IMPORTANT: If you cite this message, OPE-L policy requires you not to reveal the identity of the author.
You may cite this message only if you do not disclose who wrote it.
the fetishism of money-- viz. deriving its attributes from its metallic content, instead of its specifically equivalent form which is indeed sufficiently 'causal' that a metallic substratum is not even needed to have taken on that form, shape or gestalt...but Marx could not go entertain the possibility of pure form.... _________ Just to emend my point. However to the extent that Marx derived the attributes of money from its form, instead of its metallic content, we can say that he laid the groundwork to understand money in non metallic terms. Yours, Rakesh
- [OPE-L:3526] Re: Re: Re: Marxism and 19th century materialism, Rakesh Bhandari Wed 21 Jun 2000, 16:25 GMT
- [OPE-L:3525] Re: Re: Re: Marxism and 19th century materialism, Rakesh Bhandari Wed 21 Jun 2000, 15:30 GMT
- [OPE-L:3527] Re: Re: Re: Re: Marxism and 19th century materialism, Paul Cockshott Thu 22 Jun 2000, 11:39 GMT
- [OPE-L:3520] Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Marxism and 19th century materialism, Steve Keen Mon 19 Jun 2000, 19:31 GMT
- [OPE-L:3519] Aristotle, Rakesh Bhandari Mon 19 Jun 2000, 17:36 GMT
- [OPE-L:3518] Aristole, Rakesh Bhandari Mon 19 Jun 2000, 17:28 GMT
- [OPE-L:3517] Re: Re: Re: Re: Marxism and 19th century materialism, Rakesh Bhandari Mon 19 Jun 2000, 17:09 GMT
- [OPE-L:3516] Re: Re: Re: Re: Marxism and 19th century materialism, Rakesh Bhandari Mon 19 Jun 2000, 17:04 GMT
- [OPE-L:3515] Re: Marxism and 19th century materialism, Rakesh Bhandari Mon 19 Jun 2000, 16:23 GMT