What do you think?
Rate this book
Contending Economic Theories: Neoclassical, Keynesian, and Marxian
A systematic comparison of the three major economic theories, showing how they differ and why these differences matter in shaping economic theory and practice
424 pages, Kindle Edition
First published January 1, 2012
124 people are currently reading
2458 people want to read
About the author
Richard D. Wolff
46 books851 followersRichard D. Wolff is an American economist, well-known for his work on Marxian economics, economic methodology, and class analysis. He is Professor of Economics Emeritus, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, and currently a Visiting Professor in the Graduate Program in International Affairs of the New School University in New York. Wolff has also taught economics at Yale University, City University of New York, University of Paris I (Sorbonne), and The Brecht Forum in New York City. In 2010, Wolff published Capitalism Hits the Fan: The Global Economic Meltdown and What to Do About It, also released as a DVD. He will release three new books in 2012: Occupy the Economy: Challenging Capitalism, with David Barsamian (San Francisco: City Lights Books), Contending Economic Theories: Neoclassical, Keynesian, and Marxian, with Stephen Resnick (Cambridge, MA, and London: MIT University Press), and Democracy at Work (Chicago: Haymarket Books).
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 27 of 27 reviews
March 18, 2013
This is a really good introductory primer on the three competing economic theories: neoclassical, Keynesian, and Marxian. Although Wolff and Resnick are Marxists - of the Althusserian variety - they do an impeccable job of being completely neutral and unbiased in their assessment of the aforementioned theories. However, they do spend the majority of the book explaining the Marxian view. And, they make sure the Marxian view can be sustained in the 21st century, by adapting issues of corporate structure, state taxes, monopoly firms, etc., into the paradigm of Marxian analysis (issues Marx either was reticent on, or wrote little about). Thus, this is a good book for the Marxist who wants to bring their understanding of Das Kapital into the 21st century. Also, W&R's explication of overdetermination is fantastic. They are able to present the theory in crystal clear terminology, something Althusser failed to do.
I do have a few minor quibbles with the book, but nothing serious. First, the authors do assume the reader has taken several economic courses, thus this isn't an introduction for all layman. The graphs used in the Neoclassical and Keynesian sections are sometimes confusing, and not enough time is spent introducing the reader as to how to read these graphs. Also, W&R hop right over serious issues regarding the Marxian theory of abstract and concrete labor, and they gloss over socially necessary labor time a bit too quickly. These are concepts that could have used further explanation. Having read lots of Marx I was comfortable skimming past them, but I can safely say had this been my first time reading about them, I would have been left in the dark.
Nonetheless, W&R set lay out a crystal clear thesis - we will teach the entry points, logic, and basic analytical tools of all three theories – and they execute it to near perfection. I don’t know much about Resnick, but I do Wolff’s website, and youtube videos make a nice addition to this text. He speaks and teaches without air of superiority, and he’s always lucid and clear. Thus, reading the book, and watching/listening to him lecture, serves as a great crash course into economics.
I do have a few minor quibbles with the book, but nothing serious. First, the authors do assume the reader has taken several economic courses, thus this isn't an introduction for all layman. The graphs used in the Neoclassical and Keynesian sections are sometimes confusing, and not enough time is spent introducing the reader as to how to read these graphs. Also, W&R hop right over serious issues regarding the Marxian theory of abstract and concrete labor, and they gloss over socially necessary labor time a bit too quickly. These are concepts that could have used further explanation. Having read lots of Marx I was comfortable skimming past them, but I can safely say had this been my first time reading about them, I would have been left in the dark.
Nonetheless, W&R set lay out a crystal clear thesis - we will teach the entry points, logic, and basic analytical tools of all three theories – and they execute it to near perfection. I don’t know much about Resnick, but I do Wolff’s website, and youtube videos make a nice addition to this text. He speaks and teaches without air of superiority, and he’s always lucid and clear. Thus, reading the book, and watching/listening to him lecture, serves as a great crash course into economics.
February 25, 2017
I'm the president of a local union and have been teaching myself the basics of economics through self-directed studies for the purpose of being able to up my rhetoric in regards to supply sided b.s. I read Wolff's Occupy the Economy and Democracy at Work. I LOVED them so much I went ahead and purchased Contending Economic Theories. This book is the same high quality as the others, and I would have given it a four or five stars except that for an economics layman, such as myself, this one got a little above my head (and outside my scope of interest/application). This book is obviously a much more in depth comparison of major economic theories, and it would be a perfect textbook in an undergraduate economics course (I sensed that this was its intent). For those of us who AREN'T economics majors and don't have a lot of time, I'd recommend Occupy the Economy. The three stars I gave it are really more of a reflection of my lack of time or interest at this level than it is a rating of Wolff or the book. If I were an economist, I'm pretty sure I'd give it 6 stars. ;)
September 2, 2015
This is a bit of a strange book. It is an update of a book whose purpose the authors say was, first, to explain Marxism and especially current work in Marxian economics to modern students and, second, to compare this to the dominant approach of the neoclassical schools. In the current update, they include Keynesian economics as a third paradigm. There is a marked difference in style and tone between the discussions of neoclassical, Keynesian and Marxian bits. Presumably Wolff wrote the Marxian bits and his co-author Resnick wrote the neoclassical bits. Ironically, for a book that is co-written by a prominent Marxist, the neoclassical chapter actually gives quite a good introduction to the details of constructing supply / demand curves and other bits of neoclassical economics. But to really get an idea of what is behind these theories I would recommend going to the sources: Leon Walras, Alfred Marshall, and Kenneth Arrow, for example. I have written about Walras and Marshall here, about Walras’s critique of Proudhon here and about a classic book by Arrow here. Again, for a book aimed primarily at presenting Marxism to a wider audience, there is surprisingly little critique of the neoclassical school. For a more scathing one the reader should look at Varoufakis’s Economic Indeterminacy or his economics overview, Modern Political Economics.
The authors’ characterization of the neoclassical school as part of a broader tradition of “humanism” seems quite strange. What they mean, I guess, is that the neoclassicals and, especially what Joan Robinson calls the neo-neoclassicals (Samuelson et cet.), concentrate on economics from the subjective, consumer side of the economic exchange and from the point of view of the individual consumer. But I wouldn’t think of this as particularly having anything to do with “an outlook or system of thought attaching prime importance to human rather than divine or supernatural matters” or with “a Renaissance cultural movement that turned away from medieval scholasticism and revived interest in ancient Greek and Roman thought.” Evidently “(among some contemporary writers) a system of thought criticized as being centered on the notion of the rational, autonomous self and ignoring the unintegrated and conditioned nature of the individual” is more of what they have in mind - (reference).
They call Keynesian economics a part of “structuralism.” Again, this seems strange, since what they mean has no connection to French philosophy post-Levi-Strauss, but presumably that Keynes looked at economics from a national or international perspective. They don’t bother to try to coin a one-word phrase for Marxism. They just say that Marxism “broke away from both humanism and structuralism to establish a basically different way of understanding society.” The terms that they use have been so often used in other contexts; it is strange that they decided to try to use them in this way here. Perhaps I just missed the memo.
They see neoclassical economics as a member of the class of “reductionist” and “determinist” theories which “explain the events they deem to be important (worthy of their attention) by centering on the essential causes of those events.” They see Keynesian theories as “structural determinism” since “Keynesian theory makes the macroeconomic structure the entry point and essential cause and human economic behaviors the effects.” They present a split Marxian tradition between the determinist Marxists and their own “overdeterminist” position. The determinists are those who argued for a “posed entry point of mode of production – the structured interaction of relations of production (property) and forces of production (technology) – that determinist Marxists argued was the ultimate cause of the economy nad thereby politics and culture as well.” Economy as substructure, culture as superstructure, in other words. Their own view is described as “overdetermination” – “Everything in the world participates in overdetermining everything else and is itself overdetermined by everything else.” Well, at least the reader is spared the Hegelian flip flops that one gets from Zizek, for example. But in the end they seem to be pointing to the same thing.
No more on the specifics of each chapter. My remarks here come primarily from their introductory chapter. Suffice it to say that I think one gets a better theoretical overview from such traditional histories as Mark Blaug’s Economic Theory in Retrospect or even better, Varoufakis’s Modern Political Economics. But this book gives one a look at the sustained views of a currently very prominent Marxist, Richard Wolff. That has to be a good thing.
The authors’ characterization of the neoclassical school as part of a broader tradition of “humanism” seems quite strange. What they mean, I guess, is that the neoclassicals and, especially what Joan Robinson calls the neo-neoclassicals (Samuelson et cet.), concentrate on economics from the subjective, consumer side of the economic exchange and from the point of view of the individual consumer. But I wouldn’t think of this as particularly having anything to do with “an outlook or system of thought attaching prime importance to human rather than divine or supernatural matters” or with “a Renaissance cultural movement that turned away from medieval scholasticism and revived interest in ancient Greek and Roman thought.” Evidently “(among some contemporary writers) a system of thought criticized as being centered on the notion of the rational, autonomous self and ignoring the unintegrated and conditioned nature of the individual” is more of what they have in mind - (reference).
They call Keynesian economics a part of “structuralism.” Again, this seems strange, since what they mean has no connection to French philosophy post-Levi-Strauss, but presumably that Keynes looked at economics from a national or international perspective. They don’t bother to try to coin a one-word phrase for Marxism. They just say that Marxism “broke away from both humanism and structuralism to establish a basically different way of understanding society.” The terms that they use have been so often used in other contexts; it is strange that they decided to try to use them in this way here. Perhaps I just missed the memo.
They see neoclassical economics as a member of the class of “reductionist” and “determinist” theories which “explain the events they deem to be important (worthy of their attention) by centering on the essential causes of those events.” They see Keynesian theories as “structural determinism” since “Keynesian theory makes the macroeconomic structure the entry point and essential cause and human economic behaviors the effects.” They present a split Marxian tradition between the determinist Marxists and their own “overdeterminist” position. The determinists are those who argued for a “posed entry point of mode of production – the structured interaction of relations of production (property) and forces of production (technology) – that determinist Marxists argued was the ultimate cause of the economy nad thereby politics and culture as well.” Economy as substructure, culture as superstructure, in other words. Their own view is described as “overdetermination” – “Everything in the world participates in overdetermining everything else and is itself overdetermined by everything else.” Well, at least the reader is spared the Hegelian flip flops that one gets from Zizek, for example. But in the end they seem to be pointing to the same thing.
No more on the specifics of each chapter. My remarks here come primarily from their introductory chapter. Suffice it to say that I think one gets a better theoretical overview from such traditional histories as Mark Blaug’s Economic Theory in Retrospect or even better, Varoufakis’s Modern Political Economics. But this book gives one a look at the sustained views of a currently very prominent Marxist, Richard Wolff. That has to be a good thing.
November 19, 2020
I learned a huge amount from this book, and am very glad to have read it. That said, I don't know to what extent I'd recommend it to others. Wolff's overview of Marxist economics is brilliant. He approaches the subject in a wonderfully (and unusually) non-dogmatic way, and really helps you understand the underlying philosophy, epistemology and methodology. As such you get a very rounded sense of what Marxism is all about.
Personally I found it slightly annoying that neoclassical and Keynesian economics are given equal weight with Marxism here. A huge amount of space is dedicated to describing these fields in a quite technical way, and it felt a bit unnecessary. Wolff is a Marxist, I'm a Marxist, let's just all be Marxists, hehe. I like the comparative nature of the book, but I would have preferred less focus on the other theories; I don't really need a hundred pages of equations to confirm my belief that the basic assumptions of neoliberalism are a load of old cobblers.
So the best part of the book is, IMHO, its portrayal of Marxian economics as a creative and evolving body of ideas. It's not the first thing I'd read on the subject (Wage-Labour and Capital/Value, Price and Profit is a good start if you want the man himself, or Talking to My Daughter About the Economy: or, How Capitalism Works - and How It Fails for a modern take). But as a stepping stone between those introductory texts and Capital, Vol. 1: A Critical Analysis of Capitalist Production, people may find it very useful.
A relatively serious disagreement I have with the author is his insistence that what was established in the Soviet Union and its allies was 'state capitalism', and that a real socialism would see the workers in a given firm collectively appropriating the surplus. The idea of Soviet-style socialism was that this relationship happened at a national level: the people, represented by the state, appropriated the surplus and distributed it in a way that suited the needs of the collective. As such, without the private ownership of capital, what was established meets Wolff's criteria for socialism (albeit at a different scale) and can't reasonably be described as capitalist. Which is not to say that it was an unalloyed success, but that's another story.
Personally I found it slightly annoying that neoclassical and Keynesian economics are given equal weight with Marxism here. A huge amount of space is dedicated to describing these fields in a quite technical way, and it felt a bit unnecessary. Wolff is a Marxist, I'm a Marxist, let's just all be Marxists, hehe. I like the comparative nature of the book, but I would have preferred less focus on the other theories; I don't really need a hundred pages of equations to confirm my belief that the basic assumptions of neoliberalism are a load of old cobblers.
So the best part of the book is, IMHO, its portrayal of Marxian economics as a creative and evolving body of ideas. It's not the first thing I'd read on the subject (Wage-Labour and Capital/Value, Price and Profit is a good start if you want the man himself, or Talking to My Daughter About the Economy: or, How Capitalism Works - and How It Fails for a modern take). But as a stepping stone between those introductory texts and Capital, Vol. 1: A Critical Analysis of Capitalist Production, people may find it very useful.
A relatively serious disagreement I have with the author is his insistence that what was established in the Soviet Union and its allies was 'state capitalism', and that a real socialism would see the workers in a given firm collectively appropriating the surplus. The idea of Soviet-style socialism was that this relationship happened at a national level: the people, represented by the state, appropriated the surplus and distributed it in a way that suited the needs of the collective. As such, without the private ownership of capital, what was established meets Wolff's criteria for socialism (albeit at a different scale) and can't reasonably be described as capitalist. Which is not to say that it was an unalloyed success, but that's another story.
July 4, 2021
A good general introduction into different economic theories but boring to read.
Although it's a good book and worth reading.
Although it's a good book and worth reading.
May 29, 2019
Overall a good general introduction to these three economic theories. If one is completely unfamiliar with the basic economic and social concepts the theories presuppose they may find the reading somewhat difficult, although not inaccessible.
Dr. Wolff is himself a Marxist, but I was glad to see him treat the Neoclassical and Keynesian views fairly and exhaustively (for a somewhat introductory text).
Dr. Wolff is himself a Marxist, but I was glad to see him treat the Neoclassical and Keynesian views fairly and exhaustively (for a somewhat introductory text).
July 21, 2017
On numara ders kitabı. İktisadi bir geçmişi olmayan insanların zevk alacağını sanmıyorum. Aslında iktisadi geçmişi olanların da zevk alacağını sanmıyorum. :) Ama öğrenmek istiyorsanız, öğretir. Temel iktisadi yaklaşımların hemen hepsinin bir arada olması, karşılaştırılması falan güzel.
March 27, 2022
Wolff and team offer an excellent overview of each of the three contending economic theories that they present. A great deal of time is spent on ne0classical and Marxian economic theories, less so on Keynesian theories, but they admit up front that this is due to the original structure of the text.
The value of the book is really in its capacity to explain the theories, their entry points in rational choice, market behavior and class; the underlying assumptions in doing so: humanism, structuralist and revolutionary class consciousness; and explanatory power and limits of each. Wolff et al have clear sympathies toward Marxian doctrine. Nonetheless, the descriptions of each theory are thorough and treated fairly, with presentations of both their explanatory strengths and their limits presented in a way as to suggest each contending theory has the capacity to illuminate the other.
There are a couple of dud moments here and there, particularly in the Marxian chapter where the authors veer outside of the narrow economic focus of the book to describe Marxian cultural critique (the section on Marxian-Feminism is particularly bad), as well as in the final chapters where I think they try to offer an overview of what is ultimately too many neoclassical schools rather than focusing on a more in-depth explanation of one or two major schools. And personally, the number of equations, though I am sure is useful in a classroom environment, is less accessible for a casual reader. In the end, though, the guiding thread of presenting each school through its fundamental entry point to explain its conclusions brings the book back around to its strengths as an introductory tool for economic theory.
The value of the book is really in its capacity to explain the theories, their entry points in rational choice, market behavior and class; the underlying assumptions in doing so: humanism, structuralist and revolutionary class consciousness; and explanatory power and limits of each. Wolff et al have clear sympathies toward Marxian doctrine. Nonetheless, the descriptions of each theory are thorough and treated fairly, with presentations of both their explanatory strengths and their limits presented in a way as to suggest each contending theory has the capacity to illuminate the other.
There are a couple of dud moments here and there, particularly in the Marxian chapter where the authors veer outside of the narrow economic focus of the book to describe Marxian cultural critique (the section on Marxian-Feminism is particularly bad), as well as in the final chapters where I think they try to offer an overview of what is ultimately too many neoclassical schools rather than focusing on a more in-depth explanation of one or two major schools. And personally, the number of equations, though I am sure is useful in a classroom environment, is less accessible for a casual reader. In the end, though, the guiding thread of presenting each school through its fundamental entry point to explain its conclusions brings the book back around to its strengths as an introductory tool for economic theory.
September 30, 2018
An easy to read introduction to three of the most influential economic theories.
August 25, 2019
A hundred stars for this book! I read it at the behest of my mom, who's always asking that I read more than just fiction, and despite having spent the last several weeks of summer break freedom making progress on this book, it was fully worth it.
Richard Wolff speaks and writes with elegance and clarity, and treats the contending theories very fairly. The neoclassical and Keynesian chapters were a breeze, as I'd already learned the content via high school and college classes, but I encountered so much new information in the chapter on Marxian economic theory. Truly eye-opening.
I also really appreciated how diverse the approaches to theory itself were. The meaning of theory (entry points, logical structure) is laid out so we know what exactly we're talking about and how. The reader gets an introduction to different epistemologies (empirical, rational, non-absolutist) in the closing, which is brilliant and hopefully does a lot to help discussion between economists, theorists, and people in general.
There's precisely one thing I have to criticize about this book, and it's the usage of "he or she" and "his or her" rather than they/them/their. I know it's a norm in academic writing, so I'm not faulting the authors for it. You can tell that I think this is a great book because that's the only thing I can think of, at the moment, in the entire 378 pages that I disapproved of.
TL;DR: Everyone should read this book, and especially if you care about economics!
Richard Wolff speaks and writes with elegance and clarity, and treats the contending theories very fairly. The neoclassical and Keynesian chapters were a breeze, as I'd already learned the content via high school and college classes, but I encountered so much new information in the chapter on Marxian economic theory. Truly eye-opening.
I also really appreciated how diverse the approaches to theory itself were. The meaning of theory (entry points, logical structure) is laid out so we know what exactly we're talking about and how. The reader gets an introduction to different epistemologies (empirical, rational, non-absolutist) in the closing, which is brilliant and hopefully does a lot to help discussion between economists, theorists, and people in general.
There's precisely one thing I have to criticize about this book, and it's the usage of "he or she" and "his or her" rather than they/them/their. I know it's a norm in academic writing, so I'm not faulting the authors for it. You can tell that I think this is a great book because that's the only thing I can think of, at the moment, in the entire 378 pages that I disapproved of.
TL;DR: Everyone should read this book, and especially if you care about economics!
May 18, 2025
-Chapter 4 review, May 18, 2025-
Professor Hans G. Despain, in his review of this book, proclaimed the Marxian chapter to be the very best introduction to Marxist economics out there, superior even to Harvey's, Sweezy's and Mandel's classic introductions. Having just read it myself, I find it hard to disagree.
Chapter 4 is by far the clearest overview of Marxist Political Economy I have ever read, and I wish I had read this before diving into other, more academic Marxist texts. Fundamental and subsumed class processes, labor theory of value, exploitation, crisis, accumulation, surplus value, capitalist development, and more are discussed and explained in a way that's easy for even a layman like myself to understand. Judging from other reviews, Wolff and Resnick's Althusserian Marxism may raise some eyebrows (I myself have some reservations), but this does not detract from the overall quality of their exposition.
This textbook, alongside Bowles' Understanding Capitalism, are in my view, required textbooks before jumping into MPE proper. Though I have not read this text in full, and my reading of Bowles' textbook is still in-progress as of the time of this review, the amount of clarity both textbooks have given me on economics makes me confident in these recommendations.
I will eventually return to this textbook for the Neoclassical, Keynesian, and Late Neoclassical chapters.
Professor Hans G. Despain, in his review of this book, proclaimed the Marxian chapter to be the very best introduction to Marxist economics out there, superior even to Harvey's, Sweezy's and Mandel's classic introductions. Having just read it myself, I find it hard to disagree.
Chapter 4 is by far the clearest overview of Marxist Political Economy I have ever read, and I wish I had read this before diving into other, more academic Marxist texts. Fundamental and subsumed class processes, labor theory of value, exploitation, crisis, accumulation, surplus value, capitalist development, and more are discussed and explained in a way that's easy for even a layman like myself to understand. Judging from other reviews, Wolff and Resnick's Althusserian Marxism may raise some eyebrows (I myself have some reservations), but this does not detract from the overall quality of their exposition.
This textbook, alongside Bowles' Understanding Capitalism, are in my view, required textbooks before jumping into MPE proper. Though I have not read this text in full, and my reading of Bowles' textbook is still in-progress as of the time of this review, the amount of clarity both textbooks have given me on economics makes me confident in these recommendations.
I will eventually return to this textbook for the Neoclassical, Keynesian, and Late Neoclassical chapters.
October 1, 2017
In an incredibly informative compilation, Professor Richard Wolff and Professor Resnick provide an updated comparative study of "The Big Three" economic models – Neoclassical, Keynsian and Marxian.
The book is summarized as an introductory economics text and certainly meets such expectations. From the seemingly unquestionable mathematics of Neoclassicism to the social and political analyses of Marxism and all the mediating principles of Keynsian theory in between – indeed, nearly every fundamental facet of these complex theories is covered in immense and, at times, dense detail.
However, there are moments where the authors can come off as too understanding, where certain passages turn into tangents reminding the reader of the author's strong intent at nonpartisanship. While these are frequent throughout the text, they merely add a fluff to what is otherwise a well formulated and (as much as it can be) unbiased presentation and comparison of today's dominant economic theories.
I would highly recommend this title to anyone seeking a non-trivial introduction to economics in its truest sense.
The book is summarized as an introductory economics text and certainly meets such expectations. From the seemingly unquestionable mathematics of Neoclassicism to the social and political analyses of Marxism and all the mediating principles of Keynsian theory in between – indeed, nearly every fundamental facet of these complex theories is covered in immense and, at times, dense detail.
However, there are moments where the authors can come off as too understanding, where certain passages turn into tangents reminding the reader of the author's strong intent at nonpartisanship. While these are frequent throughout the text, they merely add a fluff to what is otherwise a well formulated and (as much as it can be) unbiased presentation and comparison of today's dominant economic theories.
I would highly recommend this title to anyone seeking a non-trivial introduction to economics in its truest sense.
August 14, 2018
I wanted a guided introduction into the field of economics to better understand the various schools of thought in the "dismal science". Having skimmed through Piketty's "Economics of Inequality" with only rudimentary understanding accumulated from various internet resources, I thought it would be best to obtain a better conceptual grasp before tackling the tome that is "Capital in the 21st Century" that's been sitting on my shelf for years.
Richard D. Wolff is known to be an outsider in the field, being a Marxian economist, which puts him a good position to explain the various contending theories. I was wary that it might contain rather ideology-heavy writing but thankfully Wolff keeps it strictly in the realm of the explanatory "how" things work.
The book was adequate in what it sought to do (explaining the three contending theories) and I can see it being used as a first-year supplementary textbook. It's worth a read, if only just to understand the implicit theoretical frameworks that people may unwittingly commit to when forming opinions about economic matters: mininum wage, role of taxes and welfare etc...
Richard D. Wolff is known to be an outsider in the field, being a Marxian economist, which puts him a good position to explain the various contending theories. I was wary that it might contain rather ideology-heavy writing but thankfully Wolff keeps it strictly in the realm of the explanatory "how" things work.
The book was adequate in what it sought to do (explaining the three contending theories) and I can see it being used as a first-year supplementary textbook. It's worth a read, if only just to understand the implicit theoretical frameworks that people may unwittingly commit to when forming opinions about economic matters: mininum wage, role of taxes and welfare etc...
November 10, 2018
One of the few books that cover the three major economic theories in a single volume. An excellent text that provides the entry points to each theory as well as their logic and object of analysis (human decisions for neoclassical, market stabilization for Keynesian and class for Marxian). Perhaps, the most valuable aspect of the book is its detailed treatment of the Marxian theory given the disdain that modern academics give to this complex theory.
Besides the broad comparison of the three major corpus, the book also offers a chapter to explain late neoclassical theorie(s), including game theory, evolutional theory, social effects of capitalism and behavioral economics.
A book that shines on the shelves of economic literature given its interesting and unique approach.
Besides the broad comparison of the three major corpus, the book also offers a chapter to explain late neoclassical theorie(s), including game theory, evolutional theory, social effects of capitalism and behavioral economics.
A book that shines on the shelves of economic literature given its interesting and unique approach.
January 4, 2019
Disappointing. There are more than three theories in the field of economics. This is an entry level theory of economics book and should be so understood for it is simply put too undergrad. I would have liked an engagement with the fourth revolution by which a surplus of workers will mean they are no longer exploited. But rather ignored. What does that contemporary transnational context mean to economics and people? This question went largely unanswered as if the authors were at odds with their lived reality. For a 2012 book, this is not acceptable. In fact, this book is indispensable for the 1970s and a surplus for 2019. And stop calling Marxist theory Marxian already! It wasn't brought here from Mars and it is distracting.... not in a good way. 2 stars.
May 10, 2019
An excellent introduction to major economic theories for people like me who hate traditional textbooks. It's also refreshing to read about economics from someone who hasn't bought into all of the assumptions of micro/macro economics and can consider them critically.
January 1, 2020
It was more of a textbook version of economic theories but without any math. It was a good read and one of the upsides of this book is that it seemed to clarify the misconceptions that arise when people analyze political economies.
June 9, 2020
A very helpful distillation of these three economic theories. While slightly repetitive in parts and not detailed enough on Keynesianism for my liking, this book was rife with interesting analyses of Marxian and Neoclassical economics.
January 2, 2025
Richard D. Wolff's deep insight is more than economic theories. He articulates the thought that I personally have but cannot articulate or elaborate sufficiently with my vocabulary. The entry points, the theories, the beauty of reductions, all merge into the thinking process presented in this book.
January 21, 2022
One of the most enlightening books I've read in a while. Specifically because of it's focus in breaking down theories into systems of objects and relationships in order to understand them.
July 6, 2023
Great book to learn about the main economic theories of our time
August 1, 2016
A surprisingly dense book on three of the major schools of economic thought. Took me a very long time to work through it, as it is most definitely academic in tone and therefore not at all a light read. That being said, worth the time investment 100%. I've come out the other side with a nuanced understanding of neoclassical theory, Keynes' critique of Smith and Ricardo's work, and some special topics on "late neoclassical theory," which include some sections on topics like game theory. I would say that it's worth the read for those topics alone, as well as its value as a book on comparative economics (an area I feel is greatly lacking quality contributions).
November 3, 2015
‘Contending Economic Theories’ is a hyper-examination of the world’s three major economic theories and their implications for economic success. While focusing on the fundamentals, Resnick and Wolff do a wonderful job at breaking down entry points and assumptions entailed in each theory, meticulously juxtaposing them in the process. This textbook is a little technical but extremely informative for its size. I suggest familiarization with elementary economics prior to reading this, or maybe read this book as an intro to economics companion.
January 7, 2016
Interesting comparative text by Wolff. Definitely most worthwhile for the bit on new Marxian economics. His description of classical economics is standard and unsympathetic, and Keynesian economics gets super short-shrifted, but we know who Wolff is. Important to get these perspectives out there. A good personal resource though I'd be hesitant to assign it as a central text in a class.
December 17, 2016
Repetitive and overlong, but not a bad summary.
August 8, 2019
Great introduction to neoclassical, Keynesian and Marxian economic theories.
November 5, 2025
Nice short intro
Displaying 1 - 27 of 27 reviews