On Tue, 2 Apr 1996, Iwao Kitamura wrote:
> But there's a term 'expanded scale of reproduction' placed just before
> the phrase ""accumulation, reproduces the capital-relation on a progressive
> scale,...".
Iwao, my edition reads "reproduction on a progressive scale, ie,
accumulation..." but in any case I don't see why you point this out.
> Accumulation derives more scale of capital-relation.
If you mean that accumulation means more or larger capitalists and more
labaor hours, I agree.
> But more scale of capital-relation doesn't define accumulation though
> it well characterises that.
Why does it not define it? If that doesn't define it, what does?
> I tend to think that "The General Law of Capitalist Accumulation" points
> production of relative surplus population. Capitalist accumulation
> unavoidably causes unemployment=reserve army. And thus derived unemployment
> becomes a necessary condition for existence of capitalist mode of production.
> This is what Marx shows in the chapter of GLCA.
I agree with this. The quotes I called up from GLCA are at the
beginning of the chapter and serve to summarize what has been learned from
the two preceeding chapters: simple reproduction and conversion of
surplus value into capital. The latter chapter is particularly important in
my view, since it defines accumulation of capital.
Paul Z.