[OPE-L:65] RE: More Paradox of Book I, Ch 25 (more digression)

Michael A. Lebowitz (mlebowit@sfu.ca)
Sun, 17 Sep 1995 21:44:50 -0700

[ show plain text ]

In message Sat, 16 Sep 1995 17:47:10 -0700,
"John R. Ernst" <ernst@pipeline.com> writes:

> I think one of the points that Mike makes in OPE Concerning Mike's post on
> dependent and independent variables, it seems to me that up to the what
> Marx calls the "period of manufacture", the wage is indeed the independent
> variable and the the rate of accumulation the dependent. Once fixed
> capital is introduced the dependent becomes the imdependent and vice
> versa. Otherwise, why make a big deal out of the two periods?
One reason to make the distinction is that it is only when fixed capital
(and the substitution of machinery for living labour) predominates that
capital now constantly reproduces a reserve army and thus reproduces an
essential condition of existence. Put another way, capitalism is not fully
an organic system until it produces its own premises; and this requires the
development of the specifically capitalist mode of production-- machinery and
the factory system.
in solidarity,
Michael A. Lebowitz
Economics Department, Simon Fraser University
Burnaby, B.C., Canada V5A 1S6
Office: (604) 291-4669; Office fax: (604) 291-5944
Home: (604) 255-0382
Lasqueti Island (current location): (604) 333-8810
e-mail: mlebowit@sfu.ca