Re: [OPE-L] Marxist Political Economy in Australia Since the Mid 1970s

From: Paul Zarembka (zarembka@BUFFALO.EDU)
Date: Fri Apr 15 2005 - 10:14:54 EDT

On Mon, 11 Apr 2005, Michael Heinrich wrote:

>  >  Paul Zarembka schrieb:
>  > Too much is made of these debates.
>  >
>  > Recall Marx said that he himself is an "economist" in his Foreword to
>  > Poverty of Philosophy:
> In "Poverty of Philosphy", published in 1847, I think, Marx was indeed
> an "economist". He used the Ricardian theory to criticize Proudhon but
> he had no other critique on Ricardo than he (Ricardo) thinks that
> capitalism is eternal. Marx accepted as well Ricardo's theory of value
> as his theory of money. It was only after 1850, when Marx studied at the
>   Library of the British Museum, that he slowly started with his
> critique (Marx himself accentuated the importance of the year 1850 in
> his preface of 1859 and we can follow this process in his letters and
> above all in his "London notebooks", which fill several volumes of MEGA).
> These debates, Paul Z. thinks "too much is made of" deal with the
> decisive difference between the Marxian project and what Marx is
> criticizing: "political economy".

We all know that Marx was doing a critique.

But what are the concepts of "production of absolute surplus value",
"relative surplus value", "accumulation of capital" (in the sense Marx
used it), "constant capital", "variable capital" etc. except NEW CONCEPTS
developed by Marx. These concepts are NOT simply criticizing the enemy's
political economy.  These are concepts defined by Marx to UNDERSTAND

We have no need to fight with people who speak of "Marxist Political
Economy" (we have real enemies out there).

Paul Z.

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Apr 23 2005 - 00:00:02 EDT