Marx and Schumpeter: A Comparison of their Theories of Development
This paper challenges Paul Samuelson's claim that the development theories of Marx and Schumpeter have little in common. There are indeed broad similarities between the two theories, arising principally from Schumpeter's use of Marx's method (with some interesting modifications), which he calls the 'economic interpretation of history'. This discussion leads us to ask if we can incorporate into Marx's method some of the insights suggested by Schumpeter's modifications. We show that Marx's method is enriched by the insertion into it of an explicit, although limited, role of the individual (human agency). The paper then turns to the differences between the two theories, concerning the theory of value and the analysis of social classes. We find an unresolved tension in Schumpeter's system of thought, between his attempt to construct a model of a dynamic, evolving economy on Marxian lines (albeit an alternative to Marx's model), and his emphasis on the role of the individual, which he inserts into an essentially static, Walrasian model.
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Volume (Year): 21 (2009)
Issue (Month): 1 ()
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.tandfonline.com/CRPE20|
|Order Information:||Web: http://www.tandfonline.com/pricing/journal/CRPE20|
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:revpoe:v:21:y:2009:i:1:p:51-83. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Michael McNulty)
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.