Right, back to the issue at hand. Some passages from the Grundrisse and Vol. III of Capital that I think prove conclusively that:
- The value-form analysis in Vol. I chapter one is not a historical account of the emergence of money, but a logical analysis of the commodity in capitalist society;
^^^^^^^ CB: So, quote some passages from the value-form analysis of Vol.I chapter one to support this claim. I have quoted a number of passages from there that make historical references. Marx refers to pre-capitalist historical periods. You have said nothing to argue against their contradicting your claim here.
^^^^^
- Value as socially necessary abstract labour time is only meaningful with reference to capitalist society mediated by money. There is no such thing as pre-monetary "value".
^^^^^^^ CB: So, your position is that there was no pre-monetary, pre-capitalist production of commodities ?
Are you saying that all production before capitalism was production for use and none of it was production for exchange ? Or are you saying there was never historically existing barter , that all early exchange was mediated by money ?