In a response to Duncan, Chai-on writes:
Chai-on (1):
----------
Yes, the money form arised from the commodity form. Its origin
was in the commodity form not anywhere-else. So, the money
must be a commodity form, too.
Michael W.:
A. What is the nature of the argument from the first two propositions to the
last? Together or separately, I cannot see how they lead to that conclusion.
B. Even if money arose HISTORICALLY from the commodity, that does not entail
that commodity-money is a necessary condition of reproduction of advanced
capitalism, does it?
Yours,
Michael W.