Message 00993 [Homepage] [Navigation]
Thread: joxT00985 Message: 16/24 L2 [In date index] [In thread index]
[First in Thread] [Last in Thread] [Date Next] [Date Prev]
[Next in Thread] [Prev in Thread] [Next Thread] [Prev Thread]

Re: [jox] p2p and market

Hi Jakob,

Am 30.03.2012 16:33, schrieb Jakob Rigi:
Of course Market existed in pre-capitalist societies. Pre-capitalist
Markets and capitalist markets share the following:

The value of commodities are determined by abstract labor congealed in
them. The capitalist markets are separatedd from pre-capitalist ones by
the fact that in them labor power is also a commodity, and hence the
surplus labor is transformed into surplus value.
In peer production there is no abstract value and hence no echange
value. In this sense peer production is different from all pr-capitalist
modes ogf production. Pre-capitalist modes of production do not work as
analogy for peer production.

That's your story.

Here is my story:

Societies (plural) are required since settlement times more than 10.000 years ago not only to produce (formerly to collect, hunt) their means of consumption but also to reproduce the cultural-technical infrastructure as the basis for producing their means of consumption.

Also in precapitalistic times a certain amount of infrastructure reproduction was through market mechanisms and used accounting. But in feudalistic times the main part of the infrastructure reproduction was realized trough a well established system of duties (with a well reproducable accounting system as explained in an earlier mail). Accounting was about direct fulfillment of obligations, so it was not directed to "value" in the sense of "labour value". This can be well explained within a sound labour value theory: No labour directed to foreign common needs, hence no outside value return for own needs - that part of reproduction was organized completely _inside_ that community. But within that community fulfilling a larger obligation you had a higher "value" in the sense of societal reputation (getting manifested by membership of a certain "Stand" - caste) and "accumulated reputational capital" that was turned in capitalist times into "true capital" within the process of first accumulation.

But there were reproductional needs beyond that, both for the "private household" and the restricted commons of that community. Here the hucksters (or how to name this broad category of peregrines in English?) come within the play, that had special goods to sell and (!) special knowledge to repair instruments, to build special buldings etc. They were paid for that, first offering "cost and lodging" (hence they could reproduce their own reproductional needs), second bargaining and paying a certain price for the foreign goods and services on the own needs. Although the price was not yet paid completely in money terms, the central Marxian formula p=c+v+m clearly applies with
c=manifested labour,
v=reproductional needs of the huckster,
m=reproductional needs of the "huckster infrastructure system".

So the central Marxian formula p=c+v+m was present long before capitalism started and that was no secret at all for Marx, who uncounted times flouted shortcut argumentations about that development.

The marxistic mantra, that the "labor power is a commodity", can easily be deconstructed, if you compare lending a horse and lending a man for one day, since, different to Marx' well known argumentation, the former is a social relation between persons within human society about something outside human society, the latter is a direct relation within human society. The point (well stressed many times, e.g. by Peter Ruben) is, that the latter appears in the formulas as it were a commodity, but is a "contract by tender", i.e., a service delivery, and addresses directly the reproductional needs of that man as part of human society (and counts separately as v), whereas the reproductional needs of the horse are addressed as the infrastructural reproductional needs of the owner of the horse. If Marx had not eliminated the labour value factors from the very beginning, he had seen that more clearly.



  Dr. Hans-Gert Graebe, apl. Prof., Inst. Informatik, Univ. Leipzig
  postal address: Postfach 10 09 20, D-04009 Leipzig
  Hausanschrift: Johannisgasse 26, 04103 Leipzig, Raum 5-18	
  email: graebe
  Home Page:


Thread: joxT00985 Message: 16/24 L2 [In date index] [In thread index]
Message 00993 [Homepage] [Navigation]