What is a commodity?

[H. Curtiss Leung]

Ken writes:

>The economy here - in Canada - is dependent upon the banking system - why do 
>you think the local banks pull in over a billion a year in profits?  From
>pentions, to social services, loans to investments, RRSP's to cheques, 
>debit cards to mastercards, pay stubs to money transfers, travellers cheques 
>to wire payments, bills (cable, phone, utilities, rent, insurance) to taxes,
 >charities to non-profit organizations....  Right now the Canadian governmet 
>works solely on loan.  Almost all major corporations have loans - because the 
>interest rates are far lower than many of the more diabolical investments.  
>There is a thriving "underground" economy here that works on the barter system 
>- but the accountants keep tabs on debits and credits.  I don't know if 
>production and exchange are dependent upon banking - in themselves - but in 
>this world - this economy - production and exchange are definitely highly 
>mediated by the banking system.

        There's the rub -- banking mediates "this world -- this economy," i.e.,
the capitalist mode of production.  It only has an ambiguous character to the 
extent that we take it to be independent of this particular historical epoch,
and that we believe no other possible organization of production and
exchange is possible.  Banks may facilitate exchange and production
right now, but given that they exist in "this world -- this economy,"
what is their _raison d'etre_?  They are profit making institutions that
serve the interests of their investors.  Given who these investors are
and the ostensive social role the banks currently play, it's hard to 
imagine a more pernicious social institution -- or a more dangerous
ideology than the notion that banking is somehow neutral or ambiguous.

>If anyone is REALLY interested in going after one of the most destructive 
>forces in the universe - look at the theory of money via the institution 
>of banking.

        My point exactly!

>Without a doubt the banks weild far MORE power, in terms of resources and 
>ability to steer resources, than any other transnational.  GE can make all the 
>guns it wants - but without a stock market, shareholder transactions, 
>investments, pensions, payrole, and instantaneous transfers - it can do squat. 

        Ah, but what you're saying here implies that money, banking, and
investment services are somehow _prior to_ the raw materials and labor needed
to make those guns.  I'm not disputing that large scale production is always
undertaken with some banking or investment involvement, but rather that the 
involvement is inevitable, natural, or neutral.  Ascribing such a role to
banks and money is pure metaphysics; instead, large scale financing is the 
medium for a relationship between social forces -- it is NOT like burning
coal!  Isn't this the fallacy Marx ridiculed when he wrote:

        So far no chemist has ever discovered exchange-value in
        either a pearl or a diamond.  The economists who have 
        discovered this chemical substance, and who lay special
        claim to critical acumen, nevertheless find that the
        use-value of material objects belongs to them independently
        of their material properties, while their value, on the
        other hand, forms a part of them as objects.  What confirms
        them in this view is the peculiar circumstance that the
        use-value of a thing is realized without exchange, i.e.,
        in the direct relation between the thing and man, while, 
        inversely, its value is realized only in exchange, i.e.,
        in a social process.  Who would not call to mind at this
        point the advice given by the good Dogberry to the night-
        watchman Seacoal?  "To be a well-favored man is the gift 
        of fortune; but reading and writing comes by nature."

Side comment: aren't the hermenueuts of suspicion susposed to be Freud,
Nietzsche, AND Marx?  Why is it that we're so good at detecting the
erotic and ascetic forms of metaphysical error, but so lousy
at detecting the commodity form?  Could it be because bringing up this 
one'll _really_ land your ass in hot water?

        My $0.02 (oops, there it goes again...)
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Curtiss Leung                        Voice (212)267-7722 x 3033
hleung@prolifics.com                   Fax (212)608-6753 
-------------------------------------------------------------------