[OPE-L:5301] Re: Re: Unproductive labour and illusions of competition

[Rakesh Narpat Bhandari <rakeshb@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Well, two simple points:

1st there are two perspectives to consider: the seller of arms and
the purchaser of arms. Paul C argues that the private production and
sale of arms is not productive of value while (I believe) the
orthodox Marxist would instead underline (and it seems to me that
Paul C's own example of a private arms dealer can be read this way)
that with the purchase of arms, the buyer is not thereby equipped to
transmit the value of the arms to future commodity output in which
surplus labor would have been absorbed. The arms, like luxury goods,
are unreproductive goods in terms of the further accumulation of
capital from the perspective of the purchaser and total capital. Arms
are thus unreproductive goods, according to then orthodox Marxist
Mario Cogoy.

So if the state has borrowed to buy arms, it cannot as a result
thereof produce the additional value with which to retire the debt
(principal and interest). It will have to print money, tax or borrow
again.

Paul C wants to make the additional argument that the arms producer
has not produced value. And I don't believe this gets to the heart of
the matter.

What is more important is that the purchaser--the state or even a
private buyer--has expended (instead of accumulated) value, even
though the level of production in society as a whole--and here is the
basis of the more important illusion which Paul C misses-- would not
immediately reflect the destruction of value since  as a result of
the arms dealer having realized value there is additional income via
the multiplier to realize commodity values.

Second--and here Paul C and Allin did not reply to me--the
expenditure of surplus value on arms does not slow down the
accumulation process if that surplus value would have lain (sp?) idle
anyways. So such expenditure can help to maintain higher production
levels in the short term than would have otherwise obtained (I don't
think this is an idle point). hence, the temptation of the capitalist
state to embark on programs of militarization.

Yours, Rakesh