Re Rakesh's [6817]: > We had some argument about whether workers who are not formally free > wage laborers could still produce surplus value--I tended to find the > old arguments of Jairus Banaji persuasive. I would consider these > workers to be clearly proletarians productive of surplus value. The continued persistence of bonded labour was never in doubt in our previous exchange. For more information on that subject, see Tom Brass _Toward a political economy of unfree labour: case studies and debates_ (Library of Peasant Studies No. 16, Frank Cass Publishers). Brass's case studies include examinations of bonded labour in eastern Peru (and the "enganche system"), northwest India, and northeast India. He also attempts a critical evaluation of the role of unfree labour in both neoclassical and Marxian theories. However -- in reply to Rakesh -- the continued existence of unfree labour for millions of people globally does not of and in itself speak to the question of whether they are productive of surplus value. In solidarity, Jerry
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Tue Apr 02 2002 - 00:00:06 EST