[OPE-L:6336] Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: recent science and society and Fred M's interpretation

From: nicola taylor (n.taylor@student.murdoch.edu.au)
Date: Wed Jan 16 2002 - 19:05:25 EST

Hi Rakesh, 2 questions for you:

>It is of course possible to give a *description* of crises, working 
>class struggle within the abode of production and unemployment 
>without reference to labor value (all one has to do is remove rose 
>blinkered spectacles); it is not however possible in my opinion to 
>give a deep explanation of the root causes of said developmental 
>tendencies of the capitalist sytem on any other foundation than the 
>one of labor value (or as Tony Smith would put it, in the 
>commodity-form, money form, and capital form themselves; of course 
>one could argue that rooting said phenomena in these forms does not 
>necessarily commit one to the theory of labor value).

i) do you agree with Tony that Marx provided some grounds for 'rooting said
phenomena' in the value forms?

If you do agree, let's (for arguments sake) say that the value-form
determination of productive activity (and determination of patterns of
consumption) is the Lakatosian hard core concept of Marxism, and labour
values little more than a protective belt.  Then: 

ii) are theories that attempt to develop this strand of Marx's thought
Marxist theories, given that they can explain the said phenomena without
recourse to labour values?


Nicola Taylor
Faculty of Economics
Murdoch University
South Street
W.A. 6150

Tel. 61 8 9385 1130 
email: n.taylor@stu.murdoch.edu.au

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Feb 02 2002 - 00:00:05 EST