David, How do you reconcile the fact that Marx has a high regard for the work of N. Sieber (who wrote a book published in Russian in 1871 which Marx read and recommended highly; he also wrote articles in the 1870s on Marx's theories) even as Sieber explicitly wrote (and Marx read) that Marx was following in Ricardo's footsteps? In other words, if Sieber was wrong, why did Marx praise Sieber's work and why didn't Marx correct Sieber? Paul Z. ************************************************************************* Paul Zarembka, editor, RESEARCH IN POLITICAL ECONOMY at ********************** http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/PZarembka On 6 Dec 2000, Jerry Levy wrote: > The inventor of the velocitometer, David Yaffe, has joined OPE-L. > Of course, David Y is known to many on this list for other accomplishments as > well (see below). > ... > He provides us with the following (controversial?)introduction: > ... > Yet it was just at that time that many of the fundamental propositions > developed by Marx in his critique of political economy were being > challenged by a group of people in the CSE. They saw themselves as > non-dogmatic and creative 'critics' of Marx and believed they were > developing Marx's theoretical insights. We saw them quite differently. We > argued that they were not simply 'revising' Marx but rejecting the > scientific basis of his work. They represented a 'new' bourgeois school of > thought - actually an old recurring one - located in the Ricardian > tradition of political economy. Their views would inevitably undermine the > revolutionary conclusions contained in Marx's work. That is why we, as > 'orthodox' Marxists (they called us 'fundamentalists') vigorously opposed > the neo-Ricardians in all forums of the CSE.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Dec 31 2000 - 00:00:03 EST