[Marxism] 'What to do with the Labor Theory of Value'

David P Á david at miradoiro.com
Sat May 11 10:57:36 MDT 2013


On 11/05/2013 18:44, Angelus Novus wrote:
> FWIW,I think TSSI is stuck in the paradigm of a Ricardian (i.e. pre-monetary) interpretation of Marx's value theory, according to which Marx just takes over the "labor theory of value" of classical political economy and gives his own political spin.

That would not be so bad. At least it is empirically useful unlike the 
so-called monetary interpretations.

> Closer to the truth, IMHO, is the interpretation offered by the Soviet economist I.I. Rubin and subsequently picked up by German theorists like Hans-Georg Backhaus and Michael Heinrich, that Marx's value theory is distinct from that of classical political economy, because Marx is the first economic thinker to explicitly theorize the role played by money in a capitalist economy.

Closer to making the LTV irrelevant, given that all operational notion 
of value is dissolved into the sphere of exchange and prices.

> Given the enthusiastic reception to Michael Heinrich's Introduction to Capital, recently published by Monthly Review Press, this is an interpretation that seems to be picking up steam.

Unfortunately, I believe you are correct.

--David.




More information about the Marxism mailing list