The Whiggish foundations of Marxian and Sraffian economics

Andrew Kliman

Cambridge Journal of Economics, 2014, vol. 38, issue 3, 643-661

Abstract: The first half of the paper discusses what is wrong with Whig history and why it is wrong to distort the past. The author’s views are compared with those of noted historians of economics. This discussion provides motivation for the second half of the paper, which focuses on Whiggish accounts of the scientifically progressive character of mainstream Marxian and Sraffian economics that rest heavily upon ‘proofs’ of internal inconsistency in Marx’s own theories. The paper argues that the inconsistencies are actually products of Whiggish misinterpretation. Thus, it is not the case that progress has taken place through correction of error; mainstream Marxian and Sraffian theories are not corrections of the original theories, but alternatives to them.

Date: 2014
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/cje/bet045 (application/pdf)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:oup:cambje:v:38:y:2014:i:3:p:643-661.

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
https://academic.oup.com/journals

Access Statistics for this article

Cambridge Journal of Economics is currently edited by Jacqui Lagrue

More articles in Cambridge Journal of Economics from Cambridge Political Economy Society Oxford University Press, Great Clarendon Street, Oxford OX2 6DP, UK.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Oxford University Press ().