Re: [OPE] Reply to critics (Levy)

> You, Jerry, argued persistently for many years that economic value cannot
> exist without exchange, and that value is created and realised through
> trade.
 
 
No, Jurriaan, I have NEVER argued that value can be created through trade.
I have repeatedly pointed this out to you in the past.
 
 
> The problem is that you just state a schematic tautology which you make true
> by metaphysical definition; by the same token I could argue that the
> commodity does have a recognized use-value, but nobody has a use for it
> right now.
 
Then the commodity's value can be made actual at a later date. Either it
eventually passes the social test of exchange or what was represented by
it in latent form as potential is never fully realized (i.e. actualized, made
ACTUAL).
 
 
> The difference between you and Marx is just that for Marx, value pre-exists
> (and exists independently of) its forms, because value as social labour
> realized in its product is created through production, and not in exchange.
> Your theory is essentially not a "labour theory of product-value", but a
> "labour theory of the exchange of products".

The difference (or, moree accurately, one of the differences) between Marx and
you on this issue is that for Marx use-value, value, and exchange-value are all
constituent aspects of the commodity. To talk about value existing independently
of the commodity is like talking about a functioning human heart existing
independently of humans.
 
In solidarity, Jerry
_______________________________________________
ope mailing list
ope@lists.csuchico.edu
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/ope
Received on Sun Oct 3 09:18:50 2010