Die Marx Kritik der österreichischen Schule der Nationalökonomie

[Front Matter and Editorial Note]: This segment contains the title page, publication details, and an editorial note for the first volume of 'Etappen bürgerlicher Marx-Kritik'. It explains the citation standards used, specifically the referencing of the Marx-Engels-Werke (MEW) edition, and acknowledges contributors like Dr. Milford and Prof. Dr. Eduard März. [Title Page and Publication Information]: The main title page listing the primary authors included in this collection on the Austrian School's critique of Marx, including Böhm-Bawerk and Hilferding. It also provides bibliographic data such as the ISBN and publisher information. [Table of Contents]: A detailed table of contents for the volume, outlining the major essays by Böhm-Bawerk, Hilferding, Rosdolsky, and Komorzynski. It lists specific chapters focusing on the theory of value, the transformation problem (average profit rate), and critiques of Marx's 'Capital' Volume III. [Table of Contents and Introductory Notes]: This segment contains the table of contents for the third part of the work, focusing on the transformation of Marx's doctrine, the equal profit rate, and internal contradictions. It also includes biographical notes and an introduction by the editors regarding the Austrian School's critique of Marx. [Introduction: The Nature of Marxian Critique and the Rise of Subjective Value Theory]: The editors provide an extensive introduction to the history of Marx-critique. They argue that Marx did not intend to found a new school but to provide a radical critique of capitalist society and its economic categories. The text traces the shift in mainstream economics from classical labor value theories (Smith, Ricardo) to the subjective value theory (marginalism) of Menger, Jevons, and Walras, which served as a theoretical 'dam' against socialist critique. It highlights the central controversy between Böhm-Bawerk and Hilferding. [The Reception of Capital and the Puzzle of the Average Profit Rate]: This section examines the academic reception of Marx's 'Capital'. It discusses the initial silence and rejection by 'mandarins' of economics and the subsequent focus on the theory of value and surplus value. A significant portion is dedicated to the 'puzzle' of the average profit rate that emerged between the publication of Volume II and Volume III, where critics like Böhm-Bawerk identified a fundamental contradiction between the law of value and the reality of equal profit rates across different capital compositions. [The Theoretical Foundations of the Austrian School]: A detailed overview of the Austrian School's axioms. It explains the subjective nature of value, derived from the relationship between human needs and the scarcity of goods (marginal utility). The text covers the determination of market prices through 'marginal pairs', the derivation of production factor values (imputation theory), and Böhm-Bawerk's 'agio' theory of interest, which views interest as a universal economic category based on the time-preference of present versus future goods. [The Böhm-Bawerk vs. Hilferding Controversy]: This segment analyzes the core arguments of Böhm-Bawerk's critique and Hilferding's rebuttal. Böhm-Bawerk claims Marx fails to logically derive labor as the common element of value by excluding use-value. Hilferding responds that the exclusion of use-value is a social necessity in commodity production, where labor serves as the social bond. The discussion covers the reduction of skilled labor to simple labor and the transformation of values into production prices, noting that early 20th-century debates often lacked access to Marx's 'Grundrisse'. [Komorzynski and Lederer: Further Perspectives on Marx-Critique]: The introduction concludes by discussing the contributions of Komorzynski and Lederer. Komorzynski attempts to refute the labor theory of value entirely, misinterpreting it as a microeconomic tool for price calculation. Lederer focuses on the role of 'social need' and demand, suggesting Marx's Volume III implicitly adopts marginalist concepts. The editors defend Marx by clarifying that 'socially necessary labor' and 'social need' are consistent across volumes when understood through Marx's specific method of abstraction. [Review of Karl Marx: Das Kapital, Volume I (1869)]: A contemporary 1869 review of the first volume of 'Capital' by an anonymous critic (Rr.). The reviewer dismisses the work as a product of 'false philosophy' and 'naturalistic economic philosophy'. He critiques Marx's style, his definition of wealth as a collection of commodities, and the labor theory of value. The reviewer argues that Marx's 'natural laws' of production negate human freedom and responsibility, and ultimately views socialism as merely 'forced Smithianism'. [Böhm-Bawerk: Karl Marx and the Close of His System - Introduction]: Böhm-Bawerk begins his famous critique by marveling at Marx's success despite his difficult dialectical style. He outlines the central contradiction he intends to expose: the conflict between the labor theory of value in Volume I (where value is based on labor) and the reality of an average profit rate proportional to total capital in Volume III. He notes that while Marx promised a solution, the academic world waited decades for Volume III to see if the system could be reconciled with reality. [The Theory of Value and Surplus Value]: Böhm-Bawerk reconstructs the foundational pillars of the Marxian system: the concept and law of value. He details Marx's dialectical derivation of value from exchange value, the reduction of concrete labor to abstract human labor, and the measurement of value by socially necessary labor time. The segment further explains the theory of surplus value, distinguishing between constant and variable capital, and defining the rate of surplus value as the exact expression of the degree of exploitation of labor. It concludes by introducing the distinction between the rate of surplus value and the rate of profit, setting the stage for the systemic contradictions explored in later volumes of 'Das Kapital'. [The Theory of the Average Rate of Profit and Prices of Production]: This section addresses the 'great cliff' of Marxian theory: the reconciliation of the law of value with the reality of an equalized average rate of profit across industries with different organic compositions of capital. Böhm-Bawerk explains Marx's solution in Volume III of 'Das Kapital', where commodities are no longer sold at their values but at 'prices of production' (cost price plus average profit). Through tabular examples, the segment illustrates how total surplus value is redistributed among capitalists like shareholders in a corporation, and how competition drives capital from low-profit to high-profit spheres, thereby transforming values into production prices. [The Question of Contradiction: Böhm-Bawerk's Critique]: Böhm-Bawerk presents his core thesis: a fundamental and irreconcilable contradiction exists between Volume I and Volume III of 'Das Kapital'. He argues that Marx's later admission that commodities do not exchange according to the labor embodied in them (but according to production prices) constitutes a total abandonment of the law of value established in Volume I. The segment cites contemporary reactions from Sombart, Schmidt, and Loria, and begins a systematic refutation of the four arguments Marxists use to claim the law of value still holds 'in the last instance'. [Refutation of the First and Second Arguments for the Law of Value]: Böhm-Bawerk refutes the first two arguments for the continued validity of the law of value. First, he addresses the claim that the sum of all prices equals the sum of all values, dismissing it as a 'conceptual nonsense' and a 'tautology' that explains nothing about individual exchange ratios. He compares this logic to claiming all animals live the same length of time because their average lifespan can be calculated. Second, he refutes the idea that the law of value governs price movements, noting that while labor is a factor in price, it is not the sole factor, as changes in capital composition or duration also affect prices independently of labor time. [Refutation of the Third Argument: Historical Priority of Value]: Böhm-Bawerk critiques Marx's claim that the law of value held sway in 'original' pre-capitalist states where workers owned their means of production. He argues this hypothesis is psychologically and economically improbable because it assumes workers are indifferent to the time they must wait for the fruits of their labor. He asserts that even in pre-capitalist settings, branches requiring more capital or longer production times would naturally command higher prices to compensate for the 'waiting time' and limited accessibility. He cites Werner Sombart to show that historically, capital never entered production without the prospect of an 'average profit' already established in commerce. [Refutation of the Fourth Argument: Indirect Regulation of Prices]: The final argument—that the law of value regulates production prices indirectly via the total surplus value—is analyzed and rejected. Böhm-Bawerk demonstrates that the 'chain of logic' Marx uses is diluted by factors foreign to the law of value at every step: wage levels, the total mass of social capital, and the duration of investment. He concludes that Marx confuses the fact that labor is *one* determinant of price with the claim that it is the *sole* determinant. He likens Marx's defense to a man claiming the amount of gunpowder is the sole cause of a cannon's effect, even after admitting that the barrel length, projectile hardness, and target thickness also play essential roles. [The Origin of the Error: Dialectical Deduction vs. Empirical Reality]: Böhm-Bawerk investigates the psychological and methodological origins of Marx's error. He argues that Marx did not derive his labor theory of value from experience or psychological analysis—both of which contradict it—but from a flawed dialectical deduction. Marx's method of 'exclusion' is criticized for arbitrarily limiting the field of investigation to 'commodities' (products of labor), thereby ignoring natural resources (land, minerals) that also possess exchange value. Böhm-Bawerk exposes the logical fallacies in Marx's abstraction from 'use-value', noting that one could just as easily abstract from labor to prove use-value is the source of value. [The Problem of Skilled Labor and the Tactical Use of Abstraction]: This segment critiques Marx's handling of skilled (complex) labor. Marx claims skilled labor is merely 'multiplied' simple labor, but Böhm-Bawerk argues this is a circular argument: the scale of multiplication is derived from the very exchange values it is supposed to explain. The author further discusses how Marx tactically used 'abstraction' to ignore the influence of capital investment for two volumes, only to face the 'bad harvest' of these contradictions in Volume III. He suggests Marx was influenced more by the authority of Smith and Ricardo and his own socialist convictions than by sound empirical evidence. [The Role of Competition and the Final Collapse of the System]: In the concluding part of this chunk, Böhm-Bawerk analyzes Marx's treatment of competition and supply/demand. He critiques Marx's 'strange theory' that supply and demand explain nothing when they are in equilibrium. He argues that competition is the very force Marx eventually relies on in Volume III to explain the transition from values to production prices, thereby contradicting his earlier dismissal of it. The author concludes that the 'ominous' tenth chapter of Volume III is a collection of contradictions and obscurities necessitated by Marx's attempt to hide the fundamental incompatibility of his initial dialectical premises with the reality of economic life. [Werner Sombart's Apology and the Reinterpretation of Marx's Value Law]: Böhm-Bawerk examines Werner Sombart's defense of Marx, noting that Sombart admits the Marxian law of value does not correspond to empirical reality but is instead a 'mental fact' or theoretical tool. Böhm-Bawerk argues that this interpretation contradicts Marx's own claims, as Marx frequently asserted that his law of value operates as a real, objective law of nature governing actual exchange relations and price gravitation. [Critique of Sombart's Concept of Value as a Mental Fact]: Böhm-Bawerk critiques Sombart's attempt to save the value law by defining it as a necessary abstraction for understanding economic phenomena. He argues that while abstraction is scientifically valid, it must only exclude irrelevant factors; since factors other than labor (like land and capital) significantly influence exchange values, an abstraction based solely on labor is not 'adequate' and fails to represent the objective reality of the economic system. [Methodological Disputes: Objectivism vs. Subjectivism]: Böhm-Bawerk addresses Sombart's claim that the conflict between Marxism and the Austrian School is a methodological one between objectivism and subjectivism. Böhm-Bawerk maintains that his critique is not of Marx's method, but of his errors in applying it, specifically the failure to correctly identify objective connections. He concludes that Marx's system, like Hegel's, is a brilliant but ultimately fragile 'house of cards' built on dialectical fallacies that will eventually succumb to the weight of facts. [Rudolf Hilferding: The Value as an Economic Category]: Rudolf Hilferding begins his counter-critique of Böhm-Bawerk by defending the Marxian analysis of the commodity. He argues that the Austrian School's focus on individual psychology misses the social and historical essence of value. Hilferding asserts that value is an expression of social production relations between independent producers, and that abstract labor is a real social process, not a mere logical abstraction as Böhm-Bawerk claims. [The Problem of Qualified Labor and Social Necessity]: Hilferding defends Marx's reduction of qualified (complex) labor to simple labor. He argues that the lack of a pre-determined mathematical reduction scale does not invalidate the law of value, as the law's primary function is to explain the laws of motion and changes in prices driven by productivity, rather than providing a static price list. He emphasizes that value is a social category reflecting the historical organization of labor rather than individual utility. [Value and Average Profit: Resolving the Apparent Contradiction]: Hilferding addresses the alleged contradiction between Volume I and Volume III of 'Capital' regarding the transformation of values into prices of production. He explains that competition between capitals leads to an equalization of profit rates across different spheres of production, resulting in prices that deviate from individual values but remain anchored by the total social surplus value. The law of value thus governs the system in its totality and regulates the movement of production prices. [Historical and Social Regulation of Prices]: Hilferding critiques Böhm-Bawerk's misunderstanding of the relationship between total value and total price. He argues that the identity of total surplus value and total profit is essential for understanding the quantitative limits of the system. He also defends Marx's historical view that commodities were exchanged closer to their values in pre-capitalist stages before the full mobility of capital necessitated the formation of an average profit rate and production prices. [Wages, Profit, and the Organic Composition of Capital]: Hilferding refutes Böhm-Bawerk's claim that wage levels are an independent determinant of value. Using Marx's analysis of the organic composition of capital, Hilferding shows that changes in wages affect the rate of profit and consequently production prices, but do not alter the total value created by labor. He critiques Böhm-Bawerk for falling back into the 'Smithian' error of resolving value into components (wages and profit) rather than seeing value as the primary social magnitude. [The Subjectivist Fallacy and the Social Reality of Labor]: Hilferding concludes his essay by contrasting the subjectivist-psychological method of the Austrian School with the objectivist-social method of Marxism. He argues that the Austrian School reduces economics to individual psychology and natural relations, thereby negating economics as a social and historical science. In contrast, Marxism reveals the social relations hidden behind economic categories, viewing the law of value as the law of motion for a specific historical epoch that will eventually be superseded by a conscious socialist organization. [Roman Rosdolsky: The Problem of Qualified Labor]: Roman Rosdolsky re-examines the problem of qualified labor in Marx's theory, specifically addressing Böhm-Bawerk's critique of the 'circular explanation'. Rosdolsky argues that Böhm-Bawerk fails to understand that the reduction of all labor to 'abstract human labor' is a real social process occurring daily in capitalist production, not just a logical trick. He asserts that the higher value of qualified labor is rooted in the social costs of its production and reproduction. [The Probable Marxian Solution to the Problem of Skilled Labor]: This segment explores Marx's potential solution to the problem of reducing skilled (complicated) labor to unskilled (simple) labor within the labor theory of value. It references Marx's notes on Ricardo and Bailey, suggesting that the ratio between different labor qualities is ultimately determined by the 'value of labor-power' itself—specifically the varying costs of education and training. The author argues that in a socialist society, these differences would be empirically measured by the labor-time invested in training, and that the same logic applies mutatis mutandis to capitalism through market mechanisms. This section aims to show that skilled labor is not a fundamental obstacle to Marx's value theory, as critics like Böhm-Bawerk claimed. [Johann von Komorzynski: The Third Volume of Karl Marx's Capital]: A critical treatise by Johann von Komorzynski on the third volume of Marx's 'Capital'. The author introduces the central 'riddle' of the equal rate of profit: the contradiction between the labor theory of value (where surplus value depends on variable capital/labor) and the empirical reality that profit rates tend to equalize across industries regardless of their organic composition of capital. Komorzynski argues that Marx's attempt to reconcile his theory with reality in Volume III fails, leading to an internal contradiction that undermines the entire exploitation theory. He positions this failure as a broader collapse of the labor theory of value inherited from the classical school. [Marx's Original Theory of Value and Surplus Value]: This section details the original formulation of Marx's value theory as presented in Volume I of 'Capital'. It defines value as congealed labor-time and explains the distinction between use-value and exchange-value. Komorzynski traces the lineage of this theory through Smith, Ricardo, and socialist predecessors like Rodbertus. Key concepts discussed include the transfer of value from means of production (constant capital) to the product, the reduction of skilled labor to simple labor through social processes, and the definition of 'socially necessary labor time' as the standard for value measurement. [Critique of the Labor Theory of Value: The Role of Utility and Nature]: Komorzynski provides a critical analysis of the labor theory of value, focusing on its failure to adequately account for utility and the value of natural resources. He argues that the theory's insistence on labor as the sole source of value contradicts economic reality, where scarce natural goods (like land or mines) possess value independent of labor. The critique highlights the circular reasoning used to reduce skilled labor to simple labor based on market prices. It also evaluates Heinrich Dietzel's attempt to rescue the theory by reinterpreting labor costs as a measure of utility (labor-saving), concluding that even this improved version cannot explain value differences rooted in innate talent or subjective purpose. [Kritik der Arbeitswerttheorie: Die Rolle von Naturkräften und Produktionsmitteln]: The author critiques the labor theory of value for failing to account for non-labor production costs, specifically natural resources and the use of existing capital goods. He argues that even in a socialist state, the scarcity of natural forces and the time-binding nature of capital must be reflected in economic calculations to avoid arbitrary pricing. He further rejects the reduction of capital costs to historical labor, asserting that current reproduction costs and the availability of production means are the true determinants of value. [Die Ausbeutungslehre und der Mehrwert bei Marx]: This section examines Marx's theory of surplus value and exploitation, which posits that profit arises because workers are paid only for the labor required to sustain their labor power while performing additional 'unpaid' surplus labor. The author highlights the logical dependency of this exploitation theory on the labor theory of value and critiques Marx's distinction between absolute and relative surplus value, particularly regarding technical progress in different production sectors. [Widersprüche der Ausbeutungstheorie: Profitrate und Wertsteigerung]: The author discusses two major contradictions in Marx's exploitation theory: the 'riddle of the equal rate of profit' and the quantitative limits of labor-based value. Using examples from Böhm-Bawerk involving jewelers and aged wine, the author demonstrates that capital returns often far exceed what could plausibly be extracted from labor alone, suggesting that factors like time, natural properties, and the capital goods themselves contribute to value increases independent of human labor. [Retrospective on Rodbertus and the Problem of the Equal Rate of Profit]: Böhm-Bawerk examines the historical and theoretical attempts to reconcile the labor theory of value with the reality of an equal rate of profit across different industries. He critiques Rodbertus and early socialist thinkers, arguing that once they admit prices deviate from labor values to equalize profit rates, the foundational logic of the exploitation theory—that profit is stolen labor—collapses. The segment highlights the tension between 'ideal' labor values and 'real' market prices in socialist doctrine. [Literary Responses to the Profit Rate Puzzle: Lexis, Schmidt, and Fireman]: This section reviews the 'literary movement' that emerged between the publication of the second and third volumes of Marx's Capital. It discusses Wilhelm Lexis's prediction of Marx's solution, Conrad Schmidt's failed attempt to derive profit rates from 'accumulated labor', and Peter Fireman's 'correction' to the value theory. Böhm-Bawerk notes that all these authors eventually concede a fundamental gap between labor values and actual exchange prices. [Marx's Theory of the Formation of the Average Profit Rate]: Böhm-Bawerk analyzes Volume III of Capital, where Marx introduces 'prices of production' to solve the profit rate contradiction. He details Marx's distinction between productive and unproductive labor (circulation costs), the role of merchant capital, and the derivation of interest and ground rent. Marx's shift is characterized as a move from labor-determined value to a system where competition redistributes total social surplus value into equalized profit rates based on total capital invested. [The Internal Contradiction of the Reformed Marxian Doctrine]: Böhm-Bawerk presents his final critique of Marx's revised system. He argues that Marx's attempt to maintain the 'law of value' as a social aggregate while denying its application to individual prices is a tautological failure. He refutes Werner Sombart's defense of Marx, asserting that if prices do not follow labor content, the 'exploitation' thesis loses its objective basis. The segment concludes that Marx's Volume III effectively commits 'theoretical suicide' by abandoning the labor theory of value. [Emil Lederer: Contributions to the Critique of the Marxian System]: Emil Lederer provides a critical analysis of Marx's system, focusing on the role of 'socially necessary labor' and its dependence on social needs (utility). He argues that Marx's Volume III implicitly incorporates marginal utility concepts. Lederer also examines the formation of profit rates, the impact of competition, and the distinction between industrial and commercial capital, suggesting that Marx's rigid categories fail to account for the complexities of modern market dynamics and monopoly power. [Biographical Notes: Böhm-Bawerk, Hilferding, Rosdolsky, Komorzynski, and Lederer]: Biographical sketches and publication lists for the key authors featured in the volume. It covers the careers of Eugen von Böhm-Bawerk (Austrian Finance Minister and economist), Rudolf Hilferding (SPD politician and author of Finance Capital), Roman Rosdolsky (Marxist historian), Johann von Komorzynski (marginal utility theorist), and Emil Lederer (sociologist and economist).