Date: 21 Dec 96 03:05:53 EST From: neil <74742.1651-AT-CompuServe.COM> Subject: M-G: sect feuding --or defense of marxism? dear friends, RE: dave's defense of state capitalism 12/20. Yes, Dave, we know that some commodity production existed previous to capitalism. But in class societies that were pre-capitalist, wealth was in tha main produced for direct use and not for sale on the market. Under feudalism , much wealth was used by those who produced the wealth and the rest by priviliged classes who sponged off the producers and took a percentage of the wealth mainly by the threat of force or actual use of force. Under capitalism, the role of production for sale and production for use are reversed, it is now production for use which is marginal, while production for sale and profit that predominates. Under capitalism, statified and "private" , Commodity production is in command. Dave, I think it is kind of pulling a fast one to try to claim that capitalist commodity production was anything like it in feudalism, etc. as you did in your previous post. Capital and surplus value and capital accumulation exist/existed in the state cap countries because the corollary, wage labor , exists and the state caps wealth also means there is an immense accumulation of commodities. Even though the "market " mechanism is restricted much more in the state cap countries, the state boards still have to shift and allocate capital investment to the "plan' to gain an average rate of surplus value measured not by industry alone, but over the whole economy. In the state cap bloc , even as most capital is allocated by the state plan, it uses checks and efficiency measurements that are the hallamrks of capitalism. 1) total physical output 2) quality as well as quantity 3) delivery obligations 4)LABOR PRODUCTIVITY 5) increase % involume of sales 6) totals #s of workers and salaried employeees 7) % can reduce the amount of hand labor 8)% reduced use of fuels and raw materials 9)PROFITABILITY 10) % cost reductions 11) ralation by % of total wage bill and net output 12) proportion of goods of first quality 13) intro. of new technology. 14)payments into the state budget 15) various targets connected to % investment. (See A. Nove , Pg 36, in The Soviet IndustrialEnterprise by I. Jeffries, Eastbourne , 1981.) Combinations of physical and monetary accounting are used both by state and private capitals. The state cap countries also have to use monetary targets because of the actual heterogeneous nature of a majority of their production. Most enterprises produce a whole range of products with few products being homogeneous to be measured in physical units alone. When physically diverse departments in production have to be totaled , this can only be done by means of a common unit, which in both explotation by state caps and private caps , invariably turns out to be money. (V. Holessovsky , Pg 206-7 , Economic Systems, Analysis and Comparison, McGraw -Hill 1977) So in the state cap societies, past and present, the purpose of the state caps production is not just to produce use values as Dave implies. But to pump sufficient surplus value out of the waged working class. and this is the main reason why economic calculation has to be cariied out by units of value , measured by money. As with the marketeer priv cap exploiters, the state caps .must know more than that XXXX tones of steel was produced or that yyyyy million barrels of oil was refined, because that will not show the state caps how effiecient prodution is the the terms that the ruling class is most interested, that is is terms of accurate calculation as to how much surplus is being milked out of the working class. With state caps too , like the ex USSR and co. their rate of surplus value must at least be roughly equal as that of their counterparts , other state cap. and priv.cap rivals, otherwise the rulers will not be able to match their rivals and maintain the necessary balance of capital accumulation. And Dave, it was the precisely that state caps inability to achieve this rate of exploitation that was in tha main responsible for the USSR and Bloc going belly up. When we deal with the ECONOMIC BASE of society, let us all put our cards on the table. I say the ex-USSR and co. were state capitalist, a designation of ECONOMY. You on the other hand play fast and loose with marxist categories,& don't define any ECONOMY at all , but only serve up the warmed over trotskyist stew of "DEGENERATED WORKERS STATE" designation. Dave, this is a definition of a POLITICAL SUPERSTRUCTURE, not an ECONOMIC BASE!! Where is your definition/explanation of the ECONOMIC BASE of the state cap societies?? Be precise as possible please! I await your reply. Neil --- from list marxism-general-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---
Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005