From: Dogan Goecmen (Dogangoecmen@AOL.COM)
Date: Sat Oct 21 2006 - 14:46:39 EDT
I merely and exactly replied to your question. Smith analysed market relations in terms of power relations. Please show me where he equates markets to free speach. Don't you have your plate not full? Best... Dogan. In einer eMail vom 21.10.2006 20:35:14 Westeuropäische Sommerzeit schreibt sinha_a99@YAHOO.COM: --- Dogan Goecmen <Dogangoecmen@AOL.COM> wrote: > > Hi Ajit, thank you very much for your questions. > > By 'market in itself' I mean that we can develop an > objective understanding > of market independently from what all sorts of > ideologies say about and > ascribe to it. I mean the question we have to pose > is this: what is the nature of > market. Based on this objective grasp we can then > judge about these ideologies > whether they are right or wrong. Market is an > institution where humans get > in touch with one another for a certain purpose: > the exchange of commodities. > That is to say that human relations on market are > mediated by commodities - > either directly or indirectly by means of money. > So, the question what is the > nature of market changes into the question what is > the nature of commodity > and money.The analysis of commodity and money must > then be analysed in terms of > human relation because commodities are being > exchanged by human beings. > These questions are profoundly posed and analysed, > I think, in the first Chapter > of the Capital of Marx. This is my reply to your > two questions in short. > Thanks again. ______________________ Thanks for your reply. As you must know Adam Smith considered market as part of the sphere of free speech. When a buyer or a seller offers to buy or sell something at a price, he or she is simultaneously putting forward an argument to convince the other party of why it is in his or her advantage to buy or sell that commodity at that price. It is part of the whole enlightenment program. So I was expecting a little more on market than you have given and again to say that "These questions are profoundly posed and analysed, I think, in the first Chapter of the Capital of Marx." is not an answer to the question, why do you think that CAPITAL ch.1 has the best analysis of it? But I can see you have your plate full and you need not feel obliged to answer my questions. Cheers, ajit sinha __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Oct 31 2006 - 00:00:03 EST