From: Jerry Levy (Gerald_A_Levy@MSN.COM)
Date: Thu Oct 13 2005 - 09:36:07 EDT
> Michael [H, JL], I don't deny that the lack of mention of capital in
> general in Capital is interesting; however, as Rob Lucas points out
> in Marx Myths, there are very few mentions of communism (which I see
> as permeating CAPITAL) there too.
Mike L:
Also interesting is the lack of references to _class_ in _Capital_.
I just did a quick word search at http://www.marxists.org for
"class". I had to make some deductions to:
a) exclude references outside of _Capital_;
b) exclude references in the afterwards and prefaces of
Volume 1, including any references by Engels;
c) exclude references that referred to something quite
different from social classes such as the "class of soil",
etc.
d) exclude reference in _Resultate_.
The references in _Capital_ to "class", with the above
exclusions with a very quick tabulation on my part, are:
Volume References
===== ========
I 16
II 10
III 11
--------
Total: 37
Of course, there could be something wrong with the
search function and/or my tabulation, but it's interesting.
Isn't it?
In solidarity, Jerry
PS: in sending Fred's paper, I was not necessarily
expressing agreement with the contents. I thought, though,
that it bears a discussion, especially since it has an
entire section on Michael H's interpretation of capital in
general and a rather long reference to Chris's position
as well.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Oct 14 2005 - 00:00:03 EDT