Talk:Ricardian socialism

Socialism Low‑importance

	Socialism portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Socialism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of socialism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SocialismWikipedia:WikiProject SocialismTemplate:WikiProject Socialismsocialism articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Economics Low‑importance

	Business and economics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Economics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Economics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EconomicsWikipedia:WikiProject EconomicsTemplate:WikiProject EconomicsEconomics articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Daily pageviews of this article

A graph should have been displayed here but graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at pageviews.wmcloud.org

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Ricardian socialism. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/20150712235906/http://cepa.newschool.edu/het/schools/utopia.htm to http://cepa.newschool.edu/het/schools/utopia.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:19, 13 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The Ricardians' Relationship to Marx[edit]

The current article, in talking about the Ricardian socialists' relationship to Marx, is a bit misleading. It reads:

"Although Ricardian socialist thought had some influence on Karl Marx's theories, Marx rejected many of the fundamental assumptions of the Ricardian socialists, including the view that labor was the source of all wealth."

While this is true to the orthodox Marxist position -- such as that espoused by the source linked immediately after the sentence -- this does not capture the full extent of the debate about Ricardian socialism's influence on Marx. Other well-regarded scholars of Marx, such as GDH Cole (author of a well-respected multi-volume History of Socialist Thought in the 1950s) detect a strong influence on him, and see his divergences from them as evolutions in the theory rather than hard breaks; Post-Keynesians and Marxians influenced by Piero Sraffa, such as Ian Steedman, also see Marx as in this Ricardian socialist tradition, which is what precipitated Steedman's break from orthodox Marxism in favor of "Ricardian Marxism"; and I've found an article by one J.E. King of about the same length as the current source (https://read.dukeupress.edu/hope/article-abstract/15/3/345/11183/Utopian-or-Scientific-A-Reconsideration-of-the?redirectedFrom=fulltext) that says the exact opposite, that their influence on Marx is underrated.

While I think it may be too much to get into all of that in the article without adding a whole section about the debate, I would at least like to add the JE King source to this sentence and slightly rewrite it for balance's sake. I will proceed to do so, unless there are any objections. Feel free to revert it if I haven't followed the right protocol. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1700:23C0:84B0:E458:F0B5:5493:3A48 (talk) 19:40, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]