土曜日, 6月 30, 2018

Anarchism: From Theory to Practice Daniel Guerin


Anarchism: From Theory to Practice Kindle版

By Way of Conclusion

However, the very excesses of this system soon began to generate their own negation. They engendered the idea that paralyzing state centralization should be loosened up, that production units should have more autonomy, that workers would do more and better work if they had some say in the management of enterprises. What medicine calls “antibodies” were generated in one of the countries brought into servitude by Stalin. 
しかし、このシステムの非常に過剰なものは、すぐに彼ら自身の否定を生成し始めた。 彼らは、国の中央集権化を麻痺させ、生産部門の自律性を高め、企業の経営に何らかの言動があれば、労働者はより多くの仕事をするだろうという考えを生み出した。 「抗体」と呼ばれる薬は、スターリンによって拘束された国の一つで生成されました。 

Tito’s Yugoslavia freed itself from the too heavy yoke which was making it into a sort of colony. It then proceeded to re-evaluate the dogmas which could now so clearly be seen as anti-economic. It went back to school under the masters of the past, discovering and discreetly reading Proudhon. 

ティトのユーゴスラビアはそれを一種の植民地にしていたあまりにも重いヨークから解放しました。 それは、今や抗経済的に見えるはずのドグマを再評価することに進んだ。 過去の巨匠のもとで学校に戻り、Proudhonを発見し、慎重に読んでいました。 

It bubbled in anticipation. It explored the too-little-known libertarian areas of thinking in the works of Marx and Lenin. Among other things it dug out the concept of the withering away of the State, which had not, it is true, been altogether eliminated from the political vocabulary, but had certainly become no more than a ritual formula quite empty of substance. Going back to the short period during which Bolshevism had identified itself with proletarian democracy from below, with the soviets, Yugoslavia gleaned a word which had been enunciated by the leaders of the October Revolution and then quickly forgotten: self-management. Attention was also turned to the embryonic factory councils which had arisen at the same time, through revolutionary contagion, in Germany and Italy and, much later, Hungary. As reported in the French review Arguments by the Italian, Roberto Guiducci, the question arose whether “the idea of the councils, which had been suppressed by Stalinism for obvious reasons,” could not “be taken up again in modern terms.” When Algeria was decolonized and became independent its new leaders sought to institutionalize the spontaneous occupations of abandoned European property by peasants and workers. They drew their inspiration from the Yugoslav precedent and took its legislation in this matter as a model.



柳田によれば、文末の「わ」は、 一人称(我)を意味する。…





水曜日, 6月 27, 2018


                  ( 経済学マルクスリンク::::::::::

NAMs出版プロジェクト: マルクス・カレツキ・ケインズ1933
NAMs出版プロジェクト: ケインジアンの交差図 1936
The Collected Writings of John Maynard Keynes, The General Theory and After: A Supplement, Vol. 29: John Maynard Keynes, Elizabeth Johnson, Donald Moggridge: 洋書

Harlan Linneus McCracken
Published by Falcon Press, USA (1933)
p.41~56 Chapter 3 Karl Marx

Chapter 3 KARL MARX



ond, labor being used less would be able to buy back less, hence

demand would drop off. (To this extent Marx departed from

an embodied labor theory to that of demand and supply. In

fact, embodied value theorists unwittingly pass over to a demand

and supply analysis with more or less frequency.)


Clearly for Marx, the secular trend was downward. But in

addition to a secular trend, he sought also to establish the fact

of a constantly recurring business cycle. The theory of the

cycle or of crises was based wholly upon his Surplus Value

analysis. Surplus Value holds so important a place in the general

theory of Marx that it is necessarv to study it with care.

In dealing with exchange or the metamorphosis of commodities, he first treated C-M-C [Commodity for Money for Commodity]. Such an exchange he considered no different in principle from that of barter since the object of exchange was to

transfer a commoditv of little or no utility to its possessor for

a different commodity of high utility, and money entered as a

convenient medium to effect the transaction. This double transaction indicated no exploitation, for the assumption was that in

each transaction there was an exchange of equivalent values, or

quantities of embodied labor, so the final commodity had

neither more nor less value than the original commodity, but

had a higher utility for the recipient. Thus the metamorphosis

C-M-C represented an exchange of equivalent values and no

exploitation. Marx admitted the possibility of variation in value,

but such would be accidental and negligible and not inherent in

the process.

But the metamorphosis M-C-M' was fundamentallv different. And it was in explaining this formula that Marx treated

thoroughly the nature and source of surplus value. In this case

the individual starts with money and ends with money. The only

possible motive, then, for making the two exchanges was to end

with more money than at the beginning. And the extent to which

the second M or M' exceeds the first, is the measure of surplus value.  


However, surplus value was not created or gained in

the circulation of commodities but in production. The first M

represented the money paid to labor for wages. In return for

the wages received labor created commodities C which belonged

to the employer, the value being determined by the amount of

labor-time or social labor-power incorporated. Then Marx, in

the inimitable Marxian style, proceeded to show that, whereas

there was an exchange of equivalents as between commodities,

vet with the concentration of capital and tools into the hands

of capitalists and the rise of the proletariat, divorced from tools

and compelled to seek employment of the capitalist, there arose

a transaction between employer and laborer, a transaction in

volving the exchange of labor-power for subsistence, in which

case there was no guarantee whatsoever that there would be an

exchange of equivalents, but rather a predetermined certainty

that labor would invest more social labor-power than would be

returned as wages

Marx then turned directly to an analysis of the determination of wages. "We must now examine more closely this peculiar commodity, labor-power. Like all others, it has its value.

How is that value determined?"

Value of Labor-Power Determined by Cost of Subsistence

and Perpetuation

"The value of labor-power is determined as in the case of every

other commodity by the labor-time necessary for the production, and

also for the reproduction of this special article. So far as it has value,

it represents no more than a definite quantity of the average labor

of society incorporated in it. Labor-power exists only as a capacity, or

power of the living individual. Its production, consequently, presup-

poses his existence. Given the individual, the production of labor-

power consists in his reproduction of himself or his maintenance. For

his maintenance he required a given quantity of the means of subsistence. Therefore the labor-time requisite for the production of

labor-power reduces itself to that necessarv for the production of those

means of subsistence; in other words the value of labor-power is the

value of the means of subsistence necessary for the maintenance of the

laborer. .. . His means of subsistence must therefore be sufficient

to maintain him in his normal state as a laboring individual. 


His natural wants such as food, clothing, fuel and housing vary according

to the climatic, and other physical conditions of his country. On the

other hand the number and extent of his so-called necessary wants, as

also the modes of satisfying them, are themselves the product of his-

torical development, and depend therefore to a great extent on the

degree of civilization of a country, more particularly on the condi-

tion under which, and consequently on the habits and degree of com

fort in which, the class of free laborers has been formed. In contra-

distinction therefore to the case of other commodities, there enters

into the determination of the value of labor-power a historical and

moral element. Nevertheless in a given country at a given period the

average quantity of the means of subsistence necessary for the laborer

is practically known. .

into the value of a definite quantity of the means of subsistence. It

therefore varies with the value of the means or with the quantity of

labor requisite for their production." 6

The value of labor-power resolves itself

Thus we are led to see that Marx held that the wages of labor

were determined, not by the amount of social labor-power which

they invested in commodities for their employers, but by the cost

of maintenance which tended to hover around the subsistence

level, though it might be modified upwards slightly by the pre-

vailing standard of living. It was by showing that labor actually

did embodv more labor-power in the commoditv which it cre-

ated for emplovers than was embodied in the monev which it

received as wages that employers found themselves the pos-

sessors of commodities more valuable than their cost. This rep-

resented surplus value created bv labor, for 'which it received no


Returning to a final analysis of the formula M-C-M' the employer possessed a certain quantity of money, which represented

so much embodied or crystallized social labor-power. With this

he employed workmen who, in exchange, created for him the C

of the equation or so many commodities in which was embodied

a quantity of social labor-power, which, as we have already observed, might hold little or no relation to the value of money

which he gave for its production and tended on the average to be far in excess. 

6 Marx, Capital, Vol. I, pp. 189-91


This C of the equation was then sold on the

market at its full value in exchange for a quantity of money of

exactly equivalent value, i.e., embodying the same amount of

crvstallized social labor-power. By the extent to which the

quantity and value of the second M exceeded that of the first, by

so much had surplus value been created by labor. It also represented the exact extent to which labor had been exploited.

As has been said, the wages of labor were determined, by

the cost of subsistence, or of production and reproduction. The

employer therefore paid him a sufficient money wage to guaran-

tee that subsistence. But upon payment of that wage, the capital

ist laid claim to the full productive capacity of the worker. To

illustrate mathematicallv, if labor in six hours embodied value

in commodities equivalent to that contained in the specie re-

ceived as wages, but the employer withheld the specie until an

additional six hours of labor-power had been embodied, then it

is clear that labor has created six hours of surplus value for the

employer for which no equivalent was paid. This represented

accurately the degree of exploitation of labor, and Marx called

it "surplus value."7

But exploitation has its limits and cannot go on indefinitely

without producing serious maladjustments in the commodity

field. All commodities produced must be exchanged (or vir-

tually all in modern capitalistic economy) and the only effective

demand is the supply of another commodity, the value of which

is proportionate to the labor-power embodied. But the greatest

group of buyers, or consumers is comprised of the laboring class

which has been "robbed" of part of its purchasing power, hence

it cannot buy back the product of its labor. Commodities seek a

market but can find none, or if they do, they must seek it at a

market price much below the actual or market value. Then both

entrepreneurs and labor lose, the former becomes bankrupt and

the latter unemploved because factories close down and the world

experiences a crisis. Indeed it comes at the time when the supply

of commodities is the greatest. While the occasion for the crisis

7 Marx, Capital, Vol. I, pp. 197-215


was bankruptcy of entrepreneurs, the basic cause was in the ex-

ploitation of labor through employers' extortion of surplus value.

If the cause of crises was to be found in underpavment of

workers, with consequent lack of market for goods, a glut of the

market and bankruptcy of employers, how was recovery to come

about? The crisis was caused by too much goods, not only con-

sumption goods, but also capital goods; in other words the

powers of production had outrun the power of effective demand

or consumption, and a bottomed market resulted.

But all above the dire poverty line kept on consuming fairly

normally even in time of depression. Ultimately the glut was

worked off, because factories were closed down and production

had ceased. Also, many bankrupt firms were unable to start

again, machinery rusted away, factories were abandoned, etc. In

other words the function of depression was to scrap enough

capital goods so that the powers of production no longer ex-

ceeded those of consumption, ie.) consumption goods became

scarce, market price came back to market value, which always

contained a margin of profit, hence industries started up with a

vim and the cycle started on its first phase again, but only to

run the gamut of the previous cycle

Thus about the downward secular trend, there ran constantly

this cyclical curve of prosperity, glut, bankruptcy, crisis, and

depression; all based in the last analysis on "surplus value ex-


Thus far, we have attempted to show how Marx explained

the secular trend of the price level on the basis of embodied

value, and the cyclical movement of market prices on the basis

of surplus value. Standing alone each explanation seems logical

and complete. The difficulty arises when we attempt to reconcile

the two. If the value of commodities was determined bv the

amount of labor embodied, how could goods sell at times far

below this value, as at the time of crisis, and at other times far

above their value as in the period of prosperity?

Marx noted the apparent contradiction and promised a recon-

ciliation at a later time. 


This was eagerly looked for in the second

volume of "Das Kapital" but strangely, it was conspicuous by its

absence. However, before his death the attempt had been made

and Engels found it among his manuscripts, and published it in

Volume III.8

Stripped of its verbiage, numerous definitions and involved

formulae, Marx held that two sets of forces were operating in

the determination of value and market price. The fundamental

and primary force, was embodied social labor-power. This de-

termined the value of all commodities. (Value here is used in ex-

actly the same way in which Ricardo used "Natural Value.") The

natural value of commodities was determined by the quantitv of

labor embodied, and market price would never depart from this

unless influenced by some disturbing factor. The disturbing factor

was found in "Demand and Supply" which constituted a secondary

force. But demand and supply had no effect so long as they were in

equilibrium. Furthermore, demand would always equal supply

if labor were not exploited. If it could buy back the full volume

of its product the market would never become glutted and

therefore market price would be held constantly at the natural

value. But due to the exploitation of labor, the compulsory pro-

duction of surplus value, supply exceeded demand and when de-

mand and supply were not in equilibrium, they did have an effect

upon prices and compelled market price to depart from the curve

of Natural Value.

In the words of Marx:

"If demand and supply balance, then they cease to have any effect,

and for this very reason commodities are sold at their market values.

If two forces exert themselves equally in opposite directions, they

balance one another, they have no influence at all on the outside,

and any phenomena taking place at the same time must be explained

by other causes than the influence of these forces. If demand and sup

ply balance one another, they cease to explain anything, they do not

affect market values and therefore leave us .. . in the dark. . . .

It is evident that the essential fundamental laws of production can-

not be explained by the interaction of supply and demand. . . . For

these laws cannot be observed in their pure state until the effects of

8 See Marx, Capital, Vol. III, Ch. X


                  ( 経済学マルクスリンク::::::::::

NAMs出版プロジェクト: マルクス・カレツキ・ケインズ1933
NAMs出版プロジェクト: ケインジアンの交差図 1936
The Collected Writings of John Maynard Keynes, The General Theory and After: A Supplement, Vol. 29: John Maynard Keynes, Elizabeth Johnson, Donald Moggridge: 洋書

Harlan Linneus McCracken
Published by Falcon Press, USA (1933)
p.41~56 Chapter 3 Karl Marx


火曜日, 6月 26, 2018
















入門経済学の歴史ちくま新書根井雅弘 2010


 叢書名   ちくま新書  ≪再検索≫
 著者名等  根井雅弘/著  ≪再検索≫
 著者等紹介 1962年宮崎県生まれ。早稲田大学政治経済学部卒。京都大学大学院経済学研究科博士
 出版者   筑摩書房
 出版年   2010.4
 大きさ等  18cm 250p
 NDC分類 331.2
 件名    経済学-歴史  ≪再検索≫
 要旨    経済システムを貫く客観的法則をはじめて見出したケネー。国民を豊かにするために何が
 目次    プロローグ 経済学史の全体像をおさえる;第1章 経済循環の発見;第2章 価値と分
配の理論;第3章 ケインズ革命;第4章 多様なケインジアン;第5章 制度主義の展
 内容    経済学の巨人たちは時代の課題とどう向き合い、思想を構築したのか。主要テーマ別に学













は、これをG-WIGとして簡潔に表現しました(ここで、Gは貨幣, Wは商品, G'= G+











月曜日, 6月 25, 2018


 備考 きわめて多様であるべき感情の種類(前定理により)の中でも特に著しいのは美味欲飲酒欲情欲食欲および名誉欲である。これらは愛もしくは欲望の感情の本性をその関係する対象によって説明する概念にほかならない。なぜなら、我々は美味欲、飲酒欲、情欲、食欲および名誉欲を美食、飲漕、性交、富および名誉への過度の愛もしくは欲望としか解しないからである。なおこれらの感情は、単にその関係する対象のみによって相互に区別される限り、反対感情を有しない。なぜなら、通常我々が美味欲に対立させる節制、飲酒欲に対立させる禁酒、最後に情欲に対立させる貞操は、感情あるいは受動ではなくて、それらの感情を制御する精神の能力を表示するものだからである。

 備考 きわめて多様であるべき感情の種類(前定理により)の中でも特に著しいのは美味欲飲酒欲情欲食欲および名誉欲である。これらは愛もしくは欲望の感情の本性をその関係する対象によって説明する概念にほかならない。なぜなら、我々は美味欲、飲酒欲、情欲、食欲および名誉欲を美食、飲酒、性交、富および名誉への過度の愛もしくは欲望としか解しないからである。なおこれらの感情は、単にその関係する対象のみによって相互に区別される限り、反対感情を有しない。なぜなら、通常我々が美味欲に対立させる節制、飲酒欲に対立させる禁酒、最後に情欲に対立させる貞操は、感情あるいは受動ではなくて、それらの感情を制御する精神の能力を表示するものだからである。

 四四 名誉欲とは名誉に対する過度の欲望である。
 説明 名誉欲はすべての感情をはぐくみかつ強化する欲望である(この部の定理二七および三一により)。したがってこの感情は、ほとんど征服できないものである。なぜなら、人間は何らかの感情に囚われている間は必ず同時に名誉欲に囚われているからである。キケロは言う、「最もすぐれた人々も特に名誉欲には支配される。哲学者は名誉の軽蔑すべきことを記した書物にすら自己の名を署する云々」
 四五 美味欲とは美味に対する過度の欲望あるいは愛である。
 四六 飲酒欲とは飲酒に対する過度の欲望および愛である。
 四七 貪欲とは富に対する過度の欲望および愛である。
 四八 情欲とは性交に対する欲望および愛である。 252
 説明 性交に対するこの欲望は適度であっても適度でなくても情欲と呼ばれるのが常である。

日曜日, 6月 24, 2018



オー!!マイ神様!! 2018年2月19日 180219 実は空海は人に好かれる天才だった時の最高権力者を夢中にさせた知られざる方法とは空海が残...

土曜日, 6月 23, 2018

Ted Bergstrom - “Ethics, evolution, and neighborly games”


ミシガン大学におけるTheodoreBergstrom による報告をWeb上で見ることができる. ExperimentswithEconomicPrinciples http://leon.econ.lsa.umich.edu/ リンク切れ


Ted Bergstrom - “Ethics, evolution, and neighborly games”

月曜日, 6月 18, 2018






 |    |交換過程 |拡大 単純  
|絶対的剰余|貨幣の資本|    <価値形態論>  
|価値の生産|への転化|     一般的 貨幣|  
相対的 |絶対的お|     |     |  
|剰余価値・|よび相対的| 貨幣または商品流通|  
1013|・〜16 |     |     |  
|     |     〜25   |     |  
| 時間18|労賃への |拡大再生産|単純再生産|  
|     | 転化17|  22 |   21|  
|    1720  |  蓄積過程2125|  
|出来高19|国民的相違|窮乏化 本源的蓄積24|  
|     |   20|法則23 植民理論25| 

 マルクス『資本論』全三巻<一~三>    商品と 
|資本の変態|(資本の |絶対|資本|拡大|単純| 
|  と循環| 循環過程)的_|へ4|価値形態論1
| 1~6 |1、2、3|相対~16一般的|貨幣| 
|    <二> 18~|時間| <一> 資本の|
|資本の回転|社会的21|_労 賃_| 蓄積過程| 
| 7~17|総資本20|17~20|21~25|
平均、利潤率|     |     |資本|労働| 
低下 利潤 |     |生産過程 |_三位一体48 
商人1~20|    <三> 49 |  |土地| 
|     |絶対、差額|競争の  資本家|労働者 
|  利子 |  地代 |外観50 |_諸階級52 
|21~36|37~47| 分配と |  |地主| 

 B | A
 C | D

 |    |交換過程 |拡大 単純  
|絶対的剰余|貨幣の資本|    <価値形態論>  
|価値の生産|への転化|     一般的 貨幣|  
相対的 |絶対的お|     |     |  
|剰余価値・|よび相対的| 貨幣または商品流通|  
1013|・〜16 |     |     |  
|     |     〜25   |     |  
| 時間18|労賃への |拡大再生産|単純再生産|  
|     | 転化17|  22 |   21|  
|    1720  |  蓄積過程2125|  
|出来高19|国民的相違|窮乏化 本源的蓄積24|  
|     |   20|法則23 植民理論25| 

 B | A
 C | D












   ( 経済学リンク::::::::::
NAMs出版プロジェクト: 経済学日本人著者入門書







   北  南
魚  1  3
果物 1.5 2


自給自足経済に関する実験1.Aと南北での物々交換に関する実験lBは、Bergstrom and Miller(2000)から採った。

Experiments with Economic Principles: Microeconomics (英語) ペーパーバック – 1999/8/9

I Competitive Markets 1. Supply and Demand 2. Shifting Supply and Demand II Market Intervention and Public Policy 3. A Sales Tax 4. Prohibition 5. A Minimum Wage III. Imperfect Markets 6. Externalities 7. Monopolies and Cartels 8. Entry and Exit 9. Network Externalities 10. Entry and Exit 11. Measuring Productivity 12. Comparative Advantage V Information, Auctions, and Bargaining 13. Adverse selection 14. Auctions 15. Fundamental Concepts VI Essential Economic Concepts

This book contains economic experiments designed for students who have not previously taken any economics. While this book can supplement any microeconomics text, it can and has been used by itself to teach principles. Unique in the marketplace, "Experiments with Economic Principles: Microeconomics" is an extension of the groundbreaking work in "Experimental Economics" of Vernon Smith. Bergstrom and Miller are two of the most highly-regarded researchers in the creative world of Experimental Economics. It includes features such as: a new chapter on public goods (ch. 6); a new chapter on network externalities (ch. 9); a new Part V on essential concepts of economic principles; more problems and tie-ins to economics in the news; more discussion of economic concepts; more modular organization for easy custom-publishing of instructor's own selection of experiments; streamlining some experiments; improved layout of homework exercises allows faster grading; improved layout of personal information sheets in Instructor's Manual; and convenient class preparation kits for instructors. 

Experiments with Economic Principles : Microeconomics / T.C....

2018年2月17日 ... Bergstrom and Miller (2000) provide a collection of pen-and-paper experiments within an introductory course to microeconomic principles. Experiments are designed such to allow and motivate discussions before, during and ...

Experiments with Economic Principles: Microeconomics, 2nd Edition

Who's the guy in the picture? Experiments with Economic Principles: Microeconomics, 2nd Edition. by Theodore Bergstrom and John H. Miller. Preface. Taking a course in experimental economics is a little like going to dinner at a cannibal's ...

  • Experiment 2: Shifting Supply and Demand
    This experiment illustrates the method of comparative statics with a shifting supply curve in a hypothetical fishing village. The experiment also forces students to grapple with the concept of sunk costs. The discussion section presents real-world examples of shifts in supply and/or demand. This discussion is intended to teach them to determine in applications which curve shifted, and to distinguish shifts in a demand or supply curve from movements along the curve.

    この実験は、仮説的漁村における供給曲線の変化を伴う比較統計量の方法を示している。 この実験はまた、学生に沈み込みコストの概念を抱かせるよう強制します。 ディスカッションのセクションでは、供給や需要の変化の現実的な例を紹介します。 この議論は、カーブがシフトしたアプリケーションを決定し、需要曲線または供給曲線のシフトをカーブに沿った動きから区別するように教示することを目的としています。


    Edward Lipiński - Wikipedia

    Edward Lipiński (October 18, 1888 – July 13, 1986) was a Polish economist, intellectual, social critic and human rights advocate. During the almost seven decades of his career, he held a series of academic and government advisory positions, ...

    カレツキアンの経済学とカレツキの経済学 - J-Stage

    At present, many heterodox economists are concerned with the economics of Michal Kalecki. However, their vision of the historical development of capitalist economies is somewhat different from that of Kalecki himself. This paper makes clear ...

    カレツキアンの経済学 とカレツキの経済学 - J-Stage

    (Adobe PDF)
    構造主義マクロ経済学, フランスとイタ リアの. サーキッ ト学派など, ... カレツキの経済学 は, さなが ら現代政治経済学. の源流 ともいうべ き ...... Advanced Economies, Aldershot: Edward Elgar. Dutt, A. K. ... Lipinski, E. [1977], "Michal Kalecki", Oxford Bul-.