“Monopoly Capital Theory and Stagflation: A Comment,” [PDF], Review of Radical Political Economics, vol. 17, nos. 1 and 2 (Spring and Summer 1985), pp. 221-25.
In my view, David Kotz’s article, ‘Monopoly. Inflation and Economic Crisis” (Kotz 1982), provides a clear and, for the most part, internally consistent explanation of the inflationary features of monpolistic pricing in the context of long-term economic stagnation, and deserves to be recognized as a notable addition to Marxian analysis. But his claim of having constructed a “new theory” (1982: 7) demands critical comment of a fraternal kind for two reasons: (1) It downplays the extent to which Kotz’s argument merely expresses the main tendency of neo-Marxian monopoly capital theory, as previously developed by Michal Kalecki, Josef Steindl, Paul Baran, Paul Sweezy, Paolo Sylos-Labini and Howard Sherman, among others (see Foster and Szlajfer 1984); (2) Kotz’s own contribution is not diminished, but only enhanced, when seen in terms of his larger historical tradition.
Comments are closed.