RE: [OPE] Value-Form Theory 101

From: Paul Cockshott <>
Date: Tue Dec 09 2008 - 10:03:23 EST



It doesn't require much intellectual sophistication and profundity on
your part

to recognize that for a commodity to represent value it must have

and exchange-value. If a product does not have exchange-value, the

itself will demonstrate that it does not have value. This is a

consequence of the production and circulation of commodities under

It is not a "deduction" - it is a relation which we (and everyone else

considers the question more thoroughly) can see is a necessary

of the essential character of capitalism. It's why we speak about
value being

_realized_ (=_actualized_).


Abstract labor having a necessary relation to the market is also

that follows from the character of capitalist relations. Of what
"value" to

capitalists or to capitalism is labor which is "wasted" by producing

'commodities' which fail the test of the marketplace: i.e. whether they

become what they were intended to become by being sold?



This of course has been the subject of much discussion on the list,
whether abstract

Labour is a property of the market or is 'simple undifferentiated
expenditure of human energy'

And as such something prior to and a condition of existence of, markets.



ope mailing list
Received on Tue Dec 9 10:05:08 2008

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Wed Dec 31 2008 - 00:00:05 EST