^^^^^ CB: A revolution in communication is a revolution in production. The 
cyberrev's impact is specifically in the communication and transportation 
aspects of production, especially. 

When I say revolution in communication and transportation, I mean revolution 
in production. 
By revolution in communication, I mean revolution in production. It's not a 
revolution in the exchange-value system. It is a revolution in the use-value 
system.

WL: "It is a revolution in the use-value system." 

Amazing logic. 

We are talking about very different understanding of the revolutionary 
process in society. I speak of the value system rather than "revolution in the 
use-value system," which strikes me as a bizzare way of speaking about 
labor-power 
and its value.  Value is not use-value. By the word value I means the amount 
of socially necessary labor that goes into the production of commodities. By 
commodity I mean products created for their exchange value and these products 
produced for their exchange value become exchangeable on the basis of the 
socially necessary labor in them. All commodities have a use value or they 
could not 
enter the world of exchange. Every use-value is not necessarily a commodity 
or more accurately "have a commodity form." 

"It is a revolution in the use-value system." 

I understand that you are the guardian of Marxist thought. Can I politely 
disagree with your marvelous formulation. You can call this a revolution in 
communications or in the use value system - a marvelous and bizzare concept, if 
that is your understanding but it is a revolution in production - the value 
system, in my estimate.

Well, . . . what can I say. You apparently derived many of your concepts from 
the CPUSA and I did not. I derived many of my applied concepts from the old 
Communist Labor Party, the Communist League and before that the League of 
Revolutionary Black Workers as well as individual study. I did right steering 
clear 
of the CPUSA. 

CB: "It is a revolution in the use-value system." . . . "It's not a 
revolution in the exchange-value system."  

WL: I can't stop laughing at this wonderfully bizarre conception of the value 
system. No doubt this is your reading of Marx and your understanding of 
Capital. 

WL: An open factual question . . . ? What do you think has been happening in 
Detroit? Ask the workers over on Mack at the two relatively new Chrysler 
Engine plants about the advance in the means of production. 

^^^ CB; "Social revolution" is not on their lips. 

^^^^^^ 

WL: I beg your pardon. Actually, CB,you have to know that I worked with these 
folks and have a sense of what the workers are actually talking about. How do 
you know what these working are talking about? I worked with most of them for 
the better part of 30 years and for many of them was their elected union rep. 

Only a doctrine of economic determinism proceeds from an assumption that the 
unfolding revolution in production - advanced robotics, means that "social 
revolution" - with quotes, is on their lips. What a bizarre framework of logic. 
Of course all of American society talks about the impact of the revolution in 
the productive forces. Everyone talks about this real revolution on one level 
or another. 

CB . . . you have a wonderful way of making me laugh.

Waistline 



 
.

_______________________________________________
Marxism-Thaxis mailing list
[email protected]
To change your options or unsubscribe go to:
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism-thaxis

Reply via email to