[Marxism] 'What to do with the Labor Theory of Value'
fuerdenkommunismus at yahoo.com
Sun May 12 09:35:55 MDT 2013
> why taking Marx's critique of political economy at face value is an
> outdated 'paradigm' to be 'stuck' in?
Hahahaha, nice try, but everyone thinks they take Marx's critique of political economy at "face value." And yet, surprisingly, people still disagree on their interpretations.
> how Marx's critique of political economy as represented by the TSSI does
> not properly reconstruct his theory of money?
Because it assumes that discussions about a so-called "transformation problem" are worthwhile. From the perspective of the "monetary" reading, there is NO transformation problem, because there is no "transforming" values into prices; values cannot be expressed without money. That is one of the main points behind Chapter One of Vol. I, and one of Marx's main criticisms of Proudhon and anarchists, who wanted to abolish money while retaining the existence of commodities.
> how Heinrich's approach does?
Buy the book and find out. Or wait until the translation of the "Science of Value" is finished for a more in-depth explanation of Marx's revolutionary break with the framework of classical political economy.
More information about the Marxism