Re: (OPE-L) Robinson and Marx

From: Riccardo Bellofiore (riccardo.bellofiore@UNIBG.IT)
Date: Wed Nov 24 2004 - 13:26:52 EST

I agree too, Paul. In fact, as some of my posts testify, I go even
further, I think taht some point of this tradition must be included
critically in a renewed Marxism. My point was about what happened
after the mid 70s. I think Neoclassical mounted an efffective
reaction. I guess that the same Robinson was not very happy with a
criticism of Neoclassicism which stopped at the critique of
neoclassical capital theory, and insisted that we should go towards
an approach which included time and history in an essential way. Does
this mean that we have to accept the idea that value is just
metaphysics? At the same time, I accept as substantially true her
criticism of the falling rate of profits. But apologies for having
put these points too quickly. I should have not intervened.


>I agree with you, Jerry.  My own exit from neoclassical economics was
>greatly contributed to by the Cambridge (UK) critique of neoclassical
>capital theory and she was of course a major part of that.  Furthermore,
>since I knew her personally a bit and got her to the ILO in the mid-70s --
>which eventually resulted in her development book which the ILO refused to
>publish because it was too radical, I know directly that she had a
>wide-ranging impact on stimulating critical economics among many
>economists and non-economists.
>Joan Robinson is DEFINITELY the kind of economist with whom we need to
>build alliances or we will be worth nothing except our own narcissism.


Riccardo Bellofiore
Dipartimento di Scienze Economiche
"Hyman P. Minsky"
UniversitÓ di Bergamo
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 26 2004 - 00:00:02 EST