You must log in or register to comment.
As a Marxist, I look at Adam Smith as an economist who was examining the necessary advancement of political economy. The wealth of nations is a book that mostly observes the emergence of a new economic system. We all believe in historical materialism, Adam Smith fits right in for us because he advocated for a newer and more efficient economic system which was an improvement over the mercantilism of the day.
He also correctly identified the contradictions and drawbacks of Capitalism just as it was getting started. I never read his other book but it’s the opposite of “men only act in their self interest” or so I’ve heard.
Everyone who loves smith at the expense of Marx has never read either.
Wealth of Nations actually dovetails nicely into Marx
It’s almost as if Marx read the book and wrote Capital as a constructive response that fleshed out the position of labor in the context of Smith’s capitalism. That the books are two sides of the same coin, and Smith doesn’t even directly endorse capitalism as a good way to run society.