Dans son livre Marx, penseur du possible, paru en 1992 aux éditions Méridiens Klincksieck, Michel Vadée fait de Marx « un adepte de la liberté individuelle et collective »1. Pour ce faire il met au coeur de son interprétation globale de l’oeuvre de Marx la catégorie de « modalité ». Loin de sauver une cohérence de façon artificielle, Michel Vadée mettra en évidence les « obscurités » et les « contradictions apparentes » de certains de ses concepts.
Par Ivan Jurkovic
Profit raten: On Coronavirus and Crisis — Michael Heinrich
Translated from the German by Alexander Locascio
Ever since the coronavirus started keeping the world on edge, there have been arguments about how to interpret what’s happening. [1] From the far-right, we’ve been getting primarily absurd conspiracy theories. Liberal conservatives such as the historian Paul Nolte [2] regard it as the greatest rupture since the end of the Second World War, but have problems determining more precisely what the content of this rupture is.
Texte de travail par Emmanuel Barot pour l’Université populaire de Toulouse, en 2013:
Le taux de profit et le monde d’aujourd ‘huiArticle de Michael Heinrich paru dans la Monthly Review en avril 2013. Cet article sera notamment l’objet de la critique de Sam Williams.
The development of crisis theory within the Marxian tradition has been central to much of our work in the last several years. The view that the various fragmentary references to crisis theory in the three volumes of Capital constitute a fully developed coherent structure, which only requires diligent exegesis, is a view that has never seemed sensible to us.
Recent research into the evolution of Marx’s manuscripts in connection with the production of the Marx-Engels-Gesamtausgabe (MEGA), the historical-critical edition of the complete writings of Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, has confirmed our understanding in a very exciting way. It is now clear that Marx never ceased to develop his thinking on the phenomena of crises in capitalism, and never ceased to discard earlier formulations; for example, at the end of his life he was focused on questions of credit and crisis. Monthly Review rarely presents its readers with discussions of economic theory at a relatively high degree of abstraction; this, however, is such an occasion. We trust that the author’s exemplary clarity will permit ready access to readers with any degree of interest in Marx’s theory; for those who wish to become familiar with the conceptual outline of Marx’s work, we cannot do better than to recommend the author’s An Introduction to the Three Volumes of Karl Marx’s Capital (Monthly Review Press, 2012).