[Xmca-l] Re: If economics is immune from ethics, why should exploitation be a topic of discussion in economics?

[Ulvi İçil]

Thank you Andy.

I know this wonderful speech.





19 Tem 2018 Per 18:07 tarihinde Andy Blunden <andyb@marxists.org> şunu
yazdı:

> Here's Lenin's Ethics:
> https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1920/oct/02.htm
>
> Andy
> ------------------------------
> Andy Blunden
> http://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/index.htm
> On 20/07/2018 12:56 AM, Ulvi İçil wrote:
>
> Andy, what about Lenin in this issue?
>
> Ulvi
>
> 18 Tem 2018 Çar 08:19 tarihinde Andy Blunden <andyb@marxists.org> şunu
> yazdı:
>
>> Harshad,
>>
>> According to Marx, "exploitation," as he uses the concept in *Capital*,
>> is not an ethical concept at all; it simply means making a gain by
>> utilising an affordance, as in "exploiting natural resources." Many
>> "Marxist economists" today adhere to this view. However, I am one of those
>> that hold a different view. And the legacy of Stalinism is evidence of some
>> deficit in the legacy of Marx's writing - it was so easy for Stalin to
>> dismiss ethics as just so much nonsense and claim the mantel of Marxism!
>>
>> Much as I admire Marx, he was wrong on Ethics. He was a creature of his
>> times in this respect, or rather in endeavouring to *not* be a creature
>> of his times, he made an opposite error. He held all ethics in contempt as
>> if religion had a monopoly on this topic, and it were nothing more than
>> some kind of confidence trick to fool the masses. (Many today share this
>> view.) In fact, contrary to his own self-consciousness, *Capital* is a
>> seminal work of ethics.
>>
>> The problem stems from Hegel and from Marx's efforts to make a positive
>> critique of Hegel. As fine a work of Ethics as Hegel's *Philosophy of
>> Right* is, it had certain problems which Marx had to overcome. These
>> included Hegel's insistence that the state alone could determine right and
>> wrong (the state could of course make errors, but in the long run there is
>> no extramundane source of Right beyond the state). This was something
>> impossible for Marx to accept. And yet Hegel's idea of Ethics as something
>> objective, contained in the evolving forms of life (rather than Pure Reason
>> inherent in every individual as Kant held, or from God via His agents on
>> Earth, the priesthood), Marx wished to embrace and continue.
>>
>> So the situation is very complex. The foremost work on Ethics was
>> authored by a person who did not believe they wrote about Ethics at all.
>>
>> Here is a page with lots of resources on this question:
>> https://www.marxists.org/subject/ethics/index.htm
>>
>> Andy
>> ------------------------------
>> Andy Blunden
>> http://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/index.htm
>> On 18/07/2018 2:54 PM, Harshad Dave wrote:
>>
>> Why do we discuss on exploitation?
>> As per Marx's views, ethics has no influence on economic processes. Does
>> exploitation have no link with ethical feelings? The sense of exploitation
>> is absolutely linked with our ethical feelings. If economics is immune from
>> influence of ethics and sense of *exploitation* is founded on our
>> ethical evaluation, then discussion on *exploitation* should not find
>> place in the topics of economics/political economics.
>> Harshad Dave
>> hhdave15@gmail.com
>>
>>
>>
>> Harshad Dave
>> ​hhdave15@gmail.com​
>>
>>
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20180719/18881a6e/attachment.html