From: glevy@PRATT.EDU
Date: Mon Jul 19 2004 - 12:04:50 EDT
---------------------------- Original Message ---------------------------- Subject: Monetary economics From: "Jurriaan Bendien" <andromeda246@hetnet.nl> Date: Sun, July 18, 2004 6:12 am To: glevy@pratt.edu Cc: paulbullock@EBMS-LTD.CO.UK -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Paul B. said: Your comment is contradictory... you say a commodity theory of money can't be sustained, but when a crisis breaks out we are back with it. Reply: I don't think there is a contradiction... or maybe you aren't "thinking dialectically enough" ? I was merely referring to the fact that the monetary system has evolved very substantially beyond the realities of the 19th century, when you could still make a credible case for a "commodity theory of money" to explain monetary phenomena. In which case, you have to show how the basic theory of money, founded on an understanding of the historical evolution of money, is modified by new conditions. It's just that in the case of a debased or destabilised currency, the real nature and functioning of money in exchange relations becomes much clearer, I think, and the illusions created by fiduciary currency are pierced through. I aim to do more work on this when I get time (just now my life is littered with unfinished projects, which probably proves I am being disorganised). I personally don't think Ernest Mandel's monetary and credit theory, despite shrewd insights, was really very good, but I do recommend that article of his I mentioned. BTW I didn't realise you edited Makoto Itoh's "The Basic Theory of Capitalism" (which I finally required a copy of). That was a sterling piece of internationalism ! It's a pity really so little Japanese Marxian scholarship is available in English. Best regards, Jurriaan
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Jul 20 2004 - 00:00:01 EDT