Distinguishing Marxian Economic Theory from Bourgeois Political Economy

Abstract

Broadly, Marx’s “economics” tends to be grouped together with others, such as the economics of Adam Smith and Ricardo, as “classical”. The most obvious reason for that is their shared commitment to some form of the “labour theory of value”, something that mainstream economics today generally sets to one side. It is, therefore, necessary first to explore and ponder why and in what manner Marx intensely examined the prior history of political economy, so as to critically appropriate its classical (and bourgeois) version. In this connection, we need to focus especially on the labour theory of value, which both the classical economists and Marx shared, while carefully examining how Marx’s version of it differs from the classical one. What marks Marx’s labour theory of value as distinct from that of the classical school, and in what ways does that difference matter? I will address this question by explaining what the labour theory of value should correctly mean, and in what sense it holds the key to the veracity of economic theory. I will also affirm that, short of grasping this point, no one can hope to comprehend economics as scientific (and objective) knowledge.