----- Original Message ----- From: "Carrol Cox" <cbcox at ilstu.edu>
>
>
> Macdonald Stainsby wrote:
> >
> > You see, I believe in a world where we don't need slavery- wage,
sexual,
> > physical or any combination of all three- so I have a hard time
talking about
> > "surplus value" to something that I am so utterly repulsed by the
notion of
> > commodifying. With the commodification of labour processes, and I
thank Marx for
> > helping me grasp this, labour becomes viciously alienating. I
cannot be anything
> > other than a total opponent of a labour relation that alienates
one from the
> > whole process of sexual intercourse. That is one huge example of
the inhuman
> > nature of the way capitalism makes us interact with other people,
as one
> > another.
========= The commodification of sex is way older than capitalism. Alienation can only make sense as compared to a normative analysis as to what is constitutive of inalienability; something that has not been done for a long, long time. So, what does inalienability and inalienable mean to you in the context of labor power which exists independently of the property and contract law that is constitutive of liberalism and capitalism?
Ian