[Marxism] Re: Ecological Economics vs The Misevaluation of Value:

Tony Abdo gojack10 at hotmail.com
Sun Aug 15 19:29:08 MDT 2004


This conversation about value is really much more than just dispute over 
language.  I am not just trying to 'appropriate' the word value from the 
marxist concept of the word. I am a marxist myself.  It is just that 
capitalism appropriated this word long ago from humanity.  And we need to 
get the word back.  Marx did not do so.  He did not try, but rather 
incorporated it whole hog into his labor theory of value.  That is not to 
deny the great value of the body of his work.

The basic problem, is that economic value is not solely produced by labor.  
And also, that labor does not have solely a positive impact on value that 
exists outside of human effort.  Unworked assets do have value, no matter 
what was written in Das Kapital by Moses in the Ancient Era. This is about 
more than changing vocabulary.  It is about emphasis of what is today 
important (value) to sustain life.

Further, it is time to recognize that life can be sustained without human 
labor, though human labor can actually destroy nature's ability to do so.  
Animals stay alive without human commodity production, and humans once did 
the same, too.  We are animals, and we exist in nature.  And nature has 
valuable assets, that exist whether marxists choose to recognize as so, or 
not?

And because nature has fixed value, human labor can destroy it, not improve 
upon it.  Today's capitalism produces more destruction, than production.  
Marx didn't see it that way in the 19th century.  And some of his followers 
today, want to not see it in the 21st century.

We just need to update some, and stop mechanically defending Holy Grail.  
Accounting by sheer calculation of market forces is dead.

Tony Abdo
```````````````````````````````````````````````````````
>From Brain Shannon
<<Tony writes:
"In essentiality, it merely states that if we can't quantify it in
dollars and cents, then we should just ignore any other concerns as
having no value!"

With some diffidence in jumping in on a question of political economy,
it seems to me to be to be a question of language. You want to
appropriate the word "value" for purposes entirely different from
understanding the laws of motion of capitalist economy. Thus your
interest in "other concerns." Of course, the long-range interests of
humanity means that we have interests other than the operation of
capitalist economics. But in Das Kapital, Marx was discussing something
entirely different.>>

_________________________________________________________________
Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE! 
hthttp://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/





More information about the Marxism mailing list