In his short but comprehensive article, Harvey poses the question “what … was Marx’s distinctive value theory and how does it differ from the labor theory of value?” And he comments on almost all concepts and discussions within Marxism, allocating at least one sentence for each. It is my opinion that there are several theoretical criticisms to be raised against Harvey’s account of the theory of value presented in his intense essay. But first, let’s give a brief presentation of Harvey’s account of the Marxist theory of value.
Canadian philosopher Joshua Moufawad-Paul’s trilogy on the enlightenment, science, and hegemony, now available in PDF format.
In this controversial and thought-provoking trilogy, JMP criticizes post-modern and post-Marxist approaches, bringing a clear Marxist perspective to the chief discussions of these trends. Strongly recommended to students of social sciences!
Free to download, read, criticise, and discuss!
The general “post-modern” critique is that the Enlightenment’s claim to universalism, with humanity as central to making society and history, is intrinsic to murderous projects such as colonialism and capitalism; communism, and the claims made by every form of Marxism, are seen as cut from the same cloth. Hence it is tempting to respond to this anti-communist criticism by upholding the Enlightenment and modernity with mild qualifications.