James Farmelant wrote:
> I would suggest that there is now a days a lack of appreciation of
> Sweezy's stature as an economist even among Marxists.
> People might want to follow up their reading of Foster's
> tribute to Sweezy in the September issue of Monthly Review
> by reading Foster's article on Sweezy in *The New Palgrave:
> Marxian Economics* eds. John Eatwell, Murray Milgate,
> and Peter Newman. As a young economist Sweezy made
> important technical contributions to the field of a sort
> whose importance were recognized by mainstream as well
> as Marxist economists. Much of his earlier research was
> concerned with the theory of imperfect competition and the
> issue of secular stagnation. Sweezy made a major contribution
> to the theory of imperfect competition with his 1939 paper,
> "Demand Under Conditions of Oligopoly" in which he presented
> the kinked demand curve analysis of oligopolistic pricing, and
> which stands as one of the classic essays in price theory.
> Sweezy was one of the early backers of Keynesian economics
> (alongside Paul Samuelson and JK Galbraith) and he was
> one of the authors of *An Economic Program for American
> Democracy* which provided a Keynesian rationale for
> increased public expenditures during the New Deal era.
> Sweezy like Harry Magdoff worked in a variety of New Deal
> agencies including the NRC (National Resources Committee)
> where he did research on the concentration of economic power.
> >From this research, he wrote a study "Interest Groups in the
> American Economy," which was published as an appendix
> to the NRC's 1939 report, *The Structure of the American Economy*.
> Sweezy established his credentials as a leading Marxist
> economist with his 1942 book, *The Theory of Capitalist Development*.
Thanks for the appreciation of Sweezy, Jim. Typically I have read Sweezy's comments on the inside of the cover of the latest MR, but have not gotten around to reading Foster's tribute.
He is indeed a giant, even though I think he made some mistakes in getting from The Theory of Capitalist Development to Monopoly Capital in 1965. Unfortunately, I think some of the charges that grew out of the latter book by younger radicals in the 70s that he had jettisoned Marxism contributed to some decline in his reputation.
But not with me. There is noone around today I hold in higher regard. And he is still turning out cleared-eyed analysis.
Roger