| Both sides previous revision
Previous revision
Next revision
|
Previous revision
|
en:riff-raff:introduction_to_riff-raff8 [Y-m-dH:i]
titorelli |
en:riff-raff:introduction_to_riff-raff8 [Y-m-dH:i] (current)
titorelli |
| This disquisition of the Mill game is of value in context because TC makes such a big deal about it and they think that it sheds light on an important problematic. The analogy is used to illustrate a picture of //the whole of the capitalist mode of production and the reproduction of its classes//, its //self-presupposition//. How does this reproduction come about? | This disquisition of the Mill game is of value in context because TC makes such a big deal about it and they think that it sheds light on an important problematic. The analogy is used to illustrate a picture of //the whole of the capitalist mode of production and the reproduction of its classes//, its //self-presupposition//. How does this reproduction come about? |
| |
| //The whole// contests according to Marx of ‘the reproduction and new production of //the relation of capital and labour itself//…’, between the working class and the capitalist class. TC insists on that it is via Marx’s //concept of exploitation//, that is to say the conditions for the extraction of surplus labour, that makes it possible to illuminate how the capitalist society and its class contradictions are reproduced as a totality and expressed as such. | //The whole// consists according to Marx of ‘the reproduction and new production of //the relation of capital and labour itself//…’, between the working class and the capitalist class. TC insists on that it is via Marx’s //concept of exploitation//, that is to say the conditions for the extraction of surplus labour, that makes it possible to illuminate how the capitalist society and its class contradictions are reproduced as a totality and expressed as such. |
| |
| > Exploitation, which is the content of the relation, can be deconstructed into three moments: the selling and purchasing of labour power; capital’s subsumtion of labour; the transformation of the surplus-value into additional capital, i.e. to new transformed means of production and new, transformed labour power. ((Théorie communiste, ‘A reply to Aufheben’, p. 164)) | > Exploitation, which is the content of the relation, can be deconstructed into three moments: the selling and purchasing of labour power; capital’s subsumtion of labour; the transformation of the surplus-value into additional capital, i.e. to new transformed means of production and new, transformed labour power. ((Théorie communiste, ‘A reply to Aufheben’, p. 164)) |
| > Exploitation makes it possible to build class struggle as contradiction, what is to say: a reciprocal but non-symetrical implication (subsumption); a process in contradiction with its own reproduction (the fall of the rate of profit), a whole of which each element exists only as a definition of its other in contradiction with it and from there with itself (productive labour and accumulation of capital, surplus labour and necessary labour).((See //Théorie communiste// № 2, p. 10 and № 20, pp. 71--72; pp. 78--79; p. 170; p. 190.)) | > Exploitation makes it possible to build class struggle as contradiction, what is to say: a reciprocal but non-symetrical implication (subsumption); a process in contradiction with its own reproduction (the fall of the rate of profit), a whole of which each element exists only as a definition of its other in contradiction with it and from there with itself (productive labour and accumulation of capital, surplus labour and necessary labour).((See //Théorie communiste// № 2, p. 10 and № 20, pp. 71--72; pp. 78--79; p. 170; p. 190.)) |
| > | > |
| > All this only functions if we achieve understanding the fall of the rate of profit as a contradiction between the classes and as a questionning of the proletarait by itself in the movement when the whole is, in its dynamics, contradictory to itself as the activity of a class.((See //Théorie communiste// № 20, p. 54)) (Roland Simon in an e-mail to riff-raff, September 14, 2006) | > All this only functions if we achieve understanding the fall of the rate of profit as a contradiction between the classes and as a questioning of the proletarat by itself in the movement when the whole is, in its dynamics, contradictory to itself as the activity of a class.((See //Théorie communiste// № 20, p. 54.)) (Roland Simon in an e-mail to riff-raff, September 14, 2006) |
| |
| ==== From self-organisation to communisation ==== | ==== From self-organisation to communisation ==== |