Warning: Undefined array key "DOKU_PREFS" in /customers/3/0/2/riff-raff.se/httpd.www/texts/inc/common.php on line 2084 Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /customers/3/0/2/riff-raff.se/httpd.www/texts/inc/common.php:2084) in /customers/3/0/2/riff-raff.se/httpd.www/texts/inc/common.php on line 2092 Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /customers/3/0/2/riff-raff.se/httpd.www/texts/inc/common.php:2084) in /customers/3/0/2/riff-raff.se/httpd.www/texts/inc/actions.php on line 38
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
Both sides previous revision Previous revision Next revision | Previous revision Next revision Both sides next revision | ||
en:the-commodity-and-communism [2022/08/12 17:14] eaustreum [2.3.2 The measure and double character of labour] |
en:the-commodity-and-communism [2023/02/25 19:52] eaustreum |
||
---|---|---|---|
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
====== From the commodity to communism ====== | ====== From the commodity to communism ====== | ||
- | Peter Åström | + | Peter Åström ((This is an extended version of “Varan, värdet och kommunismen”, |
- | ((This is a slightly | + | // |
+ | [[https:// | ||
+ | GE, HJ, AW, ALB, SF and AK for comments and suggestions.)) | ||
===== 1 Introduction ===== | ===== 1 Introduction ===== | ||
- | Capital is self-expanding value, dead labour that enslaves | + | Capital is self-expanding value, dead labour that enslaves living |
+ | therefore | ||
+ | main target of social critique. If abstract labour is the root out of which the | ||
+ | categories of capital | ||
+ | accumulation, etc. -- then it must be abolished for a classless | ||
+ | established. This could conceivably take place in a revolution where the means | ||
+ | of existence are made available to all without restriction | ||
+ | compulsion to work for a wage then falls away. A social reorganisation that, on | ||
+ | the contrary, relies on //work// as a distinct social activity, would retain | ||
+ | abstract labour | ||
+ | opinion of the undersigned.((See e.g. Peter Åström, | ||
+ | //Sic// no. 1, 2011.)) | ||
- | Under the influence of the Arab Winter((That is the counter-revolution in the Middle East and North Africa | + | Under the influence of the Arab Winter,((That is the counter-revolution in the |
- | | + | Middle East and North Africa |
+ | [[https:// | ||
+ | came to abandon this perspective which rests on a peculiar form of | ||
+ | anti-capitalism.((One of its more extreme proponents, the author of | ||
+ | [[en/ | ||
+ | communisation”]], saw the introduction of communism | ||
+ | situation | ||
+ | for ‘products’ in itself supposes the separation | ||
+ | consumption.” //Sic// no. 1, 2011, pp. 154, 165.)) I became convinced that the | ||
+ | positive side of the revolution | ||
+ | speculation. | ||
+ | for despite | ||
+ | capitalist mode of production does in fact, in the normal case, satisfy basic | ||
+ | human needs such as food, water and shelter. For communism to constitute a real | ||
+ | alternative, | ||
+ | material reproduction. | ||
+ | reactionary perspective will surely be put forward instead, for example | ||
+ | nationalism or religious fanaticism. | ||
- | When, in the light of this revaluation, | + | When, in the light of this revaluation, |
+ | canonical | ||
+ | very beginning: Marx does not take //value// as his point of departure but //the | ||
+ | commodity//, | ||
+ | light. | ||
+ | departure, is an attempt to summarise | ||
+ | capital so as to answer | ||
* what is value; | * what is value; | ||
* what does the abolition of capital imply; and | * what does the abolition of capital imply; and | ||
- | * how can a communist | + | * how can a communist |
+ | |||
+ | The entire line of argument rests on logic reasoning, not because history is | ||
+ | unimportant, | ||
+ | is intimately tied to the “internal organisation”((Karl Marx, //Marx’s Economic | ||
+ | Manuscript of 1864–1865//, | ||
+ | production. | ||
===== 2 The commodity ===== | ===== 2 The commodity ===== | ||
- | Marx begins his critical exposition in //Capital// and //A contribution to the critique of political economy// with an analysis of the single | + | Marx begins his critical exposition in //Capital// and //A contribution to the |
- | of political economy and taxation// (London 2002 [1821]), p. 6.)) On a higher level, production, exchange and consumption of commodities is the specific way in which social reproduction takes place in the capitalist epoch.((See for example MECW 28 p. 26 and “Notes on Wagner's Lehrbuch der politischen Oekonomie" | + | critique of political economy// with an analysis of the commodity, more |
+ | precisely | ||
+ | Works (henceforth | ||
+ | labour constitute by far the greatest share of all commodities, | ||
+ | may be multiplied […] almost without any assignable limit, if we are disposed to | ||
+ | bestow the labour necessary to obtain them.”((David Ricardo, //On the principles | ||
+ | of political economy and taxation// (London 2002 [1821]), p. 6.)) On a higher | ||
+ | level, production, exchange and consumption of commodities is the specific way | ||
+ | in which social reproduction takes place in the capitalist epoch.((See for | ||
+ | example MECW 28 p. 26 and “Notes on Wagner’s Lehrbuch der politischen Oekonomie” | ||
+ | in MECW 24, pp. 531--559.)) | ||
==== 2.1 Use value ==== | ==== 2.1 Use value ==== | ||
- | A product of labour is, to begin with, the result of productive | + | A product of labour is, to begin with, the result of human activity which -- |
+ | together with a larger or smaller amount of natural substrates -- turns it into | ||
+ | something useful, a //use value// | ||
+ | value or its use-value form “is independent of the amount of labour required to | ||
+ | appropriate its useful qualities”.((MECW 35, p. 46. Things can thus be useful | ||
+ | without being products of labour.)) On the other hand, a use value may be | ||
+ | considered higher or lower depending on the degree to which other use values | ||
+ | (and thus other labour processes) form a part of it as a precondition.((See MECW | ||
+ | 30, p. 58.)) | ||
- | Products of labour that satisfy human wants can be found in all human societies; they are a necessary part of human existence.(("As the former of use-values, as //useful labour//, labour is thereby the precondition of existence for man – independent of all social forms – and an eternal necessity of nature for the sake of mediating the material interchange between man and nature (i.e., human life)." | + | Products of labour that satisfy human wants can be found in all human societies; |
- | values, but not commodities. In order to produce the latter, he must | + | they are a necessary part of human existence.((“As the former of use-values, as |
- | not only produce use values, but use values for others, social use values." | + | //useful labour//, labour is thereby the precondition of existence for man – |
- | encounter the particular need which it can satisfy. Thus the use | + | independent of all social forms – and an eternal necessity of nature for the |
- | values of commodities //become// use values by a mutual exchange of | + | sake of mediating the material interchange between man and nature (i.e., human |
- | places: they pass from the hands of those for whom they were | + | life).” From the first chapter of the first German edition of // |
- | means of exchange into the hands of those for whom they serve as | + | Albert Dragstedt, //Value: Studies By Karl Marx//, New Park Publications, |
- | consumer goods. Only as a result of this universal // | + | London, 1976, pp. 7--40.)) From this general point of view, the determination as |
- | commodities does the labour contained in them become useful | + | use value “lies outside the sphere of investigation of political economy.”((MECW |
- | labour." | + | 29, p. 252. This is further developed on p. 270.)) Marx therefore discusses the |
+ | concept of use value primarily from the point of view of present social | ||
+ | relations | ||
+ | producers of commodities”,((MECW 35, p. 361)) the division of labour | ||
+ | about by the purchase and sale of the products of different branches of | ||
+ | industry”((MECW 35, p. 360)) and where the products are consumed not by the | ||
+ | producers themselves but by “consumers”. In order to be saleable, i.e. to | ||
+ | function as a // | ||
+ | useful to some buyer.((“Whoever directly satisfies his wants with the produce of | ||
+ | his own labour, creates, indeed, use values, but not commodities. In order to | ||
+ | produce the latter, he must not only produce use values, but use values for | ||
+ | others, social use values.” MECW 35, p. 51)) The product of labour is //not use | ||
+ | value for the producer//; its use value emerges | ||
+ | buyer on the market.((“To //become// a use value, the commodity must encounter | ||
+ | the particular need which it can satisfy. Thus the use values of commodities | ||
+ | //become// use values by a mutual exchange of places: they pass from the hands | ||
+ | of those for whom they were means of exchange into the hands of those for whom | ||
+ | they serve as consumer goods. Only as a result of this universal // | ||
+ | of commodities does the labour contained in them become useful labour.” MECW 29, | ||
+ | p. 283)) Finally, the use value only exists as an object for consumption and “is | ||
+ | realised only in the process of consumption.”((MECW 29, p. 269)) | ||
==== 2.2 The form of value ==== | ==== 2.2 The form of value ==== | ||
- | The seller's use of the product of labour comes from what it can fetch by being exchanged -- its //exchange value// | + | The seller’s use of the product of labour comes from what it can fetch by being |
- | only so far as it is an exchange value.)) In this function it presents itself in a //value form// that is separate from its bodily form.(("Commodities come into the world in the shape of use values, articles, or goods, such as iron, linen, corn, etc. This is their plain, homely, | + | exchanged -- its //exchange value// |
- | bodily form. They are, however, commodities, | + | value becomes a means of exchange. Here the commodity is a use value for its |
+ | owner only in so far as it is an exchange value.)) In this function it presents | ||
+ | itself in a //value form// that is separate from its bodily form.((“Commodities | ||
+ | come into the world in the shape of use values, articles, or goods, such as | ||
+ | iron, linen, corn, etc. This is their plain, homely, bodily form. They are, | ||
+ | however, commodities, | ||
+ | utility, and, at the same time, depositories of value. They manifest themselves | ||
+ | therefore as commodities, | ||
+ | they have two forms, a physical or natural form, and a value form.” MECW 35, | ||
+ | p. 57.)) | ||
- | What interests us in this section is not any actual exchange of commodities -- especially not barter where commodity is exchanged directly for commodity -- but //commodity value// | + | What interests us in this section is not any actual exchange of commodities -- |
+ | especially not barter where commodity is exchanged directly for commodity -- but | ||
+ | //the expression of commodity value// | ||
+ | form of money through the price form. This form is complicated, however, | ||
+ | requires its own explanation. We shall therefore begin by ignoring money and | ||
+ | instead investigate | ||
+ | commodities. | ||
- | The value form of a product of labour is completely absent when you look at it in isolation. Then only its bodily form, which gives it its specific properties of utility, appears. | + | The value form of a product of labour is completely absent when you look at it |
+ | in isolation. Then only its bodily form, which gives it its specific properties | ||
+ | of utility, appears. | ||
+ | commodity-body, however, then it becomes apparent that the product of labour has | ||
+ | something more to it. | ||
- | Below follows a summary and interpretation of Marx's value form investigation, | + | Below follows a summary and interpretation of Marx’s value form investigation, |
+ | from the simple form of value to the price form, without going into value as | ||
+ | such. We assume, like Marx, that the commodity values are equal quantities, but | ||
+ | what is important is that they are commensurable. | ||
Line 55: | Line 157: | ||
> 20 yards of linen are worth 1 coat. | > 20 yards of linen are worth 1 coat. | ||
- | Here we see on the one hand that 20 yards of linen //is worth as much as// 1 coat. On the other hand the value of 20 yards of linen is expressed in the use value of some other arbitrary product of labour, a coat. The latter is // | + | Here we see on the one hand a quantitative relation. On the other hand the value |
+ | of 20 yards of linen is expressed in the use value of some other arbitrary | ||
+ | product of labour, a coat. The latter is // | ||
+ | use value but still interchangeable with the linen and therefore | ||
+ | equal to it. The relation expresses the commodity of the seller, 20 yards of | ||
+ | linen, as specific //coat value//; its value appears in the shape of a | ||
+ | coat. This may sound mysterious, but if we are to ignore the price form for now, | ||
+ | then we cannot say that they both cost the same amount of money. We have only | ||
+ | these two commodities -- two use values and a relation of exchange that | ||
+ | expresses some kind of value. The linen does not need the coat in order to see | ||
+ | that it is linen, but when the relation to the coat shows to the linen that it | ||
+ | is something more than just linen, i.e. a useful thing, then this happens in the | ||
+ | form of exchangeability for coats; it does not know anything else. | ||
=== 2.2.2 Developed form of value === | === 2.2.2 Developed form of value === | ||
- | In the simple form of value, the value of linen was expressed | + | In the simple form of value, the value of linen was indeed |
- | //in general// but only in relation to some arbitrary commodity separate from itself.((See | + | an insufficient manner, for coat value is not an expression of value or |
+ | interchangeability | ||
+ | commodity separate from itself.((See | ||
+ | Band des Kapitals”, | ||
+ | of exchange relation to //all other use values//, however, | ||
+ | overcome and a new, developed form of value enters into it place. | ||
< | < | ||
Line 71: | Line 190: | ||
</ | </ | ||
- | When the product of labour 20 yards of linen is valued in the bodily forms of all other commodities, | + | When the product of labour 20 yards of linen is valued in the bodily forms of |
+ | all other commodities, | ||
+ | corn-value, etc. Here, the linen presents itself as interchangeable for every | ||
+ | other commodity, but its expression is complicated and ungainly because the | ||
+ | product of labour valued is placed next to “a many-coloured mosaic of disparate | ||
+ | and independent expressions of value.”((MECW 35, p. 74)) In addition, the | ||
+ | expression of value grows longer over time as new types of commodities | ||
+ | the world. | ||
=== 2.2.3 General form of value === | === 2.2.3 General form of value === | ||
- | If, at this point, the expression is reversed and we let the commodities individually be valued in linen, this new limitation is superseded. | + | If, at this point, the expression is reversed and we let the commodities |
+ | individually be valued in linen, this new limitation is superseded. | ||
< | < | ||
Line 88: | Line 215: | ||
</ | </ | ||
- | Now the coats, tea, coffee, etc. each receive a //simple// as well as a //common// expression of value -- in the shape of linen. This does not apply to the linen itself, but the body of the linen serves as a value mirror to all other commodities.(("By counting as //the form of value// of all other commodities the //natural form// of the body of the commodity linen is //the form of its property of counting equally// (// | + | Now the coats, tea, coffee, etc. each receive a //simple// as well as a |
- | Karl Marx, "The Value-Form: | + | //common// expression of value -- in the shape of linen. This does not apply to |
- | Appendix to the 1st German edition of Capital, Volume 1", //Capital and Class//, No. 4 Spring 1978 [1867], pp. 130--150 < | + | the linen itself, but the body of the linen serves as a value mirror to all |
- | Appendix to the 1st German edition of Capital, Volume 1", //Capital and Class//, No. 4 Spring 1978 [1867], pp. 130--150 < | + | other commodities.((“By counting as //the form of value// of all other |
+ | commodities the //natural form// of the body of the commodity linen is //the | ||
+ | form of its property of counting equally// (// | ||
+ | exchangeability with all elements of the world of commodities// | ||
+ | form// is therefore at the same time //its general social form// | ||
+ | “The Value-Form: Appendix to the 1st German edition of Capital, Volume 1”, | ||
+ | //Capital and Class//, No. 4 Spring 1978 [1867], pp. 130--150 | ||
+ | < | ||
+ | the specific role here assumed by the linen //general equivalent// | ||
+ | commodity presents itself as exchange value in general.((In the first edition of | ||
+ | //Capital I// -- subsequently omitted -- Marx makes the obscure statement that | ||
+ | here “the form of value corresponds with the concept of value”. Karl Marx, “The | ||
+ | Value-Form: Appendix to the 1st German edition of Capital, Volume 1”, //Capital | ||
+ | and Class//, No. 4 Spring 1978 [1867], pp. 130--150 | ||
+ | < | ||
+ | p. 43)) This is also the final form of value if one disregards its specific | ||
+ | expression (e.g. linen). | ||
=== 2.2.4 The money form === | === 2.2.4 The money form === | ||
- | With the general form of value, the thing expressing | + | With the general form of value, the thing that expresses |
+ | be chosen arbitrarily. In practice, however, the role as universal | ||
+ | established by custom. Historically it came to be awarded | ||
+ | of their specific properties, | ||
+ | which can be formed into arbitrarily large pieces and fused together again | ||
+ | without being destroyed.((MECW 35, p. 100)) | ||
< | < | ||
Line 111: | Line 259: | ||
</ | </ | ||
- | By switching places between the 20 yards of linen and 2 ounces of gold, all commodities (except gold) can still be expressed in a simple and for all other commodities common form of value. Here, moreover, we are faced with a relationship that is somewhat more consistent with history. | + | By switching places between the 20 yards of linen and 2 ounces of gold, all |
+ | commodities (except gold) can still be expressed in a simple and for all other | ||
+ | commodities common form of value. | ||
- | > Now the // | + | > Now the // |
- | Appendix to the 1st German edition of Capital, Volume 1", //Capital and Class//, No. 4 Spring 1978 [1867], pp. 130--150 < | + | Appendix to the 1st German edition of Capital, Volume 1”, //Capital and Class//, No. 4 Spring 1978 [1867], pp. 130--150 < |
> The exchange value of commodities thus expressed in the form of universal equivalence and simultaneously as the degree of this equivalence in terms of a specific commodity, that is a single equation to which commodities are compared with a specific commodity, constitutes // | > The exchange value of commodities thus expressed in the form of universal equivalence and simultaneously as the degree of this equivalence in terms of a specific commodity, that is a single equation to which commodities are compared with a specific commodity, constitutes // | ||
- | In its role as equivalent, a money commodity cannot express its own value, but if cast into developed form (2.2.2), its value appears in relation to all other commodities in definite proportions (2 ounces of gold = 20 yards of linen or 1 coat, etc.) Thus, the expression appears if you read commodity prices backwards.((MECW 35, pp. 104--105)) Marx did not himself discuss the possibility of something other than a product of labour serving as measure of value and expressing commodity prices in a society. In the 1870s, the most important currencies were tied to the gold and it was thus natural to assume gold to function as money-commodity throughout // | + | In its role as equivalent, a money commodity cannot express its own value, but |
- | Perspective”, | + | if cast into developed form (2.2.2), its value appears in relation to all other |
- | (red.), //Marx’s Theory of Money: Modern Appraisals//, | + | commodities in definite proportions (2 ounces of gold = 20 yards of linen or 1 |
+ | coat, etc.) Thus, the expression appears if you read commodity prices | ||
+ | backwards.((MECW 35, pp. 104--105)) | ||
- | There is an important point to be made by looking at exchange value from the simple form of value to the price form: The analysis shows that as soon as products of labour start to relate themselves to each other as commodities, | + | By the early 1870s, the most important currencies were tied to the gold and it |
- | clearly comprehending the universal equivalent form, and as a necessary corollary, the general form of value, form C. The latter is deducible from form B, the expanded form of value, the essential component | + | was therefore natural for Marx to assume gold to function as money-commodity |
- | element of which, we saw, is form A, 20 yards of linen = 1 coat or | + | throughout // |
- | x commodity A = y commodity B. The simple commodity form is | + | which in turn was tied to gold.)) Today, the gold standard is abolished, but |
- | therefore the germ of the money form." | + | states can generally still uphold stable commodity prices thanks to their power |
+ | of taxation and direct ownership of natural and industrial resources.((See | ||
+ | Duncan Foley, “Marx’s Theory of Money in Historical Perspective”, | ||
+ | Moseley (red.), //Marx’s Theory of Money: Modern Appraisals//, | ||
+ | also the | ||
+ | [[https:// | ||
+ | cent inflation target]] by the European Central Bank.)) Thus, it is not | ||
+ | necessary for a specific product of labour to serve as measure of value and | ||
+ | express commodity prices in a society, but this // | ||
+ | necessary and must be grounded in value relations. | ||
+ | |||
+ | There is an important point to be made by looking at exchange value from the | ||
+ | simple form of value to the price form: The analysis shows that as soon as | ||
+ | products of labour start to relate themselves to each other as commodities, | ||
+ | money form is a logical development. Commodity exchange without money is | ||
+ | therefore an absurdity.((“The difficulty in forming a concept of the money form, | ||
+ | consists in clearly comprehending the universal equivalent form, and as a | ||
+ | necessary corollary, the general form of value, form C. The latter is deducible | ||
+ | from form B, the expanded form of value, the essential component element of | ||
+ | which, we saw, is form A, 20 yards of linen = 1 coat or x commodity A = y | ||
+ | commodity B. The simple commodity form is therefore the germ of the money form.” | ||
+ | MECW 35, p. 81)) | ||
==== 2.3 Value ==== | ==== 2.3 Value ==== | ||
- | The value form has now been analysed for itself. The next step is to determine the substance and magnitude of value. | + | The value form has now been analysed for itself. The next step is to determine |
+ | the substance and magnitude of value. | ||
=== 2.3.1 The common third === | === 2.3.1 The common third === | ||
- | In the foregoing analysis of the value forms of the labour product, nothing was said about "what lies beneath these forms."((MECW 35, p. 91)) But what is the //value content// that is equal in two mutually interchangeable commodities that belongs to each of them // | + | In the foregoing analysis of the value forms of the labour product, nothing was |
+ | said about “what lies beneath these forms.”((MECW 35, p. 91)) But what is the | ||
+ | //value content// that is equal in two mutually interchangeable commodities that | ||
+ | belongs to each of them // | ||
- | For Samuel Bailey, no such a thing could exist.((MECW 32, pp. 312--314.)) According to him, Ricardo correctly spoke of // | + | For Samuel Bailey, no such thing could exist.((MECW 32, pp. 312--314.)) |
- | // | + | According to him, Ricardo correctly spoke of // |
+ | mistakenly came to treat value as something // | ||
+ | labour expended upon the production of two commodities, | ||
+ | this labour quantity evidently may change for either one of them. If, for | ||
+ | example, the value of commodity A increases, this only means that //the value is | ||
+ | estimated// in exchange for B, C and so on in new proportions.((MECW 32, | ||
+ | p. 316)) But, Marx replies, | ||
> To // | > To // | ||
- | The value of a commodity, Marx continues, is furthermore not something absolute but | + | The value of a commodity, Marx continues, is furthermore not something absolute |
+ | but | ||
- | > is to such an extent relative that when the labour time required for its reproduction changes, its value changes, although the labour time really contained in the commodity has remained unaltered.((MECW 32, p. 316. Here Marx refers to the individual commodity. What it "actually contains", both in terms of the footprint of the labour expressed in the body of the commodity and the labour time actually expended during its production, cannot change as long as the use value remains unaltered. If the // | + | > is to such an extent relative that when the labour time required for its reproduction changes, its value changes, although the labour time really contained in the commodity has remained unaltered.((MECW 32, p. 316. Here Marx refers to the individual commodity. What it “actually contains”, both in terms of the footprint of the labour expressed in the body of the commodity and the labour time actually expended during its production, cannot change as long as the use value remains unaltered. If the // |
- | Marx thus subscribes, albeit critically, to the tradition which holds that the magnitude of value, or the proportions in which commodities are exchanged for one another, depends on the necessary quantity of labour.((Or rather, the labour time required at any one time, on the average, to produce a new commodity. See e.g. MECW 28, p. 533.)) But how can A, a book, be equal to B, a certain quantity of coal, through their relation to labour which is //the same//, when we know that it is qualitatively // | + | Marx thus subscribes, albeit critically, to the tradition which holds that the |
+ | magnitude of value, or the proportions in which commodities are exchanged for | ||
+ | one another, depends on the necessary quantity of labour.((Or rather, the labour | ||
+ | time required at any one time, on the average, to produce a new commodity. See | ||
+ | e.g. MECW 28, p. 533.)) But how can A, a book, be equal to B, a certain quantity | ||
+ | of coal, through their relation to labour which is //the same//, when we know | ||
+ | that it is qualitatively // | ||
+ | commodity-bodies book and coal, respectively? | ||
- | We have seen (2.2) that commodities as useful objects are created by labour. From this aspect, the labour that is expressed or leaves its mark on the product is simply | + | We have seen (2.2) that commodities as useful objects are created by |
+ | labour. From this aspect, the labour that is expressed or leaves its mark on the | ||
+ | product is simply | ||
+ | from //value// and the body of the commodity as such cannot be considered equal | ||
+ | to either money or any other type of commodity. The qualitative differences of | ||
+ | the kinds of labour that created them are thus a condition of existence for | ||
+ | commodity exchange as such.((“Coats are not exchanged for coats, one use value | ||
+ | is not exchanged for another of the same kind.” MECW 35, p. 52)) | ||
> In a community, the produce of which in general takes the form of commodities, | > In a community, the produce of which in general takes the form of commodities, | ||
- | When production is based // | + | When production is based // |
- | niche in the social division of labour, so that the individual | + | labour and private property, it can be organised neither communally nor as |
+ | islands of self-sufficiency. A bridge is needed between the social and | ||
+ | individual spheres of the system. The various enterprises must, to be viable, | ||
+ | find their niche in the social division of labour, so that the individual | ||
products of labour can be recognised as subsets of the total social | products of labour can be recognised as subsets of the total social | ||
- | product. They do that only by appearing as commodities and by being valued in money. //Different kinds// of products of labour can then be considered //equally good// from a social point of view. And when they have been realised in money (i.e. sold) the value equivalent in the seller's hand does not reveal if it was weaving, tailoring or some other kind of labour that had shown itself to be a valuable contribution to society. Therefore, leaving aside for now those commodities where the price is far removed from the labour expended upon their production, we can | + | product. They do that only by appearing as commodities and by being valued in |
- | say that a sum of money is labour in object form where the definite useful character is disregarded, | + | money.((“[I]t is only on the basis of capitalistic production that products take |
+ | the general and predominant form of commodities” MECW 35, p. 582.)) | ||
+ | kinds// of products of labour can then be considered //equally good// from a | ||
+ | social point of view. And when they have been realised in money (i.e. sold) the | ||
+ | value equivalent in the seller’s hand does not reveal if it was weaving, | ||
+ | tailoring or some other kind of labour that had shown itself to be a valuable | ||
+ | contribution to society. Therefore, leaving aside for now those commodities | ||
+ | where the price is far removed from the labour expended upon their production, | ||
+ | we can say that a sum of money is labour in object form where the definite | ||
+ | useful character is disregarded, | ||
- | Here we seem to have discovered the common third thing, which, however, is not | + | Here we seem to have discovered the common third thing, which, however, is not a |
- | a thing in the ordinary sense, but that which remains of a commodity after one has abstracted | + | thing in the ordinary sense, but that which remains of a commodity after one has |
+ | abstracted | ||
> from all that which makes it to be really a thing. Any objectivity of human labour which is itself abstract (i.e., without any additional quality and content) is necessarily an abstract objectivity – a //thing of thought// | > from all that which makes it to be really a thing. Any objectivity of human labour which is itself abstract (i.e., without any additional quality and content) is necessarily an abstract objectivity – a //thing of thought// | ||
- | One can //think of// "labour in general" | + | One can //think of// “labour in general” in the physiological sense since the |
+ | human brain, muscles and so on are to some extent always consumed in the labour | ||
+ | process, and requires rest, food and so on to be recreated, | ||
+ | MECW 28, pp. 226--227.)) but it is not the individually perceived effort that | ||
+ | determines the proportions under which different commodities are | ||
+ | exchanged.((There //is// a connection between physical and mental exploitation | ||
+ | of the human organism and the value substance itself -- otherwise commodity | ||
+ | value would not be limited to products of labour --, but it is impossible to | ||
+ | estimate value creating labour by measuring for example the heart rate or the | ||
+ | calorie consumption. First of all, the effort itself is only value creating if | ||
+ | it is shown to be (or validated as) useful to others and otherwise simply a | ||
+ | waste of energy. Secondly, different kinds of labour differ with regard to the | ||
+ | //kinds// of bodily and mental abilities that are actually put to use, and | ||
+ | therefore they cannot constitute the common third. For the latter point, see | ||
+ | Michael Heinrich, //How to read Marx’s Capital//, 2021, p. 84. Human labour pure | ||
+ | and simple must therefore be an abstraction also from specific physiological | ||
+ | processes.)) On the contrary, these are “established by a social process behind | ||
+ | the back of the producers, and appear to them consequently as given by | ||
+ | tradition.”((Albert Dragstedt, //Value: Studies By Karl Marx//, New Park | ||
+ | Publications, | ||
+ | pp. 7--40. < | ||
+ | And not simply any social process: | ||
- | > The equalisation of the most different kinds of labour can be the result only of an abstraction from their inequalities, | + | > The equalisation of the most different kinds of labour can be the result only of an abstraction from their inequalities, |
=== 2.3.2 The measure and double character of labour === | === 2.3.2 The measure and double character of labour === | ||
- | The commensurability between different kinds of commodities is the result of equating // | + | The commensurability between different kinds of commodities is the result of |
- | The definite proportions are the expression of a // | + | equating // |
+ | proportions are the expression of a // | ||
+ | expended. | ||
- | The value form, as we have seen, represents value in //bodies of commodities//, | + | The value form, as we have seen, represents value in //bodies of commodities//, |
- | //tons of// iron, gold and so on. If one of the bodies, for example gold, occupies the position of general equivalent, then all commodity values can be expressed in definite physical quantities of one and the same material. Money value is objectified labour but not labour itself. How is the latter measured? | + | and in units that are suitable for these -- //numbers of// coats, //yards of// |
+ | linen, //tons of// iron, gold and so on. If one of the bodies, for example gold, | ||
+ | occupies the position of general equivalent, then all commodity values can be | ||
+ | expressed in definite physical quantities of one and the same material. Money | ||
+ | value is objectified labour but not labour itself. How is the latter measured? | ||
> The quantity of labour itself is measured by its //temporal duration// and the // | > The quantity of labour itself is measured by its //temporal duration// and the // | ||
- | In order to use time as a measure of abstract commodity-producing labour, | + | In order to use time as a measure of abstract commodity-producing labour, all |
- | all hours or days of labour must be equivalent, otherwise they cannot be given a common expression of value and price, and labour productivity (the concrete output per unit of time) cannot be compared.((”It is often difficult to ascertain the proportion between two different sorts of labour. The time spent in two different sorts of work will not always alone determine this proportion. The different degrees of hardship endured, and of ingenuity exercised, must likewise be taken into account. There may be more labour in an hour’s hard work than in two hour’s easy business; or in an hour’s application to a trade which it cost ten years’ labour to learn, than in a month’s industry at an ordinary and obvious employment. But it is not easy to find any accurate measure either of hardship or ingenuity.” Adam Smith, //The Wealth of Nations// (New York 1991), p. 27.)) Marx himself mentioned as one of his unique contributions that he was the first to critically demonstrate | + | hours or days of labour must be equivalent, otherwise they cannot be given a |
- | //the double character of labour//, that what appears in commodities as a //double form// | + | common expression of value and price, and labour productivity (the concrete |
- | -- use value and exchange-value -- is represented on the one hand by a concrete | + | output per unit of time) cannot be compared.((“It is often difficult to |
- | labour and an abstract value-forming labour, i.e. two aspects of one and the same labour.((See MECW 35, pp. 51–56 or the corresponding pages in //Le Capital//, pp. 25–29.)) | + | ascertain the proportion between two different sorts of labour. The time spent |
- | However, such labour is itself an abstraction -- //simple average labour//. It "varies in character in different countries and at different times, but in | + | in two different sorts of work will not always alone determine this |
- | a particular society it is given."((MECW 35, p. 54. On the contrary, Smith believed that labour is equal and | + | proportion. The different degrees of hardship endured, and of ingenuity |
- | comparable between entirely different periods of history. Cf. //The Wealth of Nations//, pp. 31--32.)) Simple labour (and Marx explicitly refers to the English term //unskilled labour//) can be performed with only basic skills.((According to the ISCO-08 system, e.g. "Vehicle, Window, Laundry and Other Hand Cleaning Workers", "Food Preparation Assistants" | + | exercised, must likewise be taken into account. There may be more labour in an |
- | -jobb-internationellt]]> | + | hour’s hard work than in two hour’s easy business; or in an hour’s application |
+ | to a trade which it cost ten years’ labour to learn, than in a month’s industry | ||
+ | at an ordinary and obvious employment. But it is not easy to find any accurate | ||
+ | measure either of hardship or ingenuity.” Adam Smith, //The Wealth of Nations// | ||
+ | (New York 1991), p. 27.)) Marx himself mentioned as one of his unique | ||
+ | contributions that he was the first to critically demonstrate //the double | ||
+ | character of labour//, that what //appears// in commodities as a //double form// | ||
+ | -- use value and exchange-value -- is represented on the one hand by a concrete | ||
+ | useful | ||
+ | the same labour.((See MECW 35, pp. 51–56 or the corresponding pages in //Le | ||
+ | Capital//, pp. 25–29.)) | ||
+ | //simple average labour//. It “varies in character in different countries and at | ||
+ | different times, but in a particular society it is given.”((MECW 35, p. 54. On | ||
+ | the contrary, Smith believed that labour is equal and comparable between | ||
+ | entirely different periods of history. Cf. //The Wealth of Nations//, | ||
+ | pp. 31--32.)) Simple labour (and Marx explicitly refers to the English term | ||
+ | //unskilled labour//) can be performed with only basic skills.((According to the | ||
+ | ISCO-08 system, e.g. “Vehicle, Window, Laundry and Other Hand Cleaning Workers”, | ||
+ | “Food Preparation Assistants” and “Labourers in Mining, Construction, | ||
+ | Manufacturing and Transport”, belong to “Major Group 9: Elementary | ||
+ | Occupations”. See “ISCO-08 Structure, index correspondence with ISCO-88” | ||
+ | < | ||
+ | of countries, 8.5 per cent of occupations belonged to this group in 2021. In | ||
+ | Sweden, it was just 4.2 per cent (// | ||
+ | < | ||
+ | -jobb-internationellt]]> | ||
+ | average intensity. That which is performed under higher or lower intensity must | ||
+ | be multiplied by a factor to be transformed into simple labour. An hour of | ||
+ | labour of say 20 per cent higher-than-average intensity that produces | ||
+ | cent more use values of the same quality is then multiplied by 1.2. If this | ||
+ | higher level of intensity becomes the norm in all branches of industry, however, | ||
+ | then the factor must be reduced to 1, i.e. loses its significance, | ||
+ | can still be regarded as more (or less) intensive | ||
+ | application of the law of value”,((//Le Capital//, p. 453)) corresponding to | ||
+ | greater (or smaller) amount of money. | ||
- | Different kinds of labour also differ in // | + | Different kinds of labour also differ in // |
- | assume that one part of the work is carried out by apprentices, | + | the magnitude of value. If we take a tailor’s shop as an example, we can assume |
- | the journeymen, who are fully trained in the trade, will on average get more done than the apprentices in the same period of time and the master probably even more. When differences in work performance is not due to labour-saving // | + | that one part of the work is carried out by apprentices, |
- | //skill//, i.e. a subjective factor, then the effect is the same as if work was performed with different | + | and a third by the master tailor himself. Even if everyone works equally hard, |
- | intensity. There are tasks, however, that neither the apprentice nor the journeyman but only the master tailor //can// perform. As long as these constitute //necessary labour// there will be a need for specially qualified labour. | + | the journeymen, who are fully trained in the trade, will on average get more |
+ | done than the apprentices in the same period of time and the master probably | ||
+ | even more. When differences in work performance is not due to labour-saving | ||
+ | // | ||
+ | //skill//, i.e. a subjective factor, then the effect is the same as if work was | ||
+ | performed with different intensity.((See //Le Capital//, in MEGA II.7, p. 27, | ||
+ | MECW 35, p. 54 and MECW 33, pp. 384--385.)) | ||
+ | neither the apprentice nor the journeyman but only the master tailor //can// | ||
+ | perform. As long as these constitute //necessary labour// there will be a need | ||
+ | for such specially qualified labour. | ||
- | Education or experience that contributes to a higher production output | + | Education or experience that contributes to a higher production output |
- | efficiently.(("All labour of a higher or more complicated character than average labour is expenditure of labour power | + | counted as more labour per hour, so to speak, but only if the labour power is |
- | of a more costly kind, labour power whose production has cost more | + | used efficiently.((“All labour of a higher or more complicated character than |
- | time and labour, and which therefore has a higher value, than unskilled or simple labour power. This power being of higher value, its consumption is labour of a higher class, labour that creates in equal times | + | average labour is expenditure of labour power of a more costly kind, labour |
- | proportionally higher values than unskilled labour does." | + | power whose production has cost more time and labour, and which therefore has a |
- | the journeyman and the master tailor not only receive different amounts of remuneration, | + | higher value, than unskilled or simple labour power. This power being of higher |
- | the same time. So-called skilled labour | + | value, its consumption is labour of a higher class, labour that creates in equal |
- | has a higher, refined //use value//, just as dead things can have it (stainless | + | times proportionally higher values than unskilled labour does.” MECW 35, |
- | versus ordinary steel, for example), and if its particular properties are socially necessary, all the labour that is socially necessary for its | + | p. 208. A master tailor creates more value exactly in his role as tailor master |
- | reproduction must be included in its value.((See MECW 28, p. 249.)) In the case of the price of labour power specifically, | + | but not as a hand packer of finished trousers.)) So the apprentice, the |
- | other articles necessary to perform labour of a particular kind, but it must also be sufficient for the production of the worker's substitute.((See MECW 35, p. | + | journeyman and the master tailor not only receive different amounts of |
- | 182 and MECW 30, pp. 42–50. In a country like Sweden, highly qualified workers receive a relatively | + | remuneration, |
+ | period of time. Labour power capable of performing //complex labour// has a | ||
+ | higher, refined //use value//, just as dead things can have it (stainless versus | ||
+ | ordinary steel, for example), and if its particular properties are socially | ||
+ | necessary, | ||
+ | must be included in its value.((See MECW 28, p. 249.)) In the case of the price | ||
+ | of labour power specifically, | ||
+ | shelter, clothing and other articles necessary to perform labour of a particular | ||
+ | kind, but it must also be sufficient for the production of the worker’s | ||
+ | substitute.((See MECW 35, p. 182 and MECW 30, pp. 42–50. In a country like | ||
+ | Sweden, highly qualified workers receive a relatively | ||
+ | compared with other developed countries, e.g. the United States. An important | ||
+ | reason for this is that in the former case, education and healthcare are | ||
+ | financed by taxes to a much greater degree and must therefore not be paid for by | ||
+ | the worker directly.)) | ||
=== 2.3.3 Individual and social value === | === 2.3.3 Individual and social value === | ||
- | > The real value of a commodity is […] not its individual value, but its social value; that is to say, the real value is not measured | + | > Properly speaking, all products |
- | > The labour time socially necessary is that required to produce an article under the normal conditions of production, and with the average degree of skill and intensity prevalent at the time. The introduction of power-looms into England probably reduced by one-half the labour required to weave a given quantity of yarn into cloth. The hand-loom weavers, as a matter of fact, continued to require the same time as before; but for all that, the product of one hour of their labour represented after the change only half an hour's social labour, and consequently fell to one-half its former value. | + | When Marx speaks of commodity value in general, i.e. without further |
- | > | + | specification, |
- | > We see then that that which determines the magnitude of the value of any article is the amount of labour socially necessary, or the labour time socially necessary for its production. Each individual commodity, in this connection, is to be considered as an average sample of its class.((MECW 35, p. 49)) | + | determined by the labour time required on average for the production of one |
+ | unit.((“The real value of a commodity is […] not its individual value, but its | ||
+ | social value; that is to say, the real value is not measured by the labour | ||
+ | that the article in each individual case costs the producer, but by the labour | ||
+ | time socially required for its production.” (MECW 35, p. 322); “The labour time | ||
+ | socially necessary is that required to produce an article under the normal | ||
+ | conditions of production, and with the average degree of skill and intensity | ||
+ | prevalent at the time. The introduction of power-looms into England probably | ||
+ | reduced by one-half the labour required to weave a given quantity of yarn into | ||
+ | cloth. The hand-loom weavers, as a matter of fact, continued to require the same | ||
+ | time as before; but for all that, the product of one hour of their labour | ||
+ | represented after the change only half an hour’s social labour, and consequently | ||
+ | fell to one-half its former value. We see then that that which determines the | ||
+ | magnitude of the value of any article is the amount of labour socially | ||
+ | necessary, or the labour time socially necessary for its production. Each | ||
+ | individual commodity, in this connection, is to be considered as an average | ||
+ | sample of its class.” (MECW 35, p. 49).)) This //general// (social) | ||
+ | determination cannot come from nothing, however, but is itself determined //with | ||
+ | regard to// the // | ||
+ | usually a long range of independent production processes, each of which requires | ||
+ | different amounts of labour to produce commodities of one and the same kind, and | ||
+ | it is therefore analytically useful to also speak of their // | ||
+ | values. When these goods exist on the market they have //the same value// and | ||
+ | also //the same price// (which may be different from the former) if regarded as | ||
+ | //identical from the point of view of use value//. In order to calculate, in a | ||
+ | particular case, the labour expended in the production of a commodity, we must | ||
+ | therefore take the total quantity of labour consumed individually -- both dead | ||
+ | and living labour -- and divide it by the volume of production. | ||
- | > Properly speaking, all products | + | The dead labour // |
+ | of its respective components during production, including the used up raw | ||
+ | materials, waste, wear and tear as well as depreciation | ||
+ | capital is the part of capital advanced that can be reused over multiple periods | ||
+ | of production, e.g. machines | ||
+ | labour power, etc.) is called circulating capital. See //Capital, Volume 2//, | ||
+ | department 2.)) None of this can be measured | ||
+ | production where these products are expended as means of production, but we can | ||
+ | assume a labour quantity corresponding | ||
+ | because the latter represents the number of simple hours of labour required by | ||
+ | the producer to //acquire// the means of production, regardless of what may be | ||
+ | socially necessary to // | ||
+ | Capital// (Lanham 2006), p. 34. This assumption is part of the temporal | ||
+ | single-system interpretation (TSSI) which is a reading of //Capital// that | ||
+ | avoids the so-called transformation problem.)) | ||
- | The //general// (social) determination cannot come from nothing, | + | Let us take coat production as an example. We assume that all producers buy |
- | is itself determined //with regard to// the // | + | means of production at the same average market price but that there exist |
- | circumstances. In fact, there is generally | + | individual differences |
- | production processes, each of which requires different amounts of labour | + | of production. In this situation, the producer who has a particularly |
+ | resource-efficient process can make do with relatively few yards of the raw | ||
+ | material linen and thus transfer a relatively smaller amount | ||
+ | product than the competitors. The //per-unit price// of the means of production | ||
+ | is therefore given in advance, i.e. socially determined, but the quantity | ||
+ | is determined by technical | ||
+ | individual firm. | ||
- | The dead labour | + | Also labour |
- | raw materials, waste, wear and tear as well as depreciation | + | assumed to represent |
- | //Reclaiming Marx’s Capital// (Lanham 2006), p. 34. This assumption is part of the temporal single-system interpretation (TSSI) which is a reading | + | subsistence. The size of the salary may differ depending on whether the labour |
+ | capacity is of a simpler or more complicated kind, if for example it is that of | ||
+ | a journeyman or master tailor. During | ||
+ | consumed, just like the raw materials, etc., but in contrast with the latter the | ||
+ | labour power involved does not //transfer// its value to the product, but its | ||
+ | //labour// | ||
+ | new value covers | ||
+ | //surplus value//.((The wage relation does not affect | ||
+ | but only its division between worker and non-worker. Someone who produces | ||
+ | commodities by employing their own means of production | ||
+ | -- use value and value, including surplus value -- but the laws of competition | ||
+ | will make sure that the amount | ||
+ | individually | ||
+ | hours, days, etc, but not without an estimation | ||
+ | complexity as well as a conversion into simple hours of labour. It has already | ||
+ | been mentioned however | ||
+ | and the value contribution of living labour is therefore expressed in the price | ||
+ | of the product. | ||
- | Let us take coat production as an example. We assume that all producers buy means of production at the same average market price but that there exist individual differences with regard to the relative efficiency of the processes of production. In this situation, the producer who has a particularly resource-efficient process can make do with relatively few yards of the raw material linen and thus transfer a relatively smaller amount of value to the product than the competitors. The //per-unit price// of the means of production is therefore given by advance, i.e. socially determined, but the quantity is determined by technical and organisational conditions at the level of the individual firm. | + | Let us now look at how, on the basis of the specific cases, we can arrive at a |
- | + | general determination, | |
- | Also labour power is purchased at a socially determined price that can be assumed to represent the amount necessary to acquire the necessary means of subsistence. The size of the salary may differ depending on whether the labour capacity is of a simpler or more complicated kind, if for example it is that of a journeyman or master tailor. During the process of production, labour power is consumed, just like the raw materials, etc., but in contrast with the latter the labour power involved does not // | + | a general, social value. In the example below we assume social production of |
- | + | identical coats and that the entire market consists of three producers that | |
- | Let us now look at how, on the basis of the specific cases, we can arrive at | + | supply the same number of items each. This production has a number of “value |
- | a general determination, | + | contribution categories” where the sum represents a coat’s total individual |
- | articles form a general, social value.(("The point | + | value. The mean value per category represents the socially necessary quantity of |
- | of departure is not the labour of individuals considered as social | + | labour expressed in money and the sum consequently the social value.((If we had |
- | labour, but on the contrary the particular kinds of labour of | + | assumed that they supplied different quantities of commodities then the value |
- | private individuals, | + | contributions of the three producers would have had to be weighted. One such |
- | social labour only by the supersession of its original character in | + | example is provided under section 2.5.)) //The latter is the real commodity |
- | the exchange process. Universal social labour is consequently not a | + | value, since it represents the total quantity of labour divided by the total |
- | ready-made prerequisite but an emerging result." | + | quantity of articles, i.e. the amount of labour it costs society to produce one |
- | social production of identical coats and that the entire market consists of three | + | specimen of the commodity in question.// |
- | producers that supply the same number of items each. This production has | + | |
- | a number of "value contribution categories" | + | |
- | necessary quantity of labour expressed in money and the sum consequently the social value.((If we had assumed that they supplied different quantities of commodities then the value contributions of the three producers would have had to be weighted. One such example is provided under section 2.5.)) //The latter is the real commodity value, since it represents the total quantity of labour divided by the total quantity of articles, i.e. the amount of labour it costs society to produce one specimen of the commodity in question.// | + | |
^ Table 1. Individual and social coat value (pounds sterling) ^^^^^ | ^ Table 1. Individual and social coat value (pounds sterling) ^^^^^ | ||
Line 252: | Line 608: | ||
| Total | 2.08| 1.98| 1.94| 2.00| | | Total | 2.08| 1.98| 1.94| 2.00| | ||
- | None of the processes of production in our example result in an // | + | None of the processes of production in our example result in an // |
+ | value// per unit which corresponds to the //social value//; one of them is above | ||
+ | and two below the mean. Each individual coat forms material for the | ||
+ | “congelations of undifferentiated human | ||
+ | labour”((https:// | ||
+ | flows down and crystallises into the coat form that on the market is equivalent | ||
+ | to 2 ounces of gold.((“In the expression of relative value: 20 yards of linen = | ||
+ | 1 coat (or, x linen is //worth// y of coat), one must admit that the coat counts | ||
+ | only as //value// or coagulation of labour, but it is precisely through that | ||
+ | fact that the coagulation of labour counts as //coat//, and coat as the form | ||
+ | into which human labour flows in order to congeal.” Albert Dragstedt, //Value: | ||
+ | Studies By Karl Marx//, New Park Publications, | ||
+ | coat value in money is thus 2 pounds sterling. What it corresponds to in hours | ||
+ | we do not know, but under our assumption it is as many as required to produce, | ||
+ | say, 20 yards of linen.((Even if we could provide the number of man-hours and | ||
+ | the exact level of intensity and complexity for each category, e.g. time spent | ||
+ | sowing and harvesting flax, making shovels, etc. we would have difficult | ||
+ | regression problems, because a shovel embodies a certain amount of labour that | ||
+ | went into mining and processing iron, which in turn was made possible because of | ||
+ | a long series of other labour processes.)) If one would like to perform | ||
+ | calculations in labour time, however, it is possible to //assume// a monetary | ||
+ | value per hour, for example .1 pound sterling (2 shillings in Marx’s days), | ||
+ | which gives 20 simple labour hours for one coat, 20 yards of linen or 2 ounces | ||
+ | of gold.((This form of expression (money per hour) is called MELT (Monetary | ||
+ | Expression of Labour Time) and has become a popular method for converting | ||
+ | between money and labour time. “Multiplying labor-time figures by the MELT, we | ||
+ | get dollar figures; dividing dollar figures by the MELT, we get labor-time | ||
+ | figures.” Andrew Kliman, // | ||
+ | |||
+ | If we assume that the three producers represent the conditions of coat | ||
+ | production within a society, then these are reflected exactly in the value of | ||
+ | the commodity. But what if e.g. producer III -- all else being equal -- | ||
+ | withdraws its coats from the local market and sends them off to some other | ||
+ | region? The same quantity of “undifferentiated human labour” will now, so to | ||
+ | speak, flow down into two forms of coat instead of one -- one in the region of | ||
+ | production and another in the more distant geographic location. What will happen | ||
+ | to the commodity value in the first case? The answer follows by taking the mean | ||
+ | value of I and II: (2.08 + 1.98) / 2 = 2.03; it rises by 1.5 per cent.((The | ||
+ | market price will likely rise even more, because of the imbalance between supply | ||
+ | and demand, which, for reasons of space, we cannot go into here. It should be | ||
+ | noted, however, that //value// in this case has nothing to do with //market | ||
+ | value//. The latter is a //price// for which a commodity may be sold if it lies | ||
+ | within the interval of (the individual values of) those producing under the most | ||
+ | and the least favourable conditions (see MECW 37, pp. 177--184). A market value | ||
+ | that coincides with something other than the weighted average of the individual | ||
+ | values constitutes a “false social value”. Karl Marx, //Marx’s Economic | ||
+ | Manuscript of 1864–1865//, | ||
+ | commodity value is determined by the labour supplied by III together with all | ||
+ | other coat producers that direct their output to the more distant market. If III | ||
+ | happens to be alone here, then the (real) value of the coat is determined | ||
+ | entirely by its individual value, i.e. 1.94. This example shows that, | ||
+ | technically, | ||
+ | production of such articles within a society (producers I, II and III) but by | ||
+ | the conditions of production of those firms from which the supply on a | ||
+ | particular market originate (e.g. producers I and II only), constrained by | ||
+ | demand on the same market.((Only in this sense is value fully determined already | ||
+ | at the level of production (cf. Andrew Kliman, “On Capitalism’s Historical | ||
+ | Specificity and Price Determination: | ||
+ | // | ||
+ | political economy]]//, | ||
+ | |||
+ | The fact that the (real) value of a commodity exists on the market does not mean | ||
+ | that “the act of sale” is required to make social the labour expended upon a | ||
+ | single commodity.((Cf Patrick Murray, “Avoiding bad abstractions”, | ||
+ | // | ||
+ | political economy]]//, | ||
+ | value because its owner happens to find a buyer, i.e. because of // | ||
+ | circumstances//; | ||
+ | products of labour that can satisfy a particular social want. In other words, | ||
+ | the (social) value is always identical for identical use values. Nevertheless, | ||
+ | it is necessary to supply a finished product for the individual labour content | ||
+ | to be recognised as socially useful. The stitches performed by the average | ||
+ | tailor can therefore be considered socially useful and value producing only | ||
+ | after they have been materialised in an actual commodity (a coat), not the | ||
+ | moment they are performed. The individual labour that //was// expended in | ||
+ | production thus //becomes// recognised as social labour of a definite | ||
+ | quantity.((“The point of departure is not the labour of individuals considered | ||
+ | as social labour, but on the contrary the particular kinds of labour of private | ||
+ | individuals, | ||
+ | the supersession of its original character in the exchange process. Universal | ||
+ | social labour is consequently not a ready-made prerequisite but an emerging | ||
+ | result.” MECW 29, p. 286)) | ||
- | The coat value in money is thus 2 pounds sterling. What it corresponds to in hours | ||
- | we do not know, but under our assumption it is as many as required to produce, say, 20 yards of linen.((Even if we could provide the number of man-hours and the exact level of intensity and complexity for each | ||
- | category, e.g. time spent sowing and harvesting flax, making shovels, etc. | ||
- | we would have difficult regression problems, because a shovel embodies a certain amount of labour that went into mining and processing iron, which in turn was made possible because of a long series of other labour processes.)) If one would like to perform calculations in labour time, however, it is possible to //assume// a monetary value per hour, for example .1 pound sterling (2 shillings in Marx's days), which gives 20 simple labour hours for one coat, 20 yards of linen or 2 ounces of gold.((This form of expression | ||
- | (money per hour) is called MELT (Monetary Expression of Labour Time) | ||
- | and has become a popular method for converting between money and labour time. " | ||
- | dollar figures by the MELT, we get labor-time figures.” Andrew Kliman, | ||
- | // | ||
- | If we assume that the three producers represent the conditions of coat production within a society, then these are represented completely in the value of the commodity. Socially necessary labour time can then be derived from the technological level. But what if e.g. producer III -- all else being equal -- withdraws its coats from the local market and sends them off to some other region? The same quantity of " | ||
- | other coat producers that direct their output to the more distant market. If III happens to be alone here, then the value of the coat is determined entirely by its individual value, | ||
- | i.e. 1.94. It cannot therefore be the case that the value of a commodity is fully determined independently of the social context in which the articles are confronted with the consumers, which happens at the moment of exchange. | ||
- | This does not mean, however, that //the act of sale// -- as Patrick Murray puts it -- // | ||
==== 2.4 Production and redistribution of surplus value ==== | ==== 2.4 Production and redistribution of surplus value ==== | ||
- | Having investigated individual and social value, we shall now look closer at the components of the single | + | Having investigated individual and social value, we shall now look closer at the |
+ | components of the commodity with regard to the distinction between paid and | ||
+ | unpaid labour, as well as the latter’s redistribution based on different forms | ||
+ | of property. | ||
- | The life cycle of a single | + | The life cycle of an individual |
- | value, but is in this specific form called profit.((Profit is divided between interest and profit of enterprise and the latter category into industrial profit | + | of the cycle of money capital, M – C – M′, that is from that a sum of money (M) |
- | and commercial profit. See //Capital III//, parts 4 and 5. For the sake of simplicity, we shall in all examples assume that profit is equal to industrial profit and that the capital advanced is provided by the industrialist himself.)) | + | is invested in the two commodity classes |
+ | (C) until a value in money form (M′) is realised that is greater than the amount | ||
+ | originally advanced. Should the value not be increased, it would be irrational | ||
+ | to convert money into factors of production, since the product is made only so | ||
+ | that it can be sold. Return on capital comes from surplus value, but is in this | ||
+ | specific form called profit.((Profit is divided between interest and profit of | ||
+ | enterprise and the latter category into industrial profit and commercial | ||
+ | profit. See //Capital III//, parts 4 and 5. For the sake of simplicity, we shall | ||
+ | in all examples assume that profit is equal to industrial profit and that the | ||
+ | capital advanced is provided by the industrialist himself.)) | ||
- | We continue to use the coat industry and the producers I–III | + | We continue to use the coat industry and the producers I–III |
- | a paid part -- variable capital, //v// -- and two categories | + | the following, we borrow from Table 1 (2.3.3) but create a new |
- | representing the unpaid part -- produced surplus value, //s//, and | + | categorisation. The value of the product (individual and social) is denoted |
- | realised profit, //p//. Here we also assume conditions in which the profit's | + | // |
- | share of both the value and the price of the individual commodity | + | capital, //c//, and the materialisation of living |
- | and that all capitals | + | //n//. The latter is then divided into a paid part -- variable capital, //v// -- |
- | that differences in depreciation | + | and two categories representing the unpaid part -- produced surplus value, |
- | merely represent different degrees of efficiency with regard to fixed capital use.)) The sum of //c// and //v// | + | //s//, and realised profit, //p//. Here we also assume conditions in which the |
- | in a commodity is called the cost price, //k//, and represents the amount | + | profit’s share of both the value and the price of the individual commodity |
- | the individual article has cost the capitalist.((See //Capital III//, chapter 1. The sum of //c// and //v// as capital advanced is usually referred to as //C//. In all examples provided here, //C// and //k// happen to coincide quantitatively, | + | coincides |
+ | composition of the industry, i.e. the cost distribution between labour power and | ||
+ | means of production, coincides with the composition of total capital and that | ||
+ | all capitals | ||
+ | that differences in depreciation | ||
+ | represent different degrees of efficiency with regard to fixed capital use.)) | ||
+ | The sum of //c// and //v// in a commodity is called the cost price, //k//, and | ||
+ | represents the amount the individual article has cost the capitalist.((See | ||
+ | //Capital III//, chapter 1. The sum of //c// and //v// as capital advanced is | ||
+ | usually referred to as //C//. In all examples provided here, //C// and //k// | ||
+ | happen to coincide quantitatively, | ||
+ | difference.)) | ||
- | The rate of surplus value, //s/v//, is assumed to be 50 per cent and expresses | + | The rate of surplus value, //s/v//, is assumed to be 50 per cent and expresses |
- | working conditions are the same across the three producers. The workers | + | that working conditions are the same across the three producers. The workers |
- | two-thirds of the new value produced individually. The profit, //p//, | + | keep two-thirds of the individual |
- | is determined by the selling price, which coincides with the commodity value of 2 | + | //p//, is determined by the selling price, which coincides with the commodity |
- | pounds sterling, minus the cost price, //k//. | + | value of 2 pounds sterling, minus the cost price, //k//. |
^ Table 2. Components of the coat value (pounds sterling) ^^^^^ | ^ Table 2. Components of the coat value (pounds sterling) ^^^^^ | ||
Line 302: | Line 751: | ||
| //p// | 0.18| 0.29| 0.31| 0.26| | | //p// | 0.18| 0.29| 0.31| 0.26| | ||
- | Table 1 showed that producer I "takes out" | + | Table 1 showed that producer I “takes out” a smaller value than what it “puts |
- | it "puts in" | + | in” while the reverse is true for producer II and III. From Table 2 it becomes |
- | Table 2 it becomes clear how producer I can nevertheless realise surplus value in the form of | + | clear how producer I can nevertheless realise surplus value in the form of |
- | profit because //k// is less than the selling price. The rate of profit, //p/. | + | profit because //k// is less than the selling price. The rate of profit, //p/ (c |
- | (c + v)//, for the three producers is 10, 17 and 19 per cent respectively | + | + v)//, for the three producers is 10, 17 and 19 per cent respectively (15 on |
- | (15 on average). | + | average). |
- | Under unchanged conditions of production and demand | + | Under unchanged conditions of production and demand this relationship could |
- | this relationship could be reproduced year in and year out, but as the | + | hypothetically |
- | commodity category itself reveals, the producers who contribute | + | itself reveals, the producers who contribute a relatively small (large) amount |
- | a relatively small (large) amount of value-creating labour per article are favoured (disadvantaged) when they sell it at the higher (lower) social value. Those who are relatively | + | of value-creating labour per article are favoured (disadvantaged) when they sell |
- | wasteful | + | it at the higher (lower) social value. Those who are relatively wasteful |
- | if the selling price were to fall below the cost price, there would be no funds to | + | expending |
- | support | + | price were to fall below the cost price, there would be no funds to support |
- | cost of the means of production and wages. In the absence of a reserve fund, | + | either the capitalist’s individual consumption or to pay the full cost of the |
- | a temporary increase in the price of any input is sufficient to make the individual | + | means of production and wages. In the absence of a reserve fund, a temporary |
- | capital to shrink immediately, | + | increase in the price of any input is sufficient to make the individual |
- | the purpose of production is lost if there is no profit to be made. | + | shrink immediately, |
- | There is therefore a double | + | if there is no profit to be made. There is therefore a double interest of every |
- | interest of every commodity producer in //reducing the necessary | + | commodity producer in //reducing the necessary labour time//. Such a reduction |
- | labour time//. Such a reduction takes place, among other things, by that the more efficient | + | takes place, among other things, by that the more efficient producers’ methods |
- | producers' | + | are adopted by the others and through research and development of entirely new |
- | development of entirely new ways of reducing the necessary labour. | + | ways of reducing the necessary labour. |
- | Normally, this leads to a levelling out of the differences in | + | of the differences in production conditions, but they cannot |
- | production conditions, but they can not be completely eliminated. | + | eliminated. |
We will now look at an example where a new category of unpaid labour is | We will now look at an example where a new category of unpaid labour is | ||
- | expressed in the price of the individual commodity -- //land rent//. It appears | + | expressed in the price of the individual commodity -- //land rent//. It appears |
- | the existence of natural monopolies preserves differences in the conditions of production over time. It takes both dead and living labour to grow wheat for | + | when the existence of natural monopolies preserves differences in the conditions |
- | for example, but some farmland gives a much higher yield at and | + | of production over time. It takes both dead and living labour to grow wheat for |
- | equal labour input than others. The same is true of mining, oil extraction, | + | example, but some farmland gives a much higher yield at an equal investment |
- | etc.((See //Capital III//, departments 2 and 6 as well as MECW 31, pp. 250–389 and 457–551.)) | + | others. The same is true of mining, oil extraction, etc.((See //Capital III//, |
+ | departments 2 and 6 as well as MECW 31, pp. 250–389 and 457–551.)) | ||
If demand is sufficiently high, agricultural land of even very low | If demand is sufficiently high, agricultural land of even very low | ||
fertility can be exploited commercially. The average commodity price then comes | fertility can be exploited commercially. The average commodity price then comes | ||
close to the individual value of the producer with the lowest yield per | close to the individual value of the producer with the lowest yield per | ||
- | labour input (dead and living, i.e. capital advanced, C). As long as this land is needed to cover the market's //entire// | + | labour input (dead and living, i.e. capital advanced, C). As long as this land is needed to cover the market’s //entire// |
demand for wheat -- i.e. to supplement the supply from the others --, then | demand for wheat -- i.e. to supplement the supply from the others --, then | ||
the necessary labour of the producer who rents | the necessary labour of the producer who rents | ||
Line 350: | Line 800: | ||
producers that the latter only make a normal (average) profit. | producers that the latter only make a normal (average) profit. | ||
- | It was assumed above (2.2.4) that the //value// of 1 quarter of wheat is worth 2 pounds sterling and we shall keep this for our next example, but we now say that the //price// is at 3 pounds. We also assume the same relation between | + | It was assumed above (2.2.4) that the //value// of 1 quarter of wheat is 2 |
- | //c// and //v// as in the coat industry, and this happens to represent | + | pounds sterling and we shall keep this assumption in our next example, but we |
- | the average production conditions in society at large, we know that the general | + | now say that its //price// is at 3 pounds. We also assume the same proportion of |
- | rate of profit is 15 per cent. The individual | + | dead and living labour as for the coat but let the individual differences |
- | multiplying the individual capital advanced with the general rate of profit, i.e. | + | greater. The differences in individual profits are now no longer assumed to be |
+ | due to the relative skills of the producers (economy of labour) but are fully | ||
+ | determined by the //general rate of profit//. The latter category follows by | ||
+ | dividing the total surplus value by the total capital | ||
+ | economy, //s / (c + v)//. Since we assume the same relationship between //c// | ||
+ | and //v// as in the coat industry, and this happens to represent the average | ||
+ | production conditions in society at large, we know that the general rate of | ||
+ | profit is 15 per cent. Each individual | ||
+ | individual capital advanced with the general rate of profit, i.e. | ||
> //p = (c + v) • (s / (c + v)).// | > //p = (c + v) • (s / (c + v)).// | ||
- | The price of production, //P//, is the price at which the commodity must be sold in order to replace both the means of production and the labour force and to generate the average profit, i.e. //c// + //v// + //p//. Ground rent, //r//, | + | The price of production, //P//, is the price at which the commodity must be sold |
- | is then determined | + | in order to replace both the means of production and the labour force as well as |
+ | to generate the average profit, i.e. //c// + //v// + //p//. Ground rent, //r//, | ||
+ | is then given by subtracting //P// from the price of the commodity (3 pounds). | ||
^ Table 3. Components of the wheat price (pounds sterling) ^^^^^ | ^ Table 3. Components of the wheat price (pounds sterling) ^^^^^ | ||
Line 374: | Line 834: | ||
Agricultural producers I–III all make 15 per cent profit on their respective | Agricultural producers I–III all make 15 per cent profit on their respective | ||
- | investments, | + | investments, |
- | we see that the mere ownership of the three plots of lands itself | + | component, ground rent, with the total capital advanced, //r / (c + v)//, we see |
- | 143 per cent return on the capital //invested by other people// | + | that the mere ownership of land yields about 4, 80 and 143 per cent (58 per cent |
- | average).((Land owners can be capitalists at the same time and so to speak | + | on average) |
- | lease the land to themselves, but that does not make land ownership disappear as a distinct form of property.)) The value produced in the sector is just enough | + | plots.((Land owners can be capitalists at the same time and, so to speak, lease |
- | to provide wage-earners and capitalists with a normal income. Ground rent | + | the land to themselves, but that does not make land ownership disappear as a |
- | must therefore | + | distinct form of property.)) The value produced in the sector is just enough to |
- | possible because the price of the commodity wheat exceeds the price of production.((For surplus value to flow out of an industry, it is sufficient that surplus value exceeds average profit and that the commodity is sold at a price below its value.)) | + | provide wage-earners and capitalists with a normal income. Ground rent must |
+ | therefore, in this example, come from other industries, which is possible | ||
+ | because the price of the commodity wheat exceeds the price of production.((For | ||
+ | surplus value to flow out of an industry, it is sufficient that surplus value | ||
+ | exceeds average profit and that the commodity is sold at a price below its | ||
+ | value.)) | ||
- | Should the price of wheat fall to 2.9 pounds, ground rent disappears completely for landowner I. It is then in his interest to demand rent at the expense of a part of the profit and otherwise terminate the lease. Should the price rise, then all lands become | + | Should the price of wheat fall to 2.9 pounds, ground rent disappears completely |
- | more profitable, but especially those of the poorest quality. If this situation persists for some time, it leads to poorer, unused agricultural land being brought into use. Should the price remain unchanged, it is consistently 50 per cent above the value, i.e. the amount that | + | for landowner I. It is then in his interest to demand rent at the expense of a |
- | corresponds to the socially necessary labour of the industry. | + | part of the profit and otherwise terminate the lease. Should the price rise, |
+ | then all lands become more profitable, but especially those of the poorest | ||
+ | quality. If this situation persists for some time, it leads to poorer, unused | ||
+ | agricultural land being brought into use. | ||
+ | |||
+ | With new technical | ||
+ | industries where ground rent plays a major role, but they cannot eradicate | ||
+ | differences in natural fertility and therefore not rent as an entirely passive | ||
+ | source of income. | ||
> The identity of the market price for commodities of the same kind is the manner whereby the social character of value asserts itself on the basis of the capitalist mode of production and, in general, any production based on the exchange of commodities between // | > The identity of the market price for commodities of the same kind is the manner whereby the social character of value asserts itself on the basis of the capitalist mode of production and, in general, any production based on the exchange of commodities between // | ||
- | It is the surplus labour in commodity production, not the land itself, that makes the land owner rich. The latter can therefore | + | It is the surplus labour in commodity production, not the land itself, that |
+ | makes the land owner rich. The latter can therefore | ||
+ | Constantinople, | ||
+ | situation is similar for those who sell the commodity money capital to | ||
+ | industrialists at an interest, i.e. provide loans,((Cf //Capital III//, chapter | ||
+ | 24)) but even the owner of entrepreneurial capital can live a life without | ||
+ | economic | ||
+ | and management has been handed over to paid agents with a mandate to reinvest | ||
+ | (capitalise) part of the profits. | ||
- | A not insignificant part of the value of a commodity is thus made up of unpaid labour which falls to the owner of the means of production.((In this discussion we have disregarded | + | A not insignificant part of the value of a commodity is thus made up of unpaid |
- | unproductively as revenue, in the form of servants, vehicles, jewellery, real estate, etc., while another is converted into additional capital. | + | labour which falls to the owner of the means of production.((In this discussion |
+ | we have left out the costs of circulation (buying and selling, bookkeeping, | ||
+ | etc.), but these also require their share of the surplus value contained in the | ||
+ | commodity.)) A part of it is consumed unproductively as revenue, in the form of | ||
+ | servants, vehicles, jewellery, real estate, etc., while another is converted | ||
+ | into additional capital. | ||
+ | for example 30 or 300 per cent, the real wealth of society depends on //labour | ||
+ | productivity//, | ||
+ | hence also in a definite surplus labour time.”((MECW 35, p. 807)) | ||
==== 2.5 Competition and accumulation ==== | ==== 2.5 Competition and accumulation ==== | ||
- | It is up to the owner of an enterprise | + | It is up to the owner of an enterprise |
- | the necessity for his own transitory existence implied in the transitory | + | revenue, but in that case he will eventually cease to be a capitalist, because |
- | necessity for the capitalist mode of production. But, so far as he is personified capital, it is not values in use and the enjoyment of them, but | + | competition between firms encourages accumulation.((“Except as personified |
- | exchange value and its augmentation, | + | capital, the capitalist has no historical value [...]. And so far only is the |
- | conditions, which alone can form the real basis of a higher form of society [...]. Only as personified capital is the capitalist respectable. As such, he shares with the miser the passion for | + | necessity for his own transitory existence implied in the transitory necessity |
- | wealth as wealth. But that which in the miser is a mere idiosyncrasy, | + | for the capitalist mode of production. But, so far as he is personified capital, |
- | is, in the capitalist, the effect of the social mechanism, of which he is | + | it is not values in use and the enjoyment of them, but exchange value and its |
- | but one of the wheels. Moreover, the development of capitalist production makes it constantly necessary to keep increasing the amount of | + | augmentation, |
- | the capital laid out in a given industrial undertaking, | + | itself, he ruthlessly forces the human race to produce for production’s sake; he |
- | to keep constantly extending his capital, in order to preserve it, but | + | thus forces the development of the productive powers of society, and creates |
- | extend it he cannot, except by means of progressive accumulation." | + | those material conditions, which alone can form the real basis of a higher form |
+ | of society [...]. Only as personified capital is the capitalist respectable. As | ||
+ | such, he shares with the miser the passion for wealth as wealth. But that which | ||
+ | in the miser is a mere idiosyncrasy, | ||
+ | social mechanism, of which he is but one of the wheels. Moreover, the | ||
+ | development of capitalist production makes it constantly necessary to keep | ||
+ | increasing the amount of the capital laid out in a given industrial undertaking, | ||
+ | and competition makes the immanent laws of capitalist production to be felt by | ||
+ | each individual capitalist, as external coercive laws. It compels him to keep | ||
+ | constantly extending his capital, in order to preserve it, but extend it he | ||
+ | cannot, except by means of progressive accumulation.” MECW 35, pp. 587--588)) | ||
+ | Let us see why with another example. | ||
- | It has already been mentioned (see 2.4) that it is in the interest of every commodity producer to adopt the most successful methods of production. So far the implicit assumption has been that this is possible on the basis of the existing | + | It has already been mentioned (see 2.4) that it is in the interest of every |
- | scale of production. | + | commodity producer to adopt the most successful methods of production. So far |
+ | the implicit assumption has been that this is possible on the basis of the | ||
+ | existing | ||
- | There is room for many different kinds of improvement that reduce necessary labour without involving any | + | There is room for many different kinds of improvement that reduce necessary |
- | additional costs, for example in the choice of input components or | + | labour without involving any additional costs, for example in the choice of |
- | making the organisation of labour more efficient. However, it is often possible to quickly achieve productivity gains by investing in new instruments of production or founding entirely new factories. | + | input components or making the organisation of labour more efficient. However, |
+ | it is often possible to quickly achieve productivity gains by investing in new | ||
+ | instruments of production or founding entirely new factories. | ||
In the following example, we start from Table 2 and our coat producers. | In the following example, we start from Table 2 and our coat producers. | ||
- | Previously, we assumed that all three supplied the market with an equal number of commodities and | + | Previously, we assumed that all three supplied the market with an equal number |
- | therefore the total investment and production volume was not of interest to us. They will be now, when we shall assume that producer III increases his capital with new | + | of commodities and therefore the total investment and production volume was not |
- | modern sewing machines and additional hands that operate them. Let's say that the original production volume was 100 coats per producer. III is now assumed to | + | of interest to us. They will be now, when we shall assume that producer III |
- | increase the output by 20 per cent but his constant and variable capital | + | increases his capital with new modern sewing machines and additional hands to |
- | grows by only 10 and 5 per cent respectively. At the same time, producers I and II stay with the existing productive capital and production volume. In addition, we assume that the market | + | operate them. Let’s say that the original production volume was 100 coats per |
- | total product at the new slightly lower price of production. | + | producer. III is now assumed to increase the output by 20 per cent but his |
+ | constant and variable capital grows by only 10 and 5 per cent respectively. At | ||
+ | the same time, producers I and II carry on with the existing productive capital | ||
+ | and production volume. In addition, we assume that the market | ||
+ | the industry’s much larger total product at the new slightly lower price of | ||
+ | production. | ||
In the table below, //q// represents the production volume (number of coats) and | In the table below, //q// represents the production volume (number of coats) and | ||
- | //C// the total capital advanced, //c// + //v//. The variables | + | //C// the total capital advanced, //c// + //v//. The variables //w//, //s//, |
- | //w//, //s//, //n//, //P// and //p// represent, as before, commodity value, | + | //n//, //P// and //p// represent, as before, commodity value, surplus value, new |
- | surplus value, new value, price of production and profit. | + | value, price of production and profit. |
- | We assume that the industry as a whole yields an average profit | + | yields an average profit |
- | per cent). This allows us to determine the total quantity of //p// and //P// in | + | quantity of //p// and //P// in the same way as in Table 3. In Table 4, the |
- | the same way as in Table 3. In Table 4, the individual price of production is determined by the producer's share of the total production volume of the industry multiplied by | + | individual price of production is determined by the producer’s share of the |
- | the total price of production. In other words, all commodities are sold at the same social price. The individual profit | + | total production volume of the industry multiplied by the total price of |
- | subtracting the capital | + | production. In other words, all commodities are sold at the same social |
- | i.e. //p = P - C//. | + | price. The individual profit |
+ | advanced | ||
^ Table 4. Components of the coat industry (q = production volume; the rest = pounds sterling) ^^^^^ | ^ Table 4. Components of the coat industry (q = production volume; the rest = pounds sterling) ^^^^^ | ||
Line 447: | Line 957: | ||
| //p// | | | //p// | | ||
- | Now, dividing the components in Table 4 by the production volume, Table 5 representing | + | Now, dividing the components in Table 4 by the production volume, Table 5 |
+ | representing the price components of the individual coat can be compiled. | ||
- | ^ Table 5. Components of the coat price at the sale price 1.97 (pounds sterling) ^^^^^ | + | ^ Table 5. Components of the coat price (pounds sterling) ^^^^^ |
^ Component | ^ Component | ||
- | | //w// | 2.08| 1.98| 1.85| 1.96| | ||
| //c// | 1.29| 1.18| 0.18| 1.21| | | //c// | 1.29| 1.18| 0.18| 1.21| | ||
| //v// | 0.53| 0.53| 0.44| 0.50| | | //v// | 0.53| 0.53| 0.44| 0.50| | ||
- | | //C// | 1.82| 1.71| 1.62| 1.71| | ||
- | | //n// | 0.79| 0.80| 0.67| 0.75| | ||
| //s// | 0.26| 0.27| 0.22| 0.25| | | //s// | 0.26| 0.27| 0.22| 0.25| | ||
+ | | //n// | 0.79| 0.80| 0.67| 0.75| | ||
+ | | //k// (=// | ||
+ | | //w// | 2.08| 1.98| 1.85| 1.96| | ||
+ | | //P// | 1.97| 1.97| 1.97| 1.97| | ||
| //p// | 0.15| 0.26| 0.35| 0.26| | | //p// | 0.15| 0.26| 0.35| 0.26| | ||
- | The value represented in the individual commodity | + | The //value// and the //price of production// represented in the commodity |
- | fallen from 2 to 1.96 and 1.97 pounds respectively (compared to Table 2). | + | fallen from 2 to 1.96 and 1.97 pounds respectively (compared to Table 2). The |
- | The investment by producer III in a relatively large amount of constant capital in relation to variable has the effect of bringing the value composition of the industry above the social average. This means that the profit and thus also | + | investment by producer III in a relatively large amount of constant capital in |
- | the production price (which we assume | + | relation to variable has the effect of bringing the value composition of the |
- | is slightly greater than the surplus value and value. Unaltered conditions of production here causes the rate of profit for producer I to fall from 10 to 8 per cent and for producer II from 17 to 15 per cent. For producer III who increased his capital, it rises from 19 to 21 per cent. For the sector | + | industry above the social average. This means that the profit and thus also the |
+ | production price (which we here assume | ||
+ | slightly greater than the surplus value and value. Unaltered conditions of | ||
+ | production here causes the rate of profit for producer I to fall from 10 to 8 | ||
+ | per cent and for producer II from 17 to 15 per cent. For producer III who | ||
+ | increased his capital, it rises from 19 to 21 per cent. For the industry | ||
+ | whole, the rate of profit remains | ||
If all 320 commodities (//q//) //cannot// be sold at the price of production but | If all 320 commodities (//q//) //cannot// be sold at the price of production but | ||
- | just below, III still has much to gain from his investment. He can, for example, sell at a price that gives him the same rate of profit as before but | + | just below it, III still has much to gain from his investment. He can, for |
- | results in a larger mass of profit. | + | example, sell at a price that gives him the same rate of profit as before but |
- | on the market and a larger fund for individual consumption. Producers I and II | + | results in a larger mass of profit. |
- | will still be able to sell their coats at a profit but their rooms of | + | the market and a larger fund for individual consumption. Producers I and II will |
- | investment and individual consumption will be substantially reduced. Producer III may also aim to drive I and II out of the market by temporarily | + | still be able to sell their coats at a profit but their maneuvering room -- in |
- | dumping the commodity price to a level just above the individual cost price, which | + | both investment and individual consumption |
- | means that for producers I and II it falls below the same level. Since | + | reduced. Producer III may also aim to drive I and II out of the market by |
- | no producer can expect the others to refrain from accumulating, | + | temporarily |
- | safest bet is to reinvest at least part of the profits.((According to David | + | cost price (e.g. £1.65), which means that for producers I and II it falls below |
- | Landes, in the period after the Napoleonic Wars, entrepreneurs in France, Belgium and Germany were sometimes reluctant to adopt the latest | + | it (and their capitals start to shrink). Since no producer can expect the others |
- | production equipment. The cost of investment was greater than what an individual | + | to refrain from accumulating, |
- | entrepreneur could afford or was willing to pay. Instead, inferior | + | profits.((According to the historian |
- | equipment was purchased, sometimes second-hand, | + | Napoleonic Wars, entrepreneurs in France, Belgium and Germany were sometimes |
- | Britain retaining its leading position. See David S. Landes, | + | reluctant to adopt the latest production equipment. The cost of investment was |
- | //The unbound Prometheus: Technological change and industrial development in | + | greater than what an individual entrepreneur could afford or was willing to |
- | Western Europe from 1750 to the present, Second edition// (Cambridge 2006), | + | pay. Instead, inferior equipment was purchased, sometimes second-hand, |
- | pp. 146--147.)) | + | a contributing factor to Britain retaining its leading position. See David |
+ | S. Landes, //The unbound Prometheus: Technological change and industrial | ||
+ | development in Western Europe from 1750 to the present, Second edition// | ||
+ | (Cambridge 2006), pp. 146--147.)) | ||
==== 2.6 Summary ==== | ==== 2.6 Summary ==== | ||
- | The single | + | The commodity has been examined from both a qualitative and quantitative |
- | aspect. The commodity form of the product of labour expresses a unity of opposites: use value and value. The former represents need satisfaction | + | aspect. The commodity form of the product of labour expresses a unity of |
- | and the latter abstract human labour whose magnitude is determined by the | + | opposites: use value and value. The former represents need satisfaction and the |
- | total amount of necessary labour divided by the volume of production. As a | + | latter abstract human labour whose magnitude is determined by the total amount |
- | consequence of differences in individual conditions of production but | + | of necessary labour divided by the volume of production. As a consequence of |
- | sameness in the social determination of value, commodity producers are led | + | differences in individual conditions of production but sameness in the social |
- | to reduce the necessary labour time and thus the magnitude of value in relation to the quantity of use values. We also saw how productive labour | + | determination of value, commodity producers are led to reduce the necessary |
- | becomes a source of surplus value for the owners of the means of production and finally how | + | labour time and thus the magnitude of value in relation to the quantity of use |
- | competition forces producers to transform part of this surplus value | + | values. We also saw how productive labour becomes a source of surplus value for |
- | into capital. The commodity form is thus the bearer of a historically specific | + | the owners of the means of production and finally how competition forces |
- | social relationship.((Cf MECW 30, pp. 38--39.)) | + | producers to transform part of this surplus value into capital. The commodity |
+ | form is thus the bearer of a historically specific social relationship.((Cf MECW | ||
+ | 30, pp. 38--39.)) | ||
===== 3 Capitalism and communism ===== | ===== 3 Capitalism and communism ===== | ||
- | In this concluding part capitalist | + | In this concluding part capitalist production will be discussed in more general |
- | production will be discussed in general terms, from the perspective of the reproduction and accumulation of the total product. Then follows a discussion on how a transformation of society | + | terms, from the perspective of the reproduction and accumulation of the total |
- | the economic laws of capital have been abolished: communism, socialism or | + | product. Then follows a discussion on how a transformation of society |
- | the "free association of producers" | + | place under conditions where the economic laws of capital have been abolished: |
+ | under communism, socialism or the “free association of produces”. | ||
==== 3.1 The society of labour and its guarantors ==== | ==== 3.1 The society of labour and its guarantors ==== | ||
- | Since the interest in reducing necessary labour is built into the | + | Since the interest in reducing necessary labour is built into the capitalist |
- | capitalist mode of production, it will affect the conditions of production in | + | mode of production, it will affect the conditions of production in all |
- | all industries. The result is a general increase in labour productivity | + | industries. The result is a general increase in labour productivity in any |
- | in any society dominated by this mode of production. Still, the | + | society dominated by this mode of production. Still, the total amount of labour |
- | total amount of labour performed does not decrease accordingly. The working day in the | + | performed does not decrease accordingly. The working day in the developed |
- | developed countries is shorter now than it was two hundred years ago, | + | countries is shorter now than it was two hundred years ago, but the requirement |
- | but the requirement to work for a wage (or to get an education to become employable) continues to dominate the lives of the majority of people. In addition, the number of workers has constantly | + | to work for a wage (or to get an education to become employable) continues to |
- | increased, partly | + | dominate the lives of the majority of people. In addition, the number of workers |
- | modes of production. At the same time, therefore, there is a tendency to //conserve value-creating labour// as the pillar of social production. | + | has constantly increased, partly |
- | realised surplus value and thus often to //increase the scale of production// | + | of other modes of production. At the same time, therefore, there is a tendency |
- | a maintained or temporarily increased demand for both dead and living labour. Despite of this, in the slightly longer term, fewer workers will be required in relation to the population as a whole to meet the demand for a specific kind of commodity. This does not lead to chronic unemployment but to so | + | to //conserve value-creating labour// as the pillar of social production. |
- | so-called structural transformation where workers that have become | + | capitalist epoch, commodity |
- | sector are absorbed | + | the realised surplus value and to //increase the scale of production// |
- | capitalist societies have moved from engaging labour | + | increase in labour productivity in one sector may therefore coincide with a |
- | in agriculture to shifting it increasingly | + | maintained or temporarily increased demand for both dead and living |
+ | labour. Despite of this, in the slightly longer term, fewer workers will be | ||
+ | required in relation to the population as a whole to meet the demand for a | ||
+ | specific kind of commodity. This does not lead to chronic unemployment | ||
+ | have seen historically -- but to so-called structural transformation where | ||
+ | workers that have been made redundant in one sector are reabsorbed | ||
+ | work under new circumstances. In broad terms, capitalist societies have moved | ||
+ | from engaging labour in agriculture to shifting it increasingly | ||
+ | manufacturing and then services. | ||
- | The re-employment of redundant workers is not an automatic process. A fundamental precondition of capitalist production is that the immediate producers (the workers) are propertyless, | + | The re-employment of redundant workers is far from an automatic process. A |
- | separated from the means of production so that they cannot survive without selling their labour power to the owners of capital; this is what it means to be a // | + | fundamental precondition of capitalist production is that the immediate |
- | incentives to find employment, and as long as surplus value can be generated | + | producers (the workers) are propertyless, |
- | putting proletarians to work, there will be a demand for their labour power. | + | production so that they cannot survive without selling their labour power to the |
+ | owners of capital; this is what it means to be a // | ||
+ | stands as guarantor of the continued ownership of the means of production by the | ||
+ | non-workers. Unemployment creates incentives to find employment, and as long as | ||
+ | surplus value can be generated | ||
+ | demand for their labour power. | ||
- | The following table is an attempt to illustrate in a schematic way | + | The following table is an attempt to illustrate in a schematic way capitalist |
- | capitalist reproduction in terms of both value and use value. //t// represents time (in calendar years), //c// and //v// the | + | reproduction in terms of both value and use value. //t// represents time (in |
- | total social capital, i.e. the amount of labour invested | + | calendar years), //c// and //v// the total social capital, i.e. the amount of |
- | in the form of means of production and labour power in all branches of production; //w// and //s// the total value and surplus value respectively; | + | labour invested in the form of means of production and labour power in all |
- | the volume of production and //l// the working population. The initial values are chosen arbitrarily. Both the population and the social capital are assumed to grow | + | branches of production; //w// and //s// the total value and surplus value |
- | by 1 per cent per year, the volume of production by 2 per cent, and both the rate of surplus value, //s/v//, and the value composition, | + | respectively; |
+ | population. The initial values are chosen arbitrarily. Both the population and | ||
+ | the social capital are assumed to grow by 1 per cent per year, the volume of | ||
+ | production by 2 per cent, and both the rate of surplus value, //s/v//, and the | ||
+ | value composition, | ||
^ Table 6. Accumulation (t = years; c, v, s, n, w = labour hours; q = production volume; l = number of working people in the population) ^^^^^^^^^^ | ^ Table 6. Accumulation (t = years; c, v, s, n, w = labour hours; q = production volume; l = number of working people in the population) ^^^^^^^^^^ | ||
Line 542: | Line 1083: | ||
| 30| 26.62| | | 30| 26.62| | ||
- | The choice of numbers and rate of change can be debated, but we here get a picture of a mode of production that constantly puts an equal proportion of the population | + | The choice of numbers and rate of change can be debated, but here at least we |
+ | get the picture of a mode of production that constantly puts an equal proportion | ||
+ | of the population | ||
+ | sufficient | ||
- | In commodity production, productive labour creates an abstract form | + | In capitalist |
- | of wealth -- commodity value -- the realisation of which provides an income for the various classes of society. At the same time, production is geared towards making this labour superfluous //in each individual case//. Technologies are continuously developed which are ever more efficient. They could be employed to reduce pollution and the extraction of resources, but the drive to constantly expand the total social product leads instead to catastrophic over-exploitation of the earth's ecosystems. This is how society evolves when the satisfaction of needs is merely a means to achieve the goal of constant expansion of value. | + | of wealth -- commodity value -- the realisation of which provides an income for |
+ | the various classes of society. At the same time, production is geared towards | ||
+ | making this labour superfluous //in each individual case//. Technologies are | ||
+ | continuously developed which are ever more efficient. They could be employed to | ||
+ | reduce pollution and the extraction of resources, but the drive to constantly | ||
+ | expand the total social product leads instead to catastrophic over-exploitation | ||
+ | of the earth’s ecosystems. This is how society evolves when the satisfaction of | ||
+ | needs is merely a means to achieve the goal of a constant expansion of value. | ||
- | ==== 3.2 Early communism ==== | + | ==== 3.2 The lower phase of communism ==== |
- | The commodity form carries the capitalist society within it, but also the seed of an entirely different kind. Capitalist expansion has swept away all previous modes of production and made humanity dependent on a world-wide network of production and communication. Production of commodities is now the obvious way to organise human labour and distribute its products, yet this takes place behind the backs of the producers. Taking conscious control of material production must entail that humanity establishes new social relations that abolish the logic of the commodity form. No one can say exactly what these will look like, but some general principles can be established on the basis that the profit motive and the compulsion to accumulate come to a halt. If this becomes a reality, the level of productivity achieved under capitalism and previous epochs could for the first time in history contribute to the liberation of humanity from the necessity of labour | + | The commodity form carries the capitalist society within it, but also the seed |
- | control of the "associated producers" | + | of an entirely different kind. Capitalist expansion has swept away all previous |
- | the old society has taken place and communism is established, | + | modes of production and made humanity dependent on a world-wide network of |
+ | production and communication. Production of commodities is now the obvious way | ||
+ | to organise human labour and distribute its products, yet this takes place | ||
+ | behind the backs of the producers. Taking conscious control of material | ||
+ | production must entail that humanity establishes new social relations that | ||
+ | abolish the logic of the commodity form. No one can say exactly what these will | ||
+ | look like, but some general principles can be established on the basis that the | ||
+ | profit motive and the compulsion to accumulate come to a halt. If this becomes a | ||
+ | reality, the level of productivity achieved under capitalism and previous epochs | ||
+ | could for the first time in history contribute to the liberation of humanity | ||
+ | from the compulsion to work and at the same time put an end to the destructive | ||
+ | exploitation of the natural environment. This requires, initially, that labour | ||
+ | be reorganised on the basis of the // | ||
+ | the productive powers have been used to keep humanity down in a contrived | ||
+ | existence of necessity, but can now become a vehicle for emancipation.((Cf MECW | ||
+ | 37, p. 807.)) As soon as the means of production come under the control of the | ||
+ | associated producers and the obligation to accumulate is lifted -- not in one | ||
+ | country but on a world scale -- a fundamental rupture with the old society has | ||
+ | taken place and communism is established, | ||
+ | still required for production. And no matter how the fruits of labour are | ||
+ | distributed, | ||
+ | of communist society as it is when it has just emerged after prolonged birth | ||
+ | pangs from capitalist society.”((Karl Marx, “Critique of the Gotha Programme”, | ||
+ | in MECW 24, p. 87.)) | ||
- | The existence of labour and surplus labour is not capitalism per se, any more than | + | The existence of labour and surplus labour is not capitalism per se, any more |
- | production of things is the same as production of commodities. However, many of the forms of labour developed within capitalism are | + | than production of things is the same as production of commodities. However, |
- | harmful to both the individual and society; they could be carried out under | + | many of the forms of labour developed within capitalism are harmful to both the |
- | much freer forms. The notion of a product is hardly harmful in itself; that, however, is the case for many of the actual products of modern society whose production better stop or be radically transformed. Production as a whole will have to be reorganised. Some things need to be made in greater quantities -- especially in the poorest regions of the world --, but | + | individual and society; they could be carried out under much freer forms. The |
- | on the whole, a controlled | + | notion of a product is hardly harmful in itself; that, however, is the case for |
- | also what is required to stop global heating and the extinction of species. To illustrate | + | many of the actual products of modern society whose production better stop or be |
- | but assume that accumulation comes to a halt. Since | + | radically transformed. Production as a whole will have to be reorganised. Some |
- | the additional capital and luxury consumption of the former property owners fall away | + | things need to be made in greater quantities -- especially in the poorest |
- | we can assume a much lower "rate of surplus labour", say 1/3.((The products of the soil will cost society substantially less labour when land rent is abolished: | + | regions of the world --, but on the whole, a controlled |
- | market value of products, including therefore agricultural products, | + | economy is what needs to be put on the agenda. That is also what is required to |
- | is a social act, albeit a socially unconscious and unintentional one. It | + | stop global heating and the extinction of species. To illustrate |
- | is based necessarily upon the exchange value of the product, not upon | + | transformation |
- | the soil and the differences in its fertility. If we suppose the capitalist | + | series above (Table 6), but assume that accumulation comes to a halt. Since the |
- | form of society to be abolished and society organised as a conscious | + | additional capital and luxury consumption of the former property owners fall |
- | and planned association, | + | away we can assume a much lower rate of surplus labour, say 1/3.((The products |
- | for a class of landowners would thus be destroyed. This would have the | + | of the soil will cost society substantially less labour when land rent is |
- | same effect as a reduction in price of the product to the same amount | + | abolished: |
- | resulting from foreign imports. While it is, therefore, true that, by retaining the present mode of production, but assuming that the differential rent is paid to the state, prices of agricultural products would, | + | therefore agricultural products, is a social act, albeit a socially unconscious |
- | everything else being equal, remain the same, it is equally wrong to | + | and unintentional one. It is based necessarily upon the exchange value of the |
- | say that the value of the products would remain the same if capitalist | + | product, not upon the soil and the differences in its fertility. If we suppose |
- | production were superseded by association." | + | the capitalist form of society to be abolished and society organised as a |
- | administrative activities and so on.((See Karl Marx, "Critique of the Gotha programme", in MECW 24, p. 85.)) This means that the annual labour time, as well as the means of production measured in the same unit, can in our example be cut to two thirds in one stroke, as illustrated in Table 7 below. | + | conscious |
+ | quantity of independent labour time equal to that contained in 240 shillings | ||
+ | [instead of 600]. Society would not then buy this agricultural product at two | ||
+ | and a half times the actual labour time embodied in it and the basis for a class | ||
+ | of landowners would thus be destroyed. This would have the same effect as a | ||
+ | reduction in price of the product to the same amount resulting from foreign | ||
+ | imports. While it is, therefore, true that, by retaining the present mode of | ||
+ | production, but assuming that the differential rent is paid to the state, prices | ||
+ | of agricultural products would, everything else being equal, remain the same, it | ||
+ | is equally wrong to say that the value of the products would remain the same if | ||
+ | capitalist | ||
+ | remaining surplus labour is what is needed to support the children, the elderly, | ||
+ | administrative activities and so on.((See Karl Marx, “Critique of the Gotha | ||
+ | programme”, in MECW 24, p. 85.)) This means that the annual labour time, as well | ||
+ | as the means of production measured in the same unit, can in our example be cut | ||
+ | to two thirds in one stroke, as illustrated in Table 7 below. | ||
^ Table 7. Accumulation halted and surplus labour reduced (t = year; c, v, s, n, w = labour hours; q = volume of production; l = number of working people in the population) ^^^^^^^^^^ | ^ Table 7. Accumulation halted and surplus labour reduced (t = year; c, v, s, n, w = labour hours; q = volume of production; l = number of working people in the population) ^^^^^^^^^^ | ||
Line 581: | Line 1170: | ||
| 40| 17.75| | | 40| 17.75| | ||
- | A conscious and efficient management of labour will be crucial to accomplish such a reorganisation of production. It will undoubtedly be very different compared with that which takes place in a capitalist society. Without commodities and money, there is no obvious mechanism for reducing complex labour to simple. The future society can, however, // | + | A conscious and efficient management of labour will be crucial to accomplish |
- | certain conclusions about the amount of labour will then be expended //in general//, including the cost of education. It can also, conversely, start from the total amount of socially available labour time and evaluate the | + | such a reorganisation of production. It will undoubtedly be very different |
- | potential useful effects.((Cf Friedrich Engels, // | + | compared with that which takes place in a capitalist society. Without |
+ | commodities and money, there is no obvious mechanism for reducing complex labour | ||
+ | to simple. The future society can, however, // | ||
+ | labour in both concrete and abstract sense. It can see that particular forms of | ||
+ | labour are needed in definite quantities to achieve // | ||
+ | draw certain conclusions about the amount of labour will then be expended //in | ||
+ | general//, including the cost of education. It can also, conversely, start from | ||
+ | the total amount of socially available labour time and evaluate the potential | ||
+ | useful effects.((Cf Friedrich Engels, // | ||
+ | pp. 294--295.)) Abstraction from the concrete side of labour therefore continues | ||
+ | to take place, not just in thought but also practically in the planning of | ||
+ | social production.((See Isaak Dashkovsky, “Abstract labour and the economic | ||
+ | categories of Marx” | ||
+ | < | ||
- | There is no reason to believe, however, that decision-making on the basis of relative labour time costs alone can replace all the functions of money prices. The former will be one very important factor, another will be the relative scarcity of various natural resources, for even if two means of producing an article may be equivalent in terms of labour expenditure, | + | There is no reason to believe, however, that decision-making on the basis of |
+ | relative labour time costs alone can replace all the functions of money | ||
+ | prices. The former will be one very important factor, another will be the | ||
+ | relative scarcity of various natural resources, for even if two means of | ||
+ | producing an article may be equivalent in terms of labour expenditure, | ||
+ | be more sustainable or otherwise preferable than another.((Cf David Ramsay | ||
+ | Steele, //From Marx to Mises// (1999) which contains many interesting | ||
+ | reflections on the so-called economic calculation problem.)) | ||
==== 3.3 Developed communism ==== | ==== 3.3 Developed communism ==== | ||
Line 591: | Line 1200: | ||
> Freedom in this field [physical necessity] can only consist in socialised man, the associated producers, rationally regulating their interchange with Nature, bringing it under their common control, instead of being ruled by it as by the blind forces of Nature; and achieving this with the least expenditure of energy and under conditions most favourable to, and worthy of, their human nature. But it nonetheless still remains a realm of necessity. Beyond it begins that development of human energy which is an end in itself, the true realm of freedom, which, however, can blossom forth only with this realm of necessity as its basis. The shortening of the working day is its basic prerequisite.((MECW 37, p. 807)) | > Freedom in this field [physical necessity] can only consist in socialised man, the associated producers, rationally regulating their interchange with Nature, bringing it under their common control, instead of being ruled by it as by the blind forces of Nature; and achieving this with the least expenditure of energy and under conditions most favourable to, and worthy of, their human nature. But it nonetheless still remains a realm of necessity. Beyond it begins that development of human energy which is an end in itself, the true realm of freedom, which, however, can blossom forth only with this realm of necessity as its basis. The shortening of the working day is its basic prerequisite.((MECW 37, p. 807)) | ||
- | With the means of production held in common and the livelihood of the human species secured, it should be possible to go forward with a plan of de-accumulation or disinvestment, as proposed by Amadeo Bordiga in the early 1950s.((See | + | With the means of production held in common and the livelihood of the human |
- | Bordiga, | + | species secured, it should be possible to go forward with a plan of |
- | quinterna.org/ | + | de-accumulation or disinvestment.((See Amadeo Bordiga, |
+ | quinterna.org/ | ||
+ | immediate program of the revolution]]” [1953], in //The science and passion of | ||
+ | communism. Selected writings by Amadeo Bordiga | ||
+ | pp. 476--480. Camatte, inspired by the former, uses the term | ||
+ | [[https:// | ||
+ | list of measures were meant to be taken immediately after “the future taking of | ||
+ | power in a country of the capitalist West” (ibid.). My view is that a programme | ||
+ | of disinvestment will be difficult to put into action before the introduction of | ||
+ | socialism. See also the [[https:// | ||
+ | movement”]] (“décroissance” in French). Just like the “globalisation movement” | ||
+ | at the turn of the millennium, this movement carries some communist tendencies | ||
+ | within it.)) | ||
- | Let's continue the series beyond the step illustrated in Table 7 but now assume a negative rate of accumulation, | + | Let’s continue the series beyond the step illustrated in Table 7 but now assume |
- | technological advances will gradually reduce the workload further, | + | a negative rate of accumulation, |
- | although perhaps not as quickly as under | + | advances will gradually reduce the workload further, although perhaps not as |
- | capitalism. Let us assume that labour productivity increases by half a | + | quickly as under capitalism. Let’s assume that labour productivity increases by |
- | per cent per year. The result is shown in Table 8, where we use the same | + | half a per cent per year. The result is shown in Table 8, where we use the same |
denominations as before. | denominations as before. | ||
Line 610: | Line 1231: | ||
| 90| 10.48| | | 90| 10.48| | ||
- | With the development of communist production through the process of de-accumulation, | + | With the development of communist production through the process of |
- | It will completely revolutionise today's notions of work/ | + | de-accumulation, |
+ | society//, can be reduced considerably. It would completely revolutionise | ||
+ | today’s notions of work/ | ||
- | > In a higher phase of communist society, after the enslaving subordination of the individual to the division of labour, and thereby also the antithesis between mental and physical labour, has vanished; after labour has become not only a means of life but life's prime want; after the productive forces have also increased with the all-round development of the individual, and all the springs of common wealth flow more abundantly -- only then can the narrow horizon of bourgeois right be crossed in its entirety and society inscribe on its banners: From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs!((MECW 24, p. 87. Henriksson criticises | + | > In a higher phase of communist society, after the enslaving subordination of the individual to the division of labour, and thereby also the antithesis between mental and physical labour, has vanished; after labour has become not only a means of life but life’s prime want; after the productive forces have also increased with the all-round development of the individual, and all the springs of common wealth flow more abundantly -- only then can the narrow horizon of bourgeois right be crossed in its entirety and society inscribe on its banners: From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs!((MECW 24, p. 87. Henriksson criticises |
- | me for stepping back to "a revolutionary programme of 1920" | + | me for stepping back to “a revolutionary programme of 1920” (see [[en/ |
In terms of the end result, this perspective is no different from that | In terms of the end result, this perspective is no different from that | ||
- | championed by the communisation current. However, the path to this end is different. The communisers, | + | championed by the communisation current. However, the path to this end is |
- | extremely high demands on what a communist revolution must entail, since | + | different. The communisers, |
- | it implies an immediate leap to the higher phase of communism. Marx's analysis of the capitalist mode of production, however, | + | identify the perpetuation of socially organised labour with the perpetuation of |
- | but the arguments put forward in that direction are not very convincing in my opinion. For example, according to Endnotes, the second phase of communism is "more attractive" | + | capital. This poses extremely high demands on what a communist revolution must |
- | dependent on complex production and distribution networks? Henriksson warns | + | entail, since it implies an immediate leap to the higher phase of |
- | of "a planned | + | communism. Marx’s analysis of the capitalist mode of production does not impose |
- | instrumentality, | + | such a requirement on future society |
- | immediate producers | + | should of course be corrected, but the arguments put forward in that direction |
+ | are not very convincing in my opinion. For example, according to Endnotes, the | ||
+ | second phase of communism is “more attractive” than the first.((“Communisation | ||
+ | and value-form theory”, //Endnotes// no. 2, 2010, p. 96)) That may well be the | ||
+ | case, but isn’t it also somewhat | ||
+ | care, etc. which are dependent on complex production and distribution networks? | ||
+ | Henriksson warns of “a state-planned economy, where socialist engineering, | ||
+ | rationality and instrumentality, | ||
+ | individuals, | ||
+ | [[en/communist-values.-or-a-positive-theory-of-socialism-a-propos-peter-astroem-s-critique-of-communisation-and-value-form-theory|“Communist | ||
+ | values. Or a positive theory of socialism? | ||
- | Such a risk is not non-existent | + | This is a risk that should |
- | the number of concerns that must be dealt with by the community decreases.((In his criticism of the views of the undersigned anno 2013, Henriksson conflates the categories of surplus value and | + | over time as the number of concerns that must be dealt with by the community |
- | additional capital (section | + | decreases.((In his criticism of the views of the undersigned anno 2013, |
- | how it's possible for total surplus labour (or surplus value) to // | + | Henriksson conflates the categories of surplus value and additional capital |
- | surplus labour of a total of 6 in year two.)) The individual is not free if his or her life is subordinated to society -- whatever the degree of democracy -- but life outside of society is humanly impossible. One way or another, therefore, a new social organisation is bound to step in when the old one has reached the end of its tether. | + | (section |
+ | total surplus labour (or surplus value) to // | ||
+ | next, for example from 4 hours of surplus labour out of a total of 8 in year one | ||
+ | to 3 hours of surplus labour of a total of 6 in year two.)) The individual is | ||
+ | not free if one’s | ||
+ | democracy -- but life outside of society is humanly impossible. One way or | ||
+ | another, therefore, a new social organisation is bound to step in when the old | ||
+ | one has reached the end of the road. | ||
- | ==== 3.3 Value without commodities? | + | ==== 3.4 Value without commodities? |
- | It has been debated in various | + | It has been much debated in various |
- | Some believe that an essentially different | + | “socialist |
- | that in the West was here prevailing, because of the extent of state ownership and the lack of competition between | + | mode of production. After the October Revolution, the state, the classes and the |
- | strongly influenced by Rubin. See e.g. Michael Heinrich, // | + | wages system were not merely left intact; the modern proletariat was forcefully |
- | the three volumes of Marx's Capital// (Monthly Review Press, 2012), chapter 12 and | + | created out of an otherwise mostly agrarian population. Mass industrialisation |
- | Christopher Arthur, | + | began at the end of the 1920s, not because it responded |
- | the capitalist mode of production having been abolished by | + | self-defined need for modernisation but it was brutally imposed from above in |
- | the October Revolution although | + | the name of “national interest”. The directors of the state-owned enterprises |
- | although | + | were expected to expand production and the immediate producers work and shut |
- | However, the fundamental character | + | up. The development |
- | that is, by its dynamics and direction. | + | 8. Some still argue that production was not at all governed by the same logic as |
+ | that prevailing | ||
+ | absence | ||
+ | value-form theorists who are strongly influenced by Rubin. See e.g. Michael | ||
+ | Heinrich, // | ||
+ | Review Press, 2012), chapter 12 and Christopher Arthur, | ||
+ | clock without a spring”, in //The New Dialectic and Marx’s Capital// | ||
+ | (Leiden/ | ||
+ | Bolsheviks but that it was never replaced by socialism/ | ||
+ | the position | ||
+ | “non-mode | ||
- | In the Soviet Union, the state, the classes and the wages system were not merely left intact; | + | State ownership by itself does not stand in the way of capitalist development, |
- | agrarian population. Mass industrialisation began at the end of the 1920s, | + | as the fundamental character |
- | because it responded to the inhabitants' | + | owner is but by the economic laws at work. What about the absence of independent |
- | but because it was in the interest of the ruling class and compelled | + | enterprises? |
- | military) competition with the outside world. Enterprises had to make a profit and the immediate producers work and shut up. The dynamic was therefore essentially the same as in Table 6, not Table 7. | + | as a “substance held in common |
+ | Marx, “Value-Objectivity as Objectivity Held in Common”, in Michael Heinrich, | ||
+ | //How to read Marx’s Capital// (2021), p. 377.)) existing only in products of | ||
+ | private labour made social by being exchanged for money on a market -- then | ||
+ | these categories probably did not exist within | ||
+ | consequently neither did surplus value and its sub-categories of profit, | ||
+ | interest and rent. | ||
- | If by //value// one means products of labour from independent enterprises which, by exchanging them for money on a reasonably free market, are given social | + | If the substance |
- | recognition as abstract wealth -- then this category probably did not exist | + | however, existing in the social product controlled by the bureaucracy, |
- | in the Soviet Union, and consequently neither surplus value and its | + | argued |
- | sub-categories | + | //capital//.((As Engels noted in // |
- | as the //product of labour in general//,((Cf Dasjkovskij, ”Abstract labour and the economic categories of Marx” < | + | modern State, no matter what its form, is essentially |
- | argue that the means of production and the labour force in the Soviet Union were treated as a social // | + | state of the capitalists, |
+ | capital. The more it proceeds to the taking over of productive forces, the more | ||
+ | does it actually become the national capitalist, the more citizens does it | ||
+ | exploit. The workers remain wage-workers -- proletarians. The capitalist | ||
+ | relation is not done away with.” MECW 24, p. 319.)) As for competition, | ||
+ | trade was limited, but the country as a whole was engaged in fierce military | ||
+ | competition with the outside world and this required the development of a modern | ||
+ | industry. From this point of view, production was oriented towards | ||
+ | // | ||
+ | [[https:// | ||
+ | was the USSR? Part IV: Towards a theory of the deformation of value”]], | ||
+ | // | ||
+ | driven by profit but by production targets and if the “Soviet system” was in | ||
+ | some sense capitalist, it may therefore be more adequate to analyse it from the | ||
+ | point of view of the circuit of productive capital. If we use the formula P | ||
+ | ... C′ – M′ – C′ ... P′, | ||
- | The following statement by Engels at least does not contradict this description. | + | > Capitalism [...] appears |
- | > The modern State, no matter what its form, is essentially a capitalist machine, the state of the capitalists, | + | In contrast with Western capitalism, sale (C -- M) and purchase (M -- C) were |
+ | not decided on the market but by the central plan. | ||
- | Marx did not foresee the possibility of a state-capitalist development, | + | Marx did not foresee the possibility of a state-capitalist development, |
- | at one point he actually | + | at least one occasion |
+ | the regulation of labour time under communism. | ||
> […] after the abolition of the capitalist mode of production, but still retaining social production, the determination of value continues to prevail in the sense that the regulation of labour time and the distribution of social labour among the various production groups, ultimately the bookkeeping encompassing all this, become more essential than ever.((MECW 37, p. 838)) | > […] after the abolition of the capitalist mode of production, but still retaining social production, the determination of value continues to prevail in the sense that the regulation of labour time and the distribution of social labour among the various production groups, ultimately the bookkeeping encompassing all this, become more essential than ever.((MECW 37, p. 838)) | ||
- | Such a definition, however, | + | Using the concept of value in this sense, however, |
+ | social product, | ||
+ | pp. 818--819.)) for | ||
+ | |||
+ | > Within the collective society based on common ownership of the means of production, the producers do not exchange their products; just as little does the labour employed on the products appear here //as the value// of these products, as a material quality possessed by them, since now, in contrast to capitalist society, individual labour no longer exists in an indirect fashion but directly as a component part of the total labour.((Karl Marx, “Critique of the Gotha Programme”, | ||
+ | |||
+ | In his “1857 Introduction”, | ||
+ | ‘labour as such’, labour //sans phrase// | ||
+ | became “true in practice in this abstract form only as a category of the most | ||
+ | modern society.”((MECW 28, p. 41)) We saw above (2.3.1) that commodity exchange | ||
+ | effectuates the reduction of particular forms of labour into “human labour in | ||
+ | the abstract”.((See also the // | ||
+ | infinitesimal part of a yard of cotton, it is not a formal definition that it is | ||
+ | value, exchange value. If he had not produced an exchange value, money, he | ||
+ | would have produced nothing at all. Hence, this determination of value | ||
+ | presupposes a given historical stage of the social mode of production and is | ||
+ | itself a historical relationship arising out of that stage.” MECW 28, p. 183.)) | ||
+ | In the Introduction, | ||
+ | point of view of modern wage labour “in which individuals easily pass from one | ||
+ | kind of labour to another, the particular kind of labour being accidental to | ||
+ | them and therefore indifferent.”((MECW 28, p. 41)) Dashkovsky argues that since | ||
+ | this would be the case also in socialism, abstract labour would continue to | ||
+ | exist in the future society.((“The absence of any specific dominant type of | ||
+ | labour, easy transfer from one type of labour to another, loss of the connection | ||
+ | of the labour process with determined individuals -- all this occurs under | ||
+ | socialism in its highest development.” Isaak Dashkovsky, “Abstract labour and the | ||
+ | economic categories of Marx” | ||
+ | < | ||
- | > Within the collective society based on common ownership | + | In any case, as Marx stressed in one of his last writings, his analysis does not |
+ | proceed from the // | ||
+ | commodity// | ||
+ | neither from the ‘concept of value,’ and am therefore in no way concerned to | ||
+ | ‘divide’ it. What I proceed from is the simplest social form in which the | ||
+ | product of labour | ||
+ | //‘commodity’.// | ||
+ | appears//. Here I find that on the one hand in its natural form it is a //thing | ||
+ | for use//, alias a //use-value//; on the other hand, a // | ||
+ | exchange-value// | ||
+ | ‘exchange-value’. Further analysis of the latter shows me that exchange-value is | ||
+ | merely | ||
+ | //value// contained in the commodity, and then I start on the analysis of the | ||
+ | latter.” Karl Marx, “Notes on Wagner’s Lehrbuch der politischen Oekonomie” | ||
+ | MECW 24, pp. 544--545.)) It is the internal contradiction of the commodity | ||
+ | between use value and value which defines the law of movement of the currently | ||
+ | existing societies and which I have tried to outline in this text. It may well | ||
+ | be the case that the terms abstract labour and value should be reserved for the | ||
+ | analysis of the capitalist | ||
+ | operational life, the amount of work required for the production of individual | ||
+ | objects of daily use means something quite different than ‘value’. And now it is | ||
+ | quite possible [...] that in common usage, the ‘value’ of goods in communism is | ||
+ | spoken of, although the term has acquired a completely different meaning. Here | ||
+ | [...] we do not want to set a bad example by using an old word for a new term, | ||
+ | [...] so we speak of the // | ||
+ | International Communists, // | ||
+ | distribution// | ||
+ | however, that the existence of labour in general implies commodity production, | ||
+ | compulsory accumulation or wage slavery. | ||
- | However, as Marx stressed in one of his last writings, his analysis does not proceed from the concept of //value// but from //the commodity// | + | February 2023 |