What do you think?
Rate this book
The Theory of Capitalist Development
s/t: Principles of Marxian Political Economy
Since its first publication in 1942, this book has become the classic analytical study of Marxist economics. Written by an economist who was a master of modern academic theory as well as Marxist literature, it has been recognized as the ideal textbook in its subject. Comprehensive, lucid, authoritative, it has not been challenged or even approached by any later study.
Since its first publication in 1942, this book has become the classic analytical study of Marxist economics. Written by an economist who was a master of modern academic theory as well as Marxist literature, it has been recognized as the ideal textbook in its subject. Comprehensive, lucid, authoritative, it has not been challenged or even approached by any later study.
412 pages, Hardcover
First published January 1, 1942
25 people are currently reading
1163 people want to read
About the author
Paul M. Sweezy
112 books53 followersPaul Marlor Sweezy (April 10, 1910 – February 27, 2004) was a Marxist economist, political activist, publisher, and founding editor of the long-running magazine Monthly Review. He is best remembered for his contributions to economic theory as one of the leading Marxian economists of the second half of the 20th century.
Paul Sweezy was born on April 10, 1910 in New York City and attended Phillips Exeter Academy. He went on to Harvard and was editor of The Harvard Crimson, graduating magna cum laude in 1932. Having completed his undergraduate coursework, his interests shifted from journalism to economics. Sweezy spent the 1931–32 academic year taking courses at the London School of Economics, traveling to Vienna to study on breaks. It was at this time that Sweezy was first exposed to Marxian economic ideas. He made the acquaintance of Harold Laski, Joan Robinson and other young left-wing British thinkers of the day.
Upon his return to the United States, Sweezy again enrolled at Harvard, from which he received his doctorate degree in 1937. During his studies, Sweezy had become the "ersatz son" ("ersatz" meaning "replacement" in German) of the renowned, Czech-born economist Joseph Schumpeter, although on an intellectual level, their views were diametrically opposed. Later, as colleagues, their debates on the "Laws of Capitalism" were of legendary status for a generation of Harvard economists.
While at Harvard, Sweezy founded the academic journal The Review of Economic Studies and published essays on imperfect competition, the role of expectations in the determination of supply and demand, and the problem of economic stagnation.
Sweezy became an instructor at Harvard in 1938. It was there that he helped establish a local branch of the American Federation of Teachers, the Harvard Teachers' Union. In this interval also Sweezy wrote lectures that later became one of his most important works of economics, The Theory of Capitalist Development (1942), a book which summarized the labor theory of value of Marx and his followers. The book was the first in English to deal with such questions as the transformation problem thoroughly.
Sweezy worked for several New Deal agencies analyzing the concentration of economic power and the dynamics of monopoly and competition. This research included the influential study for the National Resources Committee, "Interest Groups in the American Economy" which identified the eight most powerful financial-industrial alliances in US business.
From 1942 to 1945, Sweezy worked for the research and analysis division of the Office of Strategic Services. Sweezy was sent to London, where his work for the Office of Strategic Services (OSS) required his monitoring British economic policy for the US government. He went on to edit the OSS's monthly publication, European Political Report. Sweezy received the bronze star for his role in the war. He was the recipient of the Social Science Research Council Demobilization Award at war's end.
Sweezy wrote extensively for the liberal press during the post-war period, including such publications as The Nation and The New Republic, among others. He also wrote a book, Socialism, published in 1949, as well as a number of shorter pieces which were collected in book form as The Present as History in 1953. In 1947 Sweezy quit his teaching position at Harvard, with two years remaining on his contract, to dedicate himself to full-time writing and editing.
In 1949, Sweezy and Leo Huberman founded a new magazine called Monthly Review, using money from historian and literary critic F. O. Matthiessen. The first issue appeared in May of that year, and included Albert Einstein's article "Why Socialism?". The magazine, established in the midst of the American Red Scare, describes itself as socialist "independent of any political organization".
Monthly Review rapidly expanded into the production of books and pamphlets through its publishing arm, Monthly Review Press
Paul Sweezy was born on April 10, 1910 in New York City and attended Phillips Exeter Academy. He went on to Harvard and was editor of The Harvard Crimson, graduating magna cum laude in 1932. Having completed his undergraduate coursework, his interests shifted from journalism to economics. Sweezy spent the 1931–32 academic year taking courses at the London School of Economics, traveling to Vienna to study on breaks. It was at this time that Sweezy was first exposed to Marxian economic ideas. He made the acquaintance of Harold Laski, Joan Robinson and other young left-wing British thinkers of the day.
Upon his return to the United States, Sweezy again enrolled at Harvard, from which he received his doctorate degree in 1937. During his studies, Sweezy had become the "ersatz son" ("ersatz" meaning "replacement" in German) of the renowned, Czech-born economist Joseph Schumpeter, although on an intellectual level, their views were diametrically opposed. Later, as colleagues, their debates on the "Laws of Capitalism" were of legendary status for a generation of Harvard economists.
While at Harvard, Sweezy founded the academic journal The Review of Economic Studies and published essays on imperfect competition, the role of expectations in the determination of supply and demand, and the problem of economic stagnation.
Sweezy became an instructor at Harvard in 1938. It was there that he helped establish a local branch of the American Federation of Teachers, the Harvard Teachers' Union. In this interval also Sweezy wrote lectures that later became one of his most important works of economics, The Theory of Capitalist Development (1942), a book which summarized the labor theory of value of Marx and his followers. The book was the first in English to deal with such questions as the transformation problem thoroughly.
Sweezy worked for several New Deal agencies analyzing the concentration of economic power and the dynamics of monopoly and competition. This research included the influential study for the National Resources Committee, "Interest Groups in the American Economy" which identified the eight most powerful financial-industrial alliances in US business.
From 1942 to 1945, Sweezy worked for the research and analysis division of the Office of Strategic Services. Sweezy was sent to London, where his work for the Office of Strategic Services (OSS) required his monitoring British economic policy for the US government. He went on to edit the OSS's monthly publication, European Political Report. Sweezy received the bronze star for his role in the war. He was the recipient of the Social Science Research Council Demobilization Award at war's end.
Sweezy wrote extensively for the liberal press during the post-war period, including such publications as The Nation and The New Republic, among others. He also wrote a book, Socialism, published in 1949, as well as a number of shorter pieces which were collected in book form as The Present as History in 1953. In 1947 Sweezy quit his teaching position at Harvard, with two years remaining on his contract, to dedicate himself to full-time writing and editing.
In 1949, Sweezy and Leo Huberman founded a new magazine called Monthly Review, using money from historian and literary critic F. O. Matthiessen. The first issue appeared in May of that year, and included Albert Einstein's article "Why Socialism?". The magazine, established in the midst of the American Red Scare, describes itself as socialist "independent of any political organization".
Monthly Review rapidly expanded into the production of books and pamphlets through its publishing arm, Monthly Review Press
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 15 of 15 reviews
January 26, 2016
The timing on my reading of this book was phenomenal. Directly before it I finished reading Capital, vol. 1 by Karl Marx. Anything I missed or didn't understand was laid out in incredibly accessible terms for me by Paul Sweezy. It was almost as if I had a private tutor explaining Marxian concepts to me, with some updated information that supported some of those theories and called others into question.
Is the book dated? Yes. Obviously. It was written in 1942(ish) and is about Marxism. The USSR, which is viewed as a beacon of hope by the author in the pursuit of anti-imperialism and a worker's state, has since shown its colors as a vicious bastion of imperialism itself, and after failing to meet the goals set out by its revolutionaries it lost the battle with capitalism, falling in 1991. So modern readers can smile knowingly at Sweezy's hopes and dreams regarding a new world order.
Aside from that, though, this book is incredibly well-written, informative, accessible, and much of it is still applicable today. As an academic piece I highly recommend reading The Theory of Capitalist Development. It will give a solid look into the theory of both capitalism and of socialism, showing how the former actually works and how the latter intends to work. A must-have for anyone who wants to actually be able to call out the capitalist swine while holding their over-zealous comrades' feet to the fire.
Is the book dated? Yes. Obviously. It was written in 1942(ish) and is about Marxism. The USSR, which is viewed as a beacon of hope by the author in the pursuit of anti-imperialism and a worker's state, has since shown its colors as a vicious bastion of imperialism itself, and after failing to meet the goals set out by its revolutionaries it lost the battle with capitalism, falling in 1991. So modern readers can smile knowingly at Sweezy's hopes and dreams regarding a new world order.
Aside from that, though, this book is incredibly well-written, informative, accessible, and much of it is still applicable today. As an academic piece I highly recommend reading The Theory of Capitalist Development. It will give a solid look into the theory of both capitalism and of socialism, showing how the former actually works and how the latter intends to work. A must-have for anyone who wants to actually be able to call out the capitalist swine while holding their over-zealous comrades' feet to the fire.
June 18, 2015
Some parts of this book are obviously extremely dated, but it's surprising how much of it (especially the chapter on fascism, in light of recent developments) remains relevant today. All told, probably the best summary of Marxian economics in less than 4000 pages.
April 24, 2019
I wonder how many readers and/or reviewers of this book have realised that in chapter VII (The "Problem" of the Transformation of Values in Prices) Paul Sweezy has continued the wrong practice (initiated by Bohm-Bawerk and Bortkiewicz...) of searching for the «holy grail» of some kind of an algorithm that «converts» «prices of production» into «values».
That wrong practice derives from ignoring the Hegelian totality of «starting from the whole and then explain the various sectorial deviations from the resulting global average.
A Marxian explanation of the «Transformation Problem», hypothetically addressed do David Ricardo, could have read as follows: «The divergences between "prices of production" and "values" (or between "intrinsic values" and "market prices"), can be explained away by the following rules:
1. "Prices are instrumental in the capture of value", and
2. Value will flow from those capitalists with a higher capability/propensity to control (exploit...) variable capital, to those capitalists with the higher capability to control constant capital».
That wrong practice derives from ignoring the Hegelian totality of «starting from the whole and then explain the various sectorial deviations from the resulting global average.
A Marxian explanation of the «Transformation Problem», hypothetically addressed do David Ricardo, could have read as follows: «The divergences between "prices of production" and "values" (or between "intrinsic values" and "market prices"), can be explained away by the following rules:
1. "Prices are instrumental in the capture of value", and
2. Value will flow from those capitalists with a higher capability/propensity to control (exploit...) variable capital, to those capitalists with the higher capability to control constant capital».
Read
March 12, 2021Read for my Marxian Economics class.
While I understand it makes reading Das Kapital a little easier it was also written in the 30's-40's and even though Marx wrote Das Kapital in the 1800's Marx can be easier to understand. It wasn't bad and there was a lot that was informative and explained many topics Marx addresses, but some of what Sweezy writes I just don't really understand.
While I understand it makes reading Das Kapital a little easier it was also written in the 30's-40's and even though Marx wrote Das Kapital in the 1800's Marx can be easier to understand. It wasn't bad and there was a lot that was informative and explained many topics Marx addresses, but some of what Sweezy writes I just don't really understand.
August 7, 2024
first half is essentially a textbook on marxian economics, then it pivots into the modern day, focused on the central question of if the modern state machinery and era of monopoly/imperialism can save capitalism from its recurrent crises. spoiler alert: they cannot.
April 30, 2021
Very educational, good explaining of difficult terms, phrases, and notions such as abstraction, tendency for the rate of profit to fall, etc. It was originally published in the 40s so obviously some references to world events are outdated and some problems raised within the book have come to fruition. Great read.
March 23, 2025
Good companion to Capital
September 3, 2025
Buen libro, que explica los avances del autor sobre la economía marxista.
July 14, 2014
Paul Marlor Sweezy è senza dubbio tra gli economisti più interessanti ed allo stesso tempo più negletti dell’ultimo secolo. Compagno di studi di Paul Samuelson (uno dei padri della moderna scienza economica nonché Premio Nobel), istruttore di Bob Solow (altro Nobel) e allievo di Joseph A. Schumpeter, si forma ad Harvard dove ottiene il Phd. Avviato ad una brillante carriera accademica, decide di approfondire la dottrina marxista, intesa come particolare approccio scientifico alla scienza economica (in altre parole, non sotto l’aspetto “politico” che oggi caratterizza il termine “marxista”). Anche per questo (ma non solo), rinuncia ai fasti dell’accademia preferendo un percorso di ricerca autonomo. Alcuni anni più tardi fonderà il “Monthly Review” e produrrà alcuni saggi di grande valore tra cui “Monopoly Capital” e il volume qui recensito, ossia “The Theory of Capitalist Development”. Ultima nota curiosa, Sweezy è tra i più profondi conoscitori dell’approccio marxista all’economia ed allo stesso tempo proviene da una delle nazioni in assoluto più sgombre da contaminazioni marxiste o socialiste (con accezione politica in questo caso).
A questo punto, è opportuno entrare nel merito dei contenuti di “The Theory of Capitalist Development”. Inizio chiarendo che la validità e la potenza dell’approccio scientifico marxista non hanno nulla a che spartire con le implicazioni politiche della sua dottrina. Con ciò intendo semplicemente affermare che il metodo analitico di Marx per rapporto al funzionamento di un’economia capitalistica è oggettivamente riconosciuto come valido, anche da chi non sposa tale approccio e soprattutto ha più legittimità di chi scrive questa recensione nell’affermarlo. Del Marx economista (comunemente definito l’ultimo dei “Classici”) spesso si legge che, nonostante un’analisi impeccabile, ha tratto conclusioni sbagliate. Tuttavia, siccome qui scrivo di Sweezy e non di Marx, non mi soffermerò oltre su questo punto che era tuttavia importante menzionare in quanto centrale nei lavori di Sweezy.
Negli anni di Harvard, Sweezy si occupò di alcuni seminari incentrati sull’economia del socialismo nell’ambito del suo lavoro di assistenza a Schumpeter. “The Theory of Capitalist Development” ha radici proprio in questi seminari; questa opera fornisce gli elementi centrali, rivisitati ed aggiornati alla realtà post Grande Depressione, della teoria economica marxista.
“Il Capitale”, opera centrale di Karl Marx, è un testo che data 200 anni, estremamente dettagliato ed oggettivamente molto pesante alla lettura (parlo per esperienza diretta!). Al contrario, con l’opera di Sweezy il lettore interessato può acquisire il metodo e gli elementi centrali della teoria marxista rivisti in chiave moderna senza le infinite digressioni tipiche del “Capitale”. Infatti, e proprio in questo Sweezy si dimostra grande, egli è stato capace di applicare alla storia più recente le intuizioni di Marx. In “The Theory of Capitalist Development” si ritrovano numerosi tratti distintivi delle economie capitaliste evolute, che ritroviamo ancora oggi. La modernità di questa opera (del 1942 la prima edizione) risulta a tratti sconvolgente, contribuendo alla piacevolezza del testo che rimane pur sempre di stampo teorico. Sweezy, attingendo a piene mani dal metodo di Marx, applica un approccio misto tra storia e teoria in cui è facile trovare appigli reali e comprendere i passaggi logici. Sweezy evita inoltre di utilizzare il linguaggio matematico che ha letteralmente invaso i testi di teoria economica dopo i “Classici” a partire dalla cosiddetta rivoluzione marginalista; ciò evidentemente favorisce l’intelligibilità.
In conclusione, come già accennato da altri, “The Theory of Capitalist Development” è il testo ideale quale primo approccio al metodo di analisi economica di stampo marxista. Non è forse il libro da leggere in spiaggia durante le vacanze ma chi seriamente è interessato all’argomento troverà la lettura molto piacevole.
A questo punto, è opportuno entrare nel merito dei contenuti di “The Theory of Capitalist Development”. Inizio chiarendo che la validità e la potenza dell’approccio scientifico marxista non hanno nulla a che spartire con le implicazioni politiche della sua dottrina. Con ciò intendo semplicemente affermare che il metodo analitico di Marx per rapporto al funzionamento di un’economia capitalistica è oggettivamente riconosciuto come valido, anche da chi non sposa tale approccio e soprattutto ha più legittimità di chi scrive questa recensione nell’affermarlo. Del Marx economista (comunemente definito l’ultimo dei “Classici”) spesso si legge che, nonostante un’analisi impeccabile, ha tratto conclusioni sbagliate. Tuttavia, siccome qui scrivo di Sweezy e non di Marx, non mi soffermerò oltre su questo punto che era tuttavia importante menzionare in quanto centrale nei lavori di Sweezy.
Negli anni di Harvard, Sweezy si occupò di alcuni seminari incentrati sull’economia del socialismo nell’ambito del suo lavoro di assistenza a Schumpeter. “The Theory of Capitalist Development” ha radici proprio in questi seminari; questa opera fornisce gli elementi centrali, rivisitati ed aggiornati alla realtà post Grande Depressione, della teoria economica marxista.
“Il Capitale”, opera centrale di Karl Marx, è un testo che data 200 anni, estremamente dettagliato ed oggettivamente molto pesante alla lettura (parlo per esperienza diretta!). Al contrario, con l’opera di Sweezy il lettore interessato può acquisire il metodo e gli elementi centrali della teoria marxista rivisti in chiave moderna senza le infinite digressioni tipiche del “Capitale”. Infatti, e proprio in questo Sweezy si dimostra grande, egli è stato capace di applicare alla storia più recente le intuizioni di Marx. In “The Theory of Capitalist Development” si ritrovano numerosi tratti distintivi delle economie capitaliste evolute, che ritroviamo ancora oggi. La modernità di questa opera (del 1942 la prima edizione) risulta a tratti sconvolgente, contribuendo alla piacevolezza del testo che rimane pur sempre di stampo teorico. Sweezy, attingendo a piene mani dal metodo di Marx, applica un approccio misto tra storia e teoria in cui è facile trovare appigli reali e comprendere i passaggi logici. Sweezy evita inoltre di utilizzare il linguaggio matematico che ha letteralmente invaso i testi di teoria economica dopo i “Classici” a partire dalla cosiddetta rivoluzione marginalista; ciò evidentemente favorisce l’intelligibilità.
In conclusione, come già accennato da altri, “The Theory of Capitalist Development” è il testo ideale quale primo approccio al metodo di analisi economica di stampo marxista. Non è forse il libro da leggere in spiaggia durante le vacanze ma chi seriamente è interessato all’argomento troverà la lettura molto piacevole.
to-keep-reference
April 4, 2022Los análisis de Luxemburgo sobre la acumulación capitalista, sus críticas a Marx y su teoría sobre el colapso del capitalismo han sido todos replicados vehementemente desde que se publicó su primer libro. Para buenos resúmenes de estos temas ver Paul Sweezy, The Theory of Capitalist Development (New York: Oxford University Press, 1942), pp. 202-207.
Imperio Pág.169
Sweezy considera cómo debe igualarse trabajo calificado y trabajo no calificado, y está de acuerdo en que sería circular hacerlo con base en el valor del producto final, puesto que eso es lo que se debe explicar. Sweezy dice después que la destreza del trabajo calificado depende de dos cosas: entrenamiento y diferencias naturales. Sweezy equipara entrenamiento con número de horas dedicadas a entrenar, sin tomar en cuenta las habilidades del profesor, aun tan crudamente medida por cuantas horas que el profesor dedicó a entrenar (¿y cuántas horas dedicó su maestro?). Sweezy sugiere llegar a las diferencias naturales haciendo que dos personas hagan lo mismo y viendo cuánto difieren las cantidades, encontrando así, la razón para igualarlas. Pero si el trabajo calificado de alguna clase no es considerado como la manera más rápida de producir el mismo producto que el trabajo calificado produce, sino más bien como una forma de producir un mejor producto, entonces no funcionará este método de definir la medida M. (Al comparar el talento de Rembrandt con el mío, el hecho decisivo no es que pinta cuadros más rápidamente que yo).
Anarquía, Estado y utopía Pág.170
Imperio Pág.169
Sweezy considera cómo debe igualarse trabajo calificado y trabajo no calificado, y está de acuerdo en que sería circular hacerlo con base en el valor del producto final, puesto que eso es lo que se debe explicar. Sweezy dice después que la destreza del trabajo calificado depende de dos cosas: entrenamiento y diferencias naturales. Sweezy equipara entrenamiento con número de horas dedicadas a entrenar, sin tomar en cuenta las habilidades del profesor, aun tan crudamente medida por cuantas horas que el profesor dedicó a entrenar (¿y cuántas horas dedicó su maestro?). Sweezy sugiere llegar a las diferencias naturales haciendo que dos personas hagan lo mismo y viendo cuánto difieren las cantidades, encontrando así, la razón para igualarlas. Pero si el trabajo calificado de alguna clase no es considerado como la manera más rápida de producir el mismo producto que el trabajo calificado produce, sino más bien como una forma de producir un mejor producto, entonces no funcionará este método de definir la medida M. (Al comparar el talento de Rembrandt con el mío, el hecho decisivo no es que pinta cuadros más rápidamente que yo).
Anarquía, Estado y utopía Pág.170
September 17, 2015
A book of two halves. The first three parts are a textbook outline of basic Marxist economic theory, covering value, accumulation, and crises. This is my second reading, and in the intervening time I've read David Harvey and the three volumes of Capital. These first three parts made much more sense second time around, but I ended up feeling that although a more difficult read Marx's text held more insight especially Volume 1. Still this is a valuable textbook and summary.
The remaining parts covering Imperialism and Fascism are showing their age more, and Sweezy becomes more dogmatic. There are many assertions for the evidence and analysis given feels quite weak. It is of more historical interest than a practical guide for current thinking.
Overall a useful textbook approach but which lacks the insight and deftness of touch of David Harvey's 'Companion' or indeed of Marx himself.
The remaining parts covering Imperialism and Fascism are showing their age more, and Sweezy becomes more dogmatic. There are many assertions for the evidence and analysis given feels quite weak. It is of more historical interest than a practical guide for current thinking.
Overall a useful textbook approach but which lacks the insight and deftness of touch of David Harvey's 'Companion' or indeed of Marx himself.
July 11, 2025
1942 Classic of Marxist economic theory by the Monthly Review founder. It summarizes the economic ideas of Marx and his followers. It was the first book in English that dealt with certain questions thoroughly such as the transformation problem: the problem of finding a general rule to transform the "values" of commodities into the "competitive prices" of the marketplace.
Super complicated.
I seriously doubt many can even understand this. That may be the reason why it has never been approached in comprehensiveness..
Super complicated.
I seriously doubt many can even understand this. That may be the reason why it has never been approached in comprehensiveness..
January 14, 2016
Solid lucid summary of Marxian economics, explaining fundamentals like the tendency of the falling rate of profit, the tendency to underconsumption and the labor theory of value and showing how they apply to Marx's theoretical framework and critique of capitalism. The book was pretty dense because of how compactly it goes through so many economic concepts, but I'm ultimately glad I made it through. This is a must-read for anybody who wants to learn how to critique capitalism from a functional basis.
October 22, 2011
I loved this when I was a teen. It's still the best explication of Marxian economics.
April 23, 2017
An interesting book to help understanding Karl Marx's capital. Have some good discussion on methodology and a theory of fascism.
Displaying 1 - 15 of 15 reviews