Japan

["Charles Brown" <CharlesB@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

>>> cburford@xxxxxxxxxx 03/21/01 06:47PM >>>
It needs to be seen as not one aspect, or the other, but as a contradiction.

Marx related crises to contradictions: they are "always only momentary and
violent solutions of existing contradictions."

There is the contradiction between consumption and production. This is
sharpened by the contradiction between socialised production and capitalist
appropriation. There is a contradiction between the drive for unlimited
exploitation by capital and the limited possibilities of realisation of the
results of this exploitation.

"The conditions of direct exploitation and those of the realisation of
surplus-value are not identical. They are separated logically as well as by
time and space. The first are only limited by the productive power of
society, the last by the proportional relation of the various lines of
production and by the consuming power of society. This last named power is
not determined either by the absolute productive power nor by the absolute
consuming power of society, but by the consuming power based on
antagonistic conditions of distribution which reduces the consumption of
the great mass of the population to a variable minimum within more or less
narrow limits." Capital Vol iii Ch 15

))))))))))

Charles: Thanks for this , Chris. I had been looking for this idea on consuming power as a limit. I believe there is another similar formulation. The full contradiction of a bust includes this and the law of the tendency of the rate of profit to fall. Of course, we have had a few debates since I've been on this nest of lists in which the adherents to the law of the tendency of the rate of profit to fall explanation deny the existence of the above quotation and that Marx had the idea in it as well.

Perhaps the answer to Jim's question below - inadequate demand or excessive investment ? - is both, and they can't help themselves but to underpay and overinvest.

((((((((





"But the more productiveness develops, the more it finds itself at variance
with the narrow basis on which the conditions of consumption rest. It is no
contradiction at all on this self-contradictory basis that there should be
an excess of capital simultaneously with a growing surplus of population.
[on a world scale - CB] For while a combination of these two would indeed
increase the mass of produced surplus value, it would at the same time
intensify the contradiction between the conditions under which this
surplus-value is produced and those under which it is realised."

Marx does not lend himself to one neat definitive statement of The
Contradiction. One definition might be the contradiction between the
unending need for capital to accumulate, and the limited purchasing power
of the masses. But rather Marx describes a series of nesting contradictions
which can be looked at from different aspects.

Concerning the proposition as formulated by Jim, I would presume Keynesian
policies could only be successful if they brought back into commodity
exchange significant quantities of the means of production, in particular
labour power, and at the same time increased purchasing power.

Chris Burford

London



At 08:46 21/03/01 -0800, Jim wrote:
>that is the question: is unused capacity in Japan due to inadequate demand
>for the product -- or is it due to excessive investment in the past? in
>the former case, simple Keynesian policies (like those I suggested) might
>work, while in the latter case, they wouldn't.
>
>Chris B. writes:
>>If you believe Marx literally, Japan has absolutely to write off large
>>amounts of capital. The role of the state, as always is to smooth this
>>over, and ensure civil peace without a change in the ruling class.
>>
>>It probably cannot be done just by writing off book values. A proportion
>>of actual productive capital - workers, premises, raw materials, probably
>>also has to be stripped of the status of capital, thrown out of
>>circulation for a time, with a cheapening of the competitive price of
>>labour power, until accumulation can start again.
>
>Jim Devine jdevine@xxxxxxx &  http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine