[OPE-L:1950] Re: Accumulation of capital and Imperialism

Paul Zarembka (ecopaulz@ubvms.cc.buffalo.edu)
Thu, 25 Apr 1996 04:22:11 -0700

[ show plain text ]

On Thu, 25 Apr 1996, Paul Cockshott wrote:

> Paul C
> ------
> Production of relative surplus value has occured if
> the introduction of technical change has succeeded in
> diminishing the value of labour power. There is, I agree
> a strong tendancy for capitalism to introduce labour
> saving inovations, whether this succeeds in producing
> relative surplus value depends upon the extent to which
> the real wage rises or falls. If the real wage rises
> at the same rate, then there is no change in the rate
> of surplus value and thus no new relative surplus value.
> There are certainly many periods in which relative
> surplus value is produced, but, there are also some
> in which the share of the value product going to
> labour remains relatively constant.

Paul, I think I know all this. The issue is that you wrote it is
"false" that accumulation of capital and production of relative surplus
value are "necessities" of capital. The issue, in other words, is why are
they NOT necessities in your view.

> When I say absolute surplus value is a precondition,
> I mean in the logical not historical sense, certainly
> it goes on today.

I guess I don't understand why production of absolute surplus value is a
"precondition" but you didn't use that expression for production of
relative surplus value.

Paul Z.