[OPE-L:2245] Re: New Solution

Chai-on Lee (conlee@chonnam.chonnam.ac.kr)
Thu, 16 May 1996 09:10:54 -0700

[ show plain text ]

Dear Riccardo, Duncan, Simon, Paul, Fred, Michaels and others:

To make our debates more succinct and that shorter, I would like you to
enumerate the necessities and/or the reasons to change the notion of
money from a commodity-money into the non-commodity money. I will
take the lead by enumerating the theoretical difficulties that arise
when we take the non-commodity money conception.

(1) You must explain how the value of money is determined. And,
if it can be determined *with no reference to labor content*, then
the values of other ordinary commodities have no reason to be
determined by the labor contents. Why the two cases can be
justified in the determination of money-value and commodity-value?

(2) Money is put on a more abstract level than commodity values in
your money conception since your conception is in the context of
"monetary theory of labor value". Money is something other than the
commodity. The value of money is therefore to be explained *with no
reference to commodity values*. The exchange between money
and other ordinary commodity is of course not on an equivalent

(3) In view of the above two points, the labor theory of value in a
commodity money system should be radically different from that in a
non-commodity money system. This is why there have been so
wide varieties between us.

In my commodity money conception, however, the first two
questions do not apply and Marx's value theory is seen correct and
right in every aspect.

To repeat, please be explicit about *why* you so obstinately
oppose the commodity money conception. If the only reason for your
conception is nothing but this that today's paper money is no more a
labor-product, then you must have a serious misconception of today's
world capitalism. [with far more serious misconception of Marx's value theory].

Alas the day!

For the sake of solidarity,

Chai-on from the far East.