| This question <55|55> overall <79|81> Zaskar: <64|228>. |
| Question 14: Does Marx discuss the commodity and money before discussing capital because they precede capital historically? (Compare Grundrisse [mecw28]37:1--45:4; R259.) |
| [80] Zaskar: I believe Marx begins his treatment of capital with a discussion of the commodity and money because they are the building blocks and energy that makes capitalism possible (in his view). |
| Hans: I like the word “energy” here. Commodities are in fact endowed with some inner social “energy.” They are active. |
| [80] Zaskar: I also believe he begins his treatment here because his definition of the commodity is different than that of the traditional capitalist's. I don't believe historical context is significant in this question. I imagine Marx is simply laying groundwork for postulating his view of capitalism. |
| Hans: I would suggest you consider if there is a link after all. If commodities have “energy”, do they have this only now or have they had it also in the past? |
| [80] Zaskar: (datestring)Mon, 23 Jan 1995 13:08:27 -0700 (MST)(/datestring) In response to your question about the “energy” of commodities, I believe commodities have always had that energy or value. I believe capitalism is simply a way to exploit the value of the commodity. |
| Hans: But who is the subject in this process? It is not the humans. The humans are only the puppets, capital (i.e., self-increasing value) is the subject. |
|
|
|||||