[Marxism] Marx's crisis theory

james pitman marinercarpentry at gmail.com
Thu Apr 11 16:30:11 MDT 2013


This is from Marx's correspondence with Engels in the MECW, and his
Mathematical Notebooks:

"I have just sent Moore a history which *privatim* had to be smuggled in.
But he thinks that the question is unsolvable or at least *pro
tempore*unsolvable in view of the many parts in which facts are still
to be
discovered relating to this question. The matter is as follows: you know
tables in which prices, calculated by percent etc. etc. are represented in
their growth in the course of a year etc. showing the increases and
decreases by zig-zag lines. I have repeatedly attempted, for the analysis
of crises, to compute these ‘ups and downs’ as fictional curves, and I
thought (and even now still think this is possible with sufficient
empirical material) to infer mathematically from this an important view of
crises. Moore, as I already said, considers the problem rather impractical,
and I have decided for the time being to give it up."
One point I don't think you're getting about Heinrich is he [and I agree]
doesn't subscribe to the arithmomorphic or rationalist Marx; or Marx as a
better economist than Smith or Ricardo, or a straight forward theorist of
prices - and therefore Heinrich isn't trying to devalue Marx in the way
you're trying to allege - his argument is that Marx's critique operated on
a much higher level than classical economics, and is in no way even
comparable.

Similarly, your quote is completely decontextualised. As Heinrich says, how
can you abstract the three books, and see them as a fait accompli, when
Marx hadn't finished his project? For instance, the substance of value
theory changes over the three books we've got - why wouldn't this continue
to be the case around other categories?

Jamie.
------------------------------

[1] <file:///C:/Users/Adzowa/Downloads/Value%20Monetary.docx#_ftnref1>[MECW],
1966, vol.33, p.82


On 11 April 2013 23:03, Charlie <charles1848 at sbcglobal.net> wrote:

> ==============================**==============================**==========
> Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
> ==============================**==============================**==========
>
>
> "It is questionable, however, whether or to what extent the presentation
> of the 'shapings of the total process' envisioned by Marx for book III is
> at all possible in abstraction from the state and the world market. If,
> however, this is in fact not possible, then the construction of Capital as
> a whole is called into question."
>
> James P. wrote: ~ Is this from the book?
>
> No, it is from Heinrich's essay in the April 2013 issue of Monthly Review.
> Almost at the end.
>
>
>
> ______________________________**__________________
> Send list submissions to: Marxism at greenhouse.economics.**utah.edu<Marxism at greenhouse.economics.utah.edu>
> Set your options at: http://greenhouse.economics.**
> utah.edu/mailman/options/**marxism/marinercarpentry%**40gmail.com<http://greenhouse.economics.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/marinercarpentry%40gmail.com>
>



More information about the Marxism mailing list