Sraffa’s Constructive and Interpretive Work,and Marx

ABSTRACT

This article provides a summary account of Piero Sraffa’s constructive and interpretive work on the classical approach to the theory of value and distribution and its relationship with Marx’s contributions. It is shown that in the early phase of his constructive work Sraffa developed his equation systems by adopting a ‘physical real cost’ approach and a strictly objectivist point of view, and completely eschewed Marx’s labour-based approach and the related Marxian concepts. Only at a later stage did he explore systematically the relationship between his own modern re-formulation of the surplus approach to the theory of value and distribution and Marx’s contribution. He considered Marx’s most important analytical contribution to the further development of the surplus approach to consist of the re-integration of circular production relations, which allowed him to see the existence of a maximum rate of profits and its role in an analysis of accumulation and technical change.     

Marx 200: The Abiding Relevance of the Labour Theory of Value

ABSTRACT

Marxist political economy is alive and well, and not just because of the habitual turn to Marx in response to any crisis of capitalism. Both through Capital and through the continuing evolution of Marxism, Marxist political economy offers valuable insights that can illuminate the modalities of social and economic reproduction and the relationships between (different aspects of) the economic and the non-economic. Marxism’s presence has been felt through its own internal debates and debates with other approaches to political economy, and even through its influence on those reacting against Marxism. The key to the continuing relevance and analytical strengths of Marxist political economy lies in its capacity to provide a framework of analysis for unifying disparate insights into and critiques of the contradictions of capitalism across the social sciences. The instrument for forging that unity is Marx’s theory of value, the potential of which is examined and illustrated with reference to the Sraffian critique and two key concepts in Marxian political economy: the value of labour power and financialisation. They are explored in the light of the processes of commodification, commodity form and commodity calculation.     

James Steuart and the making of Karl Marx’s monetary thought

Abstract

This paper analyses the influence of James Steuart on Karl Marx’s monetary thought. It deals more specifically with Marx’s rejection of an automatic mechanism that links variations in the quantity of money to their direct impact on prices. Steuart’s pioneering discoveries in economics inaugurate an anti-quantity theory tradition that Marx supported and which fed his own conception of money and credit. Here, we deal with the criticism of the assumptions of the quantity theory of money (QTM), the specifically social character of labour which creates exchange value, the distinction between the functions of money, the difference between income spending and capital advances, and the difference between simple circulation and reflux of money credit.     

Marx,Sraffa, and Surplus: Observations Prompted by Garegnani (2018)

ABSTRACT

In a posthumously published article, Pierangelo Garegnani (2018. ‘On the Labour Theory of Value in Marx and in the Marxist Tradition.’) depicts Marx’s project in Capital as that of ‘developing systematically the theory of Ricardo and [the] implications of social conflict’ implied by Ricardo’s ‘surplus approach to value and distribution’. This paper argues to the contrary that Marx’s theory of surplus value and exploitation differs from (neo-)Ricardian surplus theory in fundamental ways, and modifies Garegnani’s simple Sraffian model to illustrate the distinctive implications of Marx’s theory.     

Marx and the Development of Critical Political Economy

Abstract

Although relevant analytical developments were provided over time by the critique of economic theory, they did not succeed in inhibiting the occurrence of a full-fledged revival of the neoclassical interpretation of capitalism. The development of critical economics and its capability of checking the influence of the dominant economic culture have been especially prejudiced by the failed integration between the analyses of Marx and Keynes. Following Keynes, once the ‘inducement to invest’ had been singled out as the central question for the explanation of output levels, one should have promptly acknowledged that on this very question Marx's analysis was significantly richer and more relevant than Keynes's—the richness and relevance of the former ultimately resting on the great attention Marx dedicated to the complex question of the influence of income distribution on the capitalists’ incentive to invest. It is argued in the article that through the study of this influence Marx succeeded in putting together the essential elements of a critical theory of effective demand, based on the principles and mechanisms that govern the distribution of income between profits and wages.     

Searching for New Jerusalems: P.H. Wicksteed’s “Jevonian” critique of Marx’s Capital

Abstract

In 1884, P.H. Wicksteed published a critique of the first volume of Marx’s Capital, the first detailed analytical encounter in English between Marx’s value theory and the new discourse of “marginalism”. In revisiting that episode, this article has three principal objectives. The first is to show how Wicksteed developed his understanding of political economy, as he moved from initially following Henry George’s Progress and Poverty. The second is to examine why Wicksteed’s defence of George necessitated criticizing the Marxist Social Democratic Federation. The third is to show that Wicksteed’s criticisms of Marx were simply incorrect.     

Not a man of solid principles. The relevance of Edgar Bauer’s polemical portrait of Karl Marx in his 1843 novella Es leben feste Grundsätze!

Abstract

The protagonist of Edgar Bauer’s 1843 novella Es leben feste Grundsätze! is a young intellectual named “Karl”. It can hardly be doubted that Bauer’s novella is a polemical character study of Karl Marx: the rather demeaning picture of “Herr Karl” belongs to the heat of controversy between Marx and die Freien, the Berlin Young Hegelians, after the end of their participation in the Rheinische Zeitung in late autumn 1842. So far, Bauer’s novella has never been used as a potential source to shed light on the deeper causes of animosity between Marx and die Freien.     

Money and totality: A review essay

Moseley’s (2016 Moseley, F. 2016. Money and Totality: A Macro-Monetary Interpretation of Marx’s Logic in Capital and the End of the Transformation Problem. Leiden: Brill Publishers. [Google Scholar]) Money and Totality focuses on two important issues: (a) the nature and significance of Marx’s notion of the “circuit of money capital” and (b) the solution to the “transformation problem”. The former question, in particular, makes this book important not only for Marx specialists but also for other dissenting economists. Recall that in writings before the General Theory Keynes (1933a, 1933b), in particular, made allusion to the Marxian circuit via the concept of the monetary theory of production. However, these references did not survive in the published version in 1936. Nor was Keynes at all confident on this topic in debate the following year. It is therefore important to both Marx scholars and other heterodox economists to inquire exactly how the Marxian circuit was supposed to work. A starting point is to write out the scheme from Capital Vol. 2 (Marx, 1885/1976 Marx, K. 1885/1976. Capital: Vol. II. London: Penguin Books. [Google Scholar]) in full, M – C?…?P … C’ –?M’, and try to explain what the magnitudes (M’ – M) and (C’ – C), are supposed to represent. This is indeed one of Moseley’s main tasks in this thought-provoking book.     

Say’s Law,Marxian Crisis Theory and the Interconnectedness of the Capitalist Economy

ABSTRACT

Scholars have long debated exactly why Marx felt that general gluts were not just possible, but inevitable. This article argues that Theories of Surplus Value anchored that necessity in the complex interconnectedness that characterizes capitalist production. There, Marx’s criticism of Say’s Law builds on a version of crisis theory that begins with raw material shortages in a leading sector. The disturbance is then transmitted through the many inter-industry linkages in the capitalist economy. What starts as a supply-side shock in a leading sector is transformed into a broad crisis of aggregate demand as workers are laid off and businesses fall into insolvency. This article argues that Marx’s later discussion of other types of crises in Capital can be read as consistent with this approach. A severe profit squeeze in a leading sector (whether originating in intermediate good prices, market demand, rising wages or rising use of fixed capital) necessarily turns into a general glut. In this context, Say’s Law becomes an irrelevant theorem concerning an imaginary economy. What Marx sees as fundamentally new under capitalism is not the use of money and the separation of sale and purchase, but massive interconnectedness.     

Technology and Economic Dependency: An Institutional Assessment

I compare and contrast Thorstein Veblen’s views on and criticisms of Marxian economics, with several of the “revisionist” Marxists writing early in the twentieth century, in the years preceding WWI. I explore the substantial overlap between Veblen and the revisionist authors, in particular, Eduard Bernstein. Although it is unlikely that Veblen’s name will be added to the list of revisionist authors, when the subject of revisionism is treated, I make the case that the views of the revisionist authors often can be instructive in understanding Veblen’s own position with respect to the theories of Karl Marx.     

“Social Freedom” in the Twenty-First Century: Rereading Polanyi

Karl Polanyi’s analysis of the genesis, crises, and institutional transformations of contemporary society is grounded on a theory of the basic features and dynamics of capitalism as a peculiar form of society. This article intends to develop this thesis on the basis of a reading of Polanyi’s The Great Transformation, with references to Polanyi’s preceding and later research. Polanyi’s theoretical and methodological achievements suggest a wide comparative outlook and offer a critique of economics, in addition to being deeply connected with his political philosophy. Polanyi’s approach seems to be nearer to the original institutional thought — from Karl Marx to Thorstein Veblen, from Max Weber to Adolf Löwe and Karl William Kapp — than to current neo-institutional tendencies in economics, sociology, and historiography. The hard problems society presently faces suggest the need to adhere to Polanyi’s radical point of view — that is, to a radical approach to Polanyi’s thought.     

Philosophy of Economics Rules: introduction to the symposium

ABSTRACT

Economists have long been criticized for their use of highly idealized models. In Economics rules: Why economics works, when it fails, and how to tell the difference [Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2015] Dani Rodrik responds to this criticism by offering an account of models that emphasizes the diversity of models in economics. Rodrik’s account presents a rare opportunity for economists and philosophers of economics to engage in a mutually beneficial exchange that could improve our understanding of the power and limits of economics, and the rights and wrongs of the dismal science. The symposium on Rodrik’s Economics Rules is the first attempt to seize this opportunity.     

The specificity of manufacturing in Marx's economic thought

Abstract

This article examines Marx's approach to manufacturing and the extent to which manufacturing could be considered to have a special place in Marx's economic thought, especially in relation to accumulation and growth. The important ‘progressive’ features of manufacturing that can be found in Marx's writings and which are discussed here include: division of labour; socialisation of labour; mechanisation; increasing returns to scale; learning-by-doing; technological advancement; and overall, superior potential for cumulative productivity increases. These insights anticipate some of the thinking around the specificity of manufacturing found in twentieth-century structuralist development economics and some heterodox schools of thought such as Kaldorian approaches. This article suggests an interpretation of Marx as having a two-dimensional conceptualisation of activity specificity, with not only sectoral but also ‘technological–organisational’ dimensions, where these two dimensions are not fully independent of each other.     

Will the MEGA2 edition be a watershed in interpreting Marx?

Abstract

The MEGA² edition is a watershed in interpreting important aspects of Marx’s oeuvre, but not all of them. It provides hints as to why Marx failed to complete his magnum opus, Capital, and informs about his doubts regarding the “law of motion” of capitalism centred on the “law of the falling tendency of the rate of profit” he was keen to establish.     

Is Marx's absolute rent due to a monopoly price?

ABSTRACT

Absolute rent, in Marx's view, has an upper limit represented by the difference between the value and the price of production of agricultural commodities. The relevance of this limit was questioned by Bortkiewicz because of the difficulties concerning the argument which Marx based it on. The lack of this upper limit prompted some scholars to claim that there is no difference between absolute rent and a rent paid by a monopoly price. Referring to the classical/Marxian theory of monopoly price, we shall argue that it is still possible to distinguish absolute rent from a rent due to a monopoly price.     

Marx and Sraffa: A Comment on Gehrke and Kurz

This comment focuses on the assertion by Gehrke and Kurz (2018) that the origin of the equations which formed the backbone of Sraffa’s Production of Commodities by Means of Commodities is not related in any way to Marx, and particularly Marx’s reproduction schemes, as argued by the late Giorgio Gilibert and myself. This comment argues that the 2018 article by Gehrke and Kurz makes significant—but unacknowledged—retreats from positions previously presented by the authors, and that the relevance of Marx and his reproduction schemes for the origin of Sraffa’s (1960) work for Production of Commodities is beyond reasonable doubt.     

Gordon Tullock and Richard McKenzie. The New World of Economics.

The authors extend the literature on the efficacy of high school economics instruction in two directions. First, they assess how much economic knowledge that California students acquired in their compulsory high school course is retained on their entering college. Second, using as a control group some college students from the state of Washington, where there is no mandate for high school economics instruction, the authors evaluate the impact of California's high school economics mandate on students’ economic literacy when they enter college. The testing instrument is the Test of Economic Literacy (TEL).     

The Books of Crisis and Tooke–Newmarch excerpts: a new aspect of Marx's crisis theory in MEGA

Abstract

The paper explores a new aspect of the development of the Books of Crisis: the fact that Marx’s empirical research on the 1857 crisis in these notebooks was undertaken as the direct continuation of his study of Thomas Tooke and William Newmarch's A History of Prices. Our investigation will provide clues to better understand the structure and contents of the documents. Particularly, we provide new evidence for why Marx started his research on the 1857 crisis with the French economy, which managed to steer clear of the crisis, rather than with England, which was already acutely affected by it.