• Quelm
    "In the dialectic of capital, we let capital itself define capitalism by the unfolding
    of its own logic. Therefore, we ask capital what it is like in its most abstract, i.e.
    least specified, form. The answer will be that it is mercantile, or abstract general,
    wealth which can be pursued endlessly, not material, or concrete-specific,
    wealth whose consumption eventually leads us to satiation. The value of a
    commodity reflects this abstract-general character of capital, whereas its use value
    is a reminder that it is also part of "our" material wealth. If, instead of
    letting capital explain what capitalism is, "we" tried to theorise it by observing
    it arbitrarily from the outside, capital would not fully reveal itself. Furthermore,
    "we" would be adopting the practice of bourgeois economics which
    erroneously begins its exposition with the use-value, rather than the value, of
    a commodity. Indeed, bourgeois economics always insists that commodities
    are, first and foremost, use-values, and that they obtain prices when they are,
    by chance, exchanged one for another. The dialectic insists on the opposite.
    Commodities are destined to be exchanged one for another because they are
    offered for exchange as value, indifferently to use-values, by capital."

    An Outline of the Dialectic of Capital, Volume 1, Thomas T. Sekine pg.27-28,
    Palgrave Macmillan 1997

    Does anyone know how Sekine's approach here differs from Marx, if at all? This seems like exactly the right way to approach the topic if one truly wants to understand capitalism.
  • John G
    I've never heard of this author but his work looks very interesting, and the writing style is very clear.
  • Ken
    Thomas T. Sekine consequently follows, like his teacher Kôzô Uno, Marx's method, even more consequently than Marx himself. It is known that with the premature reference to labor, Marx violates his own method in Capital. This is also an independent finding of Backhaus and Reichelt in Germany.

    A forthcoming article on this will be available here: https://doi.org/10.4444/100.100 (there you can also find a link to the original German article published in 2009)

    Some more material on Sekine and the Uno school is available in my Philosophical Bibliography: https://doi.org/10.4444/100.110

    Sekine's main work is The Dialectic of Capital: https://doi.org/10.4444/34.1

    Let me copy a recent announcement here:

    A new edition of Professor Thomas T. Sekine's masterpiece, a reformulation of Marx's Capital, homomorphic to Hegel's main work Science of Logic and based on the legendary work of the Japanese political economist Kôzô Uno (1897-1977), is available now:

    The Dialectic of Capital
    A Study of the Inner Logic of Capitalism

    by Thomas T. Sekine
    2020 edition
    ISBN 978-90-04-38481-1 (2 vols.)
    Direct link: https://brill.com/view/title/19600?format=HC
    Persistent link: https://doi.org/10.4444/34.1
  • Quelm

    Thank you for sharing the links. I've never heard of Kôzô Uno.

    It is known that with the premature reference to labor, Marx violates his own method in Capital.Ken

    Forgive my ignorance, I'm not exactly sure what this means but you have my attention. I'm very interested in looking into this school of Marxist thought, if one can call it that? :smile:
  • Ken
    A good introduction to the Uno school is Sekine's essay from 1975:
    Uno-Riron: A Japanese Contribution to Marxian Political Economy
Add a Comment

Welcome to the Internet's only Marx Hegel Forum!

The Marx Hegel Forum is a new online community for those who want to discuss the ideas of Marx, Hegel, Critical Theory and related areas of Philosophy. There are no ads on this site, it exists to promote a healthy community for intellectual engagement. Signing up is easy, just click on "Create Account" and verify your email. That's it, you can now join the conversation!