[OPE-L:3109] Re: Value, Price and Profit as a summary

From: Rakesh Bhandari (bhandari@phoenix.Princeton.EDU)
Date: Wed May 10 2000 - 16:17:33 EDT

[ show plain text ]

Paul Z asked me:
> P.S. Rakesh: "Grossmann ... was as you know the most important figure in
> the recovery of Marx's 'economics' :)." How about Sweezy?

And Paul you can actually quote the following (long story which I am not
going to get into).

I have yet to read a theoretical essay on Sweezy which deals adequately
with his implicit and explicit critiques of the two towering figures of
bourgeois economic thought in the 20th century--Keynes and Schumpeter.
Sweezy's thinking through and critique of the bourgeois economics of the
20th century must be made available, and I don't think he should have to
pass before his critiques are renewed. I am sure MR
will do something. Moreover, I have yet to read an essay on the
relationship between Baran and Sweezy's Monopoly Capital to
Preobrazhensky's Decline of Capitalism. But I suggest here is a very
important line of analysis to reopen as well. And of course there is
Sweezy's largely implicit challenge to high tech hype that it represents a
sufficiently radical Schumpeterian innovation to aborb the surplus. The
point is that his framework provides a most interesting window on current
developments. To me it seems that Sweezy's debate with JAS did not end in
Harvard Yard sixty years ago but went on to inform his life work, and I
would like to know exactly how especially since Schumpeter is a cult
figure among the American bourgeoisie. Or do they disgrace their hero in
worshipping him as Wolfgang Stolper has suggested? What did Sweezy make of
the revival of Schumpeter and the revelation of his, let's say,
reactionary views?

 His book with Magoff on the financial explosion really helped to clarify
some key questions for me. I am certainly partial to Grossmann, Mattick,
Cogoy and Carchedi, and worry deeply about the theoretical, though not
political, concessions Sweezy may have made to Keynesianism. At the same
time I am quite interested in the new bases of monopoly power; I think
they have changed in the last 35 years (see Larry Summers speech to the
high tech crowd in San Francisco), but the question in my opinion
remains crucial to understanding the bases of world economic and
political power and transformations in the international division of

Yours, Rakesh

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed May 31 2000 - 00:00:08 EDT