>Re Rakesh's : > >Previously I wrote: > >>A historical note: Marx was a dedicated revolutionary who believed >>in the revolutionary role of the working class -- from a materialist >>'scientific socialist' perspective -- long before he developed his >>critique of political economy. > >Rakesh asked: > >> Please elaborate on significance of this important point. > >Marx was a revolutionary decades before he developed his critique >of political economy and M&E's historical materialist explanation of >the revolutionary role of the proletariat was presented in the >_Manifesto of the Communist Party_ (1848). This is not to suggest >that his later critique of political economy and attempt to lay bare >the 'economic law of motion of modern society' did not _add_ >something to that understanding -- but it was there long before. > >Let us consider your point further: you argued that the 'labor >theory of value' and the FROP are required to develop the >'Marxist' perspective on the revolutionary role of the working class. >If that were the case -- given the historical detail suggested above >-- then we would have to conclude by your standards that Marx >was not a Marxist _until_ he developed his critique of political >economy. Thus, you would arrive at a very curious result: you >would be asserting with the Althusserians that there is a 'Young >Marx' and an 'Old Marx'. This is a very unusual source of >agreement that you would have with a perspective that does not >share your view on the centrality of the law of value. Have you >become a 'reverse Althusserian'? > >In solidarity, Jerry Jerry, this is indeed a difficult and troubling criticism for the point of view that I am attempting to develop! I think my answer would be that the beginnings of Marx's labor value based theory of crisis are there in Poverty of Philosophy (including the contradictions in the value form). But I haven't read the work in a long, long time. I shall have to make time...which means getting offline of course. rakesh ps. Alfredo cites Alejandro referring not to Marx's labor theory of value or law of value but theory of labor value. Is the last in Lenin too?
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Feb 02 2002 - 00:00:05 EST