| This question <86|86> overall <83|85> Sara: <515|164>. |
| Question 163: The difference between the Money form and the General equivalent form is small; nevertheless it has important implications. Elaborate. |
| [84] Sara: Money Form The transition to Money form has important implications for the state of capital. There are two key reasons that Marx states for this. First, the transition to Money form allows the “world of commodities [to] gain objective fixity and general social validity.” Second, this generates a truly novel commodity. |
| As to the first point the use of the General Equivalent form converts all commodities into a single commodity that can be representative of all other goods. However, this can occur on a case by case basis within the concept of the General Equivalent form. However, the General Equivalent form functions best when it is set apart for that purpose, or stated in Marx's words “in so far as all other commodities exclude it from their ranks and refer to it as the equivalent.” This only occurs once the commodity has switched over from the General Equivalent form to the Money form. |
| The Money form allows a certain commodity to be set aside as the ultimate General Equivalent. It is no longer used in any terms other than as a General Equivalent for other goods. In other words the case by case basis element of the General Equivalent has been eliminated. This would be the genesis of the Money form, and as Marx states is only accomplished through a “deliberate social act.” Once this act has been completed, a certain commodity has taken its place in society as the General Equivalent for all other goods. This allows one to view the system from a lense of objectivity, because it suggests that the commodity itself is set aside from the subjective actions of the market and is only affected by the market in subjective ways. This objectivity allows the populace to ignore the social act that created the Money form in the first place and view it as an objective proceeding, thus increasing the validity of the operation. And allowing the Objective view of the Money form to perpetuate the objectivity of an economic system that was in its essence created through a social act. |
| Unlike prior General Equivalents (such as linen) the commodity in the Money form is always in the money form, as opposed to being able to change back and forth from the money form. Because it is viewed (incorrectly) as an objective creation, rather than a deliberate social act. It gains an element of novelty within our society. This novelty allows economic workings at the Money form level to affect our perceptions of the market in countless ways which have a huge impact on society, because it is deemed to be separate from the subjective workings of other forms of economics. Therefore, this subtle difference between the General Equivalent form and the Money form can create a variety of consequences. |
|
|
|||||