Re: general, particular Holzkamp, Engeström

From: Steve Gabosch (
Date: Wed Oct 13 2004 - 13:14:50 PDT

Michael, I would like to please return to the post you opened this thread
with, where you discuss Engeström and Marx. Your statement that "Marx
clearly says that all activity implies the exchange situation ..."
perplexes me. I found the p88 quote you mention below - its on p84 of the
Progress MECW volume 35 I have - but I am still working on understanding
what you mean by "the exchange situation" - and why you say Marx claims
that "all activity" implies it. So far I am not seeing this in
Marx. Certainly, Marx explains that all exchange originates in the
creation of commodities through labor activity. In this sense, the
opposite idea can be attributed to Marx - that all exchange implies the
labor activity situation - but I am not grasping what you actually say,
that all activity implies the exchange situation.

- Steve

At 08:45 AM 10/13/2004 -0700, you wrote:
>I am referring to chapter 1 in the German edition--
>Marx says :
>(p.55) that production for your own needs produces use-value but not
>(p.57) in the use-value of each commodity there is a certain purposeful
>activity or useful labor
>(p.61) All labor ... produces value (of commodity)
>(p.88) The two-fold social character of the labour of the individual
>appears to him, when reflected in his brain, only under those forms which
>are impressed upon that labour in every-day practice by the exchange of
>products. In this way, the character that his own labour possesses of
>being socially useful takes the form of the condition, that the product
>must be not only useful, but useful for others,
>((THis translation was taken from the English version on
>The product of labor must be useful, importantly, for others...
>So labor already implies the usefulness of the product for others... Marx
>is not interested in production for my own needs, like my labor of running
>an organic garden and eating my own vegetables year round.
>On a final note, the English translation is atrocious. Marx wanted a
>readable work, and was proud that commentators described the Kapital as
>readable, even by non-academics. The English translation does not, in my
>view, do justice to the original, and leaves out many of the important
>shades of meaning... tradutore traditore
>On 13-Oct-04, at 1:09 AM, Steve Gabosch wrote:
>>Michael, where does Marx say this?
>>"Marx clearly says that all activity implies the exchange situation ..."
>>~ Steve

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Nov 09 2004 - 11:43:06 PST