Re: (OPE-L) on money, capital, and the state

[Costas Lapavitsas <Cl5@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Gerry,

The state is surely not exogenous to 'capitalism'. But I take it that the capitalist mode of production is a structured whole in which the sphere of the economy is analytically prior to the state and politics. It is in that sense that I prefer endogenous (to the process of exchange) explanations of money's emergence. That does not preclude the state playing an important economic role in general.

Costas  

-----Original Message-----
From: glevy@xxxxxxxxx
To: OPE-L@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Date: Sat, 29 May 2004 20:13:06 -0400
Subject: (OPE-L) on money, capital, and the state

Hi Costas:

 On the other hand, the approach of seeking to derive money as claim to
> wealth, which you associate with Schumpeter, is problematic. The reason
> is that it makes money's emergence essentially exogenous to the process
> of exchange. The usual reference for this approach is Knapp and there
> are many other Austrians and Germans, including Weber. They typically
> rely on forces outside the market (the state, law, etc) to determine the
> claim to wealth represented by money. I prefer endogenous explanations,
> when available.

The state is " exogeneous" to what?  Surely not capitalism.

In solidarity, Jerry