Marx qualifies this "absolute" law immediately after stating it. For him, it's a "law" at the level of "capital in general," the subject of volume I of CAPITAL. However, it might be changed by the competition of capitals, e.g., the uneven development of capital on the world scale. During the period from World War II to 1980 or so, the law seems to have shifted in its application from the "first world" to the "third world." Now, in the era of neoliberal capitalism (which seems aimed at restoring the classical capitalism that Marx described), it seems more general, incorporating even the US.
Mike Lebowitz, in his book BEYOND CAPITAL (now in its 2nd edition!), argues that in CAPITAL, Marx took the working class' situation as given, assuming (for example) that working-class reaction to capital's depredations is largely passive. You might see the relatively good situation of the US working class during the 1945-1980 period as a result of the fact that this assumption didn't apply, i.e., that struggles of the 1930s and after allowed workers to get a "piece of the pie." The decline of workers' power since then meant that the "absolute law" reasserted itself. ------------------------ Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] & http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine > How broad does Marx intend this generalization to be ? His > use of the term > "absolute" seems to indicate that he is predicting that this > generalization > reaches beyond the specific English illustrations of the law > he discusses. > > Charles >
