[OPE-L:5678] Re: Re: Response to Fred - 1

From: Rakesh Narpat Bhandari (rakeshb@Stanford.EDU)
Date: Mon May 28 2001 - 19:33:11 EDT

re 5675

>3.  whether or not the prices that value-form theory is trying to explain
>are disequilibrium actual market prices (as opposed to Marx's equilibrium
>values and prices of production)?

Fred, I don't think Marx believed in such a thing as equilibrium 
values. After all, to argue that the average rate of profit not only 
does not negate the law of value but becomes the form in which said 
law asserts itself does not commit one to the thesis that market is 
ever in the process of settling down on equilibrium values. You will 
note here that your equilibrium interpretatation of the law of value 
is at odds with Mattick Sr' interpretation of Marx (as well as 
Korsch's, Grossmann's and Blake's).

While the political economists understood exchange to be regulated in 
long run equilibrium by equal labor time for equal labor time, Marx 
critiqued Ricardo for not grasping why implicit in the system of 
value--that is in the necessity that individual labor be represented 
through the exchange of things as general abstract social labor 
way--was not the tendency to equilibrium in exchange but crisis in 

Of course Marx's value theoretic analysis of the possibility and 
necessity of crisis followed upon his materialist insight that the 
overthrow of capitalism could never follow from either the success of 
moral or ethical argument, no matter how analytically sound,  or the 
fact that all previous modes of production had met their historic 

Yours, Rakesh

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Jun 02 2001 - 00:00:08 EDT