ABSTRACT
This chapter argues that, with/without a synthesis of the political and economic, Marxist theorizing contributes nothing of use to the explanation of postwar macroeconomic performance and, in particular, the acceleration of inflation. It outlines Marxist crisis theories and examines their logical difficulties. The chapter shows when Marxists attempt to explain the postwar inflation the accounts that they produce are in most important respects indistinguishable from one or the other of the non-Marxist theories. It also shows what is distinguishable about their accounts, namely the assertion and identification of an underlying crisis causing mechanism for the most part, rather unconvincing. Modern underconsumption theory emerged as a Marxist response to the interest in monopoly pricing of the 1930s. The plausibility of each Marxist theory stands or falls on the distinctive crisis-generating mechanism it postulates. Perhaps more surprisingly, a number of the elements of the accounts of Marxist class conflict theorists are indistinguishable from those of many generally rather conservative neoclassical economists.
