Marx’s Heritage and the Modern Economic Science (The “Round Table” of “Voprosy Economiki”)

2005 ◽  
pp. 87-132
Author(s):  
Article Editorial

The "round table" held by "Voprosy Economiki" was devoted to urgency of Marx's scientific heritage. The articles by E. Gaidar and V. Mau, A. Buzgalin and A. Kolganov, L. Grebnev published in 2004 were in the focus of discussion. The session was conducted by the editor-in-chief academician L. Abalkin. Theoretical questions of the importance of K. Marx's and F. Engels' contribution in the world economic science, of modern opportunities of using marxist approach, of adequacy of the labor theory of value and the theory of surplus value were debated. Opinions differed: a number of participants supported Marx's economic concepts while others spoke about its conformity to realities of XIX century, and not those of the end of XX - the beginning of XXI centuries. The question of dogmatism of Marx's doctrine and the necessity of its creative revisionism was also risen. The question of "liberal marxism" as a basis for further development of modern liberalism was actively discussed. Certain attention was paid to the problem of "secular religiousness" of marxism - its acceptance as the official national ideology and its spreading as a specific religion among the population. The first part of the session is introduced including the presentations by O. Ananyin, S. Dzarasov, T. Oizerman, G. Bagaturiya, A. Chepurenko, V. Kulikov, V. Mezhuev, M. Voeikov, G. Gloveli, V. Kudrov, L. Vasina.

Author(s):  
Liudmyla Krot

In the conditions of transformational shifts and construction of the national competitive economy of Ukraine, society is a particularly attractive object for socio-economic research. The necessity of deep theoretical comprehension of the processes that take place and determination of the directions of further development of the domestic economy through the reference to the historical experience of studying market transformations by domestic economists is substantiated. There is a tendency of revival of scientific interest in historical and economic research in modern economic theory, where Ukrainian economic thought opens a wide field for scientific research. The aim of the article is to study the development of the ideas of marginalism and their reflection in the domestic economic thought in the works of representatives of the Kyiv School of Economics. The article presents the evolution of the theoretical and methodological foundations of the stages of the marginal revolution. It is noted that in Ukraine there were also powerful scientific centers of marginal orientation. It is claimed that the Kyiv School of Economics, headed by M. H. Bunge and D. I. Pikhno, initiated the subjective-psychological direction of political economy in Ukraine. It is determined that the peculiarity of O. Bilimovich's scientific thought was the complete denial of the labor theory of value. The article states that MI Tugan-Baranovsky has the primacy in the deep substantiation and creation of the synthesis of the labor theory of value and theories of marginal utility. It is noted that the combination of objective and subjective approaches on a methodological basis allowed him to avoid one-sided economic research. It is emphasized that the views of M. Tugan-Baranovsky in this problem were characterized by both undeniably powerful and theoretically weak aspects. Based on the study, it was concluded that marginalism as a powerful direction in the development of world economic theory had its own peculiarities of perception and development in Ukrainian economic thought of the second half of the nineteenth - early twentieth century. Research has revealed a critical perception of methodological individualism as a characteristic feature of the scientific tools of marginalism. It is noted that the fundamental ideas of marginalism in the Ukrainian economic thought of the second half of the XIX - early XX centuries. combined with the methods of the new historical and social schools. The article notes that at that time Ukrainian scientists took into account the influence of non-economic factors on the economic behavior of economic entities,


1986 ◽  
Vol 48 ◽  
pp. 13-13
Author(s):  
George Galster

The following note describes a skit designed primarily as a pedagogic device to illustrate in a meaningful (and, hopefully, provocative and humorous) way Marx's analysis of capitalism. Numerous concepts and phenomena are “brought to life” in the skit: exploitation, immiseration and alienation of workers, maintenance wage, labor theory of value, mechanization and the division of labor, systemic tendencies toward economic crises, relationship of various superstructural components (welfare, religion, etc.) to the economic base, and the radical theory of the state. More specifically, the economic base of a hypothetical capitalist society consists of a stylized production process involving “resources” (Oreo cookies), “labor” (students selected from the class) and eventually “capital” (table knives). The ability of the monopoly capitalist to accumulate surplus by exploiting workers becomes manifest. Other elements of the social superstructure (unions, government, religion, etc.)


2009 ◽  
Vol 51 (2) ◽  
pp. 401-425 ◽  
Author(s):  
Diane P. Koenker

The idea of leisure and vacations in the Soviet Union at first glance suggests a paradox. As a system based on the labor theory of value, the USSR emphasized production as the foundation of wealth, personal worth, and the path to a society of abundance for all. Work—physical or mental—was the obligation of all citizens. But work took its toll on the human organism, and along with creating the necessary incentives and conditions for productive labor a socialist system would also include reproductive rest as an integral element of its economy. The eight-hour work day, a weekly day off from work, and an annual vacation constituted the triad of restorative and healthful rest opportunities in the emerging Soviet system of the 1920s and 1930s.


2011 ◽  
Vol 69 (274) ◽  
Author(s):  
Alejandro Valle Baeza

Labor theory of value has received considerable attention among Marxists and their critics. No agreement has been reached as to what labor theory of value is (Foley, 2000), Itoh, 1988; Kliman, 2006; Laibman, 1992 and Mohun, 2000). Paradoxically there are empirical studies showing strong association between labor values and market prices. Such works could inject new energy into Marxist theory of value; nevertheless some critics have questioned such empirical findings because: a) there is a problem of spurious correlation involved, and b) measures of association vary with changes in the physical units of the analyzed merchandises.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document