Someone on the list send me a private "correction" which read:
"Book III was, by and large, completed before Book I. This is not true of
Book II."
I responded with two private messages which may be of interest:
Response 1:
"This is, by and large, the case. But, it doesn't solve the "paradox." For
instance, in V3 when Marx presents the law of the *tendency* for the RPD,
why didn't he use a similar formulation for the GLCA? Also, if Marx
believed that the GLCA needed further clarification in V1, why didn't he
mention it in the 1875 "postface to the French Edition" written in 1875
(after the date for most of the V2 manuscripts, see Oakley, pp. 120-122
for dates)?"
Response 2:
"Also: if Marx believed that the GLCA needed modification at a later
stage of analysis, why didn't he mention it in any of the drafts or in
his correspondence?"
Would anybody else care to take a bite?
In OPE-L solidarity,
Jerry