[A-List] Academic life of Mises
Waistline2 at aol.com
Waistline2 at aol.com
Wed Dec 18 10:48:29 MST 2002
In a message dated 12/18/02 5:30:18 AM Pacific Standard Time,
Annewilliamson at msn.com writes:
> It also occurs to me that the Henry George
> approach to property might be of interest to A-Listers. I
> learned about his work through Michael, and I have a
> number of books on it but - alas - I have not read them
> yet (your note prompted the guilty memory of that failure,
> and oh what an educated woman I'd be if I just got all the
> books on my shelves read :-), but perhaps all the A-listers
> already know all about that approach. -A.
I, also am not familiar with the material quoted above and several days ago
added by two-cents or rather dollar (must take into account 30 years of
inflation or value reduction) concerning the meaning of property.
By property is not meant buying a house or simply owning. My use of property
as I have come to understand Marx, means ownership of the material
wherewithal that reproduces capitalist property relations or ownership of
those things that allows one to dominate people. The quality of this
"domination" compels a huge section of society to sell their labor power to
the owners or institutions and institutional frameworks reproducing capital.
Capital most certainly means money in our day and age, but more fundamentally
it - capital, is a historically evolved social relations or better yet, a
social power. This social power is the instrument by which humanity is
converted into modern proletarians and compelled to sell the only thing they
own - labor power.
My computer is not my personal property as such but part of my personal
possessions, as is my car, home, books, etc.
Property in the modern sense of the word is bound up with means of production
and a home is not means of production, nor is a car.
I wanted to follow this thread, as Mark Jones introduced some material from
Marx "Outline" that spoke of the genesis of "property" before the emergence
of the mode of production in material life. I sidestepped this presentation
because personal consumption items is not my meaning of property or that of
Marx in his works published for the masses.
If our working class thinks that private property means personal possessions
devoid of the ability to reproduced a historically evolved social relations
of production, we can all go home and forget winning them to a certain kind
of political revolution. No one has to give up their Mercedes-Benz or mansion
for that matter. Our country is very developed and does not require taking
things from individuals. Nor is there a need for the state as such, to own
the means and instruments of production.
We probably need to be a lot more creative in our approach to how people
think things out and understand their surrounding.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 3140 bytes
Desc: not available
More information about the A-List