История экономической мысли глазами структуралиста (Часть 1. Классики и Маркс)

Abstract

The paper attempts to rethink the problem of the optimal structure of the economy and economic growth in the history of thought. The concept of «post-truth» according to S. Fuller is used. A. Smith used the strategy of changing speech practices and interpreting facts against the mercantilists, and subsequently K. Marx did the same for the entire classical school. The history of thought legitimizes the economic mainstream — the dominant version of economic theory, ignoring the previous versions of rhetorical domination. The central role in the problem of determining the optimal structure of the economy is given to the old discussion about the relationship between productive and unproductive labor. Both Smith, and Ricardo, and Marx were looking for the main source of value and mechanisms for its redistribution and withdrawal in favor of certain social groups. The division into productive and non-productive types of economic activity is recognized as incorrect and discarded at modern time. Condemned by A. Smith the orientation of economic agents towards extracting rent can block economic growth in fact. As D. Ricardo shows, rent-seeking behavior can lead to the disappearance of profits and the achievement of the so-called «stationary state» under certain conditions,. The principle of comparative advantage, Ricardo discovered the principle of comparative advantage. That contradicts both «equilibrium in the long run» and the theory of labor value. This principle makes it possible to build a hierarchy of geopolitical subjects in the spirit of world-system analysis with a certain modification,. Marx ignores this principle, using «surplus value» as the basis of his concept. According his approach value is created only in the sphere of material production. This kind of research leaves the problem of the optimal structure of the economy unresolved.