Re: value and labour

From: Paul Zarembka (zarembka@BUFFALO.EDU)
Date: Mon May 12 2003 - 09:16:06 EDT

Andy, you wrote:

"On the one hand we have Hegel-inspired systematic dialecticians trying to
construe a large part of Marx's essential position as metaphorical, and
another large part as failing to break from clasical political economy
sufficiently. On the other, we have critical realists who must try to
interpret Marx's labour theory of value as a more or less plausible
'hypotheses', for 'testing', thereby strip away the claims to *necessity*
that permeate Marx's own account of the move from exchange value to labor
and value."

RE "failing to break from classical political economy sufficiently" by
the Hegelian-inspired, do you mean that they fail to appreciate the
importance of the constitution of abstract labor under the capitalist
mode of production?  Also, if you have an article on your position, please
let us know. Thanks.


"Confronting 9-11, Ideologies of Race, and Eminent Economists", Vol. 20
RESEARCH IN POLITICAL ECONOMY,  Paul Zarembka, editor, Elsevier Science

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue May 13 2003 - 00:00:00 EDT