Jerry wrote in (2367):
>Fred wrote in [OPE-L:2367]:
>
>> Marx's argument seems to be (1) that commodities
>> must possess an independent, objective measure of their values and (2) that
>> THE MEASURE OF VALUE MUST ITSELF POSSESS VALUE.
>
>I think this is probably correct as an interpretation of Marx.
>
>> My main question has to do with (2). Is (2) is a necessary deduction from
>> Marx's labor theory of value or from the objective nature of Marx's logical
>> method? Or is it instead based on a particular conception of "measure"? Or
>> is it perhaps a temporary assumption that Marx made at the beginning of his
>> theory but which can be relaxed at later stages in the theory?
>
>It is consistent with Marx's form of investigation and method of
>presentation that he would first analyze how money abstractly takes the
>form of a commodity before analyzing disturbances from this tendency
>brought about either by conjunctural developments or the intervention of
>the *state*.
>
Fred asks again:
But if the basis of Marx's earlier argument is that "the measure of value
must itself possess value," how is this changed by the intervention of the
state?
Thanks,
Fred