Re: the state as capital : was arms production + Dept III

[Justin Schwartz <jschwart@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Fri, 12 Jan 1996, Chegitz Guevara wrote:

>
> How can the capitalist state be a capitalist in its own rght? It does not
> produce for exchange, but soley for use. They, therefore, do not produce
> commodities, do not produce for a market, and cannot extract surplus
> value.

I think this is an incorrect statement about the function of the modern
state. First of all, there are state owned enterprises that produce for
profit, like Renault in France. Second, there are de-facto state owned
enterprises much or all of the funding for which derives from tax revenues
but which also produce for profit and markets. The military industrial
complex on the industrial side is largely composed of such enterprises.
Finally, it is odd to say that the surplus produced by state workers is
not "value" if it is not realized in the market, given that the labor
itself and its products are treated in exactly the same way by management
of state and private enterprise. A curious result of this way of talking
is that state workers providing goods and services for use are not
exploited, even if they are doing eaxcvtly the same things that workers
providing the same goods and services for profit are doing. What are the
state workers undergoing, if not exploitation? What magic occurs when,
e.g., the post office or prison system is auctioned off to a for-profit
enterprise in virtue of which the same workers doing the same things are
not exploited on Friday, when they worked for the state, and are exploited
on Monday, when they work for a private firm?

--Justin Schwartz




     --- from list marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---

     ------------------