post with me, correct me, make fun of me for not having done this already. whatever! im gonna read it all!
so
marx mentions in the preface that he thinks this is the most difficult part of the book and Boy, Is it! Not because its that conceptually difficult or esoteric, but because its very 'thick' and thorough. marx scientifically proves that there are more ways to write 'the exchange value is the bearer of the duration of general human labor objectified in the commodity which is expressed only in transaction with another commodity' than i can fathom haha. jokes aside its a great dissection of one of the core premises of capitalist society and thus, capitalism itself.
i totally forgot that it was at the end of this chapter where marx introduces his concept of commodity fetishism. social relations between people 'naturally appear' as social relations between commodities - 'a dozen egg is worth the same as a box of nails' despite there being no material reason for that equity - obfuscates the simple fact that the economy is ultimately a way of managing and directing human labor first and foremost. it allows capitalism to suppose itself as natural and apolitical.
Scrree posted:minimum one chapter per day
good luck with vol 1 ch 15
(no shame in breaking that monster up)
Hitler posted:ill do it with u
thanks hitler
Scrree posted:minimum one chapter per day, all three volumes, with posting along the way because just post. ive gottten 3-4 hundred pages in a couple times in the last few years before getting lazy but this time, i swear to god, im going to read all of capital!
post with me, correct me, make fun of me for not having done this already. whatever! im gonna read it all!
so
I respect this, don't fail
but i "get" the hegelian method so whatevs
this paragraph cracked me up though:
Hence, in the value-relation, in which the coat is equivalent of the linen, the form of the coat counts as the form of value. The value of the commodity linen is therefore expressed by the physical body of the commodity coat, the value of one by the use-value of the other. As a use-value, the linen is something palpably different from the coat: as value, its identical with the coat and therefore looks like the coat. Thus the linen acquires a value-form different from its natural form. Its existence as value is manifests in its equality with the coat. Just as the sheep-like nature of the Christian is shown in his resemblance of the Lamb of God
after about 8 paragraphs of linen and coats he slams Christians out of nowhere
tpaine posted:READ that capital...aw yeahh...aw baby
me: Holy shit.
me: Hold on a minute, bub, I'm reading "Karl Marx"
if i dont read capital i'll never be first lady
Scrree posted:i totally forgot that it was at the end of this chapter where marx introduces his concept of commodity fetishism. social relations between people 'naturally appear' as social relations between commodities - 'a dozen egg is worth the same as a box of nails' despite there being no material reason for that equity - obfuscates the simple fact that the economy is ultimately a way of managing and directing human labor first and foremost. it allows capitalism to suppose itself as natural and apolitical.
I understood his concept of commodity fetishism to go even beyond that - that the production for trade-value rather than use-value doesn't just obfuscate the nature of the capitalist mode of production in the function of it presenting itself as the "natural order of things" in comparison to feudalism etc., but also obfuscates the nature of the commodity itself - that the trade-value is now seen as a natural element of the commodity (when it really is the use-value that would be seen as a 'physical' /natural part of the commodity), the changing of exchange rates of commodities then being understood by bourgeois economics as elements of the commodity rather than of the labor necessary to produce it.
That being where the whole religious angle (hence fetishism) comes into play, the human now being subject to the commodity as if he was the one being controlled, rather than the one in control of the commodity. The facet, that the worker's labor is what creates the "value" of the commodity in the first place, becomes hard to recognize. At least that's how I always understood the chapter
a short chapter detailing subjects like the difference between production for use and production for exchange (expected exchange value is a use value), why a money form is necessary for the widespread production of commodities, why gold and silver are the money form of commodities, and how money itself still follows the same basic principles of commodities (value is human labor, quantified by duration, endowed into a commodity)
i am somewhat struggling to apply this to modern times in the age of fiat money - the money form in it's 'pure' state. I understand that the world economy is anchored to the dollar as a ‘reserve currency’ what exactly determines the value of a dollar when it takes less than one dollars worth of labor to produce thousands of printed bills? these questions are outside the scope of what marx is talking about right now, but its a blank spot in my comprehension.
relating this to other works: it’s interesting to note that while the concept of money is needed for generalized commodity exchange, its actual practice is not. david graeber,or the graeb, asserts in his book debt that historically it was very rare for communities to actually use hard currency in their day-to-day lives, and even for extra-communal trading it'd most likely be two types of good in kind valued in diocletian-era-coins that hadn't been minted for hundreds of years. debt is a social relationship of value between people, and money is that relationship objectified in a commodity, so it makes complete sense that the former would predate the later.
on a kind of opposite note, i think the importance of china is understated when people discuss europes bullion craze. the fact that ming china had an unlimited demand for silver bullion (as its currency) and it was going through its golden era when the europeans 'discovered' the 'free', slave mined silver of south america meant that they could always tap into the chinese market without having to worry about demand side inflation (too much money compared to productive forces) in their own countries. stolen precious metals were for a long time europes primary export in the orient.
Edited by Scrree ()