er was developing his theoretical perspectives. Thus, it was completely rational that he should postulate that the next great economic transition would be from capitalism to socialism, as the prior great economic transition has been from feudalism to capitalism. In an essay relevant to the capitalist transition, Schumpeter (39) wrote in 1949 of the "rise and fall of whole classes," wherein he established the criteria for the fall from its dominant social position of the capitalist class.
While there is no doubt that Schumpeter wrote that a transition from capitalism to socialism would eventually occur, there is, however, disagreement over his reasoning for why such a transition would occur. Prevailing thought holds that Joseph Schumpeter was concerned that the excessive drive for change in capitalist economics, rather than a more sober attention to incremental advantages, would lead eventually to a transition from capitalism to socialism (Myers 30). Richard Langlois, University of Connecticut, however, contends that what Schumpeter actually was saying was the rise of corporations to the dominant position in society would lead to a stifling of innovation. The Langlois (2-4) argument is that, as corporations become larger and more powerful, they also become more bureaucratic, and by becoming more bureaucratic, the corporations nee the capitalist economic system become more like bureaucratic socialism. This view of Schumpeter's argument holds that capitalism becomes less efficient because it becomes more like socialism. The more widely accepted interpretation of Schumpeter's theory of a capitalist transition, however, is that capitalism will give way to its own excesses.
One question that frequently is posed in the contemporary period is whether Schumpeter's concept of a capitalist transition was correct, and what the answer to that question implies for environmental protection both in the contemporary period and especially in...