Gil, you write > No subsumption: Usury capital, merchant's capital up to the level of > putting-out arrangements (no direct capitalist oversight, workers still own > some of their own means of production); productive of surplus value. Wouldn't this be "productive of surplus AS value"? The point is that the productive process is not capitalist, formally or really. A surplus is created and the surplus takes the value form, but the surplus is not generated by the capital relation. Howard > [Original Message] > From: Gil Skillman <gskillman@mail.wesleyan.edu> > To: <ope-l@galaxy.csuchico.edu> > Date: 7/24/2002 1:53:18 PM > Subject: [OPE-L:7458] Re: Re: Formal subsumption and putting-out > > Paul writes > > >does not the formal/actual subsumption parallel his later use of > >the distinction between manufacture and modern industry. I take the > >distinction between these to be the mature form of the concept that > >is prefigured in the Grundrisse > > Actually, no: in Marx's representation, the formal/real subsumption > distinction *doesn't* parallel his later distinction between manufacture > and modern industry. The reason is that, for Marx, real subsumption is > necessary for the production of *relative* surplus value, and manufacture > and modern industry are stages in the production of relative surplus > value. The only changes in the production process that Marx associates > with merely formal subsumption are those associated with an increase in the > intensity, continuity, and length of the working day, and correspondingly > an increase in (only) the scale of production under the command of the > capitalist. > > So it looks as if Marx makes this three-level distinction: > > No subsumption: Usury capital, merchant's capital up to the level of > putting-out arrangements (no direct capitalist oversight, workers still own > some of their own means of production); productive of surplus value. > > Formal subsumption: industrial capital based on direct oversight of > production process (workers don't own means of production, but capitalist > merely takes over previous methods of production without altering > them). Leads to creation of *absolute* surplus value. > > Real subsumption (presupposing formal subsumption): Industrial capital that > has seized control of the methods as well as the process of production, > resulting in creation of *relative* surplus value. Stages: cooperation, > manufacture, modern large-scale industry. > > I'm not suggesting that this is the only way to analyze the progression of > the circuit of capital. But it appears to be the way that Marx has done > it. Again, this is based on my reading of the Economic Manuscript of > 1861-63 and the Resultate; I'm not claiming this reading as definitive. > > Gil --- Howard Engelskir
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Fri Aug 02 2002 - 00:00:04 EDT