Didn't Marx call money the universal commodity?

Posting mode: Reply [Return]
Name
Options
Subject	Spoiler Image
Comment
Verification
Flag
File
Embed
Password	(For file deletion.)

File: 1760446766389.png (410.5 KB, 640x480, ClipboardImage.png)

Didn't Marx call money the universal commodity? Glownonymous 14-10-25 12:59:26 No.2520908

Why do I remember some quote from Marx directly describing money as a universal commodity? Where did that come from? Who even said it? I'm not here to hear your explanation of what you think money is, I'm baffled by where this idea of Marx calling money the universal commodity came from. WHAT THE FUCK? If it wasn't him who said it?

Anonymous 14-10-25 13:34:29 No.2520918

he writes it here:
>Since all commodities are merely particular equivalents of money, the latter being their universal equivalent, they, with regard to the latter as the universal commodity, play the parts of particular commodities.
https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1867-c1/ch02.htm

Anonymous 14-10-25 15:35:04 No.2521019

It's cause the point of money is you can buy stuff with it I think

Anonymous 14-10-25 15:42:10 No.2521024

It's in like the first few chapters of Capital. Money is the universal commodity, because it is the commodity that other particular commodities are exchanged into to in turn be exchanged for another particular commodity

S 14-10-25 16:05:28 No.2521035

This is reminding me to continue reading Capital Volume 2 because there was something about money being different types of capital or something in the first chapter (I need to properly read this..)

Anonymous 14-10-25 16:20:47 No.2521043

File: 1760458847280.png (11.74 KB, 296x194, mpl.png)

>>2521035
the capital process (M-C-M')
begins with money-capital (M-M')
which joins to productive capital (P) = (LP) + (MP)
productive capital creates surplus product (C')
this then creates more money at the other end (M')
this new money then regenerates the sequence (M-M')

Unique IPs: 6