William.Cockshott at glasgow.ac.uk
Sun Feb 17 12:30:27 MST 2013
"For those who don't know, the list folded last summer, presumably because everyone has either said their say or is otherwise occupied, but the discussion headings look as if they've covered the ground discussed here, often in heated exchanges, and the participants included persuade me to have a close look. "
OPE-L has certainly become more subdued, but postings are still coming out.
Ed:"If the substance of value is socially necessary labour, measured in time, this substance has no *objective* existence outside of exchange, in which value manifests itself in objective form as physical quantities of other commodities."
This is just untrue. It is clear that the people who say this are strangers to empirical economic research.
Why has it no objective existence outside the exchange relation?
Is the performance of the labour not objective?
Are the technical conditions of labour not objective?
Both the labour expended by society to produce commodities and their price ratios are objective things. The hypothesis on which the whole marxist theory of exploitation rests is that the first objective phenomenon is the cause of the second objective phenomenon.
More information about the Marxism