[OPE-L:5766] Re: Marx & Ricardo

From: Gerald_A_Levy (Gerald_A_Levy@email.msn.com)
Date: Sun Jun 03 2001 - 18:26:44 EDT

Addendum to [5765] on the origins of the
'hostility to the Sraffian tradition':

Once upon a time, there was the Cambridge
Controversies. During that time, most Marxists
were quite happy to sit on the sidelines and cheer
for what became the Post-Keynesians and
Sraffians. From the perspective of many Marxists,
this was great fun and they immensely enjoyed
seeing the marginalists finally get their come-upence. During this time,
there were very friendly
relations indeed between advocates of these
different perspectives. E.g., if you look at the
reviews by Dobb and Meek of _PMCC_, they
gave it raves.  To be sure, Joan Robinson had
already been highly critical of Marx in _An Essay
on Marxian Economics_ (2nd edition, 1967)
but I think Dobb, Meek and others thought that
she and the others would 'come around'
eventually to a more Marxist perspective.

THEN, along came Steedman's _Marx after
Sraffa_ (1977) and things were never the same
again.  There could be no doubt, based not
only on substance but also tone, that Steedman's
book was like a "Declaration of War".  This,
of course, led to equally sharp critiques by
others (e.g. in Mandel and Freeman ed.
_Ricardo after Marx_ and Fine ed. _The Value
Dimension: Marx versus Ricardo and Sraffa_
- articles originally published in _Economy and
Society_, 1972-84)  of  Ricardo, Sraffa ... and

So, in brief, I would say that the origins of the
'hostility' can be directly traced to 1977 when
Steedman's book was published.

In solidarity, Jerry

> Gary asks in [5763]:
 I'd be interested to hear what other
listmembers think about this  connection  between
Ricardo and  Marx, since so much Marxist hostility to the  Sraffian
tradition stems from the
 belief that it inappropriately attempts  to "transform   Marx into Ricardo"
(as one TSSer
 has put it). <

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sun Jul 15 2001 - 10:56:28 EDT