[ show plain text ]
Re Paul Z's [OPE=L:2785]:
> 1. Book plans are subject to revision.
Yes, of course. The question that I was posing, though, is whether
it is possible to establish the "necessary connections between different
aspects of capitalism" without e.g. establishing a necessary connection
between capital-in-general and the state-form? ... international trade?
... the world market and crisis? These tasks, i.e. to systematically
develop and present these subjects and their connections to the prior
presentation, are imperatives that come from the need to systematically
present the subject matter (capitalism) itself.
The alternative, i.e. arguing that e.g. the state-form is not a necessary
connection between different aspects of capitalism, is not a credible
position, imo. Nonetheless, many Marxists have historically concentrated
their analysis on capital to the exclusion of an analysis of the
state-form and have been (justly) critiqued and ridiculed by others, e.g.
anarchists and autonomist Marxists. Similarly, the imperative to develop
an integrated analysis of foreign trade and the world market and crises
arises due to states not existing as simple unity but as difference and
that capitalism must be understood as an *international* system (thus, by
inference, Marx rejected an idea which I will mischievously call
"capitalism in a single country").
In solidarity, Jerry
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Apr 30 2000 - 19:59:43 EDT