Date: Sun, 20 Oct 1996 19:32:52 -0600 (MDT)
Subject: HoPE article


i will forward a copy of this to M2, waiting for others to make the 
switch, or decide if they want to join m-traxis at all.

And as soon as more people sub*scribe to marxism-traxis i will pursue a 
discussion of Chris Sciabarra's *MHU*.  Hoping that others will join in 
the discussion.

Until then, i was interested in asking if anyone else had seen the 
minisymposium in History of Political Economy (spring 1995 v. 
27[1]:107-206), titled "Locating Marx after the Fall".

The Editor's Intorduciton say the "minisymposium was organized around the 
question 'with Marxian economics in disarray as a touchstone for actual 
economies (in Eastern Europe, the former Soviet Union, etc.), is it now 
time for historians of econmics to recaliam their interest in Karl Marx'" 
(Weintraub:109).

Anthony Brewer provided a discussion in the form of a critic of the place 
of Marx in the history of economic thought and his contribution to 
economic theory, titled "A Minor Post-Ricardian? Marx as an Economist" 
(Brewer:111-45); which nine Marxian economists responded to (mostly in 
defense of Marx).

Brewer's theme is that the negelect of Marx in the history of economic 
thought is "his work simply did not seem worth discussing" (113).  He 
goes on to deconstruct Marx reducing him to a "minor" Classical thinker.

Maybe of more interest (to discuss) is the nine responses to Brewer by 
John Elliot, Duncan Foley, Samuel Hollander, M. C. Howard, J. E. King, 
Takashi Negishi, Alessandro Roncaglia, Margaret Schabas, and Ian Steedman.

would anyone be interested in discussing this?

hans d.





     --- from list marxism2-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---