Re: [OPE-L] Why aren't non-labourers sources of value?

[Andrew Brown <A.Brown@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Rakesh, Nicky and all,

Rakesh is correct imo, with his comment below on Nicky's post. What I am
trying to do is answer Rakesh's question. Hegel-inspired systematic
dialecticians have never managed this, imo, in part because of their
lack of clarity on the nature of labour and labour-power (or maybe just
their disagreement with what I take to be the correct conception of
'labour')

Many thanks,

Andy 




>(imo) Marx's key insight into the social relations of capital is
>that workers trade their labour-power freely.  i.e. the crucial
>distinction is not between humans, land, donkeys etc but between
>living *labour* and the *labour power* purchased for wages.


And why is the the crucial distinction? An argument has yet to be
presented.

Rakesh