THERE exists in English no reasonably comprehensive analytical study of Marxian Political Economy. This book is intended to fill the gap. It is, however, neither complete nor exhaustive; many important topics have been altogether omitted, and others have been passed over with no more than a brief reference. Nevertheless, I hope it will contribute to a better understanding of an important body of social thought which in the past has too often suffered from ignorant and superficial treatment. I have not tried to gloss over difficulties, but neither have I gone out of my way to dwell upon complex theoretical problems unless they seemed to be directly related to the task in hand.
Throughout the book I have quoted frequently and extensively from the works of Marx and his followers. This unquestionably makes for an awkward style of presentation, but it has seemed unavoidable. It is not possible to take for granted an acquaintance with the literature of Marxism; much of the most important work, even of Marx himself, has never been translated into English, while many relevant books and periodicals are available only in the larger libraries. Moreover, interpretations of Marxian theories have differed widely, and I am anxious that my own interpretations, however much some readers may disagree with them, shall at any rate not give the impression of being made up out of whole cloth. Quotations from Capital are taken from the three-volume edition published by Charles Kerr & Co. of Chicago. I have felt free to simplify the punctuation in the pas-sages quoted, and in several cases, all of which are recorded in the footnotes, I have altered the translation itself to convey more accurately the meaning of the German original.
Besides presenting and analyzing the views of other writers I have also attempted to solve certain theoretical problems which have long been the subject of controversy, and to bring within the framework of Marxian theory a variety of issues which it seems to me have hitherto received inadequate analysis. In the latter connection the reader's attention is particularly directed to Chapter x (Realization Crises), Chapter x11 (Chronic Depression?), Chapter XIV (The Development of Monopoly Capital), Chapter xv (Monopoly and the Laws of Motion of Capitalism), and Chapter xvit (Fascism). The arrangement of the subject matter follows a definite pattern, starting from the most abstract problem of Political Economy-the theory of value-and proceeding by successive stages to the pressing problems of present-day world society.
Many friends and colleagues have been kind enough to read all or parts of the manuscript in various stages of completion and to offer valuable criticisms and suggestions. Among them I should like particularly to mention Drs. Erich Roll, Lewis Feuer, Franz Neumann, Alan R. Sweezy, Robert K. Merton, Svend Laursen, Stanley Moore, and Mr. Paul Baran. The criticisms of my wife, Maxine Yaple Sweezy, have been especially helpful, though she can legitimately complain that they have not always been accepted. My greatest debt is to Dr. Shigeto Tsuru, with whom I have had the good fortune to have many discussions over a period of years not only on the topics covered in this book but also on a wide range of related subjects. Dr. Tsuru has read the entire manuscript and has helped me in innumerable ways to improve both form and content. It is a great pleasure for me to be able to include an Appendix by him explaining and comparing the reproduction schemes of Quesnay, Marx, and Keynes. This Appendix should, I think, be of great interest to economists.
SOCIETY is more than a number of individuals. It is a number of individuals among whom certain definite and more or less stable relations exist. The form of society is determined by the character and form of these relations. The social sciences comprise all those branches of knowledge which have as their aim the study and understanding of these relations and their changes in the course of time.
All this, it will be said, is obvious to the point of banality. And so it is. But it is as well to remember that the most obvious things are frequently the most important. Those who neglect the obvious do so at their own peril. Let us take the modern science of economics as a case in point.
Economics, by common consent, is a social science; one has only to consult a university catalogue to convince oneself. Its subject matter is drawn from the field of the production and distribution of the goods and services which people need and want. From these two premises it would seem to be a legitimate conclusion that economics studies the social (inter-personal) relations of production and distribution. What these relations are, how they change, and their place in the totality of social relations would seem to be the indicated subjects of inquiry.
But do economists see matters in this way? Let us glance briefly at the work of Professor Lionel Robbins, The Nature and Significance of Economic Science (1st ed., 1932), for enlightenment. Professor Robbins's book is not chosen as an extreme example, but merely as a convenient summary of views which are widely held among modern economists. Does Professor Robbins regard economics as a social science in the sense that it deals primarily with relations between people?
'The definition of Economics which would probably command most adherents... is that which relates it to the study of the causes of material welfare,' he tells us (p. 4). This, surely,
Hindu (935)
Agriculture (118)
Ancient (1086)
Archaeology (753)
Architecture (563)
Art & Culture (910)
Biography (702)
Buddhist (544)
Cookery (167)
Emperor & Queen (565)
Islam (242)
Jainism (307)
Literary (896)
Mahatma Gandhi (372)
Send as free online greeting card
Email a Friend
Manage Wishlist