Friday, May 4, 2018

Some Recent Links for Karl Marx 200

Monthly Review
The Multiple Meanings of Marx’s Value Theory
Riccardo Bellofiore

The Guardian — The Long Read
Yanis Varoufakis: Marx predicted our present crisis – and points the way out
Yanis Varoufakis
Marx and modern microeconomics 
Samuel Bowles

Mark Carney warns robots taking jobs could lead to rise of Marxism

Michael Roberts Blog
Marx 200: Carney, Bowles and Varoufakis
Michael Roberts

Michael Roberts Blog
Managers rule, not capitalists?
Michael Roberts

Naked Keynesianism
Sraffa and Marxism or the Labor Theory of Value, what is it good for?
Matias Vernengo | Associate Professor of Economics, Bucknell University

Monthly Review
Marx’s Open-Ended Critique
John Bellamy Foster

Paul Cockshott's Blog
Smith, Marx and Unproductive Labour
Paul Cockshott

Ernest Mandel
Marx’s Theory of Money

Karl Marx
The Power of Money

The Week
It's time to normalize Karl Marx
Ryan Cooper

Real-World Economics Review Blog
Marx, 200.0
Merijn Knibbe

Triple C
Michael Roberts

Man of Yesterday: Karl Marx and His Place in History
Robert Darby

New Politics
200 Years of Karl Marx
Paul Jay interviews Dr. Gerald Horne holds the John J. and Rebecca Moores Chair of History and African American Studies at the University of Houston

Radical Political Economy
Bicentenary of Marx’s Birth, His Legacy and His Last Laugh (1818-2018)
Cyrus Bina | Distinguished Research Professor of Economics and Management at the University of Minnesota, Morris

Marx the Journalist
An Interview with James Ledbetter

Marx's Relevance in Today's World: A Reflection on His 200th Birthday
Jean Batou, Translated by Robert James Parsons, Le Courrier , Truthout| Op-Ed


AXEC / E.K-H said...

Tom Hickey

You forgot some pertinent links:

Profit for Marxists

Karl Marx, fake scientist

Marx, the moron

Marx and the curious coexistence of provably false economic theories

Capitalism, poverty, exploitation, and cross-over exploitation

Economics: 200+ years of scientific incompetence and fraud

Economists: Standing on the Shoulders of Gnomes

Overreach: Economists have their fingers in every pie except real economics

Profit: after 200+ years still elusive

Profit and the Private-Property-Irrelevance Theorem

Egmont Kakarot-Handtke

Noah Way said...

You just have to admire the veritable host of distinctly individual and independent sources used to support the anti-Marxist argument.

Bob Roddis said...

When the USSR collapsed, some socialists FINALLY conceded that Mises was right and socialism was impossible. Robert Heilbroner for one.

He was not entirely impervious to new evidence, however. In 1989, he famously wrote in The New Yorker:

"Less than 75 years after it officially began, the contest between capitalism and socialism is over: capitalism has won... Capitalism organizes the material affairs of humankind more satisfactorily than socialism."

In The New Yorker again the next year, he reminisced about hearing of Ludwig von Mises at Harvard in the 1930s. But of course his professors and fellow students scoffed at Mises's claim that socialism could not work. It seemed at the time, he wrote, that it was capitalism that was failing. Then, a mere 50 years later, he acknowledged: "It turns out, of course, that Mises was right" about the impossibility of socialism. I particularly like the "of course." Fifty years it took him to grasp the truth of what Mises wrote in 1920, and he blithely tossed off his newfound wisdom as "of course."

Bob Roddis said...

Does anyone understand what Egmont Kakarot-Handtke is saying? He sure has zero familiarity with or understanding of Austrian concepts and analysis. Which isn't actually that unusual.

Bob Roddis said...

Also, from this Tom Hickey post, we learn what’s “Wrong with Libertarianism” where one author concedes that EVERYONE understood post 1989 that Mises had been always right and socialism had failed.

From page 408 of the Jeffrey Friedman paper:

In the new, post-1989 intellectual landscape, Cornuelle noted, IT IS NOT SOCIALISM BUT THE REDISTRIBUTIVE, REGULATORY STATE THAT COMMANDS ALLEGIANCE. IN THE 1920S AND 1930S, LUDWIG VON MISES DEVELOPED A CHALLENGE TO THE ECONOMIC FEASIBILITY OF SOCIALISM THAT WAS FINALLY, AND SUDDENLY, ACCEPTED AS SELF-EVIDENT IN 1989. With the collapse of communism, however, what is at issue between libertarians and everyone else is no longer the value of a market economy, but whether the market should be “closely watched and guided” by “democratic political institutions...and a welfare or service state with a broad charter to keep the society fair and fit for human habitation”(ibid.,365). Cornuelle pointed out that this was a debate libertarians would find much tougher going than the debate over socialism.

So, we have an admission that socialism failed and always will fail while Mr. Friedman is clueless about how the interventionist regulatory state is the CAUSE of our problems.

The left's rehabilitation of Marx and socialism is much like how the Deep State and media respond to questions about Obama's Ukraine Nazis and support for Al Qaeda in Syria. Silence and lies. Perhaps gaslighting is the appropriate term.

Bob Roddis said...

The Jeffrey Friedman article which DeLong linked to is on page 408 here:

Calgacus said...

Does anyone understand what Egmont Kakarot-Handtke is saying? He sure has zero familiarity with or understanding of Austrian concepts and analysis. Which isn't actually that unusual.
J. Barkley Rosser over at says what Egmont Kakarot-Handtke is saying is trivial and well-known. I tried but found EKH impossible to understand, because he won't define his stuff well enough, and he makes incomprehensible claims about how one can't combine the business and household sector into a private (or non-government) sector. As if there were a natural law about adding two numbers.