Review of Radical Political Economics

10.1177/0486613405278159
Lautzenheiser,
/ Summer
Yasar2005
/ Bringing Marx into the Classroom

Pedagogy

Teaching Macroeconomics by
Bringing Marx into the Classroom
MARK LAUTZENHEISER
Department of Economics, Earlham College, Richmond, IN 47374-1207, USA;
e-mail: lautzma@earlham.edu

YAVUZ YASAR
Economics Department, University of Denver, Denver, CO 80210, USA;
e-mail: yyasar@du.edu
Received December 16, 2002; accepted April 23, 2004

Abstract
The aggregate demand and supply graph is a staple in undergraduate macroeconomics courses. The
foundations of this model and questions it addresses are often different from radical economics. The current article develops an alternative to the aggregate demand and supply framework. In the alternative
framework, students are quickly introduced to certain aspects of Marxs economic theory with the aid of a
simple graphical tool.
JEL classification: A22; B14; E11; E12
Keywords:

teaching; macroeconomics and monetary economics; Marx

Attempts to introduce a radical perspective into undergraduate macroeconomics courses

confront certain constraints. First, a time constraint exists given the content of currently
available macroeconomics textbooks. To cover the standard material in the textbooks, any
incorporation of a radical perspective must take place in a relatively short time span. Second, the students have presumably mastered a certain way of thinking about economic theories and issues. This way of thinking relies heavily on algebraic manipulation and graphs.

Authors Note: The authors would like to thank three anonymous referees for helpful comments and suggestions. The authors alone are responsible for any remaining errors.
Review of Radical Political Economics, Volume 37, No. 3, Summer 2005, 329-339
DOI: 10.1177/0486613405278159
2005 Union for Radical Political Economics

329

Downloaded from rrp.sagepub.com at COLUMBIA UNIV on January 30, 2015

330

Review of Radical Political Economics / Summer 2005

For the time being at least, the introduction of radical economics into undergraduate courses
must be done in such a way as to comply with these constraints. 1
The present article translates Marxs insights on the role of money into a simple graphical apparatus. The goal of this exercise is limited to an illustration of how to overcome the
above two constraints while making radical economics accessible to undergraduate students. In the current article, the aggregate demand and supply analysis as presented in either
a principles or intermediate macroeconomics course is used as the point of entry for a radical alternative. The task of the article is less daunting at this particular point given the criticisms of the internal logic of the aggregate demand and supply framework that quite frequently come to light in confusion among students.2 These criticisms have made little
headway toward banishing the aggregate demand and supply graph from undergraduate
textbooks. Thus, rather than offering another criticism of the analysis, an alternative in the
radical tradition is given. The translation of Marxs insights at this point is a relevant alternative to this framework not because each addresses the same questions but rather because
each operates at the aggregate level.
The article proceeds with a necessarily brief discussion of the aggregate demand and
supply analysis. This is done to properly situate the current interpretation of Marxs ideas.
Section 2 makes the translation of Marxs insights from chapter 3 of volume 1 of Capital
(Marx [1867] 1990) into a simple graphical apparatus. The benefit of this graphical treatment lies in its immediate accessibility to students and its ability to contrast the standard
textbook model with a radical approach. In addition, as the application to the business cycle
makes clear, this method of presenting Marxs analysis has an affinity with Keyness financial and industrial circulation as used in A Treatise on Money (Keynes 1930). In section 3,
the graphical apparatus is extended to include the realization problem raised within volume
2 of Capital (Marx [1885] 1992). The point of the extension is to emphasize the instability
of a monetary production economy, a point seldom addressed in a traditional macroeconomics course. Finally, a few concluding remarks are made.
1. Textbook Aggregate Demand and Supply
The aggregate demand and supply graph is a staple in undergraduate macroeconomics
courses. Although fraught with difficulties, the framework continues to allow for an ease of
presentation on a multitude of topics. The effects of demand-side policies (e.g., fiscal and
1. There have been exceptional textbooks written by heterodox economists such as Hunt and Sherman
(1990), Wolff and Resnick (1987), and Robinson and Eatwell (1973). Although these continue to inspire many
of us wishing to do more radical economics in the classroom, the current constraints and prescribed intent of the
course may prevent us from adopting these books. It is in this vein that we hope to offer one method of introducing students to certain areas within radical economics.
2. Colander (1995, 2000) created an amusing discussion between an instructor and an exceptionally curious
student that highlights the difficulties of teaching the aggregate demand and supply analysis. Colander proceeded by attempting to rectify the internal problems within the aggregate demand and supply framework.
Romer (2000) proposed avoiding aggregate demand and supply in the classroom. The problem for Romer is that
the framework determines the price level rather than the more relevant inflation rate. Romers alternative uses
the ISLM model with interest rate targeting, which makes it more relevant for an intermediate macroeconomics
course. Saltz, Contrell, and Horton (2002) summarized the internal problems with the aggregate demand and
supply framework.

Downloaded from rrp.sagepub.com at COLUMBIA UNIV on January 30, 2015

Lautzenheiser, Yasar / Bringing Marx into the Classroom

331

monetary policies) as well as supply-side shocks (e.g., the oil crisis) on the price level and
real output are demonstrated with a shift of a curve. Even more, competing theories within
the mainstream (e.g., Keynesian, monetarists, and new classical) can be encapsulated in the
same framework by changing the relative slopes of the two schedules. It is these benefits
that have more than likely been the reason for its continued use despite the internal
difficulties.
The aggregate demand and supply graph can be constructed from either classical or
Keynesian theory. The aggregate demand schedule is constructed in the classical theory
from the quantity equation. The aggregate supply schedule is derived from the labor market
and aggregate production function. Assuming that markets work properly to generate full
employment, the quantity theory of money determines the price level. Hence, a change in
the money supply causes a proportional change in the price level. Assuming an exogenous
money supply, then the quantity equation (MV = Py) is read from left to right.
The Keynesian version takes a bit longer to construct. In a principles course, one must
normally develop the expenditures model, the liquidity preference theory of the interest
rate, and some interest-sensitive component of aggregate expenditures (e.g., investment).
Once these have been introduced, the aggregate demand schedule can be constructed from
the Pigou, Keynes, or international trade effects. In an intermediate course, assuming at
least one of the three effects, the aggregate demand schedule follows directly from the
ISLM model. The difficulty is then to tell a convincing story about aggregate supply and retain some semblance of consistency with the previous expenditures model (e.g., the price
level was held constant).
In addition to the obvious distinction between the treatments of the aggregate supply
schedule, the classical and Keynesian versions differ in their emphasis on the role of money.
The classical version emphasizes money as a medium of exchange. Changes in the money
supply are absorbed in changes in nominal variables, leaving real values unaffected. The
Keynesian version with its emphasis on money as a store of value is able to leave a role for
money to affect real variables via the interest rate. These two functions of money, along
with the unit of account, are commonly introduced to undergraduate students. The implications drawn from the placement of emphasis are, however, often left unexplored.
2. An Alternative Graphical Framework
On one hand, Marx criticized the classical economists for placing too much emphasis
on money as a medium of exchange.3 On the other hand, the Keynesian treatment of money
as a store of value affecting the interest rate might appear to Marx as being misplaced at
3. The emphasis on money as merely a medium of exchange had profound implications in Marxs hands.
Marx identified in this emphasis the classical economists attempt to disprove the very possibility of crisis in the
form of a general overproduction. Money acting merely as a medium of exchange reduced the scope of classical
theory to a barter economy. At the highest level of abstraction, Marx found that this type of theorizing ignored
the inherent contradiction within commodity production between value and exchange value. At a more concrete
level, this type of theorizing ignored the fact that profit was the purpose of production.
4. In some ways, this would appear to be more compatible with the development of Keyness own thought. It
is well known that Keynes formulated the liquidity preference theory of the interest rate at a very late stage in the
writing of The General Theory of Employment, Interest, and Money (1964).

Downloaded from rrp.sagepub.com at COLUMBIA UNIV on January 30, 2015

332

Review of Radical Political Economics / Summer 2005

Py
NAD
NAS2

NAS1

Ms

Mc

2
1

Ms
MH
Figure 1.
The Framework of Chapter 3

such an early stage in the analysis. In other words, it might be useful to demonstrate the role
of money as a store of value prior to the introduction of the interest rate.4 Marxs analysis of
money in chapter 3 of volume 1 of Capital ([1867] 1990) stands between the classical and
Keynesian versions of aggregate demand and supply. Within this chapter, money functions
as a medium of exchange and a store of value. In contrast to the classical theory, the quantity
equation is normally read from right to left. Thus, the nominal aggregate supply of commodities (i.e., sum of prices in Marxs terminology) determines the amount of money in circulation. This amounts to saying that under normal conditions, nominal aggregate supply
(Py) determines nominal aggregate demand (MV). The possibility of crisis, in contrast, occurs when money as a store of value dominates. Under these circumstances, the quantity
equation is read from left to right.
The mechanism allowing a change in nominal aggregate supply to call forth a change in
the money in circulation is the same that can be the cause for abnormal times. It is moneys
function as a store of value that provides the basis for this mechanism. For a given money
supply, the public can choose between transactions (money as a medium of exchange) and
hoarding (money as a store of value). Marx assumes that under normal circumstances, an increase in nominal aggregate supply will call forth a change in the composition of the money
supply from hoarding to transactions. The possibility always exists, however, that the appropriate change will not come about, thus leading to a crisis. In short, although the transactions demand for money is positively related to nominal output, the demand for money
hoards may react positively or negatively.

Downloaded from rrp.sagepub.com at COLUMBIA UNIV on January 30, 2015

Lautzenheiser, Yasar / Bringing Marx into the Classroom

333

Figure 1 translates the above discussion into a simple graphical framework. First, Marx
begins with commodities entering the market with prices already attached. Granted, this
statement appears strange to beginning students who have just learned that market demand
and supply determine prices or to the more advanced students who have been introduced to
general equilibrium theory. It facilitates, however, a discussion on the monetary nature of
production with output and pricing decisions undertaken in real time. This discussion can
be framed in terms of Marxs circuit of capital. More to the point, the assumption is a necessary feature of an endogenous money supply approach. Although commodities enter the
market with prices already attached, whether these prices will ultimately be realized depends on market conditions. Graphically, the nominal aggregate supply schedule (NAS)
appears as horizontal in the upper quadrant.
The composition of the money supply corresponds to the two functions of money. The
total money supply (Ms) consists of money in circulation (Mc) and money residing in hoards
(MH). These terms are somewhat vague at first, especially in the textbook context. The terminology can be made more concrete by allowing the M1 money supply to correspond to
the money in circulation and the M3 minus M1 money supply to the money residing in
hoards. As an additional benefit, the various definitions of the money supply are used
within this framework. This contrasts sharply to the textbook treatment in which the definitions are stated, then quickly forgotten. The lower quadrant in Figure 1 demonstrates these
aspects of the money supply.
Finally, the money in circulation multiplied by its velocity constitutes the nominal aggregate demand for commodities (NAD) as illustrated in the upper quadrant in Figure 1.
Two clarifications are needed for the interpretation of this schedule. First, the schedule corresponds to the textbook transactions demand for money. Alternatively, the schedule can be
thought of as the realization of the sum of prices. Any expenditures and therefore realization
of sales must be made in money. The amount of money thrown into circulation multiplied
by its velocity will then determine the realization of the sum of prices. The dual nature of
this schedule corresponds to the dual nature of money as medium of exchange and store of
value, as well as the direction of causation in the quantity equation.
The second clarification concerns the velocity as illustrated by the slope of the schedule
in the upper quadrant. Velocity is defined in terms of the money in circulation. This is in
contrast to the typical textbook Keynesian version, in which velocity is defined for the entire money supply and therefore varies with changes in the sum of prices. With velocity defined only in terms of money in circulation, this term can be treated as roughly constant.
Treating velocity in this way makes the framework much more relevant to Marxs approach
and Keynes in A Treatise on Money (1930). In The General Theory of Employment, Interest, and Money (Keynes 1964), Keynes opted to define velocity in terms of the entire money
supply and therefore allowed it to vary to absorb changes in income as well as hoarding. Although the definitions come to much the same thing, we believe a return to the older definition makes the changes in the composition of money more apparent.
Both aspects of Marxs discussion of the role of money are encapsulated in Figure 1.
We have found that an application of this framework is necessary to solidify the ideas. A
particularly useful application for us has been to present a very stylized account of the business cycle. First, the expansionary phase of the business cycle constitutes an increase in the
sum of prices (say, from NAS1 to NAS2). During this expansionary period, a decrease in
money hoards accommodates the increased demand for money in circulation. Here, the

Downloaded from rrp.sagepub.com at COLUMBIA UNIV on January 30, 2015

334

Review of Radical Political Economics / Summer 2005

money in circulation can be said to be endogenous in the spirit of certain post-Keynesian

theories. The endogenous nature of this component of the money supply does not rely on
banking behavior but rather on the publics decision to change the composition of their
money holdings.
The changing of the composition of the money supply allows an increase in the M1
money supply to occur during the expansion phase of the business cycle. The increase in the
M1 money supply accommodates the increased demand for money in circulation, thereby
alleviating any pressure on the interest rate to rise. This analysis is easily connected to
Keyness bull market with consensus of opinion in A Treatise on Money (1930). In
Keyness terms, the bull market with consensus of opinion was associated with an expectation that although asset prices were rising, they had not risen sufficiently. Under this type of
speculative market, the public would choose to decrease money in the financial circulation
(hoards, or M3 M1), which accommodated the increased demand in the industrial circulation (money in circulation, or M1), thereby alleviating any tendency for the interest rate to
rise.5 This additional commentary provides one explanation of why the appropriate change
in the composition of the money supply occurs. The expansionary phase, at least the early
expansion, associated with increasing confidence and rising asset prices lessens the desire
to hold money as a store of value.
The second aspect of Marxs discussion concerned the ever-present possibility of crisis.
Beginning at point 2 in Figure 1, there is always the possibility that the public will attempt
to increase money hoards. This meant that the simple exchange circuit (C M C) would
not be completed. In other words, the sale did not imply a subsequent purchase due to
money functioning as a store of value. If money hoards increased back to point 1, then nominal aggregate demand would fall, causing a crisis. It is in this sense that the NAD schedule
is understood as the realization of the sum of prices. The excess supply of commodities
would lead to a fall in prices and/or output.6 In terms of the quantity equation, the left-hand
side determines the right-hand side.
The desire to hoard embodied in the changing composition of the money supply initiates the crisis phase. Within the context of chapter 3 of Capital ([1867] 1990), Marx is content to highlight the possibility of a crisis arising from this role of money.7 On one hand, the
incompleteness of the analysis is certainly a shortcoming. On the other hand, by not specifying precisely why this circumstance arises, the stability of the system has been shown to
rest on very shaky grounds. The composition of the money supply can change in response to
a multitude of reasons. For Marx, the consequences of this change rather than the initial
impulse are interesting at this point.
Because Figure 1 follows the openness of Marxs analysis, several possibilities exist to
explain why the change in the composition of money comes about to end the expansion.
Radical economics is not short on explanations of factors that might initiate a crisis, any of
which can be mentioned. Alternatively, and continuing with the line of explanation pursued
thus far, one may return to Keyness analysis of speculative markets in A Treatise on Money
5. Erturk (2002) constructed a simple mathematical model of this aspect of A Treatise on Money (Keynes
1930).
6. Which of these actually adjusted was not the main concern at this stage. The point was that the increased
desire to hoard money initiates a crisis. Marx usually assumed some combination of price and output adjustment
(see Marx [1939] 1993: 447).
7. See Crotty (1985, 1987) and Kenway (1980) for the importance of the concept of the possibility of crisis.

Downloaded from rrp.sagepub.com at COLUMBIA UNIV on January 30, 2015

Lautzenheiser, Yasar / Bringing Marx into the Classroom

335

(1930). In this case, the decline in hoarding (financial circulation, M3 M1) accommodating the need for money as a medium of exchange (industrial circulation, M1) during the expansion changes due to speculation concerning the further upward movement in asset
prices. Keynes argued that during the late expansion phase of the business cycle, a bull market with a division of opinion develops. This type of speculative market occurs when some
individuals believe asset prices, although currently rising, will soon fall (e.g., an overvalued
stock market). When this occurs, there will be an increase in hoarding (financial circulation,
or M3 M1). A bear market with consensus of opinion normally aggravates the onset of the
recession. Here, asset prices are falling and believed to fall further, thereby causing a further
shift into hoarding. Given the total money supply, the change in composition translates to
an excess supply in the output market, as illustrated in Figure 1. For Marx, a general glut has
developed in which the supply of all commodities can be greater than the demand for all
commodities, since the demand for the general commodity, money, exchange-value, is
greater than the demand for all particular commodities (Marx [1968] 1975: 505). This
situation will continue until some members of the public believe that asset prices have fallen
too far and begin once again to decrease hoards.
The reliance on Keyness analysis of speculative markets tends to be welcomed by students in a macroeconomics course with an absence of any mention of the stock market. Of
course, this application can be returned to with the introduction of liquidity preference, the
interest rate, and an interest-sensitive component of aggregate expenditures. Even here,
however, the previous analysis seems to prepare the students to have a much deeper understanding of liquidity preference. At the very least, the students are aware of the importance
of the composition of the money supply. The previous application merely bypasses the interest rate channel at this point while arriving at the same result reached later in the course.8
Clearly, Figure 1 does not address the questions raised in the typical aggregate demand
and supply framework. Rather, the focus is on a different set of issues. In this sense, Figure
1 has several pedagogical benefits. First, the importance of money is brought out in a very
explicit manner. Thus, rather than defining velocity in terms of the total money supply,
Marxs definition of the velocity of money in circulation brings out the importance of the
composition of the total money supply.9 As demonstrated, this makes for a nice connection
to Keyness distinction in A Treatise on Money between the industrial and financial circulation (1930). Second, a dual reading of the quantity equation is easily presented. In addition
to introducing students to Marx, current issues in post-Keynesian monetary theory can be
initiated. By doing so, the students in an intermediate course are prepared for alternative
presentations of the interest rate (e.g., horizontalist and verticalist debates). Finally, these
8. For teaching purposes, this framework matches the Washington, DC, babysitting co-op story often used by
Paul Krugman (1994, 1999). According to Krugman, the babysitting economy experienced a recession when
members attempted to increase their reserves of scrip (money) that implied a decrease in demand for services.
9. Roche (1985) argued that to present a crisis, velocity must be defined in the modern sense of the total
money supply. This misses the importance of the composition effect embodied in Marxs presentation, however.
10. Without going into the details here, it is possible to make use of Rousseass (1992: 4148) Keynesian
model intended to illustrate the finance motive. An additional schedule can be added to the upper right-hand
quadrant of Figure 1. This schedule incorporates the transactions demand for money initiated by the planned expenditures. The equilibrium level of national income (i.e., sum of prices) will then be determined at the intersection of the new schedule and the NAD schedule. This makes the NAS schedule irrelevant because the economy
is demand rather than supply constrained in a Keynesian model. Although clearly relevant as an extension to our

Downloaded from rrp.sagepub.com at COLUMBIA UNIV on January 30, 2015

336

Review of Radical Political Economics / Summer 2005

Py

1+r

NAD

NAS
Costs

WN

M0

450
WN0

Mc

MH

Figure 2.
The Realization of Surplus-Value

ideas can be discussed prior to, and as preparation for, the staples of Keynesian theory such
as the multiplier and liquidity preference theory of the interest rate. 10
3. Money and the Realization Problem
The realization problem posed by Marx in volume 2 of Capital ([1885] 1992) can be
studied by slightly modifying the current framework.11 This application serves to highlight
the alternative set of questions addressed by this framework, and radical economics more
generally, in contrast to the typical aggregate demand and supply, and mainstream theory
more generally.
Some simplifying assumptions can be used to develop the important insights of the realization problem. Labor is assumed to be the sole prime cost. Next, capitalists are assumed
to form an expectation of their sales when deciding how much to produce and therefore how
much labor to hire. In keeping with Marx, a normal profit rate can be assumed to exist. The
normal profit rate in conjunction with wage and labor productivity will determine the price
of the commodities as they come onto the market (i.e., prices of production). Finally, it is
assumed that workers spend all of their wage income.
Figure 2 illustrates this framework. The upper left-hand quadrant shows the labor costs
on the horizontal axis and the ray for the normal profit rate (actually, 1 + r). Given expected
sales and therefore labor, the wage rate and normal profit rate determine nominal aggregate
supply. The 45-degree line allows a translation of the money flows to workers for production costs into the amount of money initially thrown into circulation. This setting emphasizes the dual nature of the wage bill as cost of production and source of revenue for capitalists. The two horizontal lines in the upper right-hand quadrant demonstrate nominal
framework, this does require a more advanced audience. We have purposely left out the additional schedule because it presumes a Keynesian model and the underlying ideas can be captured without it.
11. See Sardoni (1989) for further developments on this point and the connection to Kalecki.

Downloaded from rrp.sagepub.com at COLUMBIA UNIV on January 30, 2015

Lautzenheiser, Yasar / Bringing Marx into the Classroom

337

aggregate supply and costs. The difference between nominal aggregate supply (evaluated at
normal prices) and cost is total surplus-value.
The realization problem and Marxs proposed resolution are easily seen in Figure 2.
Based on expected sales, capitalists decide to hire N0 workers at the going nominal wage
(W). This decision requires that M0 be thrown into circulation (upper right-hand quadrant).
This amount of money, multiplied by velocity, represents the cost of production (upper
left-hand quadrant), which flows back to capitalists in the form of sales (upper right-hand
quadrant). The realization problem begins to come to light when the normal profit rate is
placed on costs to arrive at the nominal aggregate supply. The gap between nominal aggregate supply and the cost schedule existing at M0 (upper right-hand quadrant) will need to be
filled.
The gap can be filled, according to Marx, in three ways. First, capitalists may decide to
dishoard. Graphically, the capitalists must decrease the money residing in hoards in the
lower right-hand quadrant, which expands the money in circulation required to finance their
expenditures. Second, the money supply can increase. This option relies on shifting the entire money supply schedule outward in the lower right-hand quadrant. For Marx, operating
at a very abstract level of analysis, this could occur via an increase in gold production. Today, we would say that the money supply is expanded through the banking system via new
loans that the central bank accommodates with additional reserves. Third, the velocity of
money may increase. Tilting the nominal aggregate demand schedule upward in the upper
right-hand quadrant depicts this solution by Marx. 12
The possibility of crisis can now be dealt with in a more meaningful way. Assuming
neither the velocity nor total money supply change, if capitalists decide to decrease their
hoards by only half of what is required to realize the total value of commodities, then nominal aggregate supply will exceed nominal aggregate demand. In the current period, the realized nominal aggregate supply will shift downward to intersect nominal aggregate demand.
This will result in a lower than normal profit rate, illustrated by tilting the ray in the upper
left-hand quadrant downward.
Once a crisis arises, several adjustment processes can be discussed. For instance, the
adjustment process may occur through the output channel. In response to lower-than-expected sales and normal profit rate, capitalists in the next period may cut employment (assuming wages are fixed) and therefore output in anticipation of the lower sales. Graphically,
capitalists are attempting to slide down the normal profit rate line to the level at which previous sales occurred. Assuming nothing else changes (i.e., the amount of money hoards remains the same), the economy will reach a point of equilibrium in the sense that commodities produced will be sold at the normal profit rate. The resulting output and employment
will be less than that of the previous period. This condition will continue until capitalists are
12. Nell (1998) has attempted to demonstrate the mistake in Marxs analysis of the realization problem. In
fact, according to Nell, there is no such problem. Figure 2, with modification, can accommodate Nells argument. The money (M), rather than MV, initially thrown into circulation is assumed equal to total wages (WN). A
45-degree line drawn in both upper quadrants can illustrate this aspect. The nominal aggregate supply of commodities will equal the wage bill multiplied by the markup (Py = WNk). Under these conditions, the velocity of
money will necessarily be equal to the markup (V = k). Hence, the slope of the NAD line is not only the velocity
but the markup as well. The diagrams in the upper quadrants become mirror images of one another. Whether one
accepts Nells treatment of the problem is not at issue here. Rather, this is a useful exercise for students. The
graphical apparatus merely provides students with a way to visualize the issue.

Downloaded from rrp.sagepub.com at COLUMBIA UNIV on January 30, 2015

338

Review of Radical Political Economics / Summer 2005

willing to decrease their money hoards. Alternative adjustment processes are possible via
the price and wage channel.
The exact adjustment process is left open in Figure 2. For teaching purposes, this openness should be a benefit. In addition, money flows and the implications of the decision to
hoard are made explicit. Furthermore, the realization problem illustrates the importance of
the capitalists decision to spend. The realization problem is typically discussed in the context of where the money comes from to realize the surplus-value. It also serves, however, to
illustrate Marxs agreement with Malthus that if the demand exterior to the demand of the
labourer himself disappears or shrinks up, then the collapse occurs (1939: 420; italics in
original). In Figure 2, both aspects of the realization problem can be seen. First, the technical question of where the money comes from to realize the surplus-value is addressed. Second, and more generally, a source of demand not generated from current production is required to realize the surplus-value. This is a very general way of arguing against Says Law
and making a conceptual bridge to Keyness theory. Figure 2, then, demonstrates Marxs
position that in a general crisis of overproduction the contradiction is . . . between capital
as directly involved in the production process and capital as money existing (relatively) outside of it ([1939] 1993: 411).
4. Concluding Remarks
Introducing radical economics is difficult in undergraduate macroeconomic courses.
Part of the difficulty stems from the way macroeconomics is taught (graphs and math), as
evidenced by the leading textbooks. The other difficulty is due to the necessary time that it
takes to cover the mainstream material, leaving only a short time span to introduce radical
elements. The current article has attempted to illustrate how one might proceed to navigate
these difficulties.
The alternative framework presents a fairly close translation into graphs of various insights by Marx on money and the instability of capitalism. This framework is never intended to give students the impression that this was all there was to Marxs writings, let
alone radical economics, on these topics. Students are provided with a framework in which
to organize their thinking on these topics. If successful, students will have seen that there
exists alternative ways in which to think of money and the economy as a whole, and that
Marx and radical economics have something relevant to say on these matters.
References
Colander, D. 1995. The stories we tell: A reconsideration of AS/AD analysis. Journal of Economic Perspectives
9 (3): 16988.
. 2000. Telling better stories in introductory macro. American Economics Association: Papers and Proceedings 9 (2): 7680.
Crotty, J. 1985. The centrality of money, credit and financial intermediation in Marxs crisis theory: An interpretation of Marxs methodology. In Rethinking Marxism: Essays for Harry Magdoff and Paul Sweezy,
ed. S. Resnick and R. Wolff, 4581. New York: Autonomedia.

Downloaded from rrp.sagepub.com at COLUMBIA UNIV on January 30, 2015

Lautzenheiser, Yasar / Bringing Marx into the Classroom

339

. 1987. The role of money and finance in Marxs crisis theory. In The imperiled economy: Macroeconomics from a left perspective, ed. Editorial Collective, 7182. New York: Union for Radical Political
Economics.
Erturk, K. A. 2002. Asset prices, liquidity preference, and the business cycle. Working Paper #348. Annandale-on-Hudson, NY: Levy Economics Institute.
Hunt, K., and H. J. Sherman. 1990. Economics: An introduction to traditional and radical views. 6th ed. New
York: Harper & Row.
Kenway, P. 1980. Marx, Keynes and the possibility of crisis. Cambridge Journal of Economics 4: 2336.
Keynes, J. M. 1930. A treatise on money. In Collected writings of J. M. Keynes, ed. D. E. Moggridge. Vol. 5.
London: Macmillan.
. 1964. The general theory of employment, interest and money. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
Krugman, P. 1994. Peddling prosperity: Economic sense and nonsense in the age of diminished expectations.
New York: Norton.
. 1999. The return of depression economics. New York: Norton.
Marx, K. [1867] 1990. The process of production of capital. Vol. 1 of Capital: A critique of political economy,
ed. F. Engels. New York: Penguin.
. [1885] 1992. The process of circulation of capital. Vol. 2 of Capital: A critique of political economy,
ed. F. Engels. New York: Penguin.
. [1939] 1993. Grundrisse: Foundations of the critique of political economy (rough draft), translated and
foreword by Martin Nicolaus. New York: Penguin.
. [1968] 1975. Theories of surplus value: Part II. Moscow: Progress.
Nell, E. J. 1998. The general theory of transformational growth: Keynes after Sraffa. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Robinson, J., and J. Eatwell. 1973. An introduction to modern economics. London: McGraw-Hill.
Roche, J. 1985. Marxs theory of money: A re-interpretation. Review of Radical Political Economy 17 (1/2):
20111.
Romer, D. 2000. Keynesian macroeconomics without the LM curve. Journal of Economic Perspectives 14 (2):
14969.
Rousseas, S. 1992. Post Keynesian monetary economics. 2nd ed. New York: M. E. Sharpe.
Saltz, I., P. Contrell, and J. Horton. 2002. Does the aggregate demand curve suffer from the fallacy of composition? American Economist 46 (1): 6165.
Sardoni, C. 1989. Some aspects of Kaleckis theory of profits: Its relationship to Marxs schemes of reproduction. In Kaleckis relevance today, ed. M. Sebastiani, 20619. New York: St. Martins.
Wolff, R. D., and S. A. Resnick. 1987. Economics: Marxian versus neoclassical. Baltimore: John Hopkins University Press.

Mark Lautzenheiser received his Ph.D. from the University of Utah. His research interests include political
economy, history of economic thought, and economic education. He currently teaches in the Department of Economics at Earlham College.

Yavuz Yasar has M.Sc. and Ph.D. degrees in economics from the University of Utah. His research involves political economy and health economics. He currently teaches in the Economics Department at the University of
Denver.

Downloaded from rrp.sagepub.com at COLUMBIA UNIV on January 30, 2015