Arthur on money and exchange

Abstract

Uno’s reformulation of Marx’s value-form theory has not been correctly understood. In highlighting the process of the emergence of money from the value expression of the commodity, not from commodity exchanges, it makes the first important step towards releasing economic theory from its bourgeois confines. In responding to Arthur’s critique of the Uno School, here Sekine stresses the importance of distinguishing the supplier’s value expression of the commodity from its demanders’ measurement of value, in the light of which he shows that the passage from expanded to general value form, whether by Marx or by Arthur, makes no economic sense.