Classical economics

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The classical economics or classical economics (short: classical ), also political economy , describes in the history of economics both the theories as well as the epoch of the founders of the economy as an independent scientific discipline . Karl Marx coined the term “Classical Economics” .

Classical economics was initially largely identical to economic liberalism ( classical liberalism ) and replaced the notions of mercantilism and physiocracy . Paradigmatic validity for classical economics is attributed to the work The Wealth of Nations by Adam Smith from 1776.
Their main representatives are, in addition to Smith, David Ricardo , Jean-Baptiste Say , Thomas Malthus and John Stuart Mill .

Around 1870, classical economics was replaced as the predominant theory by neoclassics .

Theory-historical development

Mercantilism - Physiocrats - Classical

The economic thinking of mercantilism analyzed economic processes from the point of view of how the wealth of the prince or the state treasury controlled by him can be promoted.

The Physiocrats then proceeded to view economic processes from the point of view of promoting the prosperity of an entire people. In continuation and expansion of this theoretical perspective, the classical economists analyzed the market economy as a self-regulating system that is driven by the self-interest of the individual and works for the benefit of all. The causal analysis of economic relationships was often seamlessly linked to the economic policy model of liberalism , as it typically corresponded to the interests of the emerging bourgeoisie in the course of the replacement of feudal social structures.

Theoretical foundations

The conceptual structure of classical economics reveals numerous versions and contradictions; however, there are some basic principles that make the inner unity of the system clear. These include the principle of self-interest, the equilibrium thesis , the labor theory of value or that of production costs , income distribution and the demand for freedom of economic activity.

According to Hans Albert, the knowledge program of classical economics can be characterized as follows:

  1. through the assumption of regularities with which social facts can be explained
  2. these facts are explained by the co-operation of individual actions
  3. The essential condition for action is the scarcity of means to satisfy human needs
  4. self-interest is an important orientation basis for rational action
  5. action is co-determined by the institutional environment.

The central category for classical economics is the concept of capital , which was introduced by François Quesnay (1694–1774). The process consideration of the “production of goods by means of goods” differentiated a production period from a distribution period and began with a capital stock, the distribution, distribution and accumulation of which had to be analyzed in detail.

Adam Smith (1723-1790)

Adam Smith tried to show that self-serving people who are concerned about their personal economic gain serve the good of all others with their economic actions. Smith's metaphor of the invisible hand as the regulating force of the market was best known .

Thomas Robert Malthus (1766-1834)

Thomas Robert Malthus examined the causes of poverty and developed the famous population law in this context .

David Ricardo (1772-1823)

David Ricardo made an important contribution to the theory of foreign trade with the presentation of the comparative cost advantages as well as to the income law .

John Stuart Mill

John Stuart Mill (1806–1873)

John Stuart Mill systematically presented the theories of Smith, Malthus and Ricardo in his principles of political economy .

Jean-Baptiste Say (1767-1832)

Jean-Baptiste Say was best known for Say's theorem , named after him , according to which every supply creates its own demand. Supply and demand in an economy therefore always tended towards a state of equilibrium .

reception

Classic and Neoclassical

Around 1870, the marginalist revolution replaced classical economics as the predominant doctrine of neoclassics , which dissolved the classical paradox of values. In place of the labor value theory, an objective value theory, they set a subjective value theory with the marginal utility theory.

For the classical economists, the long-term growth of an economy was the focus of theoretical interest. On the other hand, neoclassicism is about the allocation of resources in a given situation. This problem of the optimal use of resources was now mainly considered on the microeconomic level, whereby a substitution of the production factors was seen as possible.

The findings of neoclassical theory were first summarized by Alfred Marshall .

Controversy over continuity or discontinuity

The Neoricardians notice a discontinuity between classical economics and the following economists. In contrast, Samuel Hollander emphasizes the continuity between classical and neoclassical economics. Because of the common basic ideas - despite differences in individual questions - classical economics and neoclassical theory become one as classical-neoclassical by some authors . summarized, Keynes had referred to both paradigms as classics.

Reception by Marx

Karl Marx and the Marxist economic theory based on him occupies a special position in relation to classical economics . On the one hand, Marx ties in with Adam Smith and Ricardo directly and expressly contrasts them as “classical economists” with “vulgar economists”. On the other hand, he accuses them of superficial views and inconsistencies, which paved the way for a "vulgar economy" in the sense of Say and Malthus. Marx began this tradition with William Petty . He delimited “classical political economy” from vulgar economics , which he used to describe the period after Ricardo and Jean-Charles-Léonard Simonde de Sismondi .

Michio Morishima , however, comes to a new, more nuanced view of the theoretical differences between Classical, Marx and Neoclassical.

Reception by the historical school

The historical school of economics accuses classical music of being unrealistic. The models and theories of the classical school are indeed very clear and often provide unambiguous results. However, these only rarely coincided with the observable events. The critics demand at least a substantiation and verification of the theoretical results through empirical studies by Wilhelm GF Roscher . Some economists - especially Karl Knies - go one step further and reject any theories that proclaim natural laws as unscientific. In their opinion, laws can only have the character of analogies - in their opinion , realistic prognoses are hardly possible.

literature

  • Tony Aspromourgos: On the Origins of Classical Economics: Distribution and Value from William Petty to Adam Smith . Routledge, 2007, ISBN 978-0-415-12878-0 .
  • Robert E. Eagly: The Structure of Classical Economic Theory. Oxford University Press, New York / London / Toronto 1974.
  • Joachim Starbatty : The English classics of political economy . Teaching and Effect. Darmstadt 1985.
  • Gerhard Stavenhagen: The system of the classical national economy . Chapter II in History of Economic Theory . Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht 1969, ISBN 3-525-10502-9 .
  • Bernd Ziegler: The emergence of economics as a scientific discipline - classical political economy as a paradigm. In: History of Economic Thought: Paradigm Shift in Economics. Oldenbourg Wissenschaftsverlag, 2008, ISBN 978-3-486-58522-3 , chapter 3.3.

Web links

Individual evidence

  1. ^ Joseph A. Schumpeter : History of economic analysis. 1st volume (Ed .: Elizabeth B. Schumpeter), Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht , Göttingen 1965, p. 89 Note 1 (ed.).
  2. Thomas Sowell : On classical economics. Yale University Press , New Haven 2006, ISBN 0-300-11316-1 , p. 2. Google Books
  3. Unlike Marx, John Maynard Keynes also used the term “classical theory” to include all of his predecessors; see. Bernhard Felderer , Stefan Homburg : Macroeconomics and New Macroeconomics. 7th edition. Springer textbook , Berlin / Heidelberg / New York 1999, ISBN 3-540-66128-X , p. 24 f.
  4. ^ Willi Albers , Anton Zottmann : Concise dictionary of economics. Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, Göttingen 1980, ISBN 3-525-10256-9 , p. 41.
  5. ^ Joseph A. Schumpeter: History of economic analysis. 1st volume (Ed .: Elizabeth B. Schumpeter), Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, Göttingen 1965.
  6. Werner Hofmann : Value and price theory. Duncker & Humblot Berlin 1964, p. 17.
  7. Jochen Nielen: The model of laisser-faire in political economy from Smith to Keynes, presented on the basis of the main works by Smith, Malthus, Ricardo, Mill, Marshall and Keynes. Dissertation . Bonn 2000, p. 163.
  8. Ronald L. Meek : Smith, Marx & after. Ten Essays in the Development of Economic Thought. Chapman & Hall, London 1977, ISBN 0-412-14360-7 , p. 3.
  9. Overview of the Analytical Structure of Classical Economic Theory. In: Robert E. Eagly: The Structure of Classical Economic Theory. Oxford University Press, New York / London / Toronto 1974, p. 3 ff.
  10. ^ Gerhard Stavenhagen: History of the economic theory . Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1969, ISBN 3-525-10502-9 , p. 52.
  11. Hans Albert: The idea of ​​rational practice and the economic tradition , p. 17.
  12. ^ The Basic Classical Model. In: Robert E. Eagly: The Structure of Classical Economic Theory. Oxford University Press, New York / London / Toronto 1974, p. 34 ff.
  13. bpb.de
  14. ^ Bernhard Felderer , Stefan Homburg : Macroeconomics and new macroeconomics . Springer, 2005, ISBN 3-540-25020-4 , p. 24 f.
  15. ^ Jörg Beutel: Microeconomics . Oldenbourg Wissenschaftsverlag, 2006, ISBN 3-486-58116-3 , p. 8.
  16. Ernesto Screpanti, Stefano Zamagni: An Outline of the History of Economic Thought. Oxford 1993, p. 147.
  17. Peter D. Groenewegen : A soaring eagle: Alfred Marshall, 1842-1924. Cheltenham Northampton 1995, p. 1.
  18. Jochen Nielen: The model of laisser-faire in political economy from Smith to Keynes, presented on the basis of the main works by Smith, Malthus, Ricardo, Mill, Marshall and Keynes. Dissertation. Bonn 2000, p. 163.
  19. ^ Joseph A. Schumpeter: History of Economic Analysis. Oxford / New York 1954, p. 833.
  20. ^ Krishna Bharadwaj : Themes in Value and Distribution: Classical Theory Reappraised. Unwin-Hyman, 1989.
  21. ^ Pierangelo Garegnani: Surplus Approach to Value and Distribution. In: The New Palgrave: A Dictionary of Economics. 1987.
  22. ^ Samuel Hollander: Sraffa and the Interpretation of Ricardo: The Marxian Dimension. In: History of Political Economy. V. 32, N. 2, 2000, 2000, pp. 187-232.
  23. Klaus Rittenbruch: Macroeconomics. Oldenbourg Wissenschaftsverlag, 2000, ISBN 3-486-25486-3 , p. 151.
  24. Michael Heine, Hansjörg Herr: Economics. Edition 3. Oldenbourg Wissenschaftsverlag, 2002, ISBN 3-486-27293-4 , p. 328.
  25. Ronald L. Meek: Smith, Marx & after. Ten Essays in the Development of Economic Thought. Chapman & Hall, London 1977, ISBN 0-412-14360-7 , pp. 4f.
  26. Michio Morishima: Ricardo's Economics. A general equilibrium theory of distribution and growth. Cambridge University Press, 1989, ISBN 0-521-36630-5 , pp. 8f.