From: Paul C (clyder@GN.APC.ORG)
Date: Fri Jun 04 2004 - 17:56:59 EDT
Gerald A. Levy wrote: > > >Yes, there is a social relation between Joe and Meg. It does not >constitute social relations _of production_, though. One should not divorce >(no pun intended) the concept of value from the _specific_ social relations >of production associated with capitalism. > Why not? So long as labour is potentially distributable between different activities, abstract social labour exists. So long as a part of the social product is sold on a market without some form of planned allocation, then the social character of that labour will reflect itself indirectly in the prices of the products. Ancient society had a lower proportion of its labour product commodified than capitalist society - that is clear, but that portion of its labour that was embodied in commodities would be influenced by the law of value. > >
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Jun 05 2004 - 00:00:01 EDT