Re: [OPE] How to read Capital

From: dogangoecmen@aol.com
Date: Fri Apr 04 2008 - 06:17:25 EDT


 Well, what is wrong with that?

Dogan


 


 

-----Ursprüngliche Mitteilung----- 
Von: Paul Cockshott <wpc@dcs.gla.ac.uk>
An: Outline on Political Economy mailing list <ope@lists.csuchico.edu>
Verschickt: Fr., 4. Apr. 2008, 11:19
Thema: RE: [OPE] How to read Capital










The issue is whether money has to be a commodity or not. If you try to logically 
derive it from
the nature of commodities, this predisposes you to a commodity theory of money.

Paul Cockshott
Dept of Computing Science
University of Glasgow
+44 141 330 1629
www.dcs.gla.ac.uk/~wpc/reports/



-----Original Message-----
From: ope-bounces@lists.csuchico.edu on behalf of dogangoecmen@aol.com
Sent: Fri 4/4/2008 9:39 AM
To: ope@lists.csuchico.edu
Subject: Re: [OPE] How to read Capital
 

 This does not undermine his explanation of the genesis of money.
Though Marx deals with gold as money his point is more general 
concept of money rather than just gold.

Dogan

-----Ursprüngliche Mitteilung----- 
Von: Paul Cockshott <wpc@dcs.gla.ac.uk>
An: Outline on Political Economy mailing list <ope@lists.csuchico.edu>
Verschickt: Do., 3. Apr. 2008, 20:44
Thema: RE: [OPE] How to read Capital










The reason I am focusing on the Chinese, is that they have had paper money for a 

thousand years,
Europe has recently caught up. The form of money analysed by Marx ( gold or 
silver coin ) was
a relic of European barbarianism from which we emerged only in the 20th century.

We now live in civilised societies in which the state is far more important to 
social relations
than it was when Marx wrote. As always the present is the key to understanding 
the past, once
you see the more advanced paper money as the norm, you begin to see how Marx 
himself was
limited in his perspective by the prevailing economic relations of his day.

Paul Cockshott
Dept of Computing Science
University of Glasgow
+44 141 330 1629
www.dcs.gla.ac.uk/~wpc/reports/



-----Original Message-----
From: ope-bounces@lists.csuchico.edu on behalf of dogangoecmen@aol.com
Sent: Thu 4/3/2008 4:44 PM
To: ope@lists.csuchico.edu
Subject: Re: [OPE] How to read Capital
 

 Of course no. I am talking about the state in capitalist societies. In earlier 
formations society commodity production is not the dominating form of 
production. And I find the question why Chinese or Roman or Greek or Ottoman 
emperors and kings coined money  less important for the questions we raised.

Dogan 



-----Ursprüngliche Mitteilung----- 
Von: Paul Cockshott <wpc@dcs.gla.ac.uk>
An: Outline on Political Economy mailing list <ope@lists.csuchico.edu>
Verschickt: Do., 3. Apr. 2008, 16:49
Thema: RE: [OPE] How to read Capital










Did this apply to Chinese Emperors of the Sung dynasty?

Paul Cockshott
Dept of Computing Science
University of Glasgow
+44 141 330 1629
www.dcs.gla.ac.uk/~wpc/reports/



-----Original Message-----
From: ope-bounces@lists.csuchico.edu on behalf of dogangoecmen@aol.com
Sent: Thu 4/3/2008 1:13 PM
To: ope@lists.csuchico.edu
Subject: Re: [OPE] How to read Capital
 

 Because the state the embodiment of a general capitalist is.


 


 

-----Ursprüngliche Mitteilung----- 
Von: Paul Cockshott <wpc@dcs.gla.ac.uk>
An: Outline on Political Economy mailing list <ope@lists.csuchico.edu>
Verschickt: Do., 3. Apr. 2008, 13:59
Thema: RE: [OPE] How to read Capital










Marx uses more philosphical language true, but the idea that one particular
commodity is set aside as a numeraire is common to much of economics.

What this theory fails to account for is why money is issued by the state.

Paul Cockshott
Dept of Computing Science
University of Glasgow
+44 141 330 1629
www.dcs.gla.ac.uk/~wpc/reports/



-----Original Message-----
From: ope-bounces@lists.csuchico.edu on behalf of dogangoecmen@aol.com
Sent: Thu 4/3/2008 11:35 AM
To: ope@lists.csuchico.edu
Subject: Re: [OPE] How to read Capital
 

Dogan
-----

(Bear also in mind how  he explains the genesis of money as form of social 
relation.) 


Paul C
----
Marx's explanation of money as a generalisation arising out of barter is really 
pretty conventional in economics, as I understand it Menger gives the same 
explanation. 
If one contrasts it with actual existing money then there are problems, and 
these problems, I think, 
illustrate the difficulties with applying a dialectical deductive approach. Real 



existing 
monies are all issued by the state, but since the state can not be deduced from 
the commodity, 
Marx can not allow the state a causitive role in money. This then renders 
contemporary money, 
or Chinese Imperial money unintelligible. We end up with Newtonian rationalism 
and 
eurocentric prejudice being disguised as dialectical development.

 


 Marx
====
"The difficulty in forming a concept of the money form, consists in
clearly comprehending the universal equivalent form, and as a necessary
corollary, the general form of value, form C. The latter is deducible from form 
B, the expanded form of value, the essential component element of which, we saw, 



is form A, 20 yards of linen = 1 coat or x commodity A = y commodity B. The 
simple commodity form is therefore the germ of the money form."

Dogan
====

As you see Marx goes here much further than traditional explanation of money. 
Its genesis is already entailed in the contradictory nature of a simple 
commodity.

Marx
====
"The universal equivalent form is a form of value in general. It can,
therefore, be assumed by any commodity. On the other hand, if a
commodity be found to have assumed the universal equivalent form (form C),
this is only because and in so far as it has been excluded from the
rest of all other commodities as their equivalent, and that by their
own act. And from the moment that this exclusion becomes finally
restricted to one particular commodity, from that moment only, the
general form of relative value of the world of commodities obtains real
consistence and general social validity."

Quotes are all from the first chapter of volume 1.

Dogan








 


________________________________________________________________________
Bei AOL gibt's jetzt kostenlos eMail f?r alle.  Klicken Sie auf AOL.de um heraus 



zu finden, was es sonst noch kostenlos bei AOL gibt.



 





_______________________________________________
ope mailing list
ope@lists.csuchico.edu
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/ope



 


________________________________________________________________________
Bei AOL gibt's jetzt kostenlos eMail für alle.  Klicken Sie auf AOL.de um heraus 


zu finden, was es sonst noch kostenlos bei AOL gibt.



 





_______________________________________________
ope mailing list
ope@lists.csuchico.edu
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/ope



 


________________________________________________________________________
Bei AOL gibt's jetzt kostenlos eMail für alle.  Klicken Sie auf AOL.de um heraus 

zu finden, was es sonst noch kostenlos bei AOL gibt.



 





_______________________________________________
ope mailing list
ope@lists.csuchico.edu
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/ope



 


________________________________________________________________________
Bei AOL gibt's jetzt kostenlos eMail für alle.  Klicken Sie auf AOL.de um heraus 
zu finden, was es sonst noch kostenlos bei AOL gibt.



 





_______________________________________________
ope mailing list
ope@lists.csuchico.edu
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/ope



 


________________________________________________________________________
Bei AOL gibt's jetzt kostenlos eMail für alle.  Klicken Sie auf AOL.de um heraus zu finden, was es sonst noch kostenlos bei AOL gibt.



_______________________________________________
ope mailing list
ope@lists.csuchico.edu
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/ope


This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Apr 30 2008 - 00:00:18 EDT