Polanyi’s non-ideological countermovement: one step forward, two steps back

This article engages with Goodwin (2024. Radical (re) readings of Polanyi: Splitting hairs and building bridges. Globalizations) to clarify the non-ideological reading of Polanyi’s countermovement concept. Goodwin (2024) is the first paper to explicitly, and in detail, respond to the non-ideological reading and is thus important to discuss to help deepen understanding of Polanyi’s countermovement. This article will first outline eight arguments that demonstrate the countermovement should be understood as a non-ideologically informed movement before engaging with the arguments presented in Goodwin (2024). Goodwin (2024) argues that the countermovement should be seen as both ideological and non-ideological. However, it is argued here that this reading of the countermovement lacks evidence and leads to a weaker understanding of Polanyi’s double movement and countermovement process. This paper calls for more contemporary empirical research to be conducted on Polanyi’s non-ideological countermovement and its interaction with ideological movements to better elaborate Polanyi’s double movement process today.