Dear Paul Z.[1711]:
>Sorry, I still do not understand you, Iwao. Of course accumulation is
>reproduction on a progressive scale. I don't think we disagree
>on anything at all since I think I agree with everything you write on
>this. Is there some phrasing of mine you are not comfortable with?
Iwao:
No. Never. I'm very glad to see you emphasizing more labor-power
when discussing accumulation. I think we take the similar position
to GLCA. I only wanted to distinguish the term "definition" from logical
equivalence in general in my[1667]. Marx's last sentence in that paragraph
"Accumulation of capital is, therefore, increase of the proletariat"
is also not a difinition but an assertion that he explains more concretely
later in the chapter, I think.
At the same time, I tend to think Marx's most aim in this chapter was
explaining that capitalist accumulation unavoidably leads production
of surplus population (not capitalist but proletariat, of course :) )
If I have time in this weekend, I would summarise the view of I.Sakisaka
on this issue.
in OPE solidarity,
Iwao
----------------------
Iwao Kitamura
mail-to: ikita@st.rim.or.jp