BIBLIOGRAPHY- Smith and Marx
A. Primary Sources
Adam Smith, An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations, in two volumes (Indianapolis, IN: Liberty Fund, 1981 [1776])
After his “Young Hegelian” phase, during which he earned his doctorate in philosophy from the University of Jena, Marx turned to Smith’s foundational text during his time in Paris (1843-5), reading it alongside other works in classical political economy and particularly those of David Ricardo. Those interested in the connections between Smith and Marx might focus their attention, as Marx did, on Book I—in particular, Smith’s discussions of the division of labour (I.i-I.iii) and the labour theory of value (I.v)—and the brief discussion in Book V of the deleterious effects of the division of labour on the working poor (V.i.50-58).
Adam Smith, An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations, in two volumes (Indianapolis, IN: Liberty Fund, 1981 [1776])
After his “Young Hegelian” phase, during which he earned his doctorate in philosophy from the University of Jena, Marx turned to Smith’s foundational text during his time in Paris (1843-5), reading it alongside other works in classical political economy and particularly those of David Ricardo. Those interested in the connections between Smith and Marx might focus their attention, as Marx did, on Book I—in particular, Smith’s discussions of the division of labour (I.i-I.iii) and the labour theory of value (I.v)—and the brief discussion in Book V of the deleterious effects of the division of labour on the working poor (V.i.50-58).
Karl Marx, Capital, Vol. I, translated by Ben Fowkes (London, UK: Penguin Classics, 1986 [1867])
_________, Theories of Surplus Value, in three volumes (Moscow: Progress Publishers, 1969 [1861-3])
_________, Grundrisse, translated by Martin Nicolaus (London, UK: Penguin Classics, 1973 [1857-9]
_________, Economic & Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844, translated by Martin Milligan, from The Marx-Engels Reader, ed. Robert Tucker (New York: W.W.Norton & Company, 1972), 66-125.
Marx scatters a number of observations about Smith and the Wealth of Nations throughout the gargantuan first volume of Capital. Readers will want to pay particular attention to Marx’s discussion of the labor theory of value in I.ii-iii (particularly fn. 16), and to Marx’s discussion of Smith’s comments on the negative effects of the division of labor, found at XIV.v. A parallel discussion of Smith’s contribution to value theory can be found deep in the Grundrisse, in Notebook VI (pp. 610-5 of the Penguin edition), where Marx argues that Smith has an incomplete conceptual understanding of the nature of labor and its relation to individual freedom. Surprisingly, Marx’s most sustained engagement with Smith, by far, can be found in an unpublished—and currently out-of-print—manuscript titled Theories of Surplus Value. TSV was meant as a continuation of 1859’s Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy, and is sometimes considered a kind of fourth volume of Capital. Chapter III, “Adam Smith,” contains Marx’s fullest discussion of Smith’s contributions to labor and value theory. Finally, readers interested in Marx’s theory of “alienation”—based at least partly on his reading of Book V of Wealth of Nations—can find its most notable exposition in his early essay “Estranged Labour,” from the Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844. Smith’s name does not appear in this particular essay, but Marx’s references at the outset to “the premises of political economy” clearly refer to those premises he found in Smith.
B. General Overviews
Ronald L. Meek, “Smith and Marx,” in Ronald L. Meek, Smith, Marx, and After: Ten Essays in the Development of Economic Thought
In one of his final essays, Ronald Meek—noted 20th-century economic historian and co-editor of the 1978 Liberty Fund edition of Smith’s Lectures on Jurisprudence—caps off a lifetime of scholarship on modern economic theory by bringing together two of his favorite subjects: Smith and Marx. Meek denies that Smith can be considered a “proto-Marxian” in any meaningful sense, but argues that Smith’s influence can be seen in Marx’s discussion of the labor theory of value, worker alienation, and even his theory of historical determinism, which Meek compares to Smith’s endorsement of the so-called “four stages” theory of history.
Spencer Pack, “Adam Smith and Marx,” in The Oxford Handbook of Adam Smith, eds. Christopher Berry, Maria Pia Paganelli, and Craig Smith (Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 2013), 523-38
Pack’s chapter on Smith and Marx is, like the rest of the Oxford Handbook, very nicely done, and a great place to start for non-specialists. Pack covers the engagement between Marx and Smith on the labor theory of value and the effects of the division of labor, and includes an interesting discussion of the two figures on money.
Pack’s chapter on Smith and Marx is, like the rest of the Oxford Handbook, very nicely done, and a great place to start for non-specialists. Pack covers the engagement between Marx and Smith on the labor theory of value and the effects of the division of labor, and includes an interesting discussion of the two figures on money.
C. Smith, Marx, and the Labor Theory of Value
Ronald L. Meek, Studies in the Labor Theory of Value (New York: Monthly Review Press, 1956)
Meek’s first book, Studies in the Labor Theory of Value can be used approximately as a textbook, and can effectively introduce non-specialists to the classical theories of labor and value, particularly those of Smith and Ricardo. For students of Smith, Chapter Two offers an account of both what makes Smith’s view on the labor theory distinct from earlier attempts to theorize the relationship, as well as an account of the development of Smith’s views between the earlier lectures and the mature doctrine in Wealth of Nations. Chapter Four depicts Marx’s initial encounter with the labor theory, as he inherited it from Smith and Ricardo.
Ronald L. Meek, Studies in the Labor Theory of Value (New York: Monthly Review Press, 1956)
Meek’s first book, Studies in the Labor Theory of Value can be used approximately as a textbook, and can effectively introduce non-specialists to the classical theories of labor and value, particularly those of Smith and Ricardo. For students of Smith, Chapter Two offers an account of both what makes Smith’s view on the labor theory distinct from earlier attempts to theorize the relationship, as well as an account of the development of Smith’s views between the earlier lectures and the mature doctrine in Wealth of Nations. Chapter Four depicts Marx’s initial encounter with the labor theory, as he inherited it from Smith and Ricardo.
Paul Samuelson, “A Modern Theorist’s Vindication of Adam Smith,” The American Economic Review 67(1) 1977, pp. 42-9.
Samuelson offers a brief and lively defense of Smith’s economic premises, including the labor theory, from the attacks of his successors. With a little charity, Samuelson argues, Smith’s intuitions about economic principles can be vindicated with the help of modern economic modeling. Non-specialists may find much of the discussion to be rough going.
D. Smith and Marx on Alienation
E.G. West, “The Political Economy of Alienation: Karl Marx and Adam Smith,” Oxford Economic Papers 21(1) 1969, pp. 1-23
Robert Lamb, “Adam Smith’s Concept of Alienation,” Oxford Economic Papers 25(2) 1973, pp. 275-85
E.G. West, “Adam Smith and Alienation: A Rejoinder,” Oxford Economic Papers 27(2) 1975, pp. 295-301
E.G. West, “The Political Economy of Alienation: Karl Marx and Adam Smith,” Oxford Economic Papers 21(1) 1969, pp. 1-23
Robert Lamb, “Adam Smith’s Concept of Alienation,” Oxford Economic Papers 25(2) 1973, pp. 275-85
E.G. West, “Adam Smith and Alienation: A Rejoinder,” Oxford Economic Papers 27(2) 1975, pp. 295-301
In a fascinating back-and-forth in the Oxford Economic Papers, E.G. West and Robert Lamb provide a detailed and often insightful conversation about Smith, Marx, and their respective theorist of alienation. West defines Marxian alienation in terms of three components: the “powerlessness” of workers under industrial capitalism; the “isolation” experienced by workers and capitalists under capitalism; and the “self-estrangement” of workers, experienced as a kind of “depersonalised detachment” from one’s work (p. 5). West argues that Smith can only be said to subscribe to the last of these; therefore, he argues, there are crucial differences between the two figures. Lamb disagrees, arguing that, if we consider the full range of Smith’s moral and social theory, rather than that found primarily in Wealth of Nations, workers can be said to be experiencing all three facets of Marxian alienation.