From: Paul Zarembka (zarembka@BUFFALO.EDU)
Date: Wed Apr 27 2005 - 14:38:40 EDT
--On Monday, April 25, 2005 3:49 PM -0300 Francisco Paulo Cipolla <cipolla@UFPR.BR> wrote in reply to Heinrich: > The way I understand your point is this: Marx´s analisys is at the same > time an analysis of what capital is and since what capital is includes > how it presents itself to the eye, then the analysis of capital must of > necessity be at the same time an analysis of how its forms of appearance > constitute the basis for all sorts of mistifications. > Therefore a positive theory of capitalism cannot but be at the same time a > critique of political economy. > If this is what you have suggested in your post I agree completely. > Paulo Paulo, I don't understand Heinrich at all this way. I understand the introduction of concepts like production of absolute surplus value, production of relative surplus value, etc. as Marx's positive contributions to a theory of capitalism. I sense that you do also. However, I don't know what they are for Heinrich except as used for a critique of political economy. Paul Z. *********************************************************************** RESEARCH IN POLITICAL ECONOMY, Paul Zarembka, editor, Elsevier Science ******************** http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/PZarembka
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Apr 28 2005 - 00:00:02 EDT