Unfortunately, don't really have the time to comment on Harvey work.
But, I'd recommend people interested chekc out he the above linked review - plus Paul Mattick Jr.'s good critical review of Harvey's major work 'Limits to Capital', linked to below:
And Harvey's not one either as he seems to be a neo-Keynesian who thinks that there can be some kind of state intervention to deal with the crisis though he also argued in his first book the Limits of Capital that ultimately what capital needs is an allout war to devalue suffcient capital for accumulation to begin again. The Kunkel review is useful since it basically summarises Harvey uncritically and in so doing touches on the real debates about the nature of capitalism's contradictions as well as crises. The whole Harvey approach is very close to that of Rosa Luxemburg in that he too finds flaws in Marx's analysis of reproduction (Harvey though goes further and even finds it in Marx's use of the law of value but he , Harvey, is on hand to put the old boy right!).
Thanks to Ronan for posting the link to Paul Mattick jr's gentle demolition of Harvey for his dismissal of the law of the tendency of the rate of profit to fall which alone explain why capitlism goes through cycles of expansion and bust. In the Kunkel article on Harvey he cites Robert Brenner's book which seems to echo what we have been saying that the capitalist crisis did not originate in 2007 or thereabouts but in 1973 when the post war boom came to an end and we have had an era of decline since. I have not read the Brenner book but have seen it referred to before and these posts make me want to read it. Kunkel though is highlighting how the academic marxists only use Capital to explain the faliures of the system - they don't have any solutions. That is the difference between them and Marx.
Unfortunately, don’t really
Unfortunately, don't really have the time to comment on Harvey work.
But, I'd recommend people interested chekc out he the above linked review - plus Paul Mattick Jr.'s good critical review of Harvey's major work 'Limits to Capital', linked to below:
It is hardly surprising
It is hardly surprising that, despite the deepening crisis, the world of commercial publishing produces so few, if any, accurate revolutionary texts.
Like the education system, the media and consumption in general, the only concern is profiteering or creating the conditions for profiteering.
The proletariat has no friends.
And Harvey’s not one either
And Harvey's not one either as he seems to be a neo-Keynesian who thinks that there can be some kind of state intervention to deal with the crisis though he also argued in his first book the Limits of Capital that ultimately what capital needs is an allout war to devalue suffcient capital for accumulation to begin again. The Kunkel review is useful since it basically summarises Harvey uncritically and in so doing touches on the real debates about the nature of capitalism's contradictions as well as crises. The whole Harvey approach is very close to that of Rosa Luxemburg in that he too finds flaws in Marx's analysis of reproduction (Harvey though goes further and even finds it in Marx's use of the law of value but he , Harvey, is on hand to put the old boy right!).
Thanks to Ronan for posting the link to Paul Mattick jr's gentle demolition of Harvey for his dismissal of the law of the tendency of the rate of profit to fall which alone explain why capitlism goes through cycles of expansion and bust. In the Kunkel article on Harvey he cites Robert Brenner's book which seems to echo what we have been saying that the capitalist crisis did not originate in 2007 or thereabouts but in 1973 when the post war boom came to an end and we have had an era of decline since. I have not read the Brenner book but have seen it referred to before and these posts make me want to read it. Kunkel though is highlighting how the academic marxists only use Capital to explain the faliures of the system - they don't have any solutions. That is the difference between them and Marx.