Even anarchist anthropologists are reluctant to embrace a labour theory of value. Debt is certainly very important in the establishment of class and patriarchal domination; but when will Professor Graeber recognise in writing DEBT, THE FIRST FIVE THOUSAND YEARS the fact that wealth, to which debt is intimately related, is either a product of labour or exists before us in nature and then is merely possessed by threat of violence through the State's law enforcement hirelings?
Maybe I'm supposed to give him a 'huss' and assume that what I'm missing is 'implied'. The problem with that is that while I may see it, others may not, as he dismisses 'the labour theory of value' earlier on in DEBT, with regard to Adam Smith, as I've already stated. Wealth is liberty — liberty to recreation — liberty to enjoy life — liberty to improve the mind. "Wealth is disposable time, and nothing more. " (From a pamphlet published anonymously in 1821, The Source and Remedy of the National Difficulties). Debt certainly leads to slavery or at the very least to dependency structures woven into the social fabric via culture e.g. the 'milk debt' Graeber outlines with regard to the ongoing establishment of Hinduism in the historical time frame he labels, "The Axial Age". But even 'milk debt' involves scads of labour time, in fact, our whole Hindu guided lives, if that's where we're at. full review here: http://wobblytimes.blogspot.com.au/2012/10/wobbly-times-number-155.html Hi-ho, Mike B) *********************************************************************** Wobbly Times http://wobblytimes.blogspot.com/ _______________________________________________ pen-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
