From: "ricardo" <davidb-AT-ak.planet.gen.nz> Subject: M-I: Re: Re: Money capital & Soviet Union Date: Sat, 20 Sep 1997 08:51:07 +1200 Rebecca and Bob, Rebecca. Yes I agree that money as a measure of value is not the same thing as money capital which contains realised surplus value. Nor do I say that capitalist social relations are restored in Russia. What I do say is that the state is now a capitalist state trying its best to restore capitalism and doing so by means, among others, of re-introducing money as a measure of value, so that the law of value can re-assert itself. The question for marxists is what is the character of the state? This is determined by the social relations that the state defends. We say that in this case a capitalist state defends capitalist social relations by actively creating the conditions for their re-introduction. Bob.This is not running the film of reformism backwards, but running the film of the Boshevik revolution backwards. Lenin talked of state capitalism in a very specific sense of the workers state coexisting for a time with bourgeois property but where the class character of the workers state was determined by the social relations the state defended. Trotsky talked about the path back to restoration taking the form of state capitalism by which he meant the state switching from supporting planned property relations to capitalist social relations. The fact that it occurred without a bloody civil war also runs the film backwards. Most of the blood was shed before and sometime after the October revolution. The important thing is the class character of the state. As soon as the class turnover takes place we can no longer call for a political revolution, we have to call for a social revolution to smash the state apparatus and restore planned property social relations. Dave ---------- > From: Rebecca Peoples <wellsfargo-AT-tinet.ie> > To: marxism-international-AT-jefferson.village.Virginia.EDU > Subject: M-I: Re: Money capital & Soviet Union > Date: Friday, September 19, 1997 03:07 > > Ricardo money capital is not the same thing as money as a measure of > value. Money can exist as a measure of value without being necessarily > money capital. > > Money capital is capital in the form of money. What I am saying is that > in Russia capital does not in any siginificant way exist as capital in > the form of money: money capital. > > Because capital cannot assume this form in Russia the circulation of > capital there is impossible. Without money capital industrial capital > cannot circulate. Consequentl a general process of valorisation cannot > exist > > If money capital does not exist in any real sense in Russian and if > consequently the circuit of capital and the general circulation of > commodites is prevented from developing then I dont see how Russian > capital can in any significant way particiapte in the international > circulation of capital. > > This is my tenative positon at the moment Ricardo. However I am open to > being influenced and even won over by a better argument or theory. > > By the way I am not syaing that capitalism will never become the > economic system in Russia. However it may as I think you said take many > years to achieve. This is just how I see things at the moment. > > Anyway thanks for replying and please come back at me if you think I am > wrong. > > Best wishes. > > Rebecca > > Ps. Your posting to David and I was quite interesting and informative. > Rebecca, > ------------------ > I agree with some of your points, especially about the SU not being > capitalist until it re-establishes the role of money as a measure of > value. > However, I think it is sufficient for the state to back the rouble as a > world currency i.e. with an exchange rate against the dollar etc > backed by > state intervention, for the rouble to act as a measure of value. When > the > state does this, and as well allows any private persons to import and > export commodities, whether or not it has succeeded in privatising > state > corporations, it has declared itself to be a state which is actively > re-establishing the law of value, rather than suppressing it. At that > point > the qualitative shift from a post-capitalist state to capitalist state > has > occurred, even though it may take years for the rest of the economy to > undergo a complete privatisation, if it ever does. In my view the East > European states and the former SU had reached that point by 1992. What > we > are seeing today are crisis ridden capitalist states undergoing the > throes > of the full impact of the law of value as it forcibly destroys the > use-values which have no exchange-value and the IMF/WB structural > adjustment packages designed to cut back on state spending and > eventually > balance the budget. > Dave. > > > > > --- from list marxism-international-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu --- --- from list marxism-international-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---
Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005