As usual, Nicky expresses what I was about to say in a much more elegant way than I could. But I would make one clarification specifically about my position on Money. Nick says in an aside: > Mike W probably does not agree with me that Marx > held a commodity theory of money (see his 2000, RPE). More precisely, my position is that whether he had one or not, Marx (and a fortiori, 21st Century Marxism) did not *need* a commodity theory of Money. And that this is just as well because such a theory would, imo, have difficulty in grasping Money in modern capitalism. My RPE paper does attempt to synthesise all the main references in Marx that are compatible with a non-commodity development of Marxist theory of Money. But the historiographic question about whether Marx thought that capitalist Money is necessarily a Commodity is, imo, still open. Comradely greetings, michael
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Jun 02 2001 - 00:00:07 EDT