According to John Milios, > “Marx shows that the products of labour become values because they are > produced within the framework of the capital relation. Further, that value > necessarily manifests itself in the form of money.”<
To my mind, the first sentences is off. I'd say that the products of labor _have_ value (as Marx defines that term) because they are produced within a framework of commodity production, not necessarily the capital relation. I don't know exactly what's meant by "shows" here. Also, in theory at least, commodity production _could_ be run using barter rather than money. It's empirically unlikely, of course. -- Jim Devine / "Segui il tuo corso, e lascia dir le genti." (Go your own way and let people talk.) -- Karl, paraphrasing Dante. _______________________________________________ pen-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
