Marx on Ricardo.

Surprised I haven’t come across this in the value form literature, more proof that Marx is not a neo-Ricardian:

“The latter reproach arises from Ricardo’s inadequate presentation, because he does not even examine the form of value — the particular form which labour assumes as the substance of value. He only examines the magnitudes of value, the quantities of this abstract, general and, in this form, social labour which engender differences in the magnitudes of value of commodities. Otherwise Bailey would have recognised that the relativity of the concept of value is by no means negated by the fact that all commodities, in so far as they are exchange values, are only relative expressions of social labour time and their relativity consists by no means solely of the ratio in which they exchange for one another, but of the ratio of all of them to this social labour which is their substance.” mecw 31. 399


About HR

Deep in the adjunct crackhole.
This entry was posted in Value. Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s