Re: [OPE-L] the forest and trees and classes of capitalism

From: glevy@PRATT.EDU
Date: Wed Apr 04 2007 - 13:08:47 EDT

• Next message: Philip Dunn: "Re: [OPE-L] calculating the not rate of profit"
• Previous message: glevy@PRATT.EDU: "Re: [OPE-L] calculating the not rate of profit"
• In reply to: Diego Guerrero: "Re: [OPE-L] the forest and trees and classes of capitalism"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

> In my opinion, what Marx says is: what appears to be a tree, is in fact
> an element of the forest. That is: we see a specific use-value or
tree,
> but as a commodity it has a value, and value cannot be understood unless
> see it as being a use-value produced with a fraction of the abstract
> labour of society (the forest).

Hi Diego:

Interesting.  You seem to be defining the forest in a trans-historical
way, i.e. the forest is defined above as the abstract labour of society in
a commodity-produucing society.  Have I misunderstood you?  I think that
for Marx the forest was capitalism and the trees (commodities) are
specific to that forest.

In solidarity, Jerry

• Next message: Philip Dunn: "Re: [OPE-L] calculating the not rate of profit"
• Previous message: glevy@PRATT.EDU: "Re: [OPE-L] calculating the not rate of profit"
• In reply to: Diego Guerrero: "Re: [OPE-L] the forest and trees and classes of capitalism"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Apr 30 2007 - 00:00:16 EDT