In a message dated 3/23/2010 10:40:21 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, 
[email protected]_ (mailto:[email protected])  writes: 
 
CB: He says "capitalist production... begets its own negation. 
 
WL: Correct. What is capitalist production if not bourgeois private  
property? I am aware of the sharp differences within Marxism on this issue.  
Marxism of all stripes contend that the negation capitalist production begets 
is  
the proletariat. What is the proletariat? A property relation expressed as 
the  workers owning their labor ability in a world of private ownership of 
means of  production. 
 
On this basis I contend that Marx is speaking fundamentally of a property  
form being negated. Her is also speaking of a quantitative aspect of 
property  development wherein one capitalist negates - kills many. Monopoly 
negates 
-  kills, “less many.”
 
>>>>> 
 

CB: What is the qualitative change in means of production that  Marx
mentions in the quote ?
 
WL: You got me there my friend. None. However you have quoted this passage  
enough to know its  this segment of Marx is 1294 words including footnotes. 
 Marx is speaking of a new mode of production taking root based on a 
qualitative  change in the means of production and corresponding change in 
property. A new  reader will not know this from this passage but there is an 
index 
called  “industrial revolution.” My fear is writing  something that only “us
” old  heads will make sense or nonsense out of. 
 

Xxxxxxxxxxxxx
 
Negation of the
> negation signifies the preservation of the specific  quality of the
> contradiction pinpointed as the point of departure - the  starting point 
of a
> motion.
 
CB: Elaborate this thought.
 

WL. This is fully elaborated in the example of advanced communist  society 
based on a post industrial development and “withering away of the state”  
will express a negation of the negation as a return to the quality called  
primitive communism - non property in means of production.
 
This is not to say the draft is internally cohesion enough with the proper  
flow. The problem is that form is not separated from quality in reality. 
 
*************
 
Negation of the negation is
> not a universal law of dialectics but  rather an expression of the
> dialectic of change. (see Dialectics,  quantity, quality, the 
antagonistic element.)
 
^^^^^^^
CB: What dialectic is not a "dialectic of change" ?
 
WL: I am still fighting with Gould’s Marxist Glossary which list “negation 
 of the negation” as one of the “laws” of dialectics. When I put down my 
boxing  gloves the above sentence is not needed at all. 
 
 


_______________________________________________
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