Abstract:

Marx’s theory of fictitious capital has become a crucial contemporary academic topic due to its critical value in analyzing financial capitalism. Inheriting Hilferding’s research on finance capital, Sweezy adopted a “continuous progressive method” to interpret the separation mechanism between fictitious and real capital. However, he overlooked the procedure of fictitious capital formation and its inherent systemic characteristics. Contemporary Neo-Hegelian Marxism defines fictitious capital as a claim on “future income streams” and a truly “non-existent” entity, offering an interpretation more imbued with Hegelian systematic dialectics while opposite to traditional readings. To address the interpretive challenges of fictitious capital, it is necessary to return to the MEGA II texts and explore Marx’s extensive notes on 1866 crisis concerning fictitious capital. Through a crisis-based perspective, a deeper understanding of the essence and operational mechanisms of fictitious capital can be achieved and a more “moderate” and dialectical approach to navigating “finance capital” can be discovered.

Key words: Marx, fictitious capital, financial capital, dialectics of value form, Das Kapital