holism in Marx's theory

Fred B. Moseley fmoseley at mhc.mtholyoke.edu
Thu Oct 27 22:00:12 MDT 1994



On Wed, 26 Oct 1994 tgs at cunyvms1.gc.cuny.edu wrote:

> It may really be naive of me to say this, but have you read Paul Mattick's
> book, Marx and Keynes?  He presents precisely the interpretation you are
> discussing.  Indeed it is surprising to me that this neo-Ricardian sophism
> is prevalent today, as you say.  I thought Mattick's interpretation was
> generally accepted

Yes, I have read Mattick's Marx and Keynes, 20 years ago and many times
since, and Mattick's work has been the single most important influence
on my own thinking, including especially the emphasis on the distinction
between capital in general and compettion, i.e. on Marx's "holistic" method.
So you are certainly right on targer to notice the similarity.  Thanks for
bringing it up.  I should have mentioned it myself.

Fred Moseley



     ------------------



More information about the Marxism mailing list