At 11:34 AM 04/16/2000 -0400, you wrote:
"Max B. Sawicky" wrote:
. . . Protesters' Headquarters Raided, Shut Down
Incredible.
What's incredible about it? It seems quite ordinary to me --
but I suppose it depends on one's assumptions about
capitalist democracy. Carrol
I think that it's
O.K. This seems right. My question: Does the novelty (or
at leas relative novelty) of the reaction reflect someone's
deliberate estimation of the threat, or merely a more-or-
less run of the mill police over-reaction? . . .
[mbs] It's an over-reaction if you are interested
in upholding the law,
- Original Message -
From: "Jim Devine"
[*] In CAPITAL, Marx goes a long distance with the contrast between
"what's
good according to capitalist standards" (trading at value, equal exchange)
and how the system works in practice (exploitation in production).
Surely Marx's entire
there is no "contrast" between the real (exploitation) and the moral
(equal exchange) in Capital. It is capitalism, not Marx, that creates the
contrast, to make us believe free market distributes fairly. Marx
objectively reads capitalism as the way it is..
Mine
[*] In CAPITAL, Marx goes a
"At 07:13 PM 04/16/2000 +0100, you wrote:
- Original Message -
From: "Jim Devine"
[*] In CAPITAL, Marx goes a long distance with the contrast between
"what's
good according to capitalist standards" (trading at value, equal exchange)
and how the system works in practice
- Original Message -
From: "Jim Devine"
In volume III, as he turns to the issue of how competition works and how
the participants perceive the system and act on those perceptions, he
drops
the assumption that commodities trade at value (so that there is unequal
exchange, the
