From: GERALD LEVY (gerald_a_levy@msn.com)
Date: Fri Apr 11 2008 - 07:59:36 EDT
Pauls C, B, Z and Dogan: The way in which Geert and Mike W in _Value-Form and the State_ got around the conundrum was to begin their systematic dialectical reconstruction in thought of capitalism with the dialectic of sociation-dissociation-association. Beginning with that starting point, rather than the commodity, they were able to present a clear _logical_ link between the analysis of capital and the state. Insofar as one wants to develop a systematic dialectical analysis, then a historical explanation for the role of the state in relation to money and the development of commodity exchange is insufficient *by itself* (although it is presupposed that one has grasped the relevant historical data and experiences before one begins - or, at least, publishes - the exposition). What is required is to logically connect the two subjects so that the subject of the state arises from the contradictions inherent in the character of capital (of course, some anarchists might put it the other way around). The issue, in other words, here shouldn't be whether there is a connection between the state and capital. Obviously, there is. Rather, the issue is how that relationship can be fully and logically expressed and unpacked. That, in turn, from a systematic dialectical perspective, centers (at least, initially) on the question of the 'starting point': i.e. is the 'starting point' of the 'commodity' in the exposition sufficient to grasp this dialectic? In solidarity, Jerry _______________________________________________ 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