Polish Marxism after Luxemburg: Volume 37

In The Accumulation of Capital (2015a), Rosa Luxemburg emphasises the importance of demand realisation in Marx's economics. First, by studying the history of political economy a refutation is provided of the suggested harmony between production and consumption (what came to be called Say's Law) first proposed by Say and J. Mill. Second, in her analysis of Marx's reproduction schemes, Luxemburg identifies the key role of demand constraints, set in the circulation of money. Central to this analysis is how the specific peculiarities of capitalism, such as constraints on the demand for commodities by wage labour, serve to intensify problems associated with Say's Law. The main purpose of this chapter is to consider how a refutation of Say's Law can be established in Luxemburg's treatment of the reproduction schemes that featured in Polish discussions of economic reproduction.

This analysis builds on the examination of Say's Law provided by Trigg (2020) under the confines of simple commodity circulation. Luxemburg's simple reproduction scheme provides a useful starting point for extending this refutation to the arena of capitalism. Core to this approach is how commodity money undergoes wear and tear as money circulates: a phenomenon that is considered by Luxemburg introducing a new department of production for the money commodity. By developing this system, and drawing on Marx's writings in Theories of Surplus Value, part 2 (Marx, 1968), the analysis will provide a systematic exploration of Marx's inevitability theory of crises under capitalism, as an extension of the more established possibility theory of crises under simple circulation.

While a political activist organising Jewish workers in Galicia, before the First World War and in the Communist Workers' Party of Poland, between 1919 and 1925, Henryk Grossman wrote substantial Marxist works on the economic history of Galicia and Poland. His principal contributions to economic theory, from 1919 and into the 1940s, were the identification of Marx's method and the fundamental structure of Capital; the significance of the distinction between use value and value, at all levels of Marx’s economic analysis; and the elaboration of Marx's account of capitalism's tendency to break down and its consequent, unavoidable proneness to economic crises, grounded in the tendency for the rate of profit to fall and its counter-tendencies. While the reception of Grossman's analyses was generally hostile, they are of vital importance for those seeking to understand and overturn capitalism today.

Industrial feudalism is a socioeconomic formation that the Polish Marxists Ludwik Krzywicki and Oskar Lange associated with monopoly finance capital. Industrial feudalism arises in a socially static capitalism where mobility between hierarchically defined social strata is restricted. Krzywicki's account predates Hilferding's Finance Capital and outlines the functioning of the capital market-based finance capital that has become more common in capitalism. Seemingly unaware of Krzywicki's pioneering articles, Oskar Lange then presented his own account of monopoly finance capital in the United States with similar social consequences in the early 1940s with state support for monopolies. Krzywicki's work on monopoly finance capital was discovered in the 1950s by Tadeusz Kowalik.

Industrial feudalism is a socio-economic formation of advanced capitalist countries in which society becomes stratified into closed, hierarchically-defined social groups. In the writings of Ludwik Krzywicki and Oskar Lange, industrial feudalism is associated with the dominance of monopoly finance capital. The chapter extends this analysis of twenty-first century capitalism in which social groups are differentiated by the kind of property that they own and hence the kind of credit to which they have access to prevent becoming déclassé. However asset inflation then inhibits upward social mobility, confining households to their inherited social class. This inhibits labour mobility. But the availability of credit for the propertied classes also defines attitudes towards state welfare provision.

The 15 years spanning from the end of the nineteenth century till the outbreak of the First World War formed, perhaps, the richest period in the history of Marxian economics. The main development between the time of Marx's writing and that of the German-Russian debates was the change in the competitive nature of the capitalist system. In the early stages of capitalism, the forces of competition created an imperative for capitalist firms to invest all their profits, or lose out in the competitive struggle to other firms which did. However, as large firms and oligopolistic structures emerged, the nature of competition changed, with price competition no longer the only form, leading to an erosion of this imperative, and an increase in capitalist consumption. Kalecki showed that, in this case, total profits were determined by capitalist's consumption and investment expenditures. The result, according to Kalecki, was a chronic tendency towards stagnation in capitalist economies. The long boom could be explained as ‘exports’ to a market external to the private sector, namely armaments and military expenditures.

Rosa Luxemburg is not an under-consumptionist stressing the tendency to stagnation, it is rather an under-investment perspective: the effective demand crisis results from the disequilibria determined by a vibrant capitalist accumulation, and stems from production rather than circulation. To show this, the chapter deals with three dimensions of Rosa Luxemburg's economic thought. First, how Luxemburg's approach in her 1913 book is related with some of her prior writings, especially Social Reform or Revolution? and the Introduction to Political Economy. Second, the re-reading that Luxemburg herself provided of her own argument in terms of a macro-monetary circuit model like the one we read in her Anti-Critique. Third and last, in which sense Marx's monetary labour theory of value was for her the essential starting point, which cannot be just set aside. This last point will be preceded by a détour, the critical consideration of some key papers by Kalecki on capitalism and reform, including his late paper with Kowalik on the ‘crucial reform’. The chapter concludes with some hints pointing towards an interpretation of capitalism and its recurring crises where exploitation and effective demand are both essential in accounting for the ascent and collapses of different forms of capitalism itself.

The chapter presents a short biography of Kalecki, from his early years in Łódź, through his economics research and development of his theory of business cycles, participation in the Keynesian Revolution and work after the Second World War on the economics of socialism and the developing countries. The key role of capital accumulation (investment) in determining levels of employment and total output is put forward as Kalecki's main innovation. There are evident similarities between Kalecki's theory of the business cycle and that of the Austro-Marxist Emil Lederer, as well as in the distributional analysis of Rudolf Hilferding. Kalecki's analysis of monetary circulation, and the centrality of his theory of profits was anticipated by Rosa Luxemburg in her Anti-Critique. But that monetary theory is rooted in a Marxian understanding of money as a means of settlement between capitalists.

Kalecki's 1968 paper on Marx's Reproduction Schemes aimed, starting from Marxian Schemes, to build an analytical bridge to the modern theories of Effective Demand and Growth. Kalecki accomplished his task modifying the structure of Marxian Schemes, reinterpreting them in terms of vertically integrated sectors, and this sidesteps Marx's analysis of the monetary intersectoral transaction. This chapter tries to show that the impossibility of implementing the intersectoral monetary transaction is not simply due to monetary technicalities, as held by Kalecki, but has crucial implications regarding Say's Law. Putting aside Marx's problem, Kalecki puts aside the true meaning of Marx's unsuccessful analysis: that an economy obeying Say's Law cannot function; as it were, Marx's Impossibility Theorem on Say's Law.

Lange's rejection of bureaucratic socialism can be traced throughout his works, from the very beginning to the end. Planners and economic agents have to act under mandatory rules provided by economic theory to avoid the risk of an autocratic regime detached from the people's needs. Drawing upon this premise, Walrasian theory played a pivotal role to introduce rules to tie the hands of socialist bureaucrats based on scientific, economic theory. In this sense, Lange's anti-bureaucratism and Walrasianism descended from a similar political premise. However, the coexistence of conflicting views into the same theory (such as Marxian and Walrasian theories) also implied potential risks, mainly when socialist democracy is conceived in technocratic terms and Marxian theory assimilates to natural sciences.

This paper surveys the intellectual trajectory of the Polish political economist Włodzimierz Brus, who took up the arguments for use of the ‘price mechanism’ in socialism from the pre-War work of Oskar Lange. Brus advanced the idea that a ‘Law of Value’ applied under socialism, which would allow prices and appropriate material incentives to bring the socialist economy into equilibrium. Kalecki, however, opposed the use of cost-minimising incentives, and Brus never fully resolved the problem of how investment is to be guided in a decentralised way. A lively discussion of ‘market socialism’ did not survive the 1960s. In exile from 1972, Brus participated in China's post-Mao discussions on economic reform. But his interest in prices and markets under socialism ceased effectively with the fall of Communism at the end of the 1980s.

The aim of this chapter is to compare the content of two essays: Oskar Lange's 1931 ‘Crisis of Socialism’ and Tadeusz Kowalik's 1996 ‘August – the Bourgeois Revolution of the Epigones’ in order to try to determine the extent to which Lange's paper influenced Kowalik's ideas. We find that Lange's article was possibly Kowalik's only source of theoretical knowledge about bourgeois revolutions and their course when he wrote his 1996 piece. What probably struck Kowalik most in ‘Crisis of Socialism’ in the context of Polish transformations was the similarity (real or apparent) between the situation in Poland in 1905–1918 and that in 1980–1989 (or even 1980–1992), that is, the possibility of constructing a ‘bourgeois class state’ only through a workers revolution immediately preceding such a construction. On the basis of this analogy, in ‘August…’ Kowalik, as we argue, introduced a novelty into his reflections: he fortified his earlier, more lax analyses with the concept of ‘bourgeois revolution.’

This chapter aims at introducing the key themes in two entries written by Tadeusz Kowalik for the Encyclopaedia Einaudi. These two long essays represent further developments of Kowalik's interpretation of the nature of capital and the cause and consequences of cyclical developments in capitalism. While the chapter is divided into two sections corresponding to the two entries, at the same time it tries to highlight the structural method of the author for which the categories of capital and crisis are historically, economically and politically entangled.

For almost half a decade, after World War II, capitalism and socialism coexisted on the European continent. Some believed that these systems would converge, with state intervention stabilising capitalism in the west and socialism became more democratic in the east. Michał Kalecki, in his last published article, co-written with Tadeusz Kowalik, wrote about how governments had implemented a crucial reform in the developed capitalist economies. State investment had filled the demand gap, which could potentially result in the long-term mitigation of capitalism's slumps and crises. Tadeusz Kowalik later extended this notion of the crucial reform, to the troubled socialist systems in Eastern Europe during the 1980s. He argued that previous economic reforms had failed in the socialist countries as they had not been accompanied by sufficient democratic political reforms, which needed to be extended in order to fully revitalise the socialist economies. Ultimately the proposals for a crucial reform of capitalism and socialism were not realised and these systems did not converge economically or politically. This chapter examines the theses of Kalecki and Kowalik within the historical and intellectual tradition of Polish socialist and Marxist thought.