> I note that Ian Steedman's _Marx After Sraffa_
>used the Sraffa critique to attack the standard
>interpretation of the Marxian LTV.
The role of the internet in clarifying these debates is perhaps limited. But one thing proved to my satisfaction, is that Steedman's title was one of the cleverest moves in the criticism of Marxism. It conveys an impression in 3 words that Sraffa's work produced a qualitative change in the way Marx's economic theories are read. Therefore I want to emphasise that Sraffa's critique was a critique *not* of marxism, but a critique of neo-classicism, as detailed in post of Thu, 13 Aug 1998 12:59:19 -0400 From: Mathew Forstater <forstate at levy.org>
Steedman's critique starts off with about 20 assumptions that highly affect the way the model will work. It requires a knowledge of mathematics to read, but not a knowledge of mathematics to cite with confidence as a refutation of Marx by those who wish to claim that Marx's theory of value is refuted.
It is out of print.
I accept Andrew's point that criticism of Marx has moved on since Rubin's time, but I thought the sentence was apt. It is unwise, I submit, to talk about the LTV. The LTV is the classical theory. Marx and Engels never used the phrase. It is essential in understanding their theory of value that prices gravitate around the socially necessary labour time, and that exchange value is not by definition labour time. The term Marx and Engels used was the "law of value".
Andrew himself quotes: " When it comes to Marx's value theory, however, the myth of internal inconsistency is so ubiquitous and hegemonic that Cassidy disposes of the issue with a single comment: Marx's "model of the economy, which depended on the idea that labor is the source of all value, was riven with internal inconsistencies, and is rarely studied these days" (Cassidy 1997:252)."
Labour is not the source of all value, according to Marx (Critique of the Gotha Programme).
Simplistic models summed up in the word "LTV" potentially sell the pass to the critics of marxism.
Chris Burford