Kamala Harris, with angry face and open mouth, seems to be talking about her father and his publication of a book. The book has the look of an old scholarly work with the academic title: “Capital Accumulation and Income Distribution.” The author, Donald J. Harris, is the father of Kamala Harris.
The meme was posted by Wendy Newbury Shiflett who wrote: “I’m sharing this from a dear high school friend. It’s 
% facts. Don’t close your eyes, America. This is her upbringing.”
Then there’s the quote:
“Go ahead and fact check this. While your at it, fact check the definition of Marxism.
Marxism is a political, economic, and social philosophy that originated in the 19th century with the work of German philosophers Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels. It’s named after Marx and is based on his ideas about the historical effects of capitalism on labor, productivity, and economic development. Marxism is a theory that argues that the struggle between social classes is a major force in history and that a worker revolution is needed to replace capitalism with a communist system.”
Who is Wendy Newbury Shiflett? And who is her “dear high school friend”? According to her FB page, Wendy Newbury Shiflett has no friends.
Someone using the same photo is on Instagram and we do get a little more information:
Wendy Newbury ShiflettWinny is my g’ma name😊 Texas🤠 Cray Cray over my man😍 Momma to 2 incredible me 🥰 Entrepreneur💪🏻 Love me some Jesus🙏🏻 And dogs🐾 Business owner👩🏼💻
From the Instagram page, we get business information. Shiflett is working in Fredericksburg, VA in a kitchen remodeling business. Shiflett is the president (sales and marketing). However, what does this person know about economics beyond running a business?Finally, if there is any virtue in the writing of this book, it springs from the sacrifices knowingly or unknowingly made by my two daughters, Kamala and Maya. In return, it is dedicated to them.
Cf. J.M. Clark 1931: 64-65: ‘The marginal theories of distribution were developed after Marx; their bearing on the doctrines or Marxian socialism is so striking as to suggest that the challenge or Marxism acted as a stimulus to the search for more satisfactory explanations. They undermine the basis or Marxian surplus value doctrine by basmg va_lue on utility instead or on labour cost and furnish a substitute for all forms or exploitation doctrine Marxian or other, in the theory that all factors or production not only are productive but receive rewards based on their assignable contribution lo the joint product.”
Rowthorn, R. 1974. “Neo-Classicism, neo-Ricardianism and Marxism,” New Left Review (July/Aug.): 63-87.
A basic reference point for the discussion is the system of ideas developed by the English Classical economists and by Marx. This is a necessary point of departure, since it is in these ideas, and especially in the work of Marx, that some of the main conceptual foundations for theoretical analysis of accumulation and distribution in the capitalist economy were laid. From this vantage point it is possible to gain both a critical understanding of contemporary approaches to that analysis and a conceptual framework for developing a more adequate theory. To this end, the integrated structure of this system of ideas is reviewed in Part One. A sharp contrast is drawn with the later neoclassical system based on marginal productivity and subjective preference theory. Against this background the problematic character of modern growth theory is identified and discussed as it has taken shape in the work of contemporary writers beginning with Harrod and Domar.
The title of Harris’ 1978 book, “Capital Accumulation and Income Distribution,” illustrates this concern. Harris was also preoccupied with exploitation and other concepts that came directly from Karl Marx’s theory of capital. For example, The Economist recounts that he once argued that the inequality that beset Black people in the U.S. did not come from a form of “colonial rule” where white people dominate. Instead, he argued that the problem was capitalism. In this sense, Harris was indeed marxist in his thinking.
In fact, a 2019 paper in Elgar Online argued that “Marx should not be considered as an ‘early post-Keynesian’ but rather as an important forerunner of modern post-Keynesianism, with certain similarities, but also some important differences, and several areas of compatibility.”
So why is Trump’s free-swinging rhetoric failing?
For one thing, Harris isn’t — and never has been — a Marxist, and most voters appear to recognize that.
In her abortive presidential campaign in 2019, she cast herself as a progressive — but she was still closer to the center than candidates like independent Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, who (unlike Harris) describes himself as a democratic socialist.
To be doubly certain, I consulted a leading historian of American Marxism, Paul Buhle, a retired lecturer at Brown University. He said he had looked into Harris’ history and found no evidence of Marxist leanings. “It’s a slur,” he wrote in an email.
For another thing, Harris has moved quickly and effectively to define her positions as squarely within the mainstream of current Democratic thinking: liberal, but a long way from anything resembling Marxism, which calls for government ownership of major industries.
Age of the Geek 