Re: [OPE-L] Marxist Political Economy?

[Gerald_A_Levy@xxxxxxx]

[Ranganayakamma wrote:]

> Can we refer to Marx's economic analysis as Marxist Political

> Economy since the subheading of Marx's 'Capital' is 'A critique

> of Political Economy'?

> Is it not necessary to call Marx's theory of economics with a different name?

 

Ranga and Michael H,

 

Three very brief responses to your questions and comments:

 

1.  I  agree with the thrust of Simon's comments in the following post:

< http://ricardo.ecn.wfu.edu/~cottrell/OPE/archive/0204/0180.html >

 

2.  Whatever you call the group of people working and/or writing in this area

of specialization (and, yes, it has indeed become an area of specialization),

there will be problems with the name.  If either of you think you have a

better name to describe this group, let us know and we can discuss it.

 

3.  I am not completely unsympathetic to your remarks about the

importance of 'critique of political economy.'   I think it's true that for

most of the XXth Century, most Marxists did not recognize or understated the

importance of critique of political economy to Marx's project in _Capital_.

Yet, I think that many now bend the stick too far in the opposite direction.

The purpose or aim of _Capital_ was not _just_ a critique of political

economy.  Marx, after all, didn't say that "the ultimate aim of his work

is to critique political economy and thereby expose its mystifications and

fetishizations."   Instead, he claimed that "it is the ultimate aim of this

work to reveal the economic law of motion of modern society." 

 

In solidarity, Jerry

 

PS: would anyone care to address one or more of the "unresolved issues"

in Simon's post referred to above?