At 12:00 19/10/00 -0400, Charles wrote:
> >the concept of exchange-value is not included in the Marxist analysis of
> >ecological revolution.
>
>It should be. It is about human energy.(Labour power). An overall balance
>of energy and resources on this planet cannot be made without consciously
>analysing what comes from human energy, and what from other forms of
>energy. And how the capitalist mode of production violently eats into all
>pre-existing modes of production.
>
>(((((((((
>
>CharlesB: Yes, I agree with your correction of me Chris. It is
>SURPLUS-value that would be specifically and especially negated. Labour (
>not just labour-power; actually expended labour power as labour) as the
>hidden reality behind and best essence underneath the phenomena
>of exchange-value and price must be considered in ecology, our active
>exchange with nature.
I was not BTW aware I was correcting you, but this point may be important
as well as subtle. We are certainly looking for a world in which the means
of production are not privately owned and the drive to accumulate surplus
value in the form of increased capital does not control the productive
process.
History shows it is possible to have several modes of production in which
there are still commodities and therefore exchange value. These commodities
can include labour power, even if that labour power is not exploitated by
capitalists. Many would claim that in the state centralised socialist
countries although others claim that their regimes amounted to a collective
capitalist, and there are shades of subtlety in the analyses between these
positions.
The main overall point I was making is that we can and should locate Marx's
analysis of the economies of exchange value within the overall larger set
of economies of social products of labour, which constitute the social life
process. All these are economies of the expenditure of human energy, which
equilibrate around the total amount of human energy available to expend.
There is also the economy of non-human energy. And the economy of natural
raw materials. Especially the finite nature of the latter is becoming
important.
Interpreted broadly, I agree that the approach of Marx and Engels is
completely compatible with an ecologically responsible critique of
political economy.
Chris Burford
London
_______________________________________________
Crashlist resources: http://website.lineone.net/~resource_base
To change your options or unsubscribe go to:
http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/crashlist
