re Ajit's 5742 > But people who think that the essence of *Capital* lies in its >first chapter no one here thinks that, Ajit. >will never be able to get out of the first chapter because >there is a logical break between the problematic of first chapter and the >problematic of the rest of *Capital*. The problematic of pure exchange >economy is not the problematic of capitalist economy--there is no production >of surplus in chapter one, by the way. The emergence of surplus is a >significant event for the theory, and the concepts developed for >understanding a pure exchange economy will not be sufficient for the >understanding of the exchange economy that produces surplus. Yes but you need a theory of money to understand why unlike in other modes of production the surplus must now necessarily be realized in monetary form if it is in fact to function for the capitalist as surplus value--that is value which he can either capitalize or expend. Rakesh
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sun Jul 15 2001 - 10:56:28 EDT