Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-544b6db54f-2p87r Total loading time: 0.189 Render date: 2021-10-24T14:39:14.517Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "metricsAbstractViews": false, "figures": true, "newCiteModal": false, "newCitedByModal": true, "newEcommerce": true, "newUsageEvents": true }

Ne Hic Saltaveris: The Marxian Theory of Exploitation After Roemer

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 December 2008

Gilbert L. Skillman
Affiliation:
Wesleyan University

Extract

In his book A General Theory of Exploitation and Class (1982) (hereafter GT), John Roemer employs the tools of mainstream general equilibrium and game-theoretic analysis to develop a fundamental critique and broadbased reformulation of Marxian economic theory. Perhaps Roemer's most striking departure from traditional Marxian tenets lies in his explanation of the material basis of exploitation in capitalist economies. Roemer argues that capitalist exploitation must be understood as essentially the consequence of exchange given differential ownership of relatively scarce productive assets (DORSPA). In particular, Roemer concludes that capitalist exploitation does not fundamentally depend on capitalist domination of production, or what Marx termed the subsumption of labor under capital.

Type
Essays
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1995

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Anderson, W.Locke, H. and Frank, Thompson. 1988. ‘Neoclassical Marxism’. Science and Society, 52: 215–28Google Scholar
Ansberry, Clare. 1993. ‘Workers are forced to take more jobs with few benefitsWall Street journal, 221 (March 11): Al, A9Google Scholar
Berg, Maxine. 1986. The Age of Manufactures: Industry, Innovation and Work in Britain 1700–1820. Oxford University PressGoogle Scholar
Berg, Maxine, Pat, Hudson and Michael, Sonenscher. 1983. ‘Manufacture in town and country before the factory’. In Manufacture in Town and Country Before the factory, pp. 132. Maxine, Berg, Pat, Hudson, and Michael, Sonenscher (eds.). Cambridge University PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bowles, Samuel. 1985. “The production process in a competitive economy: Walrasian, Neo-Hobbesian, and Marxian models’. American Economic Review, 75:1636Google Scholar
Bowles, Samuel and Herbert, Gintis. 1975. Schooling in Capitalist America: Educational Reform and the Contradictions of Economic Life. Basic BooksGoogle Scholar
Bowles, Samuel and Herbert, Gintis. 1990. ‘Contested exchange: new microfoundations of the political economy of capitalism’. Politics and Society, 18:165222CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bowles, Samuel, Herbert, Gintis and Bo, Gustafsson. 1993. Markets and Democracy: Participation, Accountability and Efficiency. Cambridge University PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Braverman, Harry. 1974. Labor and Monopoly Capital: The Degradation of Work in the Twentieth Century. Monthly Review PressGoogle Scholar
Devine, James and Gary, Dymski. 1989. ‘Roemer's theory of capitalist exploitation: the contradictions of Walrasian marxism’. Review of Radical Political Economics, 21:1317CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Devine, James and Gary, Dymski. 1991. ‘Roemer's general theory of exploitation is a special case’. Economics and Philosophy, 7:235–75CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Devine, James and Gary, Dymski. 1992. ‘Walrasian Marxism once again’. Economics and Philosophy, 8:157–62CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dymski, Gary and John, Elliott. 1989. ‘Roemer vs. Marx: should anyone be interested in exploitation?’ In Analyzing Marxism: New Essays on Analytical Marxism, pp. 333–74. Robert, Ware and Kai, Nielsen (eds.). The University of Calgary PressGoogle Scholar
Edwards, Richard. 1979. Contested Terrain: The Transformation of the Workplace in the Twentieth Century. Basic BooksGoogle Scholar
Foley, Duncan. 1989. ‘Roemer on Marx on exploitation’. Economics and Politics, 1:187–99CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grossman, Sanford and Oliver, Hart. 1980. ‘An analysis of the principal-agent problem’. Econometrica, 51:745CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hahnel, Robin and Michael, Albert. 1990. Quiet Revolution in Welfare Economics. Princeton University PressGoogle Scholar
Holmström, Bengt. 1979. ‘Moral hazard and observability’. Bell journal of Economics, 10:7491CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holmström, Bengt. 1982. ‘Moral hazard in teams’. Bell Journal of Economics, 13:324–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holmström, Bengt and Paul, Milgrom. 1991. ‘Multitask principal-agent analyses: incentive contracts, asset ownership, and job design’, journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, 7:2452CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Houston, David. 1989. ‘Roemer on exploitation and class’. Review of Radical Political Economics, 21:175–87CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Howard, M. and King, J. 1992. A History of Marxian Economics: Volume II, 1929–1990. Princeton University PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kriedte, Peter. 1983. Peasants, Landlords and Merchant Capitalists: Empire and the World Economy, 1500–1800. Berg Publishers LtdGoogle Scholar
Lawrance, Emily. 1991. ‘Poverty and the rate of time preference: evidence from panel data’. journal of Political Economy, 99:5477CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lebowitz, Michael A. 1988. ‘Is “Analytical Marxism” Marxism?Science and Society, 52:191214Google Scholar
Lohr, Steve. 1992. ‘More workers in the U.S. are becoming hired guns’. New York Times, 141 (August 14): Al, D2Google Scholar
Ma, Chin-to, John, Moore and Steven, Turnbull. 1988. ‘Stopping agents from “cheating”’. journal of Economic Theory, 46:355–72CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marglin, Stephen A. 1974. ‘What do bosses do?Revieiv of Radical Political Economics, 6:160Google Scholar
Marx, Karl. 1971. Theories of Surplus Value, Part III. Progress PublishersGoogle Scholar
Marx, Karl. 1990a. Capital, Volume I [1867]. Penguin BooksGoogle Scholar
Marx, Karl. 1990b. ‘Results of the immediate process of production (Resultate)’ [1933]. In Capital, Volume I, pp. 9481084. Penguin BooksGoogle Scholar
Marx, Karl. 1991. Capital, Volume III [1894]. Penguin BooksGoogle Scholar
Marx, Karl. 1992. Capital, Volume II [1885]. Penguin BooksGoogle Scholar
Marx, Karl. 1993. Grundrisse [1973]. Penguin BooksGoogle Scholar
Milgrom, Paul and John, Roberts. 1992. Economics, Organization and Management. Prentice HallGoogle Scholar
Radner, Roy. 1985. ‘Repeated principal-agent games with discounting’. Econometrica, 53:1173–98CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Radner, Roy. 1986. ‘Repeated moral hazard with low discount rates’. In Uncertainty, Information, and Communication: Essays in Honor of Kenneth J. Arrow, Volume III, pp. 2563. Walter, Heller, Ross, Starr and David, Starrett (eds.). Cambridge University PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reich, Michael and Devine, James. 1981. ‘The microeconomics of conflict and hierarchy in capitalist production’. Review of Radical Political Economics, 12:2745CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reiman, Jeffrey. 1987. ‘Exploitation, force, and the moral assessment of capitalism: thoughts on Roemer and Cohen’. Philosophy and Public Affairs, 16:241Google Scholar
Reiman, Jeffrey. 1990. ‘Why worry about how exploitation is defined? Reply to John Roemer’. Social Theory and Practice, 16:101–13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roemer, John. 1982. A General Theory of Exploitation and Class. Harvard University PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roemer, John. 1983. ‘Unequal exchange, labor migration, and international capital flows: a theoretical synthesis’. In Marxism, Central Planning, and the Soviet Economy: Economic Essays in Honor of Alexander Erlich. Padma, Desai (ed.). The MIT PressGoogle Scholar
Roemer, John. 1988. Free to Lose: An Introduction to Marxist Economic Philosophy. Harvard University PressGoogle Scholar
Ryder, Harl E. 1985. ‘Heterogeneous time preferences and the distribution of wealthMathematical Social Sciences, 9:6376CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sappington, David. 1983. ‘Limited liability contracts between principal and agent’, journal of Economic Theory, 29:121CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stiglitz, Joseph. 1975. ‘Incentives, risk, and information: notes toward a theory of hierarchy’. Bell Journal of Economics, 6:552–79CrossRefGoogle Scholar
16
Cited by

Send article to Kindle

To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Ne Hic Saltaveris: The Marxian Theory of Exploitation After Roemer
Available formats
×

Send article to Dropbox

To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

Ne Hic Saltaveris: The Marxian Theory of Exploitation After Roemer
Available formats
×

Send article to Google Drive

To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

Ne Hic Saltaveris: The Marxian Theory of Exploitation After Roemer
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response

Please enter your response.

Your details

Please enter a valid email address.

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *