The simple/elementary form of value considered as a whole (was Re: Charlie Andrew's book)

[Timework Web <timework@xxxxxxxxx>]

Originally, Charles Brown (CB) wrote:
> >CB:  Do you happen to recall where Marx makes the distinction between
> >"exchange value" and "value" ?  I thought "value" was shorthand for
> >"exchange value" in _Capital_.

Jim Devine suggested a passage on page 128 (vintage) 38 (progress). The
explicit distinction is on page 152/66. Marx is clear in stating that
value and its magnitude DO NOT originate in exchange value, they are
"expressed" in exchange value. He also apologizes for misleading
the reader at the beginning of the chapter by saying that "a commodity is
a use-value and an exchange-value" but he excuses the abbreviation as
harmless ONCE WE KNOW the subtle distinction between value, which is
embodied in the commodity, and exchange-value, which is manifested only in
a relationship with a second commodity of a different kind.

Rather than value being a shorthand for exchange-value, Marx used
exchange-value as a shorthand for value!


Tom Walker
Sandwichman and Deconsultant
215-2273