[Marxism] Heinrich on Marx's Crisis Theory
lnp3 at panix.com
Wed Apr 3 15:14:23 MDT 2013
On 4/3/13 4:56 PM, james pitman wrote:
> This is just feeding into my procrastinations, which are invading my essay
> writing, but it's interesting how much these two schools agree on whilst
> fundamentally disagreeing elsewhere. I see Carchedi as a possible bridge
> between Heinrich and Kliman actually.
I often wonder what bearing all this Marxist economics has to most
nations. My wife has been working on a article about "Kirchnerism" and
asked me whether the term Keynesianism can be applied to Argentina's
recent state policies. Without giving it much thought, I said that
Keynesianism and Marxist economic policy that overlaps with Keynes
(Carchedi in particular) tends to be based on the business cycle
paradigm that can be found in V. 2 of Capital, with deficit spending
functioning as a remedy during a downturn.
But I added that in Argentina you don't quite have the same thing as you
do in an advanced industrialized country. With an economy based on
agro-exports, what does it mean to have an over-accumulation of capital?
Too much hay or milking machines?
It is even more obvious when you are dealing with someplace like Bolivia
or Ecuador. These countries are in a permanent slump and no amount of
deficit spending will make a difference.
The debates over FROP, the Okishio theorem, etc. that take place on
Jerry Levy's mailing list (https://lists.csuchico.edu/pipermail/ope/)
have a rather rarefied character in my view.
More information about the Marxism