The Marxian Theory of Capitalism

  • Makoto Itoh

Abstract

The Marxian school which was founded by K. Marx (1818–1883) also arose out of the theoretical limits and deadlocks of the classical school. Marx’s renovation of economics was, however, quite different from the directions of other contemporary economic schools. Unlike the historical school or the neo-classical school, Marx did not discard the essential theoretical contents and achievements of the classical school which was based on the labour theory of value, but fully attempted to inherit them by criticising and solving the deadlocks in the classical theories from within. In such an attempt Marx consciously and systematically clarified the historical character of a capitalist economy.

Keywords

Transportation Assure Defend Omic Protec 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

  1. 1.
    G. W. F. Hegel, Grundlinien der Philosophie des Rechts ( 1821) (Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp, 1970 ) S. 24.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    L. A. Feuerbach, Das Wesen des Christentums ( Leipzig: Otto Wigand, 1841 ).Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Marx later in 1845 formulated such insufficiencies in Feuerbach’s materialism briefly in the ‘Theses on Feuerbach’, in K. Marx, F. Engels Collected Works (Moscow; Progress Publishers, 1975-, This Collected Works is abbreviated to MECW hereafter), vol 5. pp. 3ff. The thesis eleven ‘The philosophers have only interpreted the world, in various ways; the point is to change it’ is particularly famous.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    K. Marx, A Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy translated by W. Ryazanskaya (Moscow; Progress Publishers, 1970) p. 20. English translation ‘the guiding principle’ from German original ‘Leitfaden’ in this edition seems too strong and may be misleading.Google Scholar
  5. I follow here the wording in K. Marx Selected Writings, ed. by D. McLellan ( Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1977 ) p. 389.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    F. Engels, Dialectics of Nature ( Moscow: Foreign Languages Publishing House, 1954 ).Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    F. Engels, Landmarks of Scientific Socialism (Anti-Duhring) translated and edited by A. Lewis ( Chicago: Charles H. Kerr, 1907 ).Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    F. Engels, Socialism, Utopian and Scientific ( 1880) (Chicago: Charles H. Kerr, 1918 ) p. 93.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    K. Uno, [The Methodology of Political Economy] ( Tokyo: University of Tokyo Press, 1962 ) p. 107.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    P. M. Sweezy, Post-Revolutionary Society (New York: Monthly Review Press, 1980), contains a sharp critique of such a tendency in Soviet society. We shall return to this issue in Part IV.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    K. Marx and F. Engels, Manifesto of the Communist Party (1848, in MECW, vol. 6 ) pp. 477–519.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    K. Marx, Grundrisse, Foundations of the Critique of Political Economy (rough draft), translated by M. Nicolaus (Harmondsworth, Middx: Penguin Books, 1973 ).Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    K. Marx, Zur Kritik der Politischen Okonomie (Manuscript 1861–1863), in Marx-Engels Gesamtausgabe, 2. Abteilung, Band 3, 6 vols. (Berlin: Dietz Verlag, 1976–82 ).Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    T. Kuhn, The Structure of the Scientific Revolution ( Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1970 ).Google Scholar
  15. 17.
    R. Wilbrandt, Karl Marx (Leipzig and Berlin: B. G. Teubner, 4. Aufl. 1920) s. 97.Google Scholar
  16. 18.
    K. Kuruma [’For Confirmation of Marx’s Theory of Crisis’ (1930) in his Studies in the Crisis Theory] ( Tokyo: Otsuki-Shoten, 1965 ).Google Scholar
  17. 19.
    V. S. Vygodski, The Story of a Great Discovery, translated by C. S. V. Salt (1973) p. 118. An editorial note to the vol. 23 (Das Kapital, vol 1) of Marx-Engels Werke (Berlin: Dietz Verlag, 1962) s. 844. The editor’s preface to Theories of Surplus Value, part 1, ibid. p. 16.Google Scholar
  18. See also A. M. Kogan, [The Plan of the Critique of Political Economy and ‘Capital’], translated from Russian by Y. Nakano (Tokyo: Otsuki-Shoten, 1979).Google Scholar
  19. 20.
    H. Grossmann, ‘Die Änderung des ursprunglishen Aufbauplans des Marxschen “Kapital” und ihre Ursachen’, Archiv für die Geschichte des Sozialismus und der Arbeiterbewegung, xiv - 2 (1929) 305ff.Google Scholar
  20. 21.
    K. Tribe, ‘Remarks on the theoretical significance of Marx’s Grundisse’, Economy and Society (May 1974) highly appreciates Grossmann’s argument on this point in a survey of the debates on the plan problem in the appx I, while it does not refer to weaknesses in Grossmann’s standpoint.Google Scholar
  21. 22.
    F. Behrens, Zur Methode der politischen Ökonomie (Berlin: Akademie-Verlag, 1952) s. 31–48.Google Scholar
  22. 23.
    R. Rosdolsky, The Making of Marx’s ‘Capital’, translated by P. Burgess (London: Pluto Press, 1977 ) p. 54.Google Scholar
  23. 25.
    M. Itoh, book review: ‘The Making of Marx’s’ Capital, Science and Society, xLIl-3 (Fall 1979 ) p. 362.Google Scholar
  24. 26.
    K. Uno, [The Theory of Crisis], (Tokyo: Iwanami-Shoten, 1953.), appx 1.Google Scholar
  25. 27.
    Cf. K. Uno, Principles of Political Economy (Brighton: Harvester Press; Atlantic Highlands, N. J. Humanities Press, 1980) pp. xxi-xxiii.Google Scholar
  26. M. Itoh, Value and Crisis ( London: Pluto Press; New York: Monthly Review Press, 1980 ) pp. 39–42.Google Scholar
  27. 28.
    K. Uno’s methodology is presented in more detail with favourable assessments from different angles in T. Sekine, ‘Uno-Riron: a Japanese Contribution to Marxian Political Economy’, Journal of Economic Literature, 13–3 (September 1975);Google Scholar
  28. R. Albritton, A Japanese Reconstruction of Marxist Theory (London: Macmillan, 1986), and M. Itoh, Value and Crisis, ch. 1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    e.g. K. Suzuki ed., [Principles of Political Economy], 2 vols (Tokyo: University of Tokyo Press, 1960, 1962)Google Scholar
  30. H. Iwata, [World Capitalism] ( Tokyo: Mirai-Sha, 1964 ).Google Scholar
  31. 30.
    E. Bernstein, Die Voraussetzungen des Sozialismus und die Aufgabe der Sozialdemokratie ( Stuttgart: Dietz, 1899 ).Google Scholar
  32. 31.
    K. Kautsky, Bernstein und das Sozialdemokratische Programm ( Stuttgart: Dietz, 1899 ).Google Scholar
  33. 32.
    K. Kautsky, Die Agrarfrage ( Hannover: J. H. W. Dietz, 1899 ).Google Scholar
  34. 33.
    V. I. Lenin, ‘The Proletarian Revolution and a Renegade Kautsky’ (1918), in vol. 28 of The Collected Works of Lenin, vol. 28, ( Moscow: Foreign Languages Publishing House, 1965 ).Google Scholar
  35. 34.
    R. Luxemburg, The Accumulation of Capital (1913), translated by A. Schwarzschild (New York and London: Monthly Review Press, 1968).Google Scholar
  36. 35.
    R. Hilferding, Finance Capital (1910), translated by M. Watnick and S. Gordon (London, Boston and Henley: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1981 ).Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    V. I. Lenin, Imperialism, The Highest Stage of Capitalism ( 1917 ) (Peking: Foreign Languages Press, 1965).Google Scholar
  38. 41.
    Cf. e.g. Ch. 1 of P. Baran and P. Sweezy, Monopoly Capital ( New York and London: Monthly Review Press, 1966 ).Google Scholar

Part I Economic Schools and Ideologies

  1. 1.
    M. Dobb, Theories of Value and Distribution since Adam Smith ( Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1973 ) p. 1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    M. Weber, ‘Die “Objektivität” sozialwissenschaftlicher und sozialpolitischer Erkenntnis’, Archiv für Sozialwissenschaft und Sozialpolitik, XIX (1904).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Makoto Itoh 1988

Authors and Affiliations

  • Makoto Itoh
    • 1
  1. 1.University of TokyoJapan

Personalised recommendations