<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN"> <HTML><HEAD> <META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1"> <META content="MSHTML 6.00.5730.11" name=GENERATOR> <STYLE></STYLE> </HEAD> <BODY bgColor=#ffffff> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Bitch writes:</FONT></DIV> <DIV>"I'm unclear what you're saying here Jim. Which examples of primitive <BR>accumulation from Goldner did you object to? I didn't get the sense that he <BR>was talking about extraordinary theft and con tricks, but ordinary ones. "<BR></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>My point was that in fixating on the exotic thefts that happen at the margins, the central story of capital accumulation through the exploitation of labour is obscured. So what I object to is the following, which is just not true:</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2><FONT face="Times New Roman" size=3>"when  <BR>the bloated paper values are far out of alignment with real  <BR>reproductive values in the closed system (capitalists and wage  <BR>laborers) THIS GAP IS COVERED BY LOOT, i.e. primitive accumulation in  <BR>the broad sense I use it. Hence its permanence: because capitalism is  <BR>an anarchic system, it necessarily generates that gap, and it must  <BR>cover it by sucking in material wealth (labor power, commodities)  <BR>wherever they can be found, to compliment the surplus value generated  <BR>in the pure system, or cannibalize existing labor power, plant and  <BR>infrastructure inside the closed system."</FONT></FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2><FONT face="Times New Roman" size=3></FONT></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2><FONT face="Times New Roman" size=3>The 'broad sense' that Loren uses it is no sense at all, and an unnecessary and confusing vulgarisation of the precise and compelling meaning of Marx's original category of primitive accumulation. </FONT></DIV> <DIV><BR></DIV></FONT></BODY></HTML>