[OPE-L:5837] RE: quasi-separation

From: Michael Williams (michael@williamsmj.worldonline.co.uk)
Date: Fri Jun 08 2001 - 09:57:48 EDT

> If you say that abstract labour is fully separate from / independent
> of concrete labour, then you are stuck with what must be a
> transhistorical concept of value.

Though I do not say this, I would be interested in your reasons why abstract
labour independent of concrete labour must thereby be trans-historical.

> If you say that abstract labour is a mere aspect of concrete labour,
> then, again, you are stuck with a transhistorical conception of value.

No 'mere' about it. Actual labour under capitalism is, concretely the
necessary contradictory unity of value-creating labour and specific
(use-value producing) labour. Thus 'aspect' may be better rendered as
'moment' here. Such a contradictory unity is characteristic of Capitalism
(whatever similar partial, prefigurative and embryonic forms of it may have
existed earlier).


This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sun Jul 15 2001 - 10:56:29 EDT