[OPE-L:6888] Re: Re: Re: value-form

From: Ian.Hunt@flinders.edu.au
Date: Thu Apr 04 2002 - 07:22:50 EST

given your account, what would you say about Schweickart's 'economic
democracy'? That this is a form of capitalism, that 'value' exists in it
but is not actual, that what exchanges are not commodities but some other
form of the product of labour?
At 04:47 PM 4/3/02 +0100, you wrote:
>Re [6868]:
>,Hi Andy.
>>> This notion of 'identity' puzzles me. If value *is* money, then what
>>> is the value-*form*?
>>I'll let one of  our VFT comrades answer your question concerning
>>their perspectives.
>It maybe that someone has said value is money. But speaking for myself I
>would stress hat value is only actual in the entire system of capitalist
>commodity production and exchange. Aspects of its 'concept' are as it were
>'distributed' over varioius points each of which are systematically
>required to complement the others. Just to stick with form, I beleive value
>has commodity form, money form and capital form. Money has some sort of
>'visibility' as 'value for itself' (Marx Gr.) but all these forms are
>required (just as in Hegel Being/Essence/Concept are jointly required to
>make up the thought totality) for example the commodity must be a product
>of capital. Certainly value cannot be identified with any element taken in
>isolation (e.g. money or labour); nor can it be given a two-word
>definition, its concept must be *developed* systematically. (Althugh Engels
>made some major blunders, he did stress this in a couple of places.)
>Chris A
>>For myself, I would express the relation as follows:
>>Within a system of generalized commodity production and exchange,
>>commodities are defined by the duality of use-value and value where
>>the value-form is a necessary form of appearance of value and money
>>is a necessary form of appearance of the value-form. Thus, value, the
>>value-form, and money are all necessarily linked to each other and to
>>the commodity.  I guess that means I have a "single-system" (as
>>distinct from a "dual system") interpretation.
>>So that we don't all repeat ourselves endlessly, is there anybody that
>>wants to say something about this topic that they have _not_ said before
>>on this list?
>>In solidarity, Jerry
>17 Bristol Road, Brighton, BN2 1AP, England

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Thu May 02 2002 - 00:00:08 EDT