FYI: In case there are any fans of Henryk Grossman on this list, I just put a translation of his 77 page book, critiquing Sismondi, on my website. Hope you'll find it as interesting as I did.
John V BIBLIOTHECA UNIVERSITATIS LIBERAE POLONAE Varsaviae 1924. H E N R Y K G R O S S M A N D·r en Droit, Prof. à l'Univ. Libre, Varsovie. SIMONDE DE SISMONDI ET SES THÉORIES ÉCONOMIQUES. (UNE NOUVELLE INTERPRÉTATION DE SA PENSÉE.) Preface by the translator. This rather obscure but extensively researched work with well over 200 citations of Sismondi’s thoughts, by Henryk Grossman on the merit of the former with respect to modern economic thinking, I believe, deserves to be much wider known than it is so far. Just as Th. Sowell would do some fifty years later by agreeing Sismondi to be “the” progenitor of Keynes1); Grossman heaps loads of praise on Sismondi as having anticipated Marx on a number of significant points. And just as Sowell chides Sismondi for his looseness and not remaining faithful to his early formal approach, which would have identified him even more as a proto-Keynesian; so does Grossman take Sismondi to task for not following up with the in his eyes “obvious” (Marxian) cure of economic malfeasance. Neither critic doubting the superiority of their own modern hindsight, and not perceiving that from Sismondi’s starting principles, both Marx and Keynes wouldn’t have been entirely consistent; and that if Sismondi had taken the path outlined much later by any of those two, he would have been less coherent himself. The fact that Sismondi is considered to be the forerunner of the best known economists of both the 19th and 20th century remains more than remarkable however. That said, Grossman’s admiration for Sismondi, harshly dismissing most of the latter’s critics, is obviously much more profound than Sowell’s. Unlike any other prominent Marxian that I’m aware of, he even considers Sismondi to be a socialist; absolving him from the sin of being a petty bourgeois. But although Grossman argues his case well, I don’t feel he is quite convincing in his position that Sismondi’s aim was to overthrow the principle of free enterprise itself. Sismondi’s understanding of abstract exchange values in my opinion would have precluded him from considering a “planned” economy, as able to approach concrete use values all that much better than a system of free competition. So if our protagonist had more explicitly provided us with an economic cure, it would have been along the lines of how to implement fair-wage laws and profit sharing, rather than an abolition of profits altogether; as indeed, he as much as says so. Grossman’s deep-going analysis of Sismondi’s disequilibrium theory, puts this work in a complementary position with respect to my own translation of parts of Sismondi’s "Nouveaux Principes" (available on my homepage); wherein, by means of annotations, indeterminacy and his theory of growth take center stage. And this rendition too was undertaken from the perspective of providing yet another catalyst to get rid of capitalism. Now more than ever does the world need to take up Sismondi’s cause in spirit and bring it to a fruitful conclusion, by neutralizing the influence of money/capital; and thus transform the current state of affairs into a truly “free” enterprise system, that benefits all and not just some indisposed few. 1) Thomas Sowell, "Sismondi: A Neglected Pioneer"; History of Political Economy. Spring 1972. Apparently Joan Robinson too, came to this conclusion; see, A. Parguez, "Sismondi et la théorie du déséquilibre macro-économique" Revue économique, 05, 1973. [If unable to locate any of these, contact me for a .pdf copy] John Vertegaal (Fall 2008) http://www.vcn.bc.ca/~vertegaa/grossman.pdf _______________________________________________ pen-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
