there are at least two definitions of "original accumulation": 1) the forcible creation of capital as a social relationship between capitalists and the direct producers, where the latter are separated from direct access to the means of production and subsistence and so must submit to the former's dominance in order to survive. They are thus exploited.
sub-case A: the original accumulation in England. sub-case B: any forcible expropriation of the direct producers that leads to capitalist social relations. 2) any activity of capital that involves unequal exchange, unequal relations in job markets such as monopsony, or the receipt of super-profits (i.e., above the social average). This includes #1 in most cases. I agree with definition 1B, while I find definition 2 waters down the meaning too much. However, arguing about definitions is a waste of time. Instead of saying "my definition is the true one" people should say "this is what I mean my this term" and "this is why this definition is useful." Jim
