[OPE-L:4676] Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Questions

From: Gil Skillman (gskillman@MAIL.WESLEYAN.EDU)
Date: Mon Dec 11 2000 - 11:03:46 EST

Rakesh, you write
>Gil, once it is concluded that surplus value arises from the use 
>value of a commodity, then surplus value is not appropriated as you 
>seem to imply in (if this is what you mean by "via") the circulation 
>of capital or what you call the circuit of capital.

Even if surplus value doesn't *originate* in exchange, isn't it true that
it must be appropriated through exchange, i.e. via the circuit of capital?
Isn't this what Marx means at the end of Ch. 5 when he says

"But can surplus-value originate anywhere else than in circulation, which
is the sum total of all the mutual relations of commodity-owners?....It is
therefore impossible that, outside the sphere of circulation, a producer of
commodities can, without coming into contact with other commodity-owners,
valorize value, and consequently transform money or commodities into
capital.  Capital cannot therefore arise from circulation, *and it is
equally impossible for it to arise apart from circulation.  It must have
its origin both in circulation and not in circulation.*" [p. 268; Emphasis

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Dec 31 2000 - 00:00:04 EST