From: Gerald A. Levy (Gerald_A_Levy@MSN.COM)
Date: Thu Feb 26 2004 - 09:18:53 EST
Andrew T: the full reference for Shoul's diss. is --
"The Marxian Theory of Economic Breakdown" (Radcliffe,
1947). See, especially, Ch. 5: "Marx's Theory of Crises:
The Answer to Say's Law" (125-157).
Her 1957 _QJE_ article is, obviously, easier to obtain and
covers much the same ground (at least as SL is concerned).
Some notes worth pondering:
-- at the time, the _QJE_ article represented -- as far as I
know -- the only published article in English by a follower
of Grossmann.
-- at the time, it was unusual for Marxists to have their works
published in mainstream economics journals. (The
_QJE_ was published by Harvard University.) It's still
unusual, but recall the year published (1957) and the
influence of McCarthyism in the academy (and
elsewhere in society).
-- her article was re-circulated, and presumably read by
many students of economics and professional economists,
when it was re-issued (and "slightly enlarged") in the
Spengler (ed.) (1960) textbook of readings on the
history of economic thought.
-- her article represented the longest explanation in
English of the relation between Marx and Say.
-- to the current day, the article represents the longest
and most thorough explanation of what critics might call
the "Grossmanite" understanding of Say's Law.
All of the above leads me to ask: why is it so infrequently referred
to in the literature?
In solidarity, Jerry
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Feb 27 2004 - 00:00:02 EST