From: Angelus Novus <[email protected]> :
> Heinrich is clearly wrong that capitalism can only develop on the basis of formally free wage labor. Heinrich says nothing at all about capitalism "developing" on the basis of formally free wage labor.? His argument is not a historicist one, and he argues against the Kautsky/Engels orthodoxy of seeing Capital as a work of history.? It is an analysis of the capitalist mode of production, "at its ideal average", AS MARX STATES VERY CLEARLY IN HIS OWN PREFACE TO CAPITAL. ^^^^^^^ CB: Marx discusses the "secret of surplus value" but how do you square your claim that Marx doesn't consider _Capital_ a work of history with Marx's extensive discussion of the historical development of capitalist accumulation in the following parts of _Capital_ and others ? Ch. 14: Division of Labour and Manufacture Ch. 15: Machinery and Modern Industry .... II: Primitive Accumulation Ch. 26: The Secret of Primitive Accumulation Ch. 27: Expropriation of the Agricultural Population from the Land Ch. 28: Bloody Legislation against the Expropriated, from the End of the 15th Century. Forcing down of Wages by Acts of Parliament Ch. 29: Genesis of the Capitalist Farmer Ch. 30: Reaction of the Agricultural Revolution on Industry. Creation of the Home-Market for Industrial Capital Ch. 31: Genesis of the Industrial Capitalist Ch. 32: Historical Tendency of Capitalist Accumulation Ch. 33: The Modern Theory of Colonisation ^^^^^ _______________________________________________ pen-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
