reply to Keen

Fred B. Moseley fmoseley at
Mon Oct 3 07:41:15 MDT 1994


Thanks for sending me these references, but they do not address the
two main points in your interpretation which I specified:

1.  that Marx's labor theory of value is derived from a "use-value /
exchange-value dialectic".

2.  that Marx assumed that the value transferred from the means of
production is determined by their use-value.

I do not dispute that use-value played an important role in Marx's
theory or that the use-value of the commodity labor-power is its
ability to produce additional value, which is the source of surplus-
value.  But I strongly dispute the above two claims.  Your criticism
of a logical contradiction in Marx's theory depends crucially on these
two claims.  If these claims cannot be supported, then your criticism
is invalid.  But, you have provided no new evidence to support them.
Rosdolsky and Groll do not address these points specifically and
neither do the passages from Marx, except the one from p. 80 of Volume
3 of "Capital", which I have already argued does not really support
your interpretation, and which in any case is not additional evidence
beyond your published papers.  If I have missed something, please
indicate which references support which of these two claims, and
precisely how.



More information about the Marxism mailing list