Categories
- Art (356)
- Other (3,632)
- Philosophy (2,814)
- Psychology (4,018)
- Society (1,010)
Recent Questions
- Why did everyone start to hate the Russians if the U.S. did the same thing in Afghanistan, Iraq?
- What needs to be corrected in the management of Russia first?
- Why did Blaise Pascal become a religious man at the end of his life?
- How do I know if a guy likes you?
- When they say "one generation", how many do they mean?
Are you sure that someone here will give you a brief but clear answer? Actually, they write dissertations on this subject, and Marx himself wrote Capital as a criticism of Smith.
1) See Smith's Dogma.
The difference is in explaining the sources of surplus value: Marx considered capital to be a separate, special component, living according to special laws, while Smith did not.
There the devil himself will break his leg in their thoughts. Honestly, I don't understand very well.
2) Smith is the “invisible hand of the market”, and Marx is the market itself that leads to crisis and deadlock and requires state intervention. I.e. liberalism versus regulation. In principle, it is obvious that Marx is right, but the number of people willing to carry out liberal reforms at someone else's expense is still not decreasing, even in Russia.