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

[Adam Rose <adam@xxxxxxxx>]

>
> > Labour produces use-values , at all times, places and modes
> > of production.
>
> Labor can produce *goods* which do not have a use-value (although, this is
> not the norm in any mode of production). Some labor also does not engage
> in the *production* of goods or commodities.
>

True. Labour involved in reproduction of the labour force for a
very significant start. But we're not really discussing that.

>
> I think you have to make a distinction between the production of surplus
> value and the production of a surplus product.
>

Allright; but then I suppose we're back to whether the market is the
only way surplus value can be realised.

> > The modern capitalist state is a capitalist in its own right.
>
> That's where I was afraid this thread was headed. Sorry, Adam, but I
> don't have time at present to critique the theory of state capitalism.
>

There's the normal debate about the USSR etc.

But there's another related but separate debate about the nature
of states which control a large amount of the production of market
economies.

Justin Schwartz <jschwart@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> in a very good
post raised the most important consequence of NOT seeing the
state as a capitalist : are you saying then that the large number of
people employed by states are not exploited ? That somehow they
are oppressed by different relations of production than those
which apply in the private sector ?

Adam.

Adam Rose
SWP
Manchester
UK


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


     --- from list marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---

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