George: Hi Angela!
Angela: that there is a consistent thread between marx's critique of the
Hegelian state on the one hand, and OTOH, marx's critique of the political
economists'
capital is I think undeniable. and, since value is not simply
economic value - as a political economist would have it - but social
valorization, then, again, I don't see what is so controversial about
this unless you want to retain an economistic (but inaccurate) version
of marxism.
George: You miss my point. I have been criticising Clarke's view that the
captialist state is an aspect of capital. My view is that the state cannot be an
aspect of capital although it is obviously an aspect of capitalism. If the state
is conceived as an aspect or form of capital then the category capital, as
conceived in Capital, is being challenged. Marx's Capital is thereby under
attack too.To present the capitalist state as an aspect of capital is to seek to
transform the category capital into a sociological category that divests capital
of the specific significant meaning it retains throughout Capital.
My point is both modest and significant.
Warm regards
George
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|