Gerald Levy (email@example.com)
Sat, 16 Oct 1999 10:02:37 -0400 (EDT)
Chris A wrote in [OPE-L:1484]:
> Jerry is right to ask for an integrated theory of th six books.
I'm glad you agree with me with me, now I'm going to put you "on the
> In relation to this:
> 1. marx somewhere referred to Caital/WagedLabour/LandedProperty as "the
> inner totality" of boureois society. I take it this means that the
> dialectical connections would be tighter here than in the further
1. Do you take the position (following Rosdolsky) that the subjects
of the books on "Landed Property" and "Wage Labour" (Books 2-3 in
the 6-book-plan) were incorporated into _Capital_ or do you take the
position (as Mike L does) that the subject matter of Books 2-3 were
outside the scope of _Capital_ (i.e. Book 1)?
> 2. marxists have often tried to go straight from Vol.1 to the state as if
> the state was only there to secure the conditions for accumulation.
2. In the Geert/Mike W book, there is a dialectical relation suggested
between the categories of "civil society" and "state" that leads to
the category of "mixed economy". Do you think that the subject of
"civil society" has to be incorporated into the subject matter of
"The State" (Book 4 in the 6-book-plan)? Do you agree with the way
in which this subject was presented in _Value-Form and the State_?
> 3. Those who complain "there is no crisis theory in Capital" should
> ponder the implications of the fact Marx intended to trat this in book
3. What do you see as the *order* of topics to be presented in Book 6
(World Market and Crisis)? What are the aspects of "crisis theory"
that need to be developed further at a level of abstraction
associated with Volume 3 of _Capital_ and what are the aspects of
"crisis theory" that require further development at a level of
abstraction that is more concrete than that in _Capital_?
In solidarity, Jerry
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Mon Jan 03 2000 - 12:18:31 EST