Another Review on Jamal
Naqvi’s Book
Dogma Vs Deliberation
Why some left leaders and intellectuals are still reluctant to
debate on it? Some use even below the belt language, some use this opportunity to
settle old scores, some called him Zandiq and many of us still want to avoid
that discussion. I don’t want to use word
of Marx i-e "All
I know is that I am not a Marxist." (Ref http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1890/letters/90_08_05.htm)
yet one can appeal to supporters’ of scientific approach that without
arguments, deliberations even on fundamental ideas, one cannot grow at all. Are
we fundamentalist? In such debates we should separate debates on history of
left from debates regarding ideology. Now read what reviewer shared with us.
Thanks
- An intense debate is raging on in many intellectual circles. Critics have discussed all aspects of Naqvi’s politics, expressed personal grudges, and contested his criticism of the long-held leftist ideals.
- He has questioned the validity of the ‘Theory of Surplus Value’, the core concept of Marxism that explains the exploitation of the industrial labour by the capital. He has forcefully challenged the class system created in the former Soviet Union in the name of elimination of classes.
- Jamal Naqvi is not the first to question the validity of the Theory of Surplus Value. Ricardo before Marx had examined the relationship between profit and wages. His contention “pro?ts would be high or low in proportion as wages were low or high” is insular realism and Marx borrowed it unwarily from Ricardo. After presenting the theory, Marx spent next 17 years explaining what he meant by Value. Did he mean Intrinsic Value, the Exchange Value, or the third thing? In the end, Marx settled with claiming that he looked at Value from the Commodity standpoint
Some more useful links regarding the debate and book
http://punjabpunch.blogspot.com/2014/07/sky-has-no-limit-reservations-of-jamal.html
No comments:
Post a Comment