reply to Steve Keen
eugeneh at HUMANITIES1.COHUMS.OHIO-STATE.EDU
Sat Aug 6 15:20:55 MDT 1994
My thanks to Steve Keen for correcting my misunderstanding
of his position on the LTV.
My understanding has always been that the use/exchange
value dialectic with respect to labor was *consonant* with
the understanding of the LTV derived from the categories
necessary/surplus labor (not different from or opposed to
it, as Steve suggests).
I confess to not seeing the advantage -- if the use/exchange
and necesary/surplus versions of the LTV are indeed
incompatible -- of retaining the former rather than the
latter. As I suggested in a recent reply to Phil Goldstein
on Stalin -- and here I feel sure I'm in complete agreement
with Steve and his quotation from Marx -- as "heirs" our
business will always be to sift out what is useful within
Marx's capacious writings from what is less so.
More information about the Marxism