Reading Marx’s Capital with David Harvey

“Marxist Geographer David Harvey on the G20, the Financial Crisis, and Neo-Liberalism”
Democracy Now!
April 2, 2009

Part 1 of 3:

Part 2 of 3:

Part 3 of 3:

David Harvey Interviewed on New York Public Radio (WNYC)
March 26, 2009

5 Minute Video Excerpt:

Listen to full audio interview (24 minutes):

Or download MP3 file (9.8 MB)

(To download on a PC right-click on the above file and click ‘Save as’ or ‘Download to’. On a Mac Control-click instead of right-click.)

The End of Capitalism? – A Response to Tim Geithner
GRITtv
Wednesday March 11, 2009 8:00 pm

The Crisis and the Consolidation of Class Power
David Harvey interviewed by Marco Berlinguer and Hilary Wainwright on December 13th, 2008.
Available at Red Pepper

Does this crisis signal the end of neoliberalism? My answer is that it depends what you mean by neoliberalism. My interpretation is that it’s a class project, now masked by a lot of rhetoric about individual freedom, liberty, personal responsibility, privatisation and the free market. That rhetoric was a means towards the restoration and consolidation of class power, and that neoliberal project has been fairly successful… Read the rest of this article at Red Pepper.

Exhibit A: The Arrogance of the Neoclassical Economists
David Harvey
February 15, 2009
http://davidharvey.org

A response to DeLong.

The real mystery here is the arrogance of the economists in the face of a catastrophic situation.  I would have thought that in a profession dominated by neoclassical and increasingly neoliberal theory these last thirty years, that there might have appeared at least some sliver of humility. They have collectively provided us with no guidance on how to avoid the current mess and now, when faced with a crisis, they can only say, as Marx long ago presciently noted, that things would not be so if the economy only performed according to their textbooks.  Maybe it is time to revise if not change the textbooks.

The charge that I have neither read nor understood DeLong’s canonical writings is the usual technocratic hubris deployed by economists when they have nothing to say.  I might as well reply that DeLong has neither read nor understood his Marx (I have a remedial course on line) and in any case I don’t see why I should go back to Friedman rather than to Galbraith, Hicks rather than Joan Robinson and why it is that he presumes that Dobb, Sweezy, Glyn, Itoh and Morishima have nothing to say of relevance to our current difficulties because neoclassical economics is a God-given truth beyond contestation?

Continue Reading »