[OPE] grundrisse manuscript

I wonder if someone has ready to mind the approximate number of total
manuscript pages devoted to the Grundrisse in Marx's hand.

howard

----- Original Message -----
From: "Paul Bullock" <paulbullock@ebms-ltd.co.uk>
To: "Outline on Political Economy mailing list" <ope@lists.csuchico.edu>
Sent: Friday, January 08, 2010 11:43 AM
Subject: Re: [OPE] Peer production and abundance

> Paul C,
>
> the system is exploitative, we work in a social division of labour that
> is organised to exploit: without being exploited we would not (for the
> masses) be allowed to live, OR more narrowly, without the exploitation of
> the masses the conditions of the labour aristocracy and new petty
> bourgeoise would not be provided for (of course I know there are plenty of
> those IN these sections of the population - eg academics - who deny such
> social differences and lay claim to better conditions because of 'science'
> or some such fetishised idea). Thus all of this is predicated by
> exploitation and usually works towards the reinforcement of the system.
>
> However I don't doubt that all this inventive activity is a part of the
> process by which the development of the forces of production constantly
> strains against the actual relations, its splitting at the seams, so to
> speak. For some time bourgeoise state employment plays a role if it can
> tax its way forward, but this is transitory.
>
> The whole analysis must be of the social/material contradictions. That
> capitalism finds it more and more difficult to incorporate in any
> seemingly 'rational' way will bring about a social revolution - which of
> course needs its political leadership based in the exploited masses. If
> capitalism can't adjust and adapt such activity, can't use it draw on it,
> then we shall see if it becomes part of the armoury of demands, and
> capacities of a working class movement that will be the basis for reducing
> imperialism.
>
> Paul Bl
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Paul Cockshott" <wpc@dcs.gla.ac.uk>
> To: "Outline on Political Economy mailing list" <ope@lists.csuchico.edu>
> Sent: Friday, January 08, 2010 1:54 PM
> Subject: RE: [OPE] Peer production and abundance
>
>
>>I would agree that the production of GPL material does depend on those
>>producing it having both free time and some other revenue stream.
>> I do not agree that it depends on the exploitation of other workers
>> though.
>
>> In some cases it is work done in the evenings, and in others it is work
>> done in academic institutions or government laboratories.
>>
>> In the case of a programmer employed by Nokia who writes software for
>> peer to peer file sharing in their evenings, this does not depend
>> on the exploitation of workers elsewhere. The Nokia worker will have been
>> paid for the labour power that they sell to Nokia during the day
>> and that labour power will have been exploited by Nokia. If the
>> programmer choses to go and help Pirate Bay during the evenings
>> as voluntary work, this is not itself dependent on their explitation by
>> Nokia. No surplus value from the work at Nokia goes into
>> the production of the free software..
>> They do need an income to live, but the free software is produced out of
>> their unpaid time and is thus a tapping of a potential surplus
>> product that could only be extracted by capital as a result of a longer
>> working day. Since the working week is legally limited,
>> it is rather the constraints placed on capitalist exploitation by the
>> limitation of the working day that allow the production of the
>> free software.
>> In the case of software produced in academic institutions that is placed
>> in the public domain, like the BSD Unix operating system,
>> and many Unix utilities developed for that, then that labour was paid for
>> out of taxes, and placement in the public domain
>> was a condition of the tax funded work ( those conditions on US grants
>> have I believe been changed in a way less favourable
>> to the public domain).
>> The model of software funded out of tax revenues seems to be one that
>> could be retained under socialism, but the free and voluntary
>> work done is spare time is also something that would presumably be
>> encouraged in the future.
>>
>>
>> ________________________________________
>> From: ope-bounces@lists.csuchico.edu [ope-bounces@lists.csuchico.edu] On
>> Behalf Of Paul Bullock [paulbullock@ebms-ltd.co.uk]
>> Sent: Friday, January 08, 2010 1:17 PM
>> To: Outline on Political Economy mailing list
>> Subject: Re: [OPE] Peer production and abundance
>>
>> Where marginal costs of providing some software is effectively zero, but
>> operations require purchase of other tied/ joint commodities I don't see
>> where this sort of innovation leads us to 'socialism'.. it becomes a
>> marketing issue.
>>
>> Furthermore if the production of much software/ sourceware is actually
>> done in the free time of the professional middle classes within richer
>> states then this is predicated on the exploitation of workers labour
>> power elsewhere, ie my free time is someone elses surplus labour time
>> performed. So we havn't got out of the capital relation.
>>
>> The abolition of large scale private property and the formulation of
>> basic democratic social planning is the essential prerequisite.
>>
>> Paul Bullock
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: GERALD LEVY<mailto:gerald_a_levy@msn.com>
>> To: Outline on Political Economy mailing
>> list<mailto:ope@lists.csuchico.edu>
>> Sent: Thursday, January 07, 2010 7:07 PM
>> Subject: RE: [OPE] Peer production and abundance
>>
>>> I think there is merit to the argument that the 'open source' mode of
>>> production conflicts with and potentially undermines capitalist property
>>> relations. But a systematic theory of this mode of production has yet to
>>> be formulated.
>>
>>
>> Hi Dave Z:
>>
>> Well, I would call it a type (or form or pattern or system) of
>> production, not a
>> 'mode of production". Use of the latter expression is unnecessarily
>> confusing, imo.
>>
>>
>>> If the 'open source' mode of production is to become the dominant mode,
>>> the question arises: what share of the total output of an economy could
>>> actually be produced in this way?
>>
>> Except for the caveat which I referred to above, that's a good question.
>>
>> In solidarity, Jerry
>>
>> ________________________________
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> ope mailing list
>> ope@lists.csuchico.edu
>> https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/ope
>>
>> The University of Glasgow, charity number SC004401
>> _______________________________________________
>> ope mailing list
>> ope@lists.csuchico.edu
>> https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/ope
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> ope mailing list
> ope@lists.csuchico.edu
> https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/ope

_______________________________________________
ope mailing list
ope@lists.csuchico.edu
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/ope
Received on Fri Jan 8 13:38:01 2010