マルクス的経済理論における置塩(1963)以降の進展 : 搾取理論の場合(<特集>置塩経済学の可能性)
スポンサーリンク
概要
- 論文の詳細を見る
In Marxian economics, the capitalist economy is conceived of as an exploitative system. Since Okishio (1963), it had been recognized that the validity of this basic Marxian insight was shown by the so-called Fundamental Marxian Theorem (FMT), assuming a simple Leontief economic model with the Okishio definition of exploitation. However, FMTis no longer robust once a more complex economic model is considered. Moreover, the Generalized Commodity Exploitation Theorem indicates that the definition of exploitation a la Okishio(1963)-Morishima (1973) does not properly capture the core feature of exploitation as a concept of social relations, but rather it simply represents the productiveness of the economic system as a whole. Given these two criticisms, Roemer (1982, 1994) proposed the property relations definition of exploitation (PR-exploitation) which was to recognize exploitation as a concept of social relations stipulated by the ownership structure of productive assets. Though PR-exploitation has nothing to do with the classical labour theory of value, it is a mathematical extension of the Okishio definition. Moreover, it is generally true that, under the definition of PRexploitation, the capitalist economy can be conceived of as exploitative. However, the PR theory of exploitation is a double-edged sword in that it denies the relevance of the notion of exploitation as a primary normative concern: Roemer (1994) argued that the primary normative concern should be injustice of unequal distribution of productive assets rather than exploitation per se. His criticism against exploitation was so influential that the Marxian theory of exploitation was almost "killed", in that there had been no substantial works in this field after Roemer (1994) until recently. However, the Marxian notion of exploitation has now been revived: indeed recently, there has been some significant developments in theories of exploitation as the social relation of unequal exchange of labour (UE-exploitation). This paper examines, among others, the arguments of proper conceptual definitions of exploitation developed by Vrousails (2013) in political philosophy and by Wright (2000) in sociology. Both approaches share a common feature, in that they address the systematic generation of the unequal exchange of labour due to the asymmetric power relations embedded in the trading structure. Interestingly, by the new theory of exploitation a la Vrousails(2013)-Wright(2000), Roemer's claim that the theory of exploitation is reduced to a theory of distributive injustice can be invalidated, and the notion of UE-exploitation is restored as a primary normative concern. Given this new trend, one of the relevant subjects for Marxian exploitation theory would be to identify the proper formulation of UE-exploitation, which has been developed significantly due to an axiomatic theory of exploitation initiated by Veneziani and Yoshihara. Among many others of them, this paper examines Profit-Exploitation Correspondence Principle (PECP) [Veneziani and Yoshihara (2013a)] which is proposed to characterize axiomatically the eligible definitions of exploitation. Then, an extension of the exploitation form a la New Interpretation is shown, among the main definitions in the literature, to be uniquely eligible.
- 2014-01-20