U.S. Vice President Kamala Harris’ father was a marxist economist.
In July 2024, after U.S. Vice President Kamala Harris entered the race to become president, a claim that her father was a marxist economist began to circulate online (archived):
The X post, which had gained 1.7 million views and 4,900 likes, came from Maxine Fowé, a political economist and an economic policy adviser at the German Federal Parliament, according to her LinkedIn profile.
The claim is true. Taking a closer look at Harris’ work and the economics school of thought he professed, we were able to confirm that he inscribed himself in Marx’s intellectual tradition.
Starting with Fowe, we found her biography on the website of one her previous employers, the German think tank Das Progressive Zentrum, which described her focus on “issues in the field of democratization of the economy and post-Keynesian economics in times of financialization dynamics.”
This detail is important because Donald J. Harris, a professor of economics at Stanford University, also did his research from a post-Keynesian perspective. Fowé was noting his line of inquiry admiringly. Keynesians stipulate that markets alone cannot ensure full employment and instead advocate for government intervention. Post-Keynesians agree, but argue that in intervening, the government should focus on equality and redistribution of wealth.
The post-Keynesian school of economics finds its roots in “The General Theory of Employment, Interest, and Money” — a 1936 book by economist John Maynard Keynes. In his book, Keynes attacked classical economics, which was the orthodoxy — that is, the mainstream — of the time.
Keynes’ main argument was that, contrary to classical economics’ assumption, markets alone would never ensure full employment because employment depends on demand — that is, the amount of money people and companies spend on available goods and services. He said that the psychology of markets was too volatile to manage. Instead, Keynes advocated for government intervention to stabilize the economy. For example, his recommendation for getting out of the 1930s Great Depression was that governments should simultaneously spend more and cut taxes.
From Keynes, three schools of thought emerged: Neo-Keynesians, new Keynesians and post-Keynesians. Neo-Keynesianism supporters, who focus on growth and stability rather than full employment, were the mainstream — or the orthodoxy — in the 1950s and 1960s. In the 1980s and 1990s, new Keynesians took the spotlight. N
Post-Keynesianism, which also evolved from Keynesianism, is in the heterodoxy — outside of the mainstream. Like Keynesianism, it assumes that markets alone cannot ensure full employment, and that the government must stimulate demand. But to post-Keynesians, the dimension of equality, classes and economic power is very important. Therefore, they are very concerned with distribution of income — how a country’s wealth is distributed among its inhabitants.
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.”
