Money and growth

  • George Catephores


It is sometimes argued that Marxist economics disregards the psychological aspect of economic life, treating it as irrelevant, compared to the fact that individuals have to bend to economic necessity, no matter what their feelings might be. This is certainly not correct. Integration of individuals in the system of production relations is a complex process, in which psychology plays an important part. Marxism refuses to reduce all explanations of social events solely or primarily to psychological facts.1 It does not, on the other hand, fail to register the importance of human psychology as a link in the chain of forces that hold together (or disrupt) a mode of production.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Further reading

  1. Braverman, H., Labor and Monopoly Capital; the degradation of work in the twentieth century (Monthly Review Press, New York, 1974) chapters 4 and 5.Google Scholar
  2. Brenner, R., ‘On Sweezy, Frank and Wallerstein’, in New Left Review, 104 (London, July–August, 1977).Google Scholar
  3. Desai, M., Marxian Economics, 2nd edn (Basil Blackwell, Oxford, 1979).Google Scholar
  4. Friedman, A., Industry and Labour (Macmillan, London, 1977) chapter 6 and passim.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Keynes, J. M., ‘Economic Possibilities for our Grandchildren’ in his Collected Works, Vol. IX, Essays in Persuasion (Macmillan, London, 1972).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© George Catephores 1989

Authors and Affiliations

  • George Catephores

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations