Some preliminary thoughts on knowledge-based production: 49 seconds on Mustafar

Critique

Volumn 35, Issue 3, 2007, Pages 357-373

  Potts, Nick ^a  

^a SOUTHAMPTON SOLENT UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Knowledge based production; Marx; Value theory

Indexed keywords

EID: 61149318935     PISSN: 00111600     EISSN: 03017605     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/03017600701676753     Document Type: Article

References (39)

1. As in, for example, M. Hardt and T. Negri, Empire (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2000).
2. Like, for example, D. Harvie, 'Value Production and Struggle in the Classroom', Capital and Class, 88: Spring (2006), pp. 1-32.
3. P.M. Sweezy, The Theory of Capitalist Development: Principles of Marxian Political Economy (New York: Modern Reader Paperbacks, 1970 [1942]).
4. A. Freeman, 'The Psychopathology of Walrasian Marxism', in A. Freeman and G. Carchedi (eds) Marx and Non-Equilibrium Economics (Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, 1996), pp. 1-28.
5. L. Bortkiewicz, 'Value and Price in the Marxian System', International Economic Papers, 2 (1952 [1906-7]), pp. 5-60,
6. L. Bortkiewicz, 'On the Correction of Marx's Fundamental Theoretical Construction in the Third Volume of Capital', originally published in 1907, in P.M. Sweezy (ed) Karl Marx and the Close of his System (Philadelphia: Orion, 1984 [1949]).
7. As in J. Winternitz, 'Values and Prices: A Solution of So-called Transformation Problem', Economic Journal, 58 (1948), pp. 276-280.
8. As in F. Seton, 'The Transformation Problem', Review of Economic Studies, 24 (1957), pp. 149-160.
9. M. Desai, Marxian Economics (London: Basil Blackwell, 1979).
10. Periodically, new 'improved' simultaneous and dualistic interpretations of the transformation problem appear, such as J. Loranger, 'A Profit-rate Invariant Solution to the Marxian Transformation Problem', Capital and Class, 82: Spring (2004), pp. 23-37, which appear to satisfy all three equalities, but only upon the pain of introducing further assumptions/restrictions to the 'solution'.
11. A. Kliman, Reclaiming Marx's 'Capital' (Lanham, MD: Lexington Books, 2007) demonstrates how Loranger's 'solution' cannot always satisfy all three equalities unless prices and money wages are, when required, allowed to be negative!
12. M. Morishima, Marx's Economics: A Dual Theory of Value and Growth (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1973).
13. A. Kliman, 'Simultaneous Valuation Vs. the Exploitation Theory of Profit', Capital and Class, 73: Spring (2001), pp. 97-112,
14. A. Kliman and A. Freeman, 'Replicating Marx: A Reply to Mohun', Capital and Class, 88: Spring (2006), pp. 117-126.
15. I. Steedman, Marx after Sraffa (London: New Left Books, 1977).
16. G. Reuten, 'The Difficult Labor of a Theory of Social Value: Metaphors and Systematic Dialectics at the Beginning of Marx's "Capital"', in F. Moseley (ed.) Marx's Method in Capital: A Re-examination (New Jersey: Humanities Press, 1993).
17. C. Arthur, 'Value, Labour and Negativity', Capital and Class, 73: Spring (2001), pp. 15-39.
18. T. McGlone and A. Kliman, 'The Duality of Labour', in A. Freeman, A. Kliman and J. Wells (eds) The New Value Controversy and the Foundations of Economics (Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, 2004), pp. 135-150.
19. K. Marx, Capital: A Critique of Political Economy, Vol. 1 (London: Penguin/Vintage Publishers edition, 1976), pp. 261-262.
20. See, in particular, A. Freeman and G. Carchedi (eds) Marx and Non-Equilibrium Economics (Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, 1996),
21. A. Freeman, A. Kliman and J. Wells (eds) The New Value Controversy and the Foundations of Economics (Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, 2004).
22. A. Kliman, 'Hermeneutics and the Value Theory Controversy: Lessons from Mainstream Historians of Economic Thought', Beiträge zur Marx-Engel-sForschung, Neue Folge (2004).
23. G. Stigler, 'Textual Exegesis as a Scientific Problem', Economica, 32 (1965), pp. 447-450.
24. H. Barkai, 'Ricardo's Static Equilibrium', Economica, 32 (1965), pp. 15-31.
25. E.D. Hirsch, Validity in Interpretation (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1967).
26. Mongiovi and Veneziani are notable critics of the TSSI; see G. Mongiovi, 'Vulgar Economy in Marxian Garb: A Critique of Temporal Single System Marxism', paper presented to the Association for Heterodox Economics Annual Conference, Dublin, July 2002,
27. R. Veneziani, 'The Temporal Single-system Interpretation of Marx's Economics: A Critical Evaluation', Metroeconomica, 55:1 (2004), pp. 96-114.
28. The reader may find it illuminating to follow the debate on sequential valuation/the TSSI in Research In Political Economy, 17 and 18 (1999 and 2000), between D. Laibman, D. Foley and A. Kliman and A. Freeman.
29. S. Mohun, 'On the TSSI and the Exploitation Theory of Profit', Capital and Class, 81: Autumn (2003), pp. 85-102.
30. A. Kliman and T. McGlone, 'The Transformation non-Problem and the non-Transformation Problem', Capital and Class, 35 (1988), pp. 56-83.
31. K. Marx, Capital: A Critique of Political Economy, Vol. 3 (London: Penguin/Vintage Publishers edition, 1981), Part 3.
32. A. Freeman and A. Kliman, 'Two Concepts of Value, Two Rates of Profit, Two Laws of Motion' and 'Rejoinder to Duncan Foley and David Laibman', Research In Political Economy, 18 (2000), pp. 243-267 and 285-293.
33. N. Okishio, 'Technical Changes and the Rate of Profit', Kobe University Economic Review, 7 (1961), pp. 86-99.
34. Marx, Capital, Vol. 1, op. cit., ch. 7.
35. Marx, Capital, Vol. 3, op. cit., Part 3.
36. K. Marx, Capital: A Critique of Political Economy, Vol. 2 (London: Penguin/Vintage Publishers edition, 1978), pp. 544-545.
37. Marx, Capital, Vol. 2, op. cit., eh. 6.
38. For simplicity we shall use the term 'unproductive labour' for all categories of labour that do not produce value. G. Carchedi, 'On the Production of Knowledge', Research in Political Economy, 22 (2005), pp. 267-304, explains how Marx imagined different categories of labour that do not produce value. Labour applied to the supervision of the valorization process is termed non-labour.
39. G. Carchedi, On the Economic Identification of Social Classes (London: Routledge, 1977), explains how supervisory non-labour forms a hierarchy leading up to the actual owners of capital, which 'collectively' supervises the valorization process, with capitals' need for such non-labour providing the basis for new middle classes.