Chapter 1 is the most important chapter in Capital, as well as the most difficult and the most controversial. An influential interpretation of Chapter 1 in recent decades has been the so-called “value-form interpretation” of Marx’s theory in general and Chapter 1 in particular. The most important proponent of the value-form interpretation today, both in Germany and in the English-speaking world, is Michael Heinrich, and Heinrich’s work has emphasized the first chapter. Heinrich’s latest book in English is a detailed commentary of the first seven chapters of Volume 1 of Capital. The publication of an English translation of Heinrich’s book is an important event in Marxian scholarship and it is important to critically engage with this important book in order to advance our understanding of this critical foundational chapter. This book emphasizes the quantitative issue of whether the magnitude of value and socially necessary labour-time are determined in production or also depend on exchange and demand, which has been the main issue in the controversy over the value-form interpretation.

Economist, theorist and historian, the author suggests a definition of political economy which has nothing in common with the definition of economics. He states that political economy deals with human working activity, not from the standpoint of its technical methods and instruments of labor, but from the standpoint of its social form.

Political economy, defined in the study of social relations and culture. Originally published in the former Soviet Union, was suppressed and after 1928 it was never re-issued. This is the first English-language edition. Includes an outstanding introductory essay on "Commodity Fetishism" by Freddy Perlman.

Isaak Ilyich Rubin (1886-1937) was a Soviet economist who participated in the Russian Revolution and was a researcher at the Marx-Engels Institute Though his ideas were suppressed by the Soviet Union and he was eventually killed after being accused of Trotskyism, his ideas have since been rehabilitated within modern Marxism. Essays on Marx's Theory of Value (1924) emphasizes the importance of Marx's theory of commodity fetishism within the labor theory of value. It also argues that Marx's mature economic work represented the culmination of his lifetime project to understand how human creative power is shaped by social structures. He also discusses commodity production as a mere theoretical abstraction that only explains one aspect of a developed capitalist economy. The concept of value, as understood by Rubin, cannot exist without the other elements of a full-blown capitalist economy: money, capital, the existence of a proletariat, and so on. This Radical Reprint by Pattern Books is made to be accessible and as close to only manufacturing cost as possible.

Many scholars discuss Marx’s Capital from many perspectives, but Accounting for Value uniquely advances and defends an ‘accounting interpretation’ of his theory of value, that he used it to explain capitalists’ accounts. It confirms and builds on the Temporal Single-System Interpretation’s refutation of the charge that Marx’s illustration of the ‘transformation from values to prices’ is inconsistent, and its defense of his ‘Law of the Tendential Fall in the Rate of Profit’. It rejects other interpretations by showing that only a ‘temporal’, ‘single-system’ interpretation is consistent with Marx’s accounting. The book shows that Marx became seriously interested in accounts from the late 1850s during an important period in the development of his critique of political economy, asking Engels for information and explanations. Examining their letters in the context of Marx’s evolving work, it argues, supports the hypothesis that discovering he could explain them with his theory of value gave him the breakthrough he needed to decide how to present his work and explains why, in 1862, he decided to change its title to Capital. Marx’s explanations of capitalist accounting, it concludes, amount to an ‘accounting theory’ that explains how individual capitalists and the capital market use what is, for many, the ‘invisible hand’ of accounting to control the production and distribution of surplus value. Marx claimed his theory of value was a work of ‘science’, a critique of political economy that would deliver a ‘theoretical blow’ from which the bourgeoisie would ‘never recover’. He failed, critics argue, because his critique depends on hypothetical entities, which we cannot directly observe, such as ‘value’ and ‘abstract labour’, ‘surplus value’, which means his theory is not open to empirical refutation. The book, however, argues that he used his theory of value to explain the ‘phenomenal forms’ of ‘profit’, ‘rate of profit’, etc., by explaining the observable accounting principles and practices capitalists use to calculate and control them, in which, as he said, we can ‘glimpse’ the determination of value by socially necessary labor time, which experience could have refuted.

This book provides a contemporary assessment of Marx's theory of money. This theory is often praised as one of Marx's greatest achievements, especially when compared with either classical or neoclassical economics. On the other hand, Marx's theory of money has also been severely criticized, especially that it seems to require that money be a produced commodity. The contributors to the volume provide a wide-ranging and in-depth appraisal of the strengths and weaknesses of Marx's theory of money, compared to other theories of money.

Karl Marx is the most historically foundational and systematic critic of capitalism to date, and the years since the 2008 financial crisis have witnessed a rebirth of his popular appeal. In a world of rising income inequality, right-wing nationalisms, and global climate change, people are again looking to the father of modern socialism for answers. As this book argues, every era since Marx's death has reinvented him to fit its needs. There is not one Marx forever and for all time. There are a thousand Marxes. As Thomas Nail contends, one of the most significant contributions of Marx's work is that it treats theory itself as a historical practice. Reading Marx is not just an interpretative activity but a creative one. As our historical conditions change, so do the kinds of questions we pose and the kinds of answers we find in Marx's writing. This book is a return to the writings of Karl Marx, including his under-appreciated dissertation, through the lens of the pressing philosophical and political problems of our time: ecological crisis, gender inequality, colonialism, and global mobility. However, the aim of this book is not to make Marxism relevant by "applying" it to contemporary issues. Instead, Marx in Motion, the first new materialist interpretation of Marx's work, treats Capital as if it were already a response to the present. Thomas Nail argues that Marx was a new materialist avant la lettre. He argues that Marx did not believe history was determined, or that matter was passive, or that humans were separate or superior to nature. Marx did not even have a labor theory of value. Marxists argue that new materialists lack a sufficient political and economic theory, and new materialists argue that Marx's materialism is human-centric and mechanistic. This book aims to solve both problems by proposing a new materialist Marxism.