From: Gerald_A_Levy@MSN.COM
Date: Tue Jan 18 2005 - 18:18:18 EST
> I'm not quite sure about the relationship between the world market and
> the capital-in-general,
Hanno,
I raised the issue because of the theme of "totality" that was raised in
this discussion. Briefly put, if the "totality" is capital, then capital-
in-general might be seen as an abstract representation of that totality.
But, I would argue that this is a mistake of the first order since the
primary subject is not capital, but capitalism. To grasp capitalism as
a totality, we have to move way beyond -- yet, nonetheless, comprehend --
capital-in-general. This is expressed rather well, I believe, in the
beginning of _Capital_, Volume 3, Chapter 6, Section 2 ("Revaluation
and Devaluation of Capital: Release and Tying-Up of Capital"):
"The phenomena under investigation in this chapter assume for their
full development the credit system and COMPETITION ON THE WORLD
MARKET, the latter being the VERY BASIS AND LIVING ATMOSPHERE
of the capitalist mode of production. These concrete forms of capitalist
production, however, can be comprehensively depicted only AFTER the
GENERAL NATURE OF CAPITAL is understood; it is therefore OUTSIDE
THE SCOPE OF THIS WORK -- they belong to a possible continuation."
(Penguin ed., p. 205, emphasis added).
You asked whether capital in general had a real existence. If capital-in-
general is real, how can it exist outside of the "very basis and living
atmosphere of the capitalist mode of production"? This would suggest
that to fully comprehend the credit system and competition on world
markets we must first grasp the "general nature" of capital-in-general.
But, to _fully_ grasp the nature of capital-in-general and its real existence
we have to comprehend the development of the credit system and
competition on world markets. I.e. we have to move _beyond_ _Capital_.
I hope you are enjoying this discussion.
In solidarity, Jerry
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jan 19 2005 - 00:00:02 EST