Re: (OPE-L) Luxemburg's Intro to P.E. in English

From: Riccardo Bellofiore (riccardo.bellofiore@UNIBG.IT)
Date: Thu Nov 18 2004 - 12:29:37 EST

At 8:47 -0800 18-11-2004, Rakesh Bhandari wrote:

>Her economic theory was developed in such a way as to have political
>implications that she repudiated. For example, Robinson's confidence
>in state management of effective demand to stabilize capitalism.

your picture of Robinson is wrong. You can go and read the Second
Crisis in Economic Theory. Anyhow, the point is irrelevant: Robinson
never attributed her approach to Luxemburg. Simply spotted the
problem of the inducement to invest, that others did'n see.

>>The only thing on which she surely would agree 100% would be the need
>>to approach Marx (also) in a critical fashion - just go and read the
>>Accumulation of Capital and the Anti-critique. She of course thinks
>>that in this way she reinstates the true Marxian position (as I am
>>thinking I am doing exactly the same with my reconstruction).
>Critical so that the theory and revolutionary praxis of the working
>class are intertwined. Not theory so that the possibility of the
>technocrat state as savior is opened up.

Who denied this? If you attribute this to Robinson, it is a
declaration of ignorance of her position.

>>Thanks for the post on Crotty.

No. Because I am trying to produce something for the conference, and
in the middle I am closing other 4-5 works. I had health problems
after summer, and I am not 100% OK, so I am avoiding to indulge too
much in distractions. Maybe in a while.

>>Yo may be interested in RL's chapter Stagnation and Progress in
>>Marxism in Riazanov ed, Karl Marx. Man Thinker and Revolutionist.
>>Martin Lawrence Lt., 1928.
>Yes I have not read it. Thanks.

It is on the web, in the You would not believe but I
agree, say, 85% ...

I am re-reading the Anti-critique, which is so much powerful than the
Accumulation of Capital. It is a pity that in English they are
published separately (In Italian, they are in the same book, with an
intro by Sweezy). The errors are there, but so it is the stress on
the macro nature of Marx's economic theory, the picture of the
monetary circuit, the problem of the inducement to invest, the
relation between extraction of surplus value and the insufficiency of
demand. IMHO.
Riccardo Bellofiore
Dipartimento di Scienze Economiche
"Hyman P. Minsky"
Via dei Caniana 2
I-24127 Bergamo, Italy
direct    +39-035-2052545
secretary +39-035 2052501
fax:      +39 035 2052549

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 19 2004 - 00:00:02 EST