Value without Fetish

Elena Louisa Lange, PhD (2011), is a philosopher and Japanologist at the University of Zurich. Her research on Marx‘s Critique of Political Economy has been widely published in peer-reviewed journals. She is also a co-editor of Concepts of Philosophy in Asia and the Islamic World (Brill, 2018).

• AcknowledgementsNote on Translations and TranscriptionsPart 1 The Method of The Critique of Political Economy1 Introduction – Marx’s Critique of Fetishism as Method1.1 The Critique of Fetishism and Uno’s Theory of ‘Pure Capitalism’1.2 The Aporias of Classical Political Economy1.3 The Critical Function of Marx’s Labour Theory of Value. Against Some Readings of ‘Form’ in Contemporary Value Form Theory2 What’s ‘Pure’ about Capitalism? Uno’s Three-Level Method and the Theory of Principles2.1 The Limits of the Three-Level Method (sandankairon)2.2 Pure Theory’s X-Axis: The Law of Population2.3 Pure Theory’s Y-Axis: The Commodification of Labour PowerPart 2 The Object of The Critique of Political Economy3 Uno’s Theory of Value – Value without Fetish (1947–69)3.1 The Problem of Abstract Labour in Uno’s Theory of Value3.2 Uno’s Theory of Value: Methodological Individualism and the Fetishism of Use Value3.3 Uno’s Theory of Money: Baileyan Assumptions3.4 Uno’s Theory of Capital: M-C-M’ as Pure Form4 The Principles of Political Economy (1952/1964) in Light of Marx’s Critique of Political Economy4.1 The Reconstruction of Capital4.2 The Law of Value as the Law of General Social Equilibrium (Uno)4.3 Surplus Value and Profit: The ‘Transformation Problem’ in Uno’s Perspective4.4 The Law of Value as the Law of Crisis (Marx)5 Uno’s Legacy in Japan and Beyond5.1 Money vs. Value? The ‘Monetary Approach’ in the Post-Uno School of Value Theory5.2 The ‘Dialectic of Capital’ as the Apologetic of Capital in the Anglophone Uno School5.3 The Meaning of Real Subsumption or the Real Subsumption of Meaning: Aspects of Anglophone Uno School HistoriographiesReferencesIndex