Date: Sun, 24 Jul 1994 16:32:00 -0400 (EDT) From: Alex Trotter <uburoi-AT-panix.com> Subject: Labor, Surplus value, catastrophism The economic dimension of Marx's ouevre is not my forte; I wonder, therefore, if those with deeper knowledge can elucidate something for me. If the labor theory of value is valid (i.e., that profit derives only from living labor and not from raw materials or machinery) and capitalism operates by a dynamic whereby the mode of production is constantly revolutionized toward an increasing ratio of constant to variable capital, then the theory of the historic tendency for the rate of profit to fall should also be valid. Looking at capitalism today, it does seem that the preponderance of speculative over tangible wealth is quite lopsided. Is this an indication that the rate of profit actually *is* falling? This leads to another question: what about the predictions proffered by Marx and later, by Marxists, that capitalism would succumb to catastrophic economic crisis? Certainly we know that capitalism is prone to crises or "business cycles," the worst so far having been the great crash of 1929. World War II and postwar reconstruction gave the system a new lease on life, but it started to slow down again in the early 1970s. Are we reaching, or have we reached, a situation in which Keynesianism, the welfare state, and permanent war production can no longer keep the engine running? What importance is now placed on the theory of catastrophe? A slew of other questions come out of this too, such as the relevance of Lenin's (or Luxemburg's) theories of imperialism, and also the question of to what extent the social revolution is brought about by the subjective will of the proletariat, or depends on the determinism of objective processes in the economy. What do y'all think about this? --Alex Trotter ------------------
Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005