On crises of overproduction (and underconsumption): "Starting from these profound but unsystematic remarks, many interpretations of the ‘marxist theory of crises’ have been offered by economists who consider themselves marxists. ‘Monocausal’ ones generally centre around ‘disproportionality’ (Bukharin, Hilferding, Otto Bauer) - anarchy of production as the key cause of crises - or ‘underconsumption’ - lack of purchasing power of the ‘final consumers’ as the cause of crises (Rosa Luxemburg, Sweezy). ‘Non-monocausal’ ones try to elaborate Marx’s own dictum according to which all basic contradictions of the capitalist mode of production come into play in the process leading to a capitalist crises (Grossman, Mandel).
"The question of determining whether according to Marx, a crisis of overproduction is first of all a crisis of overproduction of commodities or a crisis of overproduction of capital is really meaningless in the framework of Marx’s economic analysis. The mass of commodities is but one specific form of capital, commodity capital. Under capitalism, which is generalised commodity production, no overproduction is possible which is not simultaneously overproduction of commodities and overproduction of capital (overaccumulation)." -Ernest Mandel, "Marx's Theory of Crisis" http://www.internationalviewpoint.org/spip.php?article289 ----- Original Message ----- From: "S. Artesian" <sartes...@earthlink.net> To: "Marv Gandall" <marvgand...@videotron.ca> Sent: Monday, October 05, 2009 6:22 PM Subject: Re: [Marxism] China's nationalized sector has key role incurrentgains Then Nestor, you really need to sit down and reread your Marx. Overproduction is always the overproduction of capital; the overproduction of commodities beyond the ability of the market, the relations of production, to provide the required return. Overproduction is not underconsumption. Capital is not organized around production for use; production for need. It, capitalist production is about, and is only about the expansion of value. I'm astonished that as a Marxist you aren't aware of that fundamental aspect of Marx's analysis. It's like, not it's not like, it is exactly not understanding the dual role, the dual existence of the commodity. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Néstor Gorojovsky" <nmg...@gmail.com> To: "David Schanoes" <sartes...@earthlink.net> Sent: Monday, October 05, 2009 5:24 PM Subject: Re: [Marxism] China's nationalized sector has key role incurrentgains >I am astonished at the idea that in a world where at least 2 billion > people lack the most essential goods to barely eke out a decent living > there are Marxists who believe that China, or Japan, or the US of > America or Bangla Desh "overproduce" something! ________________________________________________ YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.econ.utah.edu Set your options at: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/marvgandall%40videotron.ca ________________________________________________ YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.econ.utah.edu Set your options at: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
