vince the author that the basis of all value is not the quantity of labor necessary to produce a commodity, but the need which exists for that commodity, balanced by its scarcity."
Thus money, which is for Ricardo no longer a value determined by labor time and which J. B. Say takes for that rason as an example to convince Ricardo that other values cannot be any more than money, determined by labor time, this money, I say, which is taken by J. B. Say as the example of value determined exclusively by supply and demand, becomes for M. Proudhon the example, par excellence, of the application of value constituted. . . . by labor time.
To conclude, if money is not a "value constituted" by labor time, still less can it have anything in common with the "just proportion" of M. Proudhon. Gold and silver are always exchangeable, because they have the particular function of serving as the universal agent of exchange, and not at all because they exist in a proportionate quantity to the mass of wealth; or, to speak more correctly, they are always in proportion because, alone of all commodities, they serve as money, as the universal agent of exchange, whatever may be their quantity relatively to the whole mass of wealth. "The money in circulation can never be sufficient to cause a glut; because if you reduce its value you augment its quantity in the same proportion, and in increasing its value you diminish the quantity." (Ricardo.)
"What an imbroglio is political economy!" cries M. Proudhon.
"Accursed gold!" ironically exclaims a Communist (by the mouth of M. Proudhon). It would be as reasonable to say: Accursed wheat, accursed vines, accursed sheep! seeing that "in the same way as gold and silver,
