[OPE-L:41] Re: Plans, Political Writings, and Dates

James Devine (JDevine@lmumail.lmu.edu)
Wed, 13 Sep 1995 11:00:13 -0700

[ show plain text ]

I think one reason why one might want to start with Marx's
outline is to capture the general progress of his thought in
CAPITAL and in Mike L.'s missing book. That is, we have to start
with the understanding that Marx, as his mode of presentation,
was working from the abstract to the concrete and in a specific
way that the vast majority of other economists do not. With this
in the background, we won't fall into the standard fallacy of
"Marx doesn't discuss how supply and demand work in volume I of
CAPITAL therefore he was wrong" or, worse, "Marx rejectd supply
and demand" because we know that most of vol. I is at a level of
abstraction where market supply and demand only exist at the most
abstract level.

However, I don't think we should spend much effort on deciding
_which_ of Marx's plans to use. I would prefer the latest of his
plans, whatever it was, because it shows more of his conclusions.

for socialism from below,

Jim Devine jdevine@lmumail.lmu.edu
Los Angeles, CA (the city of your future: the modern home of slavery)