No, I think it is Polanyi’s embedding, which is a distinct concept from Polanyi’s double movement. 1/

If I understand correctly (I may not! I have not read the original, Polanyi is a token of conversations I’ve been a part of, and my understanding derives from those), the double movement is basically reaction to a society overtaken by markets, whose markets are not properly contained, embedded. 2/

As this thread has pointed out, that is often a fascist turn. But the point of Polanyi’s embedding is precisely to let markets form a managed part of a stable and civilized society, to forestall reaction in whatever direction it might take. 3/

Again, I’m speaking from loose familiarity (confirmed as one does in these times with a quick, unreliable Claude check). 4/

But my understanding remains that embedding does mean what I intended it to mean, a cabining of markets so they are consistent with social values, rather than destabilizing of society and yielding “double movement”, an often ugly reaction. /fin