In regard to Paul Mattick [589] & [590]
1. The presupposition of capitalism is bound up with my discussion on hist
time approach just before.
2. The labor producing gold is not immediately social. I agree. But the labor
that produces the money is immediately social, definitely. The two labors should not be confused. Marx also insisted the "directly social labor chacter of the money producing labor in many places. If, as you presume, its social character requires
mediation, use as money, then the money is not directly money but can be the money only post factum. Money is the money the moment it is produced, and so is already realized as a social value. Any comments?
Thanks,
Chai-on Lee
Sorry for the disordered writing.