Educational videos: Fundamentals of political economy

[Q]

Recently the CPGB organised a weekend school, where "back to the basics" stuff was discussed. This video explains the fundamentals of political economy.

35878144

[blake 3:17]

Don't have the two hours tonight, but have made note. Thanks!

[Q]

The second video of the weekend school: Hillel Ticktin on the role and power of money

36009350

[Q]

Could a mod change the title of the thread to the plural videos? As there are probably some more videos to follow.

[CommieTroll]

Can't wait until Friday so I can watch these, really busy at the moment:cursing:

[Die Neue Zeit]

I'm sure comrade Cockshott has a rebuttal to Moshe Machover's comments.

[Die Neue Zeit]

http://www.cpgb.org.uk/letters.php?issue_id=899



Bastard

On the critique of the SWP’s resolution, Peter Manson writes: “Human labour creates all surplus value under capitalism.” This isn’t accurate. Human labour-power in productive labour, be it manual or mental (and taking into account its technological, labour-saving equivalent), is the only non-natural source of value production.

I use the term, ‘value production’, because business management refers to value-added processes. It refers to concepts of ‘value’ without using the academic term, ‘surplus value’. Taking into account one other factor is flexible enough to take post-Keynesian criticisms of Marx’s labour theory of value (modern suggestions that machinery can add more lifetime product value than lifetime depreciation) with a grain of salt.

Speaking of Keynesianism, I’m quite disappointed that post-Keynesian economics and policies, as opposed to what they call ‘bastard Keynesianism’, were not discussed or criticised in the CPGB’s political economy event. I’m not sure how the term ‘nationalist’ easily applies to post-Keynesian policies.

[Paul Cockshott]

I'm sure comrade Cockshott has a rebuttal to Moshe Machover's comments.
Well i must check what he says as i normally get on well with Moshe.

[Sentinel]

Could a mod change the title of the thread to the plural videos? As there are probably some more videos to follow.

Done.

[Kotze]

Paul Cockshott claims a correlation between labour-value ratios and price ratios of goods (and Dave Zachariah has done such a study and before them Anwar Shaikh) and that profit rates fall when the labour force shrinks.

Moshé Machover agrees with the first claim, and he says something skeptical about falling profit rates, but that relates to the plausibility of a different explanation: technical innovation (http://cpgb.org.uk/article.php?article_id=1004565).

These claims aren't in conflict.

[Paul Cockshott]

Dave Tamerlan and I incorporate technical change into our predictive model of the rate of profit(http://glasgow.academia.edu/paulcockshott/Papers/1130908/From_Adam_Smith_to_the_dynamics_of_the_profit_rate ), Moshe is right to point to the inadequacy of the way the theory of the rate of profit is often presented by Marxists.

[Die Neue Zeit]

Perhaps the CPGB folks and comrade Machover should have titled the discussion differently, then? :confused:

[Paul Cockshott]

Well there is nothing particularly novel in what Moshe says or very original. He only gives attention to one of Marx's arguments for a falling rate of profit. See http://glasgow.academia.edu/paulcockshott/Papers/1120785/Is_the_theory_of_a_falling_profit_valid for an examination of the two reasons he gives. The second reason Marx gives is not susceptible to Moshe's criticism.

[Q]

And another video. This time a talk from Werner Bonefield on the nature of the bourgeois state and its place in liberal political thought. The radical academic and founder of the 'Open Marxism' school spoke at the CPGB's weekend school on the Fundamentals of political econmy on January 21-22 2012 in London.

36451059

[Q]

Mike Macnair: Against Keynes and Keynesianism.

36874394

Here is the more indepth article based on this talk (http://cpgb.org.uk/article.php?article_id=1004711).

[Die Neue Zeit]

^^^ Sufficed to say, the comrade's second article (http://www.cpgb.org.uk/article.php?article_id=1004718) is questionable.

Here are my points for criticism that I hope to work on soon:

1) "Palliatives" and "state paternalism" - yes I know DeLeon's use of the former term, but you yourself read one of my time-and-again posts about interventionism on behalf of labour (http://www.revleft.com/vb/economist-state-capitalism-t167000/index.html?p=2345686).

Politico-ideological independence is a goal, but economic independence "this side of revolution" is illusory.

2) The usual dichotomy between industrial capital and financial capital is tiresome:

http://www.cpgb.org.uk/letters.php?issue_id=881 ("Capital idea")

The real dichotomy is between industrial capital and trade capital, one of which finance capital subordinates itself to at any given point in time.

3) There are no mentions whatsoever of Post-Keynesian economics and public policy.

4) The commentary on "global money" is too long.

5) His commentary on a shorter workweek is weak:

"Suppose we demand a 30-hour week, or indeed a 20-hour week. This in no way involves a nationalist-mercantilist policy. It is a demand which can be applied across the board globally, and not a demand which involves forcing the state to spend more money. The 10-hour day was won in Britain under conditions far more difficult for the working class as a class than today’s. The demand for the eight-hour day formed the focus of the Second International’s global May Day campaign."

He doesn't mention "without loss of pay or benefits," among other details.

6) Defending is not advancing, with regards to "health and safety."

7) Cooperatives, "self-help," etc.: In Lassalle's day, it was the liberals who employed "self-help" rhetoric. Again, this goes back to the illusion of economic independence. I reiterated with Boffy again my preference of the Non-Profit Organizational "business model" over the For-Profit Coop "business model."

[Q]

^^^ Sufficed to say, the comrade's second article (http://www.cpgb.org.uk/article.php?article_id=1004718) is questionable.

You raise valid criticisms. Perhaps you should write out an article (as opposed to a letter) some time soon, criticizing Macnair's (the PCC's?) position and offering a positive alternative as well?

[Die Neue Zeit]

I'll admit that matching his six-page document on Word can be tough yet not tough. I can copy and paste much of my existing material. :D