On 02/6/28 09:16 AM, "Chris Burford" <cburford@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> At 27/06/02 09:17 -0400, Louis Proyect wrote:
>> Burford:
>>> The most important circumstance is that with rising capitalist
>>> productivity, which Marx recognised vividly in a text like the Communist
>>> Manifesto, the sum total of use values, of products of social labour, in
>>> the world can increase.
>>
>> The Communist Manifesto was written before V. 1 of Capital, where Marx
>> fully explored value theory.
>
>
> I am not sure if Proyect accepts may main point that
>
>> You are absolutely right in your fundamental perception that the
>> distribution of exchange value is a zero sum game.
>>
>>
>> This is most important for progressive people in the imperial metropolises
>> (?) of this world, especially the USA, to understand.
>
> It is true that Capital was written after the Communist Manifesto. My
> statement was also alluding to the "absolute general law of capitalist
> accumulation" (Vol I Chap 25). Perhaps Proyect would consider that should
> be understood only on a state level and not a global level.
>
>> Furthermore, there is no link between
>> capitalist productivity and the increase of "use values", ie., goods like
>> clothing, food, etc, detached from their role as commodities.
>
> But capital competes by cheapening the price of commodities by lowering
> their labour content. So I am unclear what point Proyect is making here.
> How can we consider capitalist productivity of use values "detached from
> their role as commodities"?
>
> >> commodity has two character, i.e. Exchange value and use value
Capitalism increase both side by quantity and quality
>
>> In fact, the
>> rise of capitalism is linked to a decrease in use values in most of Latin
>> America, Asia and Africa.
> >> What means " decrease use value?" In daily experience teach us more and
more use-value are consumed. If decrease of use value happens, How can you
explain mach exchange value? IN fact in capitalism
"The utility of a thing makes it a use-value. [4] But this utility is not a
thing of air. Being limited by the physical properties of the commodity, it
has no existence apart from that commodity. " Use-values become a reality
only by use or consumption: they also constitute the substance of all
wealth, whatever may be the social form of that wealth. In the form of
society we are about to to consider, they are, in addition, the material
depositories of exchange-value.( from capital)
> Very possibly That is not because capitalism does not cheapen the exchange
> value of commodities but because there is relatively less exchange value
> for the populations of Latin America, Asia and Africa to purchase them.
> This is an expression of the limited purchasing power of the masses and
> why Nancy is correct to be thinking of a zero sum game.
> >> why does capitalism cheapen the exchange value? If productive force
increase, Exchange value down.
>"An increase in the quantity of use-values is an increase of material
wealth.
With two coats two men can be clothed, with one coat only one man.
Nevertheless, an increased quantity of material wealth may correspond to a
simultaneous fall in the magnitude of its value" "On the one hand all labour
is, speaking physiologically, an expenditure of human labour-power, and in
its character of identical abstract human labour, it creates and forms the
value of commodities. On the other hand, all labour is the expenditure of
human labour-power in a special form and with a definite aim, and in this,
its character of concrete useful labour, it produces use-values."(from
Capital)
>
>> Despite being organized around so-called
>> tributary relationships, the average citizen of the Inkan or Moghul
empires
>> were far better off before the introduction of capitalism.
>
>
> Very possibly. There was no unemployment before capitalism.
> >> Before capitalism ,why does not unemployment exists?
For example, Freed farmer entered Cities, and forms low class including
Unemployment. At least, Mass unemployment in primitive accumulation process.
In Feudal system,there were many no peasant class such as small industry,
Hunter class who were semi-unemployment during winter.etc
>>> Also the total number of wage labourers in the world can increase as
small
>>> producers pour off the land at an unprecedented rate in the history
of the
>>> world.
>>
>> The use of the verb "can" above is dubious at best. The actual experience
>> is mass unemployment or entry into the informal sector (prostitution, drug
>> dealing, peddling, begging, theft, etc.)
>
>
> They form a vast reserve army of labour. That is why the use of the verb
> "can" is not dubious at all in this context.
>
>
>>> The widening disparities of exchange value may be mitigated by
reforms such
>>> as the latest agreement at the G8 about Africa.
>>
>> Such "reforms" are completely undermined by the ability of Western
>> corporations, including massive cotton producers, to destroy the economies
>> of subSaharan Africa.
>
>
> Today's G8 agreement on Africa is totally inadequate.
>
>
>>> Nevertheless the immiseration of the people of Africa is *directly*
linked
>>> to the centralisation and concentration of capital in countries like the
>>> USA and England.
>>>
>>> (From which the intelligentsia of the west benefit as we stroll
around the
>>> shopping areas of the more interesting suburbs, sustained periodically by
>>> the odd frappacino in surroundings subtly suggestive of some fetishised
>>> link with care free south american peasants).
>>
>> The only way to absolve oneself of guilt is to participate in
>> anti-capitalist activity (including scholarship) of the most unrelenting
>> character.
>
> The intelligentsia is not a class in its own right with a distinctive
> relationship to the means of production but rather a stratum that can play
> different roles in different economic and political conjuctions. It tends
> to individualism and subjectivism. Being motivated mainly by guilt is a
> possibility but I am not aware that Marx considered the revolution would be
> greatly motivated by guilt. Rather he thought that working people should be
> their own liberators.
>
> What *is* difficult is the nature of the alliance between progressive
> people in the imperialist west and the mass of people in the LDC's. Too
> much guilt IMO is a distraction from understanding a way forward, which we
> should be able to argue is in the material interest of the great majority
> of people of the world. Probably 95%.
>
> It *is* necessary to focus on the zero sum game of exchange value and
> discuss and change the system *as a whole*.
>
> Chris Burford
>
> London
> MIYACHI TATSUO
Psychiatric Department
Komaki municipal hosipital
1-20.JOHBUHSHI
KOMAKI CITY
AICHI PREF.
486-0044
TEL:0568-76-4131
FAX 0568-76-4145
miyachi9@xxxxxxxxxx
>