My post, "Was Marx Right?" in response to a question by Chris has triggered a tsunami of comments, in the form of an extended many-sided discussion among four or five readers. I am delighted to have been the occasion for this series of exchanges, all of which I found interesting. I am not going to enter the exchange because I had my say about these matters in an extended colloquy with Professors Kliman and Freeman some while ago. But I would like to repeat one thing that I said at that time.
The debate in which Professors Kliman, Freeman and others have been engaged for some while with other interested economists seems to have been engendered, at least in part, by the claim advanced by a number of early critics that Marx's account in Capital is inconsistent. [I have it in my mind that Bohm-Bawerk advanced this criticism, but that may be all wrong.] As I explained to Professors Kliman and Freeman, I do not think Marx was guilty of inconsistency. My critique of his Labor Theory of Value, set out in two books and several journal articles, is quite different from that. What is more, I consider Marx's fundamental claim to be correct, namely that capitalism rests on the exploitation of the working class. So when it comes to the debate that has occupied some of the readers of this blog in the past several days, I do not [as I gather used to be said by good ole boys] have a dog in that hunt.
One hundred thirty-one years after his death, Marx still seems to have the ability to get people riled up, which I take to be a good sign.