From: Ian Wright (wrighti@ACM.ORG)
Date: Fri Mar 23 2007 - 12:41:48 EDT
Rakesh, Fred I agree that Pilling's book is in general exceptional. > Marxists are also blamed for the real contradictions of capitalist production. I also agree that Marx's proposed solution of the classical contradiction between the labour theory of value and capitalist profits, that prices are transformed labour-values, is unique in the sense that it aims both to resolve the contradiction and additionally explain the necessity for its existence in the mind of pro-capitalist theorists. Unfortunately, in the special case of equilibrium, Marx's critics scored a point. The transformation problem derails this train of thought. Putting it back on track requires, I think, that the special case be addressed, not avoided. Fred this is why I currently view your macro-monetary interpretation, if restricted to sequential determination, as tangential to this goal. But it is ok to have different theoretical goals, when understood to be part of a broader project. Fred, would I be right in thinking that you will give a sequential determination reply to Ajit's critique that your reasoning is circular? Best wishes, -Ian.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Mar 31 2007 - 01:00:12 EDT