From: Jerry Levy (Gerald_A_Levy@MSN.COM)
Date: Thu Oct 13 2005 - 09:36:07 EDT
> Michael [H, JL], I don't deny that the lack of mention of capital in > general in Capital is interesting; however, as Rob Lucas points out > in Marx Myths, there are very few mentions of communism (which I see > as permeating CAPITAL) there too. Mike L: Also interesting is the lack of references to _class_ in _Capital_. I just did a quick word search at http://www.marxists.org for "class". I had to make some deductions to: a) exclude references outside of _Capital_; b) exclude references in the afterwards and prefaces of Volume 1, including any references by Engels; c) exclude references that referred to something quite different from social classes such as the "class of soil", etc. d) exclude reference in _Resultate_. The references in _Capital_ to "class", with the above exclusions with a very quick tabulation on my part, are: Volume References ===== ======== I 16 II 10 III 11 -------- Total: 37 Of course, there could be something wrong with the search function and/or my tabulation, but it's interesting. Isn't it? In solidarity, Jerry PS: in sending Fred's paper, I was not necessarily expressing agreement with the contents. I thought, though, that it bears a discussion, especially since it has an entire section on Michael H's interpretation of capital in general and a rather long reference to Chris's position as well.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Oct 14 2005 - 00:00:03 EDT