, ▁we ▁must ▁investigate ▁the ▁real ▁historical ▁orig ins ▁of ▁the ▁conditions ▁which ▁give ▁rise ▁to ▁the ▁r iddle ▁in ▁the ▁first ▁place , ▁i . e . ▁the ▁real ▁economic ▁history ▁of ▁trade ▁and ▁the ▁way ▁that ▁history ▁has ▁been ▁reflected ▁in ▁human ▁thought . ▁Once ▁we ▁do ▁this , ▁value ▁is ▁no ▁longer ▁defined ▁simply ▁an ▁attribute ▁of ▁products ▁and ▁assets , ▁but ▁as ▁a ▁relation ▁between ▁objects ▁and ▁subjects . ▁ ▁Is ▁it ▁an ▁equilibrium ▁theory ? ▁ ▁Thomas ▁T . ▁Se k ine ▁has ▁interpreted ▁Marx ' s ▁law ▁of ▁value ▁as ▁a ▁purely ▁theoretical ▁principle ▁of ▁market ▁equilibrium ▁which ▁has ▁no ▁application ▁to ▁empir ical ▁reality . ▁This ▁ra ises ▁the ▁question ▁of ▁how ▁we ▁verify ▁that ▁it ▁is ▁a ▁" law " ▁at ▁all . ▁Paul ▁Matt ick ▁argued ▁that ▁Marx ▁offered ▁no ▁theory ▁of ▁market ▁equilibrium , ▁only ▁a ▁dynamic ▁theory ▁of ▁en larg ed ▁economic ▁reprodu ction . ▁ ▁In ▁reality , ▁mark ets ▁were ▁rarely ▁in ▁equilibrium ▁anyway ▁( that ▁was ▁more ▁a ▁hypothesis ▁used ▁by ▁econom ists , ▁or ▁a ▁eu ph em ism ▁for ▁" price ▁stability "), ▁and ▁what ▁explained ▁the ▁market ▁behaviour ▁of ▁individuals ▁and ▁groups ▁was ▁precisely ▁the ▁im bal ances ▁between ▁supply ▁and ▁demand ▁prop elling ▁them ▁into ▁action . ▁On ▁this ▁interpretation , ▁capital ist ▁development ▁is ▁always ▁im bal anced ▁development ▁which , ▁typically , ▁the ▁state ▁tries ▁to ▁mit ig ate ▁or ▁compens ate ▁for . ▁ ▁Under ▁capital ist ▁conditions , ▁bal ancing ▁output