Every single regular crisis of capital, in particular, is the direct result of the bourgeois property form. Allow me to emphasize "regular" as meaning cyclical - not the revolutionary transformation (more accurately transition) from one mode of production to anther. Actually, "regular crisis" or cyclical crisis of capital means bourgeois property as the mode of producing commodities. The appearance of crisis in the financial, agricultural or industrial sectors, at any given point in time, always have its peculiar cause, which in the first and last instance is a break in circulation or in laypersons terms, crisis due to the character of bourgeois production. Bourgeois property is the cause of crisis in a system of capitalist commodity production. Sorry if I wrote in a manner to lead one to believe I was not speaking of crisis. Adding "not the ultimate cause of crisis" to the thread was meant to indicate I was speaking of crisis. I am not talking of "revolutionary transformation" but the source of crisis. Under consumption is not the source, root cause or taproot, of the crisis of bourgeois property or the bourgeois mode of production or commodity production on the basis of bourgeois property relations. The conflict immanent in the bourgeois form of property is expressed in the commodity form, with all its implications, and the commodity form of bourgeois mode of producing is the cause - direct and ultimate, source of all crisis expressed as breach in circulation and most certainly regular crisis. In my reading of Chapter 30 in Vol. 3, I take Marx to be speaking in a specific context. If Marx means that the ultimate source of all crisis - regular and cyclical, in the bourgeois mode of commodity production or the conflict inherent to the bourgeois property form, is under consumption of the masses, then I disagree with Marx. Marx is not God. Or to be treated as a God whose every utterances is to be clung to, or quoted out of context. . Its no big thing. WL.
In a message dated 1/20/2009 5:09:24 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, _charl...@cncl.ci.detroit.mi.us_ (mailto:charl...@cncl.ci.detroit.mi.us) writes: In this quote, Marx is not talking about revolutionary transformation necessarily, but rather about the regular crises within capitalism still. Such crises may be involved in a revolutionary transformation as a sort of trigger, but Marx is not claiming that underconsumption is the ultimate cause of revolution. Of course, poverty does contribute to revolution, but that's not the point in this particular quote. _http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism-thaxis_ (http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism-thaxis) This email was cleaned by emailStripper, available for free from _http://www.papercut.biz/emailStripper.htm_ (http://www.papercut.biz/emailStripper.htm) **************A Good Credit Score is 700 or Above. See yours in just 2 easy steps! (http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100000075x1215855013x1201028747/aol?redir=http://www.freecreditreport.com/pm/default.aspx?sc=668072%26hmpgID=62%26bcd=De cemailfooterNO62) _______________________________________________ Marxism-Thaxis mailing list Marxism-Thaxis@lists.econ.utah.edu To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism-thaxis
