Pub Date : 2022-06-15DOI: 10.13169/worlrevipoliecon.13.1.0118
Suleyman Orhun Altiparmak
The Keystone XL (KXL) pipeline is one of the most polarised examples of contemporary American energy politics. The pipeline policy process has not been stable, so it should be analysed over time via a holistic, historical view of interacting dimensions. Robert Cox’s theoretical notions of the “materials–ideas–institutions” balance are drawn upon to understand how actors’ motivations behind policy development were re-shaped through temporal processes over nearly two decades. A critical feature identified is how such interacting dimensions became significant according to specific US presidential administrations: each, in turn, shifting the direction of decision-making around KXL. The article’s originality lies in operationalising the theory to give an alternative, dynamic explanation for policy motivations around the KXL while also establishing a novel theoretical lens to generally view such policy development.
{"title":"Explaining Contentious Energy Policy","authors":"Suleyman Orhun Altiparmak","doi":"10.13169/worlrevipoliecon.13.1.0118","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.13169/worlrevipoliecon.13.1.0118","url":null,"abstract":"The Keystone XL (KXL) pipeline is one of the most polarised examples of contemporary American energy politics. The pipeline policy process has not been stable, so it should be analysed over time via a holistic, historical view of interacting dimensions. Robert Cox’s theoretical notions of the “materials–ideas–institutions” balance are drawn upon to understand how actors’ motivations behind policy development were re-shaped through temporal processes over nearly two decades. A critical feature identified is how such interacting dimensions became significant according to specific US presidential administrations: each, in turn, shifting the direction of decision-making around KXL. The article’s originality lies in operationalising the theory to give an alternative, dynamic explanation for policy motivations around the KXL while also establishing a novel theoretical lens to generally view such policy development.","PeriodicalId":41482,"journal":{"name":"World Review of Political Economy","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2022-06-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43459417","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-06-15DOI: 10.13169/worlrevipoliecon.13.1.0060
Baolin Bai, Ruixue Bai
The marginal productivity theory is the modern form of the three-factor theory of value. It is the fundamental theory used in Western economics to describe value creation, as well as the fundamental Western theory dealing with wealth theory in the value category. Its original form is the “trinity formula,” composed of three propositions and formulated more than 200 years ago by Jean-Baptiste Say. Because of internal logical defects in the three propositions, the “trinity formula” is merely a hypothesis, and cannot be accepted as a scientific “theory.” The modern form of the three-factor theory of value is the marginal productivity theory proposed more than 100 years ago by John Bates Clark, and subsequently developed further by other researchers. The marginal productivity theory, however, still suffers from three defects of internal logic, and, correspondingly, from three external theoretical difficulties. The article explains that the marginal productivity theory, the modern form of the factor theory of value, has external deficiencies. First, the subject of distribution cannot be defined; second, the contributions made by the factors cannot be defined; and third, the ownership of the contributions cannot be defined.
{"title":"Deficiencies of the Three-Factor Theory of Value","authors":"Baolin Bai, Ruixue Bai","doi":"10.13169/worlrevipoliecon.13.1.0060","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.13169/worlrevipoliecon.13.1.0060","url":null,"abstract":"The marginal productivity theory is the modern form of the three-factor theory of value. It is the fundamental theory used in Western economics to describe value creation, as well as the fundamental Western theory dealing with wealth theory in the value category. Its original form is the “trinity formula,” composed of three propositions and formulated more than 200 years ago by Jean-Baptiste Say. Because of internal logical defects in the three propositions, the “trinity formula” is merely a hypothesis, and cannot be accepted as a scientific “theory.” The modern form of the three-factor theory of value is the marginal productivity theory proposed more than 100 years ago by John Bates Clark, and subsequently developed further by other researchers. The marginal productivity theory, however, still suffers from three defects of internal logic, and, correspondingly, from three external theoretical difficulties. The article explains that the marginal productivity theory, the modern form of the factor theory of value, has external deficiencies. First, the subject of distribution cannot be defined; second, the contributions made by the factors cannot be defined; and third, the ownership of the contributions cannot be defined.","PeriodicalId":41482,"journal":{"name":"World Review of Political Economy","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2022-06-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42130827","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-03-25DOI: 10.13169/worlrevipoliecon.12.3.0296
R. Boer
This study offers a comparative analysis of economic reforms in Eastern Europe and China. Some CMEA countries—especially Yugoslavia and Hungary—undertook reforms in the 1960s, while China launched its reform and opening-up in 1978. In light of the lessons learned—concerning planning, markets, ownership of means of production and liberation of productive forces, and the interaction of relations and forces of production during socialist construction—it is possible to provide a systematic comparison. After providing background to the reforms, the comparison has four steps: (1) de-linking a market economy from a capitalist system, and the concomitant de-linking of a planned economy from a socialist system; (2) whether a market economy is a neutral instrument usable in any system, or whether it is a component shaped by the system of which it is a part; (3) planning and markets within a socialist system; (4) the relationship between ownership of the means of production (and control over the forces of production) and liberation of productive forces in the process of socialist construction. The fourth topic leads to the more foundational question of the dialectical interactions between relations and forces of production, since on this matter the economic definition of socialism turns.
{"title":"From Belgrade to Beijing","authors":"R. Boer","doi":"10.13169/worlrevipoliecon.12.3.0296","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.13169/worlrevipoliecon.12.3.0296","url":null,"abstract":"This study offers a comparative analysis of economic reforms in Eastern Europe and China. Some CMEA countries—especially Yugoslavia and Hungary—undertook reforms in the 1960s, while China launched its reform and opening-up in 1978. In light of the lessons learned—concerning planning, markets, ownership of means of production and liberation of productive forces, and the interaction of relations and forces of production during socialist construction—it is possible to provide a systematic comparison. After providing background to the reforms, the comparison has four steps: (1) de-linking a market economy from a capitalist system, and the concomitant de-linking of a planned economy from a socialist system; (2) whether a market economy is a neutral instrument usable in any system, or whether it is a component shaped by the system of which it is a part; (3) planning and markets within a socialist system; (4) the relationship between ownership of the means of production (and control over the forces of production) and liberation of productive forces in the process of socialist construction. The fourth topic leads to the more foundational question of the dialectical interactions between relations and forces of production, since on this matter the economic definition of socialism turns.","PeriodicalId":41482,"journal":{"name":"World Review of Political Economy","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2022-03-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42727451","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-03-25DOI: 10.13169/worlrevipoliecon.12.3.0395
C. Flamant
The question of rent in economic theory is rather complicated, even at the level of its definition. This article attempts to get back to basics in order to clear things up and present a complete and correct theory of rent. Starting with the classical definition of rent, as an income earned by the owner of non-produced inputs, it clarifies first the definitions of the different kinds of rent: differential rent, absolute rent. It then uses a step-by-step approach to show the effect of these various kinds of rents on a price system. The article also addresses the issue of type II differential rent, corresponding to the use of different techniques with a homogeneous input. This helps to explain the effect of rent on the distribution of the product. The question of urban land rent is also clarified: it is shown that it obeys mechanisms that are clearly different from those governing agricultural land rent.
{"title":"Elements For a Coherent Theory of Rent","authors":"C. Flamant","doi":"10.13169/worlrevipoliecon.12.3.0395","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.13169/worlrevipoliecon.12.3.0395","url":null,"abstract":"The question of rent in economic theory is rather complicated, even at the level of its definition. This article attempts to get back to basics in order to clear things up and present a complete and correct theory of rent. Starting with the classical definition of rent, as an income earned by the owner of non-produced inputs, it clarifies first the definitions of the different kinds of rent: differential rent, absolute rent. It then uses a step-by-step approach to show the effect of these various kinds of rents on a price system. The article also addresses the issue of type II differential rent, corresponding to the use of different techniques with a homogeneous input. This helps to explain the effect of rent on the distribution of the product. The question of urban land rent is also clarified: it is shown that it obeys mechanisms that are clearly different from those governing agricultural land rent.","PeriodicalId":41482,"journal":{"name":"World Review of Political Economy","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2022-03-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49156022","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-03-25DOI: 10.13169/worlrevipoliecon.12.3.0374
Xian Zhang
The study on how Marx created the theory of social capital reproduction shows that this theory ranks among his original contributions to economics. In this theory, Marx’s analysis of Department II and the exchange relation reveals the conditions that capitalist reproduction must follow if it is to proceed smoothly. The fully indirect exchange process indicates that the capitalists’ individual consumption preferences, and changes in these preferences, are factors not only in determining capital accumulation but also in destroying the proportional relations of reproduction. Although Marx proposed the decomposition of Department II and made a theoretical analysis of the law of the simple reproduction of social capital after decomposition, he did not construct a complete model or make the same decomposition of the two major departments in the analysis of the reproduction of social capital on an extended scale. As a result, it is necessary to develop a technical supplement on the basis of Marx’s department decomposition principle, so as to cast light on the correctness of his theory of social capital reproduction and on the inevitability of capitalist reproduction crises.
{"title":"Marx’s Social Capital Reproduction Model","authors":"Xian Zhang","doi":"10.13169/worlrevipoliecon.12.3.0374","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.13169/worlrevipoliecon.12.3.0374","url":null,"abstract":"The study on how Marx created the theory of social capital reproduction shows that this theory ranks among his original contributions to economics. In this theory, Marx’s analysis of Department II and the exchange relation reveals the conditions that capitalist reproduction must follow if it is to proceed smoothly. The fully indirect exchange process indicates that the capitalists’ individual consumption preferences, and changes in these preferences, are factors not only in determining capital accumulation but also in destroying the proportional relations of reproduction. Although Marx proposed the decomposition of Department II and made a theoretical analysis of the law of the simple reproduction of social capital after decomposition, he did not construct a complete model or make the same decomposition of the two major departments in the analysis of the reproduction of social capital on an extended scale. As a result, it is necessary to develop a technical supplement on the basis of Marx’s department decomposition principle, so as to cast light on the correctness of his theory of social capital reproduction and on the inevitability of capitalist reproduction crises.","PeriodicalId":41482,"journal":{"name":"World Review of Political Economy","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2022-03-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46873018","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-03-25DOI: 10.13169/worlrevipoliecon.12.4.0558
A. Gabriele
This article synthetically presents the key arguments and finding of a recent book of mine (Enterprises, Industry and Innovation in the People’s Republic of China: Questioning Socialism from Deng to the Trade and Tech War, Springer, 2020) on the gradual evolution of enterprise forms since the inception of rural and industrial reforms and the development of a modern innovation system in China. The book focuses mainly on the multi-causal processes of change occurring in the underlying socioeconomic relations of production and exchange, which cannot be adequately interpreted as a pure manifestation of the simple State–Market opposition. In fact, the complex and evolutionary interactions between state-led industrial and other development-oriented policies, on the one hand, and (relatively) automatic market mechanisms working in a quasi-by-default manner, on the other hand, constitute the essence of China’s distinctive economic model. From an epistemological perspective, the conceptual foundations of my work are those of the Classics and of the Marxian tradition, with the twin categories of the mode of production and socioeconomic formation as basic starting points. I try to partly re-interpreted these foundations taking into account the lessons of historical experience, as tools that can help—along with other ones—to understand twenty-first-century complex socioeconomic systems.
{"title":"Enterprise Reforms and Innovation as Key Drivers of The Socialism With Chinese Characteristics","authors":"A. Gabriele","doi":"10.13169/worlrevipoliecon.12.4.0558","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.13169/worlrevipoliecon.12.4.0558","url":null,"abstract":"This article synthetically presents the key arguments and finding of a recent book of mine (Enterprises, Industry and Innovation in the People’s Republic of China: Questioning Socialism from Deng to the Trade and Tech War, Springer, 2020) on the gradual evolution of enterprise forms since the inception of rural and industrial reforms and the development of a modern innovation system in China. The book focuses mainly on the multi-causal processes of change occurring in the underlying socioeconomic relations of production and exchange, which cannot be adequately interpreted as a pure manifestation of the simple State–Market opposition. In fact, the complex and evolutionary interactions between state-led industrial and other development-oriented policies, on the one hand, and (relatively) automatic market mechanisms working in a quasi-by-default manner, on the other hand, constitute the essence of China’s distinctive economic model. From an epistemological perspective, the conceptual foundations of my work are those of the Classics and of the Marxian tradition, with the twin categories of the mode of production and socioeconomic formation as basic starting points. I try to partly re-interpreted these foundations taking into account the lessons of historical experience, as tools that can help—along with other ones—to understand twenty-first-century complex socioeconomic systems.","PeriodicalId":41482,"journal":{"name":"World Review of Political Economy","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2022-03-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42813438","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-03-25DOI: 10.13169/worlrevipoliecon.12.3.0321
Antonis Balasopoulos
This article begins by dwelling on the forms and causes of Western “historical nihilism” toward the Chinese socialist project. I then analyze issues attendant to Deng’s appeal to “liberating thought,” particularly as regards the importance of the development of the forces of production and the dilemmas this presents for socialists. This segues into a discussion of contradiction analysis, which is theoretically central in Boer’s book. Through the discussion of the difference of such analysis from forms of “either/or” logic dominant in the West, I arrive at the significance of the category of the “concrete universal” (Hegel) for the understanding of “socialism with Chinese characteristics.” After unpacking some of the central issues posed by the “reform and opening-up,” I dwell on the question of socialism in China. I emphasize some of the complications inherent in the combination of socialist planning and the market economy, including the issue of the conception of a future or prospective “communist” stage. The discussion concludes by dwelling on issues of law and political structure, with particular emphasis on the innovative importance of “rule of law” in the socialist context, as well as on the importance of contradiction analysis for understanding the dialectic of sovereignty and globalization.
{"title":"The Continuing Adventures of the Dialectic","authors":"Antonis Balasopoulos","doi":"10.13169/worlrevipoliecon.12.3.0321","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.13169/worlrevipoliecon.12.3.0321","url":null,"abstract":"This article begins by dwelling on the forms and causes of Western “historical nihilism” toward the Chinese socialist project. I then analyze issues attendant to Deng’s appeal to “liberating thought,” particularly as regards the importance of the development of the forces of production and the dilemmas this presents for socialists. This segues into a discussion of contradiction analysis, which is theoretically central in Boer’s book. Through the discussion of the difference of such analysis from forms of “either/or” logic dominant in the West, I arrive at the significance of the category of the “concrete universal” (Hegel) for the understanding of “socialism with Chinese characteristics.” After unpacking some of the central issues posed by the “reform and opening-up,” I dwell on the question of socialism in China. I emphasize some of the complications inherent in the combination of socialist planning and the market economy, including the issue of the conception of a future or prospective “communist” stage. The discussion concludes by dwelling on issues of law and political structure, with particular emphasis on the innovative importance of “rule of law” in the socialist context, as well as on the importance of contradiction analysis for understanding the dialectic of sovereignty and globalization.","PeriodicalId":41482,"journal":{"name":"World Review of Political Economy","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2022-03-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47949384","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-03-25DOI: 10.13169/worlrevipoliecon.12.4.0436
D. Laibman
Controversy has prevailed since the problem of “transforming” values into prices first emerged in the late 19th century. Progress has, regrettably, been hampered by attempts to “vindicate” Marx’s work exactly, rather than treating him as a pioneer upon whom his successors must build, using the latest scientific methods. To make progress, the question must be faced squarely: what does the value dimension—assuming that we can define it and determine its properties with rigor and precision—actually do? How does a value-theoretic political economy provide superior insights into capitalist laws of motion, which could not be attained by critical study of the empirically received categories (prices, wages, profits, production) alone? Insights from Marx and Engels into the formation of a general balance of the opposing class forces of capitalist society may help us in our search for answers to these questions.
{"title":"Value and Price","authors":"D. Laibman","doi":"10.13169/worlrevipoliecon.12.4.0436","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.13169/worlrevipoliecon.12.4.0436","url":null,"abstract":"Controversy has prevailed since the problem of “transforming” values into prices first emerged in the late 19th century. Progress has, regrettably, been hampered by attempts to “vindicate” Marx’s work exactly, rather than treating him as a pioneer upon whom his successors must build, using the latest scientific methods. To make progress, the question must be faced squarely: what does the value dimension—assuming that we can define it and determine its properties with rigor and precision—actually do? How does a value-theoretic political economy provide superior insights into capitalist laws of motion, which could not be attained by critical study of the empirically received categories (prices, wages, profits, production) alone? Insights from Marx and Engels into the formation of a general balance of the opposing class forces of capitalist society may help us in our search for answers to these questions.","PeriodicalId":41482,"journal":{"name":"World Review of Political Economy","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2022-03-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49433764","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-03-25DOI: 10.13169/worlrevipoliecon.12.4.0541
Anthony William Donald Anastasi
As of now, there has been a relatively insufficient amount of scholarship tying Marxist theory to Modern Monetary Theory (MMT). This article argues that Marxists should take a closer look at the economic theory. MMT is a normative theory and could be used to promote any worldview or theory. Marxists should use it to argue for and, if implemented, manage non-reformist reforms such as a Job Guarantee and publicly funded elections. These reforms could raise the material and working conditions of the working class, strengthen class consciousness, and condition society for a post-capitalist economic system.
{"title":"Marxism and MMT","authors":"Anthony William Donald Anastasi","doi":"10.13169/worlrevipoliecon.12.4.0541","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.13169/worlrevipoliecon.12.4.0541","url":null,"abstract":"As of now, there has been a relatively insufficient amount of scholarship tying Marxist theory to Modern Monetary Theory (MMT). This article argues that Marxists should take a closer look at the economic theory. MMT is a normative theory and could be used to promote any worldview or theory. Marxists should use it to argue for and, if implemented, manage non-reformist reforms such as a Job Guarantee and publicly funded elections. These reforms could raise the material and working conditions of the working class, strengthen class consciousness, and condition society for a post-capitalist economic system.","PeriodicalId":41482,"journal":{"name":"World Review of Political Economy","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2022-03-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41287022","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-03-25DOI: 10.13169/worlrevipoliecon.12.4.0444
Tiago Camarinha Lopes
This article argues that to make progress in the theory of value and price we must incorporate in the debate of the transformation problem the methodological discussion about how Marxian economics relates to non-Marxian economics. Two alternative approaches to deal with that relationship are presented in a stylized form, called the “pure-blood Marxian approach” and the “muggle Marxian approach.” Two examples of the “muggle Marxian approach,” represented by two of the most influential communists working in the field of academic economics in the West in the 20th century, Piero Sraffa and Oskar Lange, are presented to show the superiority of this approach over the “pure-blood Marxian approach.”
{"title":"Pure-Blood and Muggle Marxian Approaches in the Theory of Value and Price","authors":"Tiago Camarinha Lopes","doi":"10.13169/worlrevipoliecon.12.4.0444","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.13169/worlrevipoliecon.12.4.0444","url":null,"abstract":"This article argues that to make progress in the theory of value and price we must incorporate in the debate of the transformation problem the methodological discussion about how Marxian economics relates to non-Marxian economics. Two alternative approaches to deal with that relationship are presented in a stylized form, called the “pure-blood Marxian approach” and the “muggle Marxian approach.” Two examples of the “muggle Marxian approach,” represented by two of the most influential communists working in the field of academic economics in the West in the 20th century, Piero Sraffa and Oskar Lange, are presented to show the superiority of this approach over the “pure-blood Marxian approach.”","PeriodicalId":41482,"journal":{"name":"World Review of Political Economy","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2022-03-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45702622","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：