[OPE-L:2285] Re: value-form theories

[Gerald Levy <glevy@xxxxxxxxx>]

Paul C wrote in [OPE-L:2284]:

> Yes. But of course I think that the concept of abstract labour is
> necessary for analysing other modes of production, particularly
> socialist industrial economies.

This points out, once again, a recurrent theme in our discussions on
value. The "core of the problem" (stated in somewhat different, but
related, terms than in [2278]) is that there are two major perspectives
here (and in Marxism since Marx):

1) value and abstract labour are categories that are needed to comprehend
the nature of capitalist, pre-capitalist, and post-capitalist societies.

2) value and abstract labour are categories that are needed to comprehend
the nature of capitalist society.

(of course, there are other perspectives as well that reject value theory
altogether).

You and others (such as Makoto from an Uno-perspective) have been
consistent in advocating 1) and developing a perspective which is, at
least, internally consistent. The "core of the problem", though, is REALLY
a problem for FRED since he has asserted the "independence" of abstract
labour from price while at the same time in other places asserting (I
think correctly) a necessary link between value and money.

In solidarity, Jerry