From: gerald_a_levy (gerald_a_levy@MSN.COM)
Date: Sun Nov 09 2003 - 08:50:33 EST
Mike L asked: > The question I asked, then, is > why should we assume the case of constant real wage (and thus relative > surplus value) or the case of real wages rising but less than productivity > (in which case there is both rising real wage and relative surplus > value--- a possibility entertained in CAPITAL)--- rather than this 3rd > case in which workers are the beneficiaries of productivity gain? The assumption that there is a constant real wage or that wages rise less steeply than productivity might be explained on two grounds: 1) within a layered (systematic dialectical) presentation of the subject matter of capitalism, these assumptions are justified on the grounds that the third possibility relates to a subject matter which is (or more accurately, was _intended to be_) introduced in a deeper, fuller way at a later stage in the presentation. 2) one could argue that the assumption of a real wage which rises less steeply than productivity mirrors an actual historical experience under capitalism. I think that 1) is more convincing that 2) in the sense that it is more consistent with Marx's logical method -- although Marx did seem to make claims at various points of his analysis that assumptions could also be justified if they were reflections of actual historical processes that are tendencially exhibited under capitalism. While it doesn't answer your question, I think that the historical experience has been that real wages tend to increase less sharply than productivity gain under capitalism. This, though, begs the question: why has this been the case, if it has indeed been the case? > What prevents workers > from obtaining the gains from the rise in social productivity? Their relative strength, or lack thereof, against capital, including their level of organization and non-organization, inter-class and international solidarity and divisions, and militancy or class collaboration. More generally, while capital and the state are 'external' forces which help to prevent this possibility from occurring and while there are tendencial developments mitigating against this possibility (e.g. the creation and reproduction of the relative surplus population, i.e. the industrial reserve army), the remaining factors are 'internal' to the working class. This reminds me of our recent "secret" discussion .... In solidarity, Jerry
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Nov 10 2003 - 00:00:01 EST