From: Gerald_A_Levy@MSN.COM
Date: Tue Nov 23 2004 - 07:28:00 EST
Mandel wrote the following as a note to his article "Gold, Money, and the Transformation Problem": "Throughout this contribution, I consider gold and paper currencies (bank notes) as identical, assuming paper currencies to be convertible into gold. The problem of inconvertible, constantly depreciating, inflationary paper currencies -- moneys with forced course as Marx called them -- are outside the realm of this study, as they were outside the realm of the third volume of _Capital_. BUT THEY CAN BE EASILY REDUCED TO MARX'S COMMODITY THEORY OF MONEY, ON THE BASIS OF CHAPTER II OF _CONTRIBUTION TO A CRITIQUE OF POLITICAL ECONOMY_." (Ernest Mandel and Alan Freeman eds. _Ricardo, Marx, Sraffa_, London, Verso, 1984, p. 277, emphasis added). But, Mandel doesn't then tell us how this reduction can be "easily" done on the basis of the 2nd ch. of the _Contribution to a Critique_. What did he have in mind? Which part of Ch. 2 was he thinking about? And, where exactly did Marx refer to monies with "forced course"? In solidarity, Jerry
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Nov 25 2004 - 00:00:01 EST