I would also like Gil to return to the list, and never asked him to leave. I would hope of course that we can have a cease fire on the transformation problem (or my own inverse transformation problem which I imagine will soon be the dominant interpretation) and Gil's chap 5 and 6 critiques. Of course Gil will say that I have myself pursued his critiques with my own insistence that surplus value--in the sense of an increase in the value in circulation which is appropriated by Mr Moneybags--was produced without the commodification of labor power in the cases of modern plantation slavery, the putting out system and certain forms of what Jairus calls peasant capitalism. But if we are to talk about such cases, I hope that we will do it in terms of history and empirical evidence instead of simply in terms of the hermeneutics of chaps 5 and 6. Rakesh
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sun Jun 02 2002 - 00:00:07 EDT