chaion lee (conlee@chonnam.chonnam.ac.kr)
Wed, 6 Dec 1995 06:16:11 -0800

[ show plain text ]

In reply to Mattick (OPE-L:609).

Thank you for your reply. This is a rejoinder.

A coin if it is fallen to the bottom of the sea on the spot where it is
produced can possess no 'immediately social labor'? So, you argue the
labor that produces money is not directly social labor? I think some
misconceptions are involved here. The coin, like any other commodity,
had a potential value, but it lost the value when it is fallen to the bottom
of the sea. As far as the value is concerned, it is right. But, social
value is not such a thing. When we say the money-producing labor is
directly social, we mean by it that the money is proved socially useful
before it is exchanged. Even if it was fallen into the sea, the labor that
produced it was still socially useful. "Directly social labor" means "it is
proved socially useful before exchange". Socially necessary labor is about
the socially average labor, about exchange value. Socially useful labor is
about use-value. Most people misunderstood this.

Thanks again,

Chai-on Lee