[ show plain text ]
At 12:59 12/05/00 -0400,fred wrote:
>I of course agree with Michael here. Clearly, Marx " saw the commodity
>and money as historically prior to the full development of capitalist
>social relations of production." But this is a separate question from
>the precise specification of the commodity in Chapter 1.
>Duncan, are you arguing that the commodity in Chapter 1 is product of
>a historically prior simple commodity production?
One only has to argue that commodities share certain formal properties
irrespective of the mode of production to disagree with your
conclusion fred. The point is that the commodity in chapter 1
of capital could have been produced in a variety of different
modes of production without invalidating the formal analysis,
which is therefore logically more general than you want
to restrict it to.
Paul Cockshott (firstname.lastname@example.org)
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed May 31 2000 - 00:00:09 EDT