1979 Reply to Weeks and Dore

7/28/2019 1979 Reply to Weeks and Dore

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/1979-reply-to-weeks-and-dore 1/4

Reply to Weeks and DoreAuthor(s): Samir AminReviewed work(s):Source: Latin American Perspectives, Vol. 6, No. 2, Views on Dependency (Spring, 1979), pp.88-90Published by: Sage Publications, Inc.

Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2633487 .Accessed: 11/03/2013 16:26

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of

content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms

of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

Sage Publications, Inc. is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Latin American

Perspectives.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded on Mon, 11 Mar 2013 16:26:27 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=sage

http://www.jstor.org/stable/2633487?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp





http://www.jstor.org/stable/2633487?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=sage



REPLY O WEEKSANDDOREby

Samir Amin*

The foregoingritique y JohnWeeks andElizabethDore I consider o bebased on a completelyrroneous nterpretationf my analyses. Thoughhave only imitedpace toreply, nonetheless eel can summarizemyposi-tion1 s follows:

The law of value is not imited o explaining he character f the socialproductn thecapitalistmode ofproduction,hat s, tscommodityharacter.Nor does itsimply isclosetheorigin fprofit,hat s, surplus alue. The lawofvalue makes tpossibleto understand he aws ofaccumulation hichde-terminehereproductionnd expansion fthecapitalistmode ofproduction.These aws, expressed hroughalances and imbalances etween hetwo sec-torsofproductionproductionf the means ofproductionndproductionfthemeans ofconsumption),ive objective tatus othevalueof aborpower.2Indeed, he aws of accumulation stablish heobjective elationship etweenthe value of labor power and the level of development f the productiveforces.

The theory f mperialism ustbe based on thetheory f value operatingona world cale. In these ircumstances,he aw ofvaluemust eflect hedif-fering rice evels at which aborpower s sold inthevariousparts f the m-perialist ystem. f,therefore, relationships to be established etween hevalueof aborpower nd thedevelopmentf theproductive orces,tmustbe

clearlyunderstoodwhichproductiveorces ne is referringo: sectorial, a-tional,or world-wide.

Within givennational erritory,he evelofdevelopmentf theproduc-tiveforcesvariesfrom ne branch o another, ut aborpowerhas thesamevalue.The orthodox rgumentinkingwages to sectorial roductivitys nec-essarily marginalistrgument,nd one that s tautological,ince it is notpossibleto compare heproductivityf differentranches.The unity f thecommodity,apitaland labormarkets,n theone hand,and thedetermina-tionofaccumulation alanceswithin hismarket n theother, orceone to

*The author is directorof the UN-sponsored African Institutefor Economic Development andPlanning in Dakar, Senegal.

'English-speakingreaders will finda fullexpositionofmyarguments n my (1976,1977,and 1978)works.2Inthe originalFrenchversion,the authoruses "valeur de la forcede travail,"which was trans-lated as "value ofthe labor force."We feel the correct ranslation hould be "value of labor pow-er" and have substitutedthis usage throughout the editors).

88








AMIN: REPLY TO CRITIQUE 89

concludethatthe value of labor power s objectivelyinked o thenational("average") evel of development f the productive orces.

But in this case, whatis the significancef theuniversalizationf the

productive rocesson a world cale, on the same scale as imperialism?f thecommoditynd capital marketshave become world markets, n the onehand, nd ifthespacewithinwhich ccumulation alancesare achievedhasbecome he whole worldon theother, he value of abor power at the worldlevelis thus inked o the world"average" evelofdevelopment f the pro-ductiveforces.

Nationaldifferencesn the priceof labor powerare thereforeot to beexplained y differencesn averagenationalevelsof development,utratherbythefragmentationftheworkinglass. Once again, hestate-politics-classstruggle actor s necessarily eintroducednto thetheory f imperialism.

Moreover,n dealingwith the imperialist ystem ne is dealingwith asystem fsocial formationsnd not with the capitalistmode of productionextended o the world s a whole. n this ystem f social formations,ll thenoncapitalistmodes are dominatedby capital, and hence surplus abor iswrested rom henonproletarianizedroducers o be turned ntoprofit ncapital.Thus therelations f exploitationf the original recapitalistlassesare dominated,hroughhese nternationallass alliances, ythecapitalist e-lationswhich determineccumulation n a world scale.

The priceof abor power n the mperialistenterss therefore ot nde-pendent fthepriceof this abor power n the dominated eriphery,ecausethe "averageprice"of thetotality f labor powermustcorrespondo theirvalue,which s inrelation o the developmentf productive orces n a worldscale. The priceoflaborpowerat the center s indissolubly oundup withthe mperialistharacter f thesystem f capitalist xploitation.hisconclu-sionreflects olitical nd idelolgical henomenawhich are sufficientlybvi-ous notto by systematicallygnored.

What occurs with regard to the price of commodities"unequal ex-change") s nottheoutcome fphenomena elated o circulation,utratherreflects ackontocirculationheconditions f the creation nd distributionof surplus aborwithin he imperialist ystem.

I failto see anythingn these arguments hichcan

beconsidered s

(1)"neoclassical"!; 2) "neo-Ricardian"! see my critiqueof Sraffa n Amin[1978]); 3) basedon an argumentf "under-consumption"see my critique fthis rgumentn Amin 1974]);4) "circulationist"whichwould gnore lassesetc . . !!); 5) "eclectic" is itforbidden o introduce ew argumentsn ana-lyzingnewrealities such as theuniversalizationf theproductive rocess- and does one have to limit neself o Marx'sexegesisto be a Marxist?).

There does exist a differencen political cope separatingmy analysesformhat f WeeksandDore,but t s not ituatedntheareawheremycrit-ics locate t. n conclusion, maintain hatbecause Weeksand Dorearepow-

erless ograsp he mperialistimension fcontemporaryapitalism,mycrit-ics reflecthepowerlessness ftheworkinglass and socialistmovementnthedeveloped enters. ompensated ya dognatic xposition,his mpotencetakestheform f an inabilityograsp he nature fclass conflictsn a worldscale.This perspectiveeduces heconfrontationetween apitalism nd so-cialism o a direct lass conflict etween apital nd laborat thecenter ftheLatinAmnerionerspectives:ssue 21, Spring 979, Vat.V{, Na. 2








90 LATIN AMERICANPERSPECTIVES

system. lyingn the face of real history,t thereby endersmpossible nyunderstandingfeither hescope ofthenational iberationmovementn theOrient r of theEast-West onflict, r oftheir rolongations ithinWesternsociety.

REFERENCESAmin,Samir

1976Unequal Development, ew York:Monthly eview Press

1977 mperialismnd Unequal Development, ew York:MonthlyReview Press

1978The Law of Value and HistoricalMaterialism, ew York:Monthly eviewPress

nardia~~~nkdependent3West7 treetNewswekadical New York,N.Y.10011Newsweekly (212)691-0404

Ad ExchangeProgram

Therevolutionary

presss a The Guardianowerful

weapon t

ofhe

i heople i

people's choiceAmerica's #1 independent Marxist newsweekly

-Lenin provides U.S. labor, antiracist, women's andantirepression coverage. Plus reportsand analysis onAfrica and the thirdworld that ust can't be beat.

Special trial offer 6 wveeks - $1I enclose

() $1 - 6 wk. trial Name -_-$17 - 1 year Address

()$10 - 6 months AdrsC ity State Zip

Add $5 PER YEAR for Guardian, Dept. LAP, 33 W. 17 St., NYC 10011Canada and abroad






Documents

1979 Reply to Weeks and Dore