From: Rakesh Bhandari (bhandari@BERKELEY.EDU)
Date: Mon Apr 11 2005 - 11:02:07 EDT
At 12:24 AM -0400 4/11/05, michael a. lebowitz wrote: > >Rather than dismissing the Inaugural Address as 'a propaganda text', >I think that if you are going to talk about these matters, you >should demonstrate your point that Capital is a critique of all >political economy and not of simply the political economy of capital. What do we mean by critique? If by we critique we mean something like the Kantian transcendental analytic, then Marx is interested to determine the conditions of possibility of political economy as such (see Michel Henry). What are the conditions that make possible the impossible equation of xcommodityA=ycommodityB? Or perhaps critique should be understood as the delimitation of the domain under which concepts have some, perhaps practical validity (see Mattick jr,Gideon Freudenthal)? If such questions can be sensibly formulated and shown to have animated Marx's scientific work, then it does seem that it would be misleading to say that Marx is simply advancing a kind of political economy. Rakesh
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Apr 15 2005 - 00:00:02 EDT