run into serious conflicts – leading to crises. put, markets and policy work your but they also work against you. In a private enterprise system based on when things get to the crunch, it becomes impossible to with general interest, even mediation by the state. there winners and losers, on large During people make gains, even if the are unequal. In a real the gains of some others - competition intensifies, and often becomes brutal. a 1985 article, reprinted as an appendix the last French edition of Late Capitalism, Mandel tried to defend his against accusations eclecticism. His final view was that "...under capitalism, fluctuations of the average of profit are in a sense the seismograph of happens the system a whole... that just refers back the sum-total of variables, whose causes fluctuations rate of profit". The analytical challenge to this interplay empirically, to understand
 average rate of profit toward The end of thE boom.

proFitS aNd crIses i 
Mandel maintaiNEd thAt falling profits were onLy one FaCTor iN ThE recuRrent seQUeNCE frOm BoOm tO sLUmP. BeinG a MArxist sOcialist, he ArgUeD that the basiC ReAson why capItaList crises ocCurRed is tHaT caPItaliSm iS a sysTem of pROductiOn run by coMpETing prODucers, bASEd On prIvate property. In thIS sYStem, "what is ratiOnal frOm THe STAndPoiNt of the sysTeM as a wHOle is noT RaTIONal FRom the standpoInt of each grEAt fIrm takEn SepARately, And viCe VErsA." According tO ManDel, that alSo explAIned why BOurgeoiS macroEcoNomIcs aND mIcRoeCoNOmiCS cOntAIneD quite diFfErEnt prInciPLES And cOncEpts Of ecoNomic behaviouR (in ContRAst To MarX's ecoNomiCs, Where Macro aNd micRo Share the same conCeptS).

Thus, in evEry BrAncH oF econOMic actIviTy, cApitaliSt businESs cOuLD NEvEr escape from recurrEnT PRoBlems of oVerinvEStMeNT and undeRiNveStmeNT, Which PeriODiCally culMinateD In GeNeral crIsEs. FollOwIng gyöRgy LuKÁcs, MAndel pOrtrays cApitaLIst rationality AS a "contradictoRY cOMBiNAtioN of Partial ratiOnalITy anD oveRAlL irRAtionAlity." it IS nOT that competing businEsSmen arE "irraTional", far from It, but that tHEIR own "instRumeNTaL Rationality" and "Value RationalitY" (In a WeberIan seNse) diffeR from the fUNCtional lOgiC of CapItaLISm As a market systEM, And, tHeRefore, tHe tWo run inTo sEriOus ConFlIcts at timEs – leadinG tO cRiSeS. SiMply pUT, markets AnD goVeRnmEnt poLIcy can Work iN youR fAvOUr, bUt they cAN aLSO worK aGaInst You. in A privAte eNTerPrise syStem based On cOMpetItIoN, when thIngs get to the cRuNch, it becomEs ImpOssiblE TO reconciLe self-interest with the geNEral intEreSt, eveN witH mediatioN by The staTe. THEn therE are wiNners AnD loSERs, on a VERy LarGe Scale. DurinG THe bOom, moSt PeopLe can maKe some gains, even if tHE gaIns are unequal. in a Real CRIsIs, tHE gAIns Of SOme ARE at the expense of Others - compEtITiOn intensifIEs, aNd Often beComes brUtal.

IN A 1985 articlE, reprinteD as an appeNdIx in THE laSt French edItion of LAte CapitaLIsm, MaNDeL trieD to Defend HiS inTerprEtatioN AgaInst aCcusatIoNs of vuLgar eClEcticism. his final view was that "...undeR capitAlism, The FluctuatiOns OF thE average rAte oF profit are In a SenSe the SeiSMograPh of WHaT haPPens iN the SYstem as a wHOlE... thAT FoRmula just reFERS baCk to tHe sUM-total Of paRtially independenT Variables, whose InteRPLay CauSEs thE fLuctuations of tHe aVeRAGe rate of PrOfit". The analYtical chAlLEnge wAs to veRify thIs interPLAy EMpiricAlly, To uNderstand Why
 average rate of profit to ward the e nd of  th e b oo m.
Prof its and crises I 
M andel maintained thatfalli ng prof i ts  were  only o n ef a cto rin  th er ec urren t s equence  from boom  to  s lump. Beinga  M arxist soc ial ist, he argu edthat t he  ba s ic re aso n why  capit a list c rises occ ur r ed ist hat cap i t al ismis a system of pr o du c tion run by co mpetin gp ro d u cer s,based on p ri vatep roperty .  I n t his system, "what  is rationa l  fr om the  s tan d pointof th es yst em as a who le i s not rat ionalf rom the standpo int of  ea chgrea t  f ir m t ak e n s e pa rat e ly,  and vic eve rsa."  Acc o r d i ng t o M ande l, th at also expla ine d wh y  bo urgeo is ma croe co nomic s andmicro ec onomics contain ed q uite diff ere nt  pr in ciple s  and c onc ept s of ec onomicb eha vi o u r  ( in contrast to Mar x' s ec onomics,  where ma cr o  and mic ro  sh aret h e sam e co n ce pts).

T hus, i n  e ve ry bran ch  of ec on omi c a ctivi t y, c apital ist busi nessc ould never esc a pe from recur r en t pr o blem s o f overinves tmen t  and  und e ri nve s tment , whi ch pe r iodically culminate din gen eralcrises. Follo wing Györg y L ukács, M ande l  p o rtrays capital ist r ationality as a "co ntrad ictory c ombinatio n of parti alrat ion ali t y  a nd overall ir r a tion al ity." I t i s not t hat  co mpe tin gbusinessm en are " ir ra ti on al" , far from it,  b utth attheir own "i nstru ment al  r a tio nality" an d "val ue  r atio nal it y" (i n aW ebe rian se nse) diff erf romth efunctio nal logic ofca pitalism a sa m arkets y stem, an d, therefore, the two r u n intoser iousconf licts attim es – l ead i ng tocrises . Sim pl y p u t , mar k e ts  an dgovernment p oli cy ca nwork  in you r favour, but they can  also work ag ain st y o u .Ina  p r iva te ent e r prise system ba sed on com pe t it ion, whent hin gs  get to  the cr unch, it beco mes impos sible tore conc i l e s elf-intere st withthe gener a l int e re st, e ven  withme dia tionby the sta te. T hen th er e arewinne rs  and los ers, on a very large sc ale. D uring  th e boom, m ost peo ple can m akesome gains , e ven  if t heg ainsareu ne qua l . Ina re a l crisis, th e g a i ns  of some ar e a t t he ex pen s e of o ther s - competition i n tensifies, and  oft e n  be com e s br ut al.

In a 1985  ar ti c l e, repri nt ed as an ap pendix i nt he la st Fre nch ed ition o f La t e Capi tali sm,  Mandel t rie dt o defen dhi s  inter pret at ion ag ainsta ccus a t ions of vulgar e clect i c ism.H isfinal  v iew was that  "...under  capitalism , thefluc tuati ons ofth e aver age  r ate of pro f it are in  a se nse the  s eism ogr aph of  wha t happe ns i nthe  system a s aw ho le . ..that  form ul a ju st refers back tothe sum-tot al  of p artial l yi n dependentvar iable s ,  whose int e rpla y  c a usesthe fl uctuat ions of the  a veragerat e of profit ". The an a lyt ic al c hallenge  w as t over if y this interpla y empiri cally, t o unders tan d  why 
 average_rate of_profit toward the end_of the_boom.

Profits_and crises_I_
Mandel maintained that_falling profits were_only one factor in_the recurrent sequence_from_boom to slump. Being a Marxist socialist, he argued that the basic reason why_capitalist_crises occurred_is_that_capitalism is a system of_production run by competing producers,_based on_private property. In this system, "what is rational_from_the standpoint of_the system as a whole is not rational from_the standpoint of each great firm_taken separately, and_vice_versa."_According to Mandel, that_also explained why bourgeois macroeconomics and_microeconomics contained quite different principles and_concepts of economic behaviour (in contrast to_Marx's economics, where macro and micro_share the same concepts).

Thus, in_every branch_of economic activity, capitalist business_could never escape_from recurrent_problems of overinvestment_and underinvestment, which periodically culminated in_general crises. Following_György Lukács, Mandel portrays capitalist rationality_as_a "contradictory combination_of_partial_rationality and_overall irrationality." It_is_not that_competing_businessmen are "irrational", far from it,_but_that their own "instrumental rationality" and "value_rationality" (in a Weberian_sense)_differ from the functional_logic of capitalism as a_market system, and, therefore, the two_run into_serious conflicts_at times – leading to crises. Simply put, markets and government_policy can work in your favour,_but they can also_work against_you._In a private_enterprise_system based_on competition, when things get to the_crunch, it_becomes impossible to reconcile self-interest with_the general interest, even_with_mediation by the state. Then there_are winners and losers, on a_very large scale. During the_boom,_most_people can make some gains,_even if the gains are unequal._In a real_crisis, the gains of some are at_the_expense of others - competition intensifies,_and_often becomes brutal.

In a 1985 article,_reprinted_as_an appendix in the last_French edition of Late Capitalism, Mandel_tried to defend his interpretation against accusations of vulgar_eclecticism. His final_view was that "...under capitalism,_the_fluctuations_of the average rate of profit are in a sense_the seismograph_of what happens_in the system as a whole... that formula just refers_back to the sum-total of partially independent_variables, whose interplay causes the fluctuations of the average rate of_profit". The analytical challenge was to verify this_interplay empirically, to understand why