fuerdenkommunismus at yahoo.com
Sun Feb 17 13:23:18 MST 2013
Paul, I'm going to bow out of the discussion, because I think you're refusing to discuss in good faith. For example, you continue to refer to "abstract labor" as a mere technological average that exists prior to the mediation of money, despite my offering numerous quotations from Marx to the contrary.
You apparently want to retain the terms that Marx uses, but you don't like the content that Marx assigns to those terms, so you fill the terms out with your own content. I think terms can have different meanings in different contexts, but then you should state this openly, rather than trying to pass off your concepts as Marx's.
And when you write:
> We should not incidentally take Marx's vanity at face value. Just
> because he claimed to have discovered abstract labour, it does not
> indicate that previous writers like Smith did not in practice work with > the concept, it is just that the Scots philosopher would not make a song > and dance of it the way the German one did.
I know any further discussion is fruitless. Marx's own stated intent was to write a "critique of political economy." That's even the subtitle of his book. He was perfectly clear about the fact that he was engaging in a categorical critique of Smith and Ricardo. If you want to attribute this to his "German vanity", then I have nothing else to say.
More information about the Marxism