ABSTRACT
Introduction In economics there are theories of value and distribution and theories of development and growth; mostly these two blocks are separated from each other. This was the case in the classical political economy of Adam Smith, David Ricardo and John Stuart Mill and it still is the case after the neoclassical synthesis of John Hicks and Paul Samuelson. The latter economic theory has enforced this divide with the construction of micro-and macroeconomic analysis. Galbraith (2007) highlights that the still present problems of income inequality relate to a great extent to this scientific project of neoclassical divide and conquer. Karl Marx was one of the only ones who has explicitly emphasized the interdependent relations between value, wage labour, the introduction of the commodity form in capitalist exchange societies and the principle of accumulation that is representing the core of economic development as well as growth (Marx, 1867). Thereby Marx has provided a synthesized theory of value, distribution, development and growth in his critique of political economy. The Marxian analytical apparatus is a dynamic one that is highlighting economic development as a process of (re)structuration and ongoing alienation. Heterodox economists have always stressed that historical and institutional circumstances influence this course of economic development.
