[OPE-L:1728] Re:

=?EUC-KR?B?sOa/tbTrx9AgsbO89sD8u+q9xw==? (conlee@chonnam.chonnam.ac.kr)
Tue, 9 Apr 1996 03:26:59 -0700

[ show plain text ]

Chai-on said:
No. PCP cannot be a dominating mode of production in a social formation
because commodity exchange is to be ruled by a certain social process
determines the reduction coefficient of heterogeneous to homogeneous
A dominating mode of production determines the frame of reference for the
reduction of skilled, complex labors to unskilled, simple ones.

Paul replied:
It all depends what you mean by dominant. Your definition seems
too specific to commodity production. In discussing the transintion
from slavery to feudalism under the colonate would your definition
apply? I think not.
By dominant I meant simply that it employed the greater
part of the social labour.

Chai-on rereplies:
The terminology of "Dominant" should not follow ** the demographic
majority rule.** The point is the relationship between distinct modes of
production. PCP cannot rule other modes of production on account of its
own weak point. The weak point is this: commodity production requires a
reduction principle of skilled, complex labors to unskilled, simple ones.
The reduction principle, according to Marx, is determined by a social
process. IMO, the social process is the frame of reference derived from
other mode of production, not from pcp's own mode of production. It is to
be imposed from without.