Hardt, Chaosmosis, and Entropy (was Re: Hardt-Negri in the Observer)

["Charles Brown" <CharlesB@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

>>> schaffer@xxxxxxxxxxxxx 07/17/01 01:00AM >>>

-clip-


2.) was Marx and his MCM' up to Joycean no-good?

(((((((

CB: Maybe this one ?


But the two commodities whose identity of quality is thus assumed, do not play 
the same part. It is only the value of the linen that is expressed. And how? By 
its reference to the coat as its equivalent, as something that can be exchanged 
for it. In this relation the coat is the mode of existence of value, is value 
embodied, for only as such is it the same as the linen. On the other hand, the 
linen's own value comes to the front, receives independent expression, for it 
is only as being value that it is comparable with the coat as a thing of equal 
value, or exchangeable with the coat. To borrow an illustration from chemistry, 
butyric acid is a different substance from propyl formate. Yet both are made up 
of the same chemical substances, carbon (C), hydrogen (H), and oxygen (O), and 
that, too, in like proportions ― namely, C4H8O2. If now we equate butyric acid 
to propyl formate, then, in the first place, propyl formate would be, in this 
relation, merely a form of existence of C4H8O2; and in the second place, we 
should be stating that butyric acid also consists of C4H8O2. Therefore, by thus 
equating the two substances, expression would be given to their chemical 
composition, while their different physical forms would be neglected.