Abstract
The chapter informs about Charasoff’s contributions to economic theory, major Western and Russian intellectual influences on his thinking, and the reception of his work in East and West. The attention focuses on the discussion of Charasoff’s fascination with Tolstoyanism, his novel concepts and original findings with regard to Marx’s economic theory and its critique, and the reasons for the neglect of his innovative ideas by contemporary economic theorists in Germany and Russia.
I therefore already in advance do not expect too much success from my attempt to develop Marx’s, or more generally, the classical economic theory in a positive direction and to round it off. A purely destructive “critical” work could certainly reckon on more recognition, and this the more so, the fewer original ideas it contained and the closer it fell in line with the already familiar critical works.
(Charasoff 1910: vii)
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
- 1.
In the preface to his second book, Charasoff informed his readers that he intended to supplement the two books with a third one, which was to bear the title “Die Probleme der Produktion und der Verteilung” {The problems of production and distribution} and which was to contain “a thorough criticism of the subjective theory of value” (Charasoff 1910: xiv, n.). Alas, this book was never published.
- 2.
Michail Reissner studied law at the University of Heidelberg in 1897–98. He later became a professor at the law faculty of Petrograd University in 1917, and was involved in the drafting of the first constitutional law of the Soviet Union. In the 1920s, as a member of the Soviet Ministry of Sciences and Education, he was responsible for the foundation of the “Communist Academy” in Moscow, which became a centre for Marxist social sciences. He was also a founding member of the Russian Psychoanalytical Society in Moscow, where Georg Charasoff delivered two invited lectures in the 1920s.
- 3.
Buek’s article on “Leo Tolstoy” (1905) was one of the first examples for the application of neo-Kantian ideas to specifically Russian themes. Otto Buek can therefore be considered as one of the founders of “Russian neo-Kantianism” (Dmitrieva 2016). On Buek’s role in the development of an anarchist-socialist variant of neo-Kantianism, merging the neo-Kantian ideas of the “Marburg school” with Tolstoy’s pacifism and anti-modernism; see Hanke (1993), Sieg (1994), and Dmitrieva (2007).
- 4.
The publisher of Charasoff’s books, Hans Bondy, belonged to Otto Buek’s circle of friends in Berlin, which included many (now) well-known artists, writers, publishers, and intellectuals.
- 5.
- 6.
Alexander (b. 1900 in Strasbourg) was the illegitimate child of Marie Seldovic’s sister, Anna Helena Seldovic, and apparently was adopted by von Charasoff. Arthur (b. 1902 in Zurich) and Helene (b. 1903 in Zurich) were legitimate children of Georg and Marie von Charasoff.
- 7.
Charasoff enrolled for the courses of Professor Burkhardt, who at this very time was one of the examiners of Albert Einstein’s doctoral dissertation.
- 8.
Charasoff’s letters to Chertkov and his wife are preserved in the Chertkov Papers at the Russian State Archive of Literature and Art (RGALI) in Moscow. Charasoff seems to have met Chertkova earlier and to have corresponded with her before. He also must have received an invitation to visit the couple in England, because in his first letter Charasoff declined this invitation on the ground that he had to edit the proofs of his doctoral thesis, which was about to be printed.
- 9.
See “Vormundschaftsakten Kinder Charasoff” (Stadtarchiv Zürich).
- 10.
See Plekhanov (1976: 56–63).
- 11.
See Kautsky Papers (Correspondence D VII 66, International Institute of Social History, Amsterdam).
- 12.
For a more detailed discussion of the Charasoff-Kautsky correspondence, see Mori (2007).
- 13.
- 14.
A more detailed account of the contents of Charasoff’s “Chertkov manuscript” and a comparison with the contents of his German books of 1909 and 1910 is beyond the scope of this paper. It is planned to provide such an account, as well as additional information on the Charasoff–Chertkov correspondence, in a joint project of the author with Denis Melnik (HSE Moscow).
- 15.
Charasoff’s extant correspondence with Chertkov, who in July 1908 left the Tolstoy colony in England and returned to Russia, breaks off without providing any information on the reasons for the collapse of the Russian book project.
- 16.
See Kautsky Papers (Correspondence D VII 67–8, International Institute of Social History, Amsterdam).
- 17.
An “Austrian” production model exhibits a finite number of production stages and presupposes the non-existence of basic commodities. See the chapter on Dmitriev in this volume (Gehrke and Kurz (2022a, this volume).
- 18.
In the Preface of his second book Charasoff emphasized: “With regard to the theory of the production equations and the production series developed by me I would like to point out that in this regard priority claims could be made for the contributions of K. Menger, Böhm Bawerk, Walras and others. I nevertheless regard the entire theory of production stages as my own, since I developed it entirely on my own already several years ago (when I had not yet any knowledge at all of the similar theories of the founders of the subjective method)” (1910: xiv). It needs to be stressed that Charasoff, unlike Menger and Böhm-Bawerk, developed his analysis on the basis of an interdependent production system with circular production relations and thus with an infinite number of “production stages”.
- 19.
See his remarks in Charasoff (1909: 65–67), where he relegates the demonstration of his method of price determination to an appendix.
- 20.
There are brief mentions also of other contemporary authors and their views on specific points, including Oppenheimer, Brentano, Eckstein, Hilferding, Lexis, Liefmann, Schmidt, and Sombart, but none of them plays an important role.
- 21.
Boudin (Boudianoff), was a Russian-born lawyer and Communist activist based in New York City. The German edition of his The Theoretical System of Karl Marx in the Light of Recent Criticism (1907), translated by Luise Kautsky, was published in spring 1909. By attacking Boudin, Charasoff clearly meant to criticize also the views of Karl Kautsky, who had written a favourable foreword for the German translation.
- 22.
The final chapter of the 1909 book, entitled “Karl Marx to his bourgeois critics”, is written in the form of an imaginary speech by Marx to an audience made up of capitalists. There, Charasoff puts into Marx’s mouth the statement that Tugan-Baranovsky “merely poses as my disciple” and that his work is marred with “grave misunderstandings” (1909: 90–91).
- 23.
- 24.
See Hanke (1993: 117–167) on the debates on Tolstoy’s teachings among German socialists and Marxists. Kautsky, in his Ethik und materialistische Geschichtsauffassung (1906: 43) had referred to Eisner’s neo-Kantian reinterpretation of Marxian ideas as “Gefühlssozialismus” {sentimental socialism}. The assessments of Tolstoy’s novels and teachings among German socialists reached from “revolutionary” (Eisner) to “reactionary” (Kautsky).
- 25.
On Cohen’s neo-Kantianism, see Hanke (1993: 126–128).
- 26.
Charasoff outlined his views on Tolstoy in a letter to Robert Michels of 1914. There he noted that Tolstoy is often wrongly regarded as a thinker in the tradition of Jean-Jacques Rousseau, based on the rather superficial observation that both have advanced a critique of modern science and culture. In Charasoff’s reading, Tolstoy should rather be seen as an antipode of Rousseau: While the latter obliges the individual to defend the constitution, Tolstoy identified the progress of the human race directly with the progression of the individual towards the renunciation of violence and governance. Tolstoy, Charasoff maintains, substitutes for the Roman law as the foundation of society “Christian love”, by which he means not a sentimental feeling, but social relations of a kind in which society has renounced all demands for force and violence on the part of the individuals.
- 27.
On Buek’s contribution to the “anthropological turn” in Russian neo-Kantianism, see Dmitrieva (2010: 89–90).
- 28.
- 29.
For a more detailed discussion of Bauer’s review, see Mori (2007).
- 30.
For completeness, it should be mentioned that there was also a short review of Charasoff’s book of 1909 authored by Moride (1909), a young French economist who had just finished a doctoral dissertation on Marx and physiocracy.
- 31.
Bukharin’s book manuscript was completed and first published in German in 1913/14, but the first Russian edition appeared only in 1919, the first German translation of the Russian edition in 1926, and the first American edition in 1927.
- 32.
This is reported in Vormundschaftsakten Kinder Charasoff (Stadtarchiv Zürich). No further information is provided on whether her death was caused by an accident (as a doctor of medicine she may well have worked with poisonous substances) or she had deliberately killed herself (and if so, why).
- 33.
- 34.
Charasoff published several “transrational” or “zaum” poems and also provided psychoanalytical interpretations of Russian poetry, including an influential Freudian interpretation of Tatiana’s dream in Pushkin’s Eugene Onegin (Kharazov 1919a, b). On the literary scene in post-revolutionary Tiflis and Charasoff’s activities, see Marzaduri (1982), Margarotto et al. (1982), Janecek (1996), Nikolskaia (1998, 2000), and Ram (2004).
- 35.
He still owned a factory which however had been shut down.
- 36.
The two elder children, Alexander and Arthur, left Tiflis and found employment in Azerbaijan.
- 37.
Interestingly, Charasoff also referred to his earlier contributions to political economy in an autograph letter from 1921, dedicated to the actor Nikolay Khodotov, at that time his neighbour in Tiflis. On the front page of this letter is a typed list of Charasoff’s books, supplemented with the hand-written quotation (in German): “Regierte Recht, so läget Ihr vor mir im Staube jetzt: Denn Ich bin Euer König.” (Schiller: Maria Stuart.) [“Ruling right, you’d lie before me now in the dust: for I am your king.” (Schiller: Maria Stuart.)]. On the back page is a poem that he wrote (in Russian) to the memory of the recently deceased Peter Kropotkin, under the title “I won’t resurrect”.
- 38.
In the preface of the 1924 book, Charasoff notes that he corrected the students’ notes of his lectures and “poked out” on his typewriter a compilation of text passages that had been taken from his German books, from a “Summary of Political Economy” published two years ago by a local publishing house, and from some unpublished manuscripts. No copy could be found of the “locally printed” “Summary of Political Economy” of 1922.
- 39.
- 40.
- 41.
Natalie Moszkowska, of Polish descent, came to Zurich in 1908 in order to study political economy. She wrote her doctoral dissertation (published in 1917 but completed already in 1914) on workers’ savings banks in the Polish coal and steel industry under Heinrich Sieveking's supervision. It seems very likely that she and Charasoff met in Sieveking’s seminars at the University of Zurich. On Moszkowska’s life and work, see Howard and King (2000).
- 42.
- 43.
- 44.
Klimpt had studied mathematics and economics in Berlin and Heidelberg in the 1920s. He submitted his doctoral dissertation, published subsequently as Klimpt (1936), at the University of Heidelberg in 1931.
- 45.
Independently of Charasoff, a number of similar findings, including a proof of the duality properties of linear economic systems, have been presented in papers published between 1911 and 1913 by Father Maurice Potron, a French Jesuit and trained mathematician. For Potron’s contributions, see Bidard and Erreygers (2010).
- 46.
- 47.
The location of the archive sources used in this paper is as follows: the “Vormundschaftsakten Kinder Charasoff” are held at the Stadtarchiv Zürich, the Kautsky Papers at the International Institute of Social History (Amsterdam), the Chertkov Papers at the Russian State Archive of Literature and Art (RGALI, Moscow), and the Roberto Michels Papers at the Fondazione Luigi Einaudi (Torino).
References
The location of the archive sources used in this paper is as follows: the “Vormundschaftsakten Kinder Charasoff” are held at the Stadtarchiv Zürich, the Kautsky Papers at the International Institute of Social History (Amsterdam), the Chertkov Papers at the Russian State Archive of Literature and Art (RGALI, Moscow), and the Roberto Michels Papers at the Fondazione Luigi Einaudi (Torino).
Bauer, O. 1908–9a. ‘Bücherschau. Marx-Literatur’, Der Kampf 2 (May 1909): 380–1.
Bauer, O. 1908–9b. ‘Bücherschau. Marx-Literatur’, Der Kampf 2 (July 1909): 480.
Bauer, O. 1910–11. ‘Bücherschau. Marx-Literatur’, Der Kampf 4 (February 1911): 237–8.
Bidard, C. and Erreygers, G. (eds) 2010. The Analysis of Linear Economic Systems. Father Maurice Potron’s Pioneering Works, Abingdon and New York: Routledge.
Bortkiewicz, L. von 1906–7. ‘Wertrechnung und Preisrechnung im Marxschen System’, Archiv für Sozialwissenschaft und Sozialpolitik (in three parts) 23 (1906): 1–50 and 25 (1907): 10–51 and 445–88.
Bortkiewicz L. von 1907. ‘Zur Berichtigung der grundlegenden theoretischen Konstruktion von Marx im 3. Band des „Kapital“’, Jahrbücher für Nationalökonomie und Statistik 34: 319–35.
Bortkiewicz L. von 1921. ‘Objektivismus und Subjektivismus in der Werttheorie’, Ekonomisk tidskrift, 21 (1): 1–22.
Bortkiewicz, L. von [1907] 1949. ‘On the Correction of Marx’s Fundamental Theoretical Construction in the Third Volume of Capital’, in Sweezy, P. M. (ed.), Karl Marx and the Close of his System, by Eugen von Böhm-Bawerk & Böhm-Bawerk’s Criticism of Marx, by Rudolf Hilferding, together with an Appendix consisting of an Article by Ladislaus von Bortkiewicz on the Transformation of Values into Prices of Production in the Marxian System, New York: A. M. Kelley.
Bortkiewicz, L. von [1906–7] 1952. ‘Value and Price in the Marxian System’, International Economic Papers 2: 5–60. (English translation of Parts 2 and 3 of Bortkiewicz, L. v. 1906–7. ‘Wertrechnung und Preisrechnung im Marxschen System’, Archiv für Sozialwissenschaft und Sozialpolitik (in three parts) 23 (1906): 1–50 and 25 (1907): 10–51 and 445–88.)
Boudin, L. B. 1907. The Theoretical System of Karl Marx in the Light of Recent Criticism, New York: C. H. Kerr.
Boudin, L. B. 1909. Das theoretische System von Karl Marx, (übersetzt von Luise Kautsky, Einleitung von Karl Kautsky), Stuttgart: Dietz.
Bucharin, N. I. [1919] 1926. Die Politische Ökonomie des Rentners (Die Wert- und Profittheorie der österreichischen Schule). Berlin: Verlag für Literatur und Politik.
Buek, O. 1905. ‘Leo Tolstoi’, Kampf. Zeitschrift für gesunden Menschenverstand, Berlin: (February 24, 1905), no. 19, pp. 539–543, (March 3, 1905), no. 20, pp. 575–579.
Bukharin, N. I. [1921] 1926. Historical Materialism. A System of Sociology, Authorized translation from the third Russian edition, London: George Allen & Unwin.
Bukharin, N. I. [1927] 1970. The Economic Theory of the Leisure Class, New York: Monthly Review Press.
Charasoff, G. 1902. Arithmetische Untersuchungen über Irreduktibilität. Heidelberg: J. Hörning.
Charasoff, G. von 1909. Karl Marx über die menschliche und kapitalistische Wirtschaft: eine neue Darstellung seiner Lehre. Berlin: Hans Bondy.
Charasoff, G. 1910. Das System des Marxismus. Darstellung und Kritik. Berlin: Hans Bondy.
Charasoff, G. 1918a. ‘Die Ideologie des Marxismus’, Die Aktion 8 (17/18): col. 209–15.
Charasoff, G. 1918b. ‘Kritik der Lehre von dem Klassenkampf’, Die Aktion 8 (19/20): col. 235–48.
Charasoff, G. 1918c. ‘Das Grundgesetz der technischen Entwicklung’, Die Aktion 8 (27/28): col. 339–47.
Charasoff, G. 1918d. ‘Die Marxsche Preisformel’, Die Aktion 8 (31/32): col. 395–403.
Charasoff, G. 1918e. ‘Die fundamentale Zweiteilung der gesellschaftlichen Produktion’, Die Aktion 8 (35/36): col. 446–54.
Charasoff, G. 1920. ‘Eine Darstellung der Lehre von Karl Marx’, Die Aktion 10 (46/47): col. 634–9, 10 (47/48): col. 657–61, 10 (49/50): col. 697–700, and 10 (51/52): col. 707–10.
Charasoff, G. 1921. ‘Karl Marx an seine bürgerlichen Gegner. Ein hypothetischer Vortrag’, Der Gegner 2 (12) (1920/21): 425–32.
Cohen, G. A. [1978] 2000. Karl Marx’s Theory of History: A Defence, Expanded edition, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Dmitriev, V.K. [1898] 1974. ‘The theory of value of David Ricardo. An attempt at a rigorous analysis’ in V.K. Dmitriev 1974. Economic Essays on Value, Competition and Utility. English translation of a collection of Dmitriev’s essays published in 1904 in Russian, edited with an introduction by D.M. Nuti, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Dmitrieva, N. A. 2007. Russkoe neokantianstvo: “Marburg” v Rossii. Istoriko-filosofskie očerci [Russischer Neukantianismus: “Marburg” in Russland. Historisch-philosophische Skizzen]. Moscow: Rossijskaja političeskaja enciklopedija. (In Russian).
Dmitrieva, N. A. 2010. ‘Mensch und Geschichte. Zur „anthropologischen Wende“ im russischen Neukantianismus’, Etica & Politica/Ethics & Politics, 12(2): 82–103.
Dmitrieva, N. A. 2016. ‘Back to Kant, or Forward to Enlightenment: The Particularities and Issues of Russian Neo-Kantianism’, Russian Studies in Philosophy, 54(5): 378–394.
Duffner, H. and Huth, T. [1987] 2013. ‘Georg Charasoff’s Theory of Value, Output, and Prices of Production’. Mimeo: University of Bremen. This article, which was written in 1987 and circulated in mimeographed form, was published in 2013 as working paper no. 279 in the Leuphana University of Lüneburg Working Paper Series in Economics.
Eckstein, G. 1909. ‘Zur Marxschen Wertlehre. Rezension von Wilhelm Hohoff, Die Bedeutung der Marxschen Kapitalkritik (1908) und Georg von Charasoff, Karl Marx über die menschliche und kapitalistische Wirtschaft (1909)’, Literarische Rundschau. 2. Beilage des Vorwärts. Berliner Volksblatt 26 (44/21): Sunday, 21 February 1909.
Egidi, M. and Gilibert, G. 1984. ‘La teoria oggettiva dei prezzi’, Economia Politica 1 (1): 43–61.
Egidi, M. and Gilibert, G. 1989. ‘The Objective Theory of Prices’, Political Economy. Studies in the Surplus Approach 5: 59–74. (English version of Egidi and Gilibert 1984.)
Gehrke, C. 2015a. ‘Spuren einer Lebensreise: Georg von Charasoff (1877–1931)’, in H.-M. Trautwein (ed.), Studien zur Entwicklung der ökonomischen Theorie XXX. Berlin: Duncker & Humblot.
Gehrke, C. 2015b. ‘Georg von Charasoff: A Neglected Contributor to the Classical-Marxian Tradition', History of Economics Review, 62(1): 1–37.
Gehrke, C. and Kurz, H. D. 2022a. ‘The circular flow of ideas: Vladimir K. Dmitriev', in: V. Avtonomov and H. Hagemann (eds), Russian and Western Economic Thought: Mutual Influences and Transfer of Ideas, Basel: Springer Nature.
Gehrke, C. and Kurz, H. D. 2022b. ‘Ladislaus von Bortkiewicz: traveller between worlds', in: V. Avtonomov and H. Hagemann (eds), Russian and Western Economic Thought: Mutual Influences and Transfer of Ideas, Basel: Springer Nature.
Grossmann, H. 1929. Das Akkumulations- und Zusammenbruchsgesetz des kapitalistischen Systems. (Zugleich eine Krisentheorie). Leipzig: C. L. Hirschfeld.
Grossmann, H. [1930] 2017. ‘Zum Abschluss des Streites um die Wert- und Preisrechnung im Marxschen System (Eine Berichtigung des grundlegenden Fehlers bei von Bortkiewicz, Rosa Luxemburg und Otto Bauer)', in: Schriften aus dem Nachlass, edited by Jürgen Scheele, Baden Baden: Tectum, pp. 47–94.
Grossmann, H. [1929] 2019a. ‘Die Änderung des ursprünglichen Aufbauplans des Marxschen „Kapital“ und ihre Ursachen’, in: ders.: Aufsätze zur Krisentheorie, Frankfurt a.M. 1971, S. 9–42 (urspr. in: Archiv für die Geschichte des Sozialismus und der Arbeiterbewegung, XIV. Jg., Leipzig 1929, S. 305–338). English translation in: Henryk Grossman (2018) Works: Essays and Letters on Economic Theory, edited by Rick Kuhn, Leiden: Brill.
Grossmann, H. [1932–33] 2019b. Fünfzig Jahre Kampf um den Marxismus 1883‐1932, Fischer, Jena, 1932, and as Part 7, ‘Die weitere Entwicklung des Marxismus bis zur Gegenwart’, of the essay ‘Sozialistische Ideen und Lehren I’ in Ludwig Elster (ed.), Wörterbuch der Volkswirtschaft. Band 3, 4th edition, Fischer, Jena 1933, pp. 272–341. English translation as 'Fifty Years of Struggle over Marxism, 1883–1932’, in Henryk Grossman (2018). Works: Essays and Letters on Economic Theory, edited by Rick Kuhn, Leiden: Brill.
Hanke, E. 1993. Prophet des Unmodernen. Leo N. Tolstoi als Kulturkritiker in der deutschen Diskussion der Jahrhundertwende. Tübingen: Max Niemeyer Verlag.
Howard, M.C. and King, J.E. 2000. ‘Natalie Moszkowska’, in R.W. Dimand, M.A. Dimand and E. Forget (eds), A Biographical Dictionary of Women Economists. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
Janecek, G. 1996. Zaum: The Transrational Poetry of Russian Futurism. San Diego, CA: San Diego University Press.
Kautsky, K. 1886. Karl Marx’ ökonomische Lehren, 1st ed. 1886, 25th ed. 1930, Stuttgart: Dietz.
Kautsky, K. 1906. Ethik und materialistische Geschichtsauffassung, Stuttgart: Dietz.
Kharazov, G.A. 1919a. ‘Son Tat’iany (Opyt tolkovaniia po Freidu) {Tatiana’s dream (A Freudian interpretation)}’, Ars 1: 9–20. (In Russian).
Kharazov, G.A. 1919b. ‘Fuga {Poem}’, Ars 1: 51–2.
Kharazov, G.A. 1924. Introduction to Theoretical Political Economy. Lectures by Prof. G. A. Kharazov in the Academic Year 1923–24 at the Faculty of Economics (in Russian). Baku: Azerbijan Polytechnic Institute.
Klimpt, W. 1936. Mathematische Untersuchungen im Anschluß an L. v. Bortkiewicz über Reproduktion und Profitrate, Berlin: Märkische Verlagsanstalt.
Klyukin, P. 2007. ‘Revision of the Neo-Ricardian Theory of Value and Distribution: New Evidence and New Perspectives (in Russian)’, Voprosy ekonomiki 5: 117–137.
Klyukin, P. 2008. ‘Creative Heritage: Charasoff in the Context of the Economic Theory of Reproduction, (in Russian)’, Voprosy ekonomiki 2: 133–49.
Kurz, H.D. 1989. ‘Die deutsche theoretische Nationalökonomie zu Beginn des 20. Jahrhunderts zwischen Klassik und Neoklassik’, in B. Schefold (ed.), Studien zur Entwicklung der ökonomischen Theorie VIII. Berlin: Duncker & Humblot.
Kurz, H. D. and Salvadori, N. 1993. ‘Von Neumann’s Growth Model and the Classical Tradition’, The European Journal of the History of Economic Thought 1 (1): 129–60.
Kurz, H. D. and Salvadori, N. 1995. Theory of Production. A Long-Period Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Kurz, H. D. and Salvadori, N. 2000. ‘“Classical” Roots of Input-output Analysis: A short Account of its Long Prehistory’, Economic Systems Research 12: 153–79.
Marchionatti, R. (ed.) 1998. Karl Marx. Critical Responses, Vol. III. Critical Appraisals of Marx’s Work, 1899–1914, London and New York: Routledge.
Marchionatti, R. 2019. 'Between Berlin and Cambridge: classical conceptions of the general economic equilibrium in the late 1920s', Cambridge Journal of Economics, 43 (5): 1377–1395.
Marchionatti, R. and Fiorini, R. 2000. Between Walras and Ricardo. Ladislaus von Bortkiewicz and the origin of neo-ricardian theory, Revue européenne des sciences sociales/European Journal of Social Sciences, 38 (117), 173–191.
Margarotto, L. et al. (eds) 1982. L’avanguardia a Tiflis. Venice: Università degli studi di Venezia.
Marzaduri, M. 1982. ‘Futurismo Menscevico’, in L. Margarotto et al. (eds), L’avanguardia a Tiflis. Venice: Università degli studi di Venezia.
Mori, K. 2007. ‘Eine dogmenhistorische Dualität in der Reproduktions- und Preistheorie: Georg von Charasoff und Kei Shibata’, Marx-Engels-Jahrbuch 2006: 118–41.
Mori, K. 2011. ‘Charasoff and Dmitriev: An Analytical Characterisation of Origins of Linear Economics’, International Critical Thought 1 (1): 76–91.
Mori, K. 2016. ‘Georg von Charasoff and Anticipation of von Mises Iteration in Economic Analysis’. Cahiers d'économie politique/Papers in Political Economy, 71: 65–89.
Moride, P. 1909. ‘Review of Charasoff (1909)’, Revue d’histoire des doctrines économiques et sociales 2: 427–8.
Morishima, M. 1973. Marx’s Economics. A Dual Theory of Value and Growth. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Moszkowska, N. 1929. Das Marxsche System. Ein Beitrag zu dessen Ausbau. Berlin: Engelmann.
Neumann, J. von [1937] 1945–46. ‘A Model of General Economic Equilibrium’, Review of Economic Studies 13 (1): 1–9.
Nikolskaia, T.L. 1998. ‘The Reception of Dadaism in Georgia’, in G. Janecek and T. Omuka (eds), The Eastern Dada Orbit: Russia, Georgia, Ukraine, Central Europe and Japan. New York: G.K. Hall.
Nikolskaia, T.L. 2000. Fantasticheskii gorod: Russkaia i kul’turnaia zhizn’ Tbilisi (1917–1921) {Fantastical City: Russian and Cultural Life of Tbilisi (1917–1921)}. Moscow: Piataia strana.
Okishio, N. 1961. ‘Technical Changes and The Rate of Profit’, Kobe University Economic Review 7: 85–99.
Pareto, V. 1909. Manuel d’économie politique, Paris: Giard.
Parys, W. 2014. ‘Why didn’t Charasoff and Remak use Perron-Frobenius mathematics?’,The European Journal of the History of Economic Thought 21 (6): 991–1014.
Parys, W. 2018. ‘Labour values and energy values: some developments on the common substance of value since 1867’, European Journal of the History of Economic Thought, 25(5): 1052–80.
Peter, H. 1933. Grundprobleme der theoretischen Nationalökonomie I: Wert, Preis, Profit, Stuttgart: Kohlhammer. (In Russian).
Peter, H. 1934. Grundprobleme der theoretischen Nationalökonomie II: Der Gesamtprozeß der Entwicklung, Stuttgart: Kohlhammer.
Peter, H. 1937. Grundprobleme der theoretischen Nationalökonomie III: Automatischer Prozeß und gestaltete Wirtschaft. Fragen der angewandten Theorie, Stuttgart: Kohlhammer.
Plekhanov, G. 1976. ‘Synopsis of the Lecture “Scientific Socialism and Religion”’, in G. Plekhanov, Selected Philosophical Works, Vol. 3. Moscow: Progress Publishers.
Ram, H. 2004. ‘Modernism on the Periphery: Literary Life in Post-revolutionary Tbilisi’, Kritika: Explorations in Russian and Eurasian History 5(2): 367–82.
Schmidt, C. 1910. ‘Georg Charasow, Das System des Marxismus (Buchbesprechung)’, Sozialistische Monatshefte 14 (13) (30 June 1910): 850–4.
Shibata, K. 1933. ‘The Meaning of the Theory of Value in Theoretical Economics’, Kyoto University Economic Review, 8(2), 49–68.
Sieg, U.1994. Aufstieg und Niedergang des Marburger Neukantianismus. Die Geschichte einer philosophischen Schulgemeinschaft. Würzburg: Königshausen & Neumann.
Sraffa, P. 1960. Production of Commodities by Means of Commodities. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Stamatis, G. 1999. ‘Georg Charasoff: A Pioneer in the Theory of Linear Production Systems’, Economic Systems Research 11: 15–30.
Sweezy, P. M. 1942. The Theory of Capitalist Development, New York: Monthly Review Press.
Tugan-Baranowsky, M. 1905. Theoretische Grundlagen des Marxismus. Leipzig: Duncker & Humblot.
Acknowledgements
I am most grateful to Denis Melnik (Higher School of Economics, Moscow) for his invaluable help in tracking down the Charasoff correspondence in the Chertkov files at the State Archive of Literature and Art (RGALI) in Moscow and providing me with a summary account. I would also like to thank Vladimir Avtonomov, Harald Hagemann, John E. King, and Heinz D. Kurz for helpful comments and suggestions.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2022 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Gehrke, C. (2022). Russia-West-Russia: Georg von Charasoff, the “Humane Economy”, and the Critique of Marx’s Theory of History. In: Avtonomov, V., Hagemann, H. (eds) Russian and Western Economic Thought. Springer Studies in the History of Economic Thought. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-99052-7_9
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-99052-7_9
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-99051-0
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-99052-7
eBook Packages: Economics and FinanceEconomics and Finance (R0)