Re: [OPE] value-form theory redux

From: Philip Dunn <>
Date: Sat Mar 14 2009 - 08:31:46 EDT

On Sat, 2009-03-14 at 12:11 +0100, Dave Zachariah wrote:
> This reply will be concise so that we can clearly identify the
> substantiative difference. I make the following claims, stop at the
> claim you think there is a real disagreement with VFT.
> 1. (Definition) 'Economic value' in general is a property that
> use-values have in societies. It is the property of commensurability,
> i.e. which allows the agents of the social system to quantitatively
> compare different use-values.

Stopping here. Value is not a property of use-values. It is a property
of commodities.

"Not an atom of matter enters into the objectivity of commodities as
values; in this it is the direct opposite of the coarsely sensuous
objectivity of commodities as physical objects. We may twist and turn a
single commodity as we wish; it remains impossible to grasp it as a
thing possessing value."

ope mailing list
Received on Sat Mar 14 08:32:54 2009

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Tue Mar 31 2009 - 00:00:03 EDT