> --- Wojtek Sokolowski <sokol at jhu.edu> wrote:
> > John B:
> >
> > 2. According to Marx, exploitation occurs when the
> > surplus generated by
> > labor is not returned to the laborer but retained by
> > someone else.
And then Andie/jks replies:
> Your account of Marxisn exploutation is erroneous.
> Exploitation for Marx is not mere surplus transfer
> from producer to nonproducer, It is _wrongful_ surplus
> transfer. The wrongfulness may be, as some people
> believe, theft, although I do not think Marx thinks
> so. It might be injustice, which is more plausible,
> but stll in my view nor Marx. I think Marx's view is
> that the wrongfulness is deprivation of freedom --
> coerion, dominatio9n, and the like.
And your use of quotes is misleading. You are replying to WS, not me (Fugazy, johnbizwas@). I agree with you, btw.
Next, in a snarl of intertextuality, Tom W. writes:
> Justin wrote,
>
> > / John B:
> />/
> />/ 2. According to Marx, exploitation occurs when the
> />/ surplus generated by
> />/ labor is not returned to the laborer but retained by
> />/ someone else.//
> /
> > Your account of Marxisn exploutation is erroneous.
>
>
> The paradox is that none of us really knows or could know exactly and all of what Marx said or meant. In this case, my interpretation agrees with Justin's. John B.'s position would appear to be the "utopian" socialist position that Marx criticized repeatedly: that the labourer is
> entitled to the entire product of his/her labour. But that's just my interpretation.>>end of all that confused quoting.
Ah, just as I thought, you have confused positions and replies totally. Too much intertextuality makes you go barmy in a post-mo way. BTW, I am not upholding any Marx position (existent or non-existent, as someone on the list has claimed, most likely confusing my text with someone else's) but am trying to work within an established tradition of Marxism. In many parts of the world such discussions as this would be seen as so silly because Marx is the starting point. I know that much of the US and UK are outside of that tradition totally. Obviously.With discussions like this, you can't even get past preliminaries.
Now for some laughs about Peak Oil! (Oh, just to nip it off in the bud, are you going to trust an oil exec. about how much oil they have?). A company gets bought not because how much oil is in the ground worldwide, but how much that company getting bought is entitled to extract from the pool that is available at a cost that yields profits that match or are better than the world average. Now that is something an oil capitalist would know something about. As for peak oil, might as well pray to God for wisdom and insight.
F -- _______________________________________________ NEW! Lycos Dating Search. The only place to search multiple dating sites at once. http://datingsearch.lycos.com