Introduction

Bellofiore, Riccardo; Fineschi, Roberto

doi:10.1007/978-0-230-30514-4_1

Cited by 5 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Its objectivity is spectral. Nevertheless, the ghostlike objectivity of value becomes visible in the money form; back in production the ghost turns into a vampire that feeds on living labour as the human material of value that begets a surplus and is thus greater than itself (see Bellofiore, 2009: 185). Socially necessary labour time is not fixed and given.…”

Section: Economic Abstraction and Classmentioning

confidence: 99%

Negative dialectics and the critique of economic objectivity

Bonefeld

2016

History of the Human Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article explores Adorno’s negative dialectics as a critical social theory of economic objectivity. It rejects the conventional view that Adorno does not offer a critique of the economic forms of capitalist society. The article holds that negative dialectics is a dialectics of the social world in the form of the economic object, one that is governed by the movement of economic quantities, that is, real economic abstractions. Negative dialectics refuses to accept the constituted economic categories as categories of economic nature. Instead, the article argues, it amounts to a conceptualized social praxis [begriffene Praxis] of the capitalistically constituted social relations, which manifest themselves in the form of seemingly independent economic categories. Economic nature is a socially constituted nature, which entails the class antagonism in its concept. The article concludes that for negative dialectics the explanation of real economic abstractions lies in the understanding of the class-divided nature of human practice.

show abstract

Section: Economic Abstraction and Classmentioning

confidence: 99%

Negative dialectics and the critique of economic objectivity

Bonefeld

2016

History of the Human Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Problems related to this initiative were manifold, starting with the high cost of the project, but also involving ideological concerns: the fear that such an edition could weaken the primordial function which the texts of Marx and Engels served for Communist parties and Eastern European governments, as an intellectual support for Marxism-Leninism. By the end of the 1960s, overcoming much resistance, the Marxism-Leninism Institutes (IML) of Moscow and Berlin began the edition of a second MEGA (Bellofiore and Fineschi 2009: 8; Rojhan 1998: 3 ss. ).…”

Section: Editing Marx and Engels’s Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Notes on a Crisis

Paula¹,

Cerqueira²,

Cunha³

et al. 2012

Review of Radical Political Economics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper presents Notebook B113, one of Marx's unpublished manuscripts, and suggests its importance for highlighting the monetary and financial issues which Marx was investigating after 1867. The contents of this notebook reveal a systematic effort to investigate new features of financial markets and institutions which were spreading throughout Europe during the 1860's, and which were put in sharp evidence by the events that surrounded the Overend, Gurney crisis in England, in 1866. Besides offering valuable clues with respect to Marx's method of investigation and composition, the relevance of the themes comprised in the notebook for the analysis developed in part five of Capital's volume III suggests that these manuscript excerpts and notes were part of the preparatory material for a future revision of that book, which Marx was never able to carry through.

show abstract

“… 7 There are Marxist authors who are not Metalist at all, e.g., Bellofiore (2009) and Augusto Graziani (1997). See Cruz, Parejo, and Rangel (2020b) for a discussion of value form theorists. …”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The “Control Space” of the State: A Key Element to Address the Nature of Money

Espinosa

Hidalgo

García

et al. 2023

Review of Radical Political Economics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The academy has traditionally tended to classify the study about money into two approaches that are often considered incompatible: commodity money and debt money. The first one presents money as a commodity that, thanks to its particular characteristics, allows transactions to be carried out in a much more efficient way than the simple barter. The second one considers that money is a type of debt used in a certain institutional context to facilitate transactions, normally issued by one State to distribute the resources produced in the territory over which it exercises its power. In this work, it is argued that these two approaches are not necessarily incompatible and that an analytical tool can be used to detect a common framework and thus better address the nature of money: the “control space” of the State. JEL Classification: E40, E42, E52

show abstract

Introduction

Cited by 5 publications

References 0 publications

Negative dialectics and the critique of economic objectivity

Negative dialectics and the critique of economic objectivity

Notes on a Crisis

The “Control Space” of the State: A Key Element to Address the Nature of Money

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About