Paul wrote: > What seems clear to me is that Sieber figured out a lot of what Marx >was up to, on his own, in Russia, and this impressed Marx. Actually, what >bothers me most in Sieber is his 1871 sentence concluding that Marx >imparted "to Ricardo's theory a fuller and more complete form, and also >endorse its validity with new proofs". This suggests a continuity from >Marx to Ricardo which I believe to be incorrect and yet is part of the >Sieber-Plehanov-Lenin legacy that is a step backwards. > > Paul Z. Doesn't Marx, in his Afterward to the Second German Edition of Capital, more or less endorse Sieber's view of the connection between Marx and Ricardo? However slippery Marx's grasp of Russian may have been, he understands Sieber to have posited a continuity between Marx and Ricardo, and in referring to Sieber Marx's tone is unambiguously approving. I have been criticized for overstating the affinity of Marx and Ricardo, and I take the point. But surely it is a mistake to deny that there was a substantial continuity esp. in light of Marx's own acknowledgment of it? Gary
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Feb 02 2002 - 00:00:06 EST