[ show plain text ]
Jerry wrote in 3053:
>Canaan won't help Paul M Jr.: Smith begins with the *division of
>labor* rather than the commodity. Moreover, for AS the division of
>labor is a more elementary category for comprehending capitalism than
>the commodity since AS tends to view the social relations characteristic of
>bourgeois society as eternal and natural.
Jerry, not having read Canann yet, I see this as rather confirming Mattick
Jr's point. Since Smith thought commodity production was necessary for the
division of labor and his analytical focus was on the latter, he has
implicitly understood wealth only in terms of objects with exchange value,
i.e., commodities, with which the critique of political economy must thus
begin.
Yours, Rakesh
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed May 31 2000 - 00:00:08 EDT