Mr. Anwar Shaikh is misleading the the whole class, (30:00) in the sense that why the labor was not the part of determining and deciding, on so called "civilized society" 's distribution of surplus value on "the fair and just basis", in order to maintain "equality" - for the same the standard of living of labor and producer? This is the origin of exploitation and inequality in a capitalist society. That is the first point need to be clarified and instilled in, any and all, students of Economics and Political Economy. How does one knows whether the other person is fair, just and honest, in any transaction? For example, if there is a round cake and that must be equally distributed, how this is to be accomplished? The "fair and just" way is to have a condition that state: If one cut/divide the cake first, then the other will pick up first the portion s/he chooses. This will resolve the problem in the sense that the dishonest party will suffer, in the sense that creating inequality in the first place to begin with, he lost the bigger piece of the cake. This is the duty and responsibility of a TRUE TEACHER.
People like Marx who did do much, and studied so much, a wrote so much, reminds me once again that cocaine was completely legal back then. Makes me think of a letter from Benjamin Franklin apologizing for missing a meeting of congress because he "took a cheerful amount of opium and slept in".
people do implicit, intuitive, heureistic optimization not only explicit optimization. some of cost-benefit analyses is inherent/genetic; it is evolutionary according to biology.
I'm almost certain one of the students who responds to professor Sheikh's questions is Isabella Weber. If you can confirm, I'd appreciate it. Her book on China's economy was fantastic!
100% it does on a commodity production economy. It’s the gravitational central point of price variances/imbalances namely, demand and exchange. Labour cost=value=central point of prices=abstract value and universal across the whole economy. And competition between commodity producers makes that fact about price even more crude.
@@charli212 No it does not. It was like that for a very short time in Marx's times. Not anymore as capitalism now is in the stage of imperialism. Read Lenin "Imperialism, the Highest Stage of Capitalism". Lenin proved that competition leads to imperialism = monoply capitalism. Prices are set by oligopolis/monopolies. Also Marx in Capital pointed out that competition leads directly to monopoly.
@@Diamat1917 I don’t agree with Lenin thesis because it was heavily based on the Russian case and cannot be extrapolated to all cases. And monopolies due to concentration and centralisation are a feature of capitalism, but prices are rooted in the labour process and not in the boardrooms.
@@charli212 Lenin was 100% right and history proved it. The highest state of capitalism = imperialism is a global system of interconnected and mutually interdependent institutions: private monopolies and companies, financial institutions, states and international bodies, various political organisations and networks, which secure the interests of the big capital and bourgeoisie. Lenin defined imperialism through accumulation of capital and power. In the last century this process was deepened with even higher degree of concentration of wealth and resources in the hand of even smaller minority. This wealth and resources are concentrated in so-called West, with US, EU, Japan and Canada accounting for more than half of world’s economy and 168 poorest countries accounting for merely 16%. 90 out of the world’s 100 biggest companies are based in and owned by the West and its allies, with only a handful of enterprises and banks from China, India and Russia and none from the rest of Asia, Africa and Latin America, which constitute vast majority of world population. US, Germany, Japan and UK are also leading countries in export of capital in form of the Foreign Direct Investments. This data leaves no doubt that the core of the imperialist system is now even more centred on in US / EU / Japan axis and their allies. In XXI century we can add another type of monopoly - technological dominance. Western imperialism has maintained its monopoly position in the high-tech sector of world industry, including navigation satellite systems, cybersecurity and semiconductors. This unprecedented monopoly power over industrial standards is backed by patent and licencing system, with US-based corporations being the key technology owners. This advantage is being weaponised and used not only to exert pressure on countries like China, Russia or Iran, but on their own allies at the expense of their own industries. Prices are set directly by imperialists to secure monopoly profits which is backed by military power. Other countries, aware of this process are attempting to gain technological independence by developing their own technology. Time is running out for imperialism to ensure its global dominance in the sphere of technology. One more decade of peaceful development could lead to the loss of the West’s hegemonic position in technology sector. This is the main reason why imperialist centre (USA) has stepped up its aggressive acts, staging colour revolutions and inciting military conflicts, which can potentially escalate into World War III.
1:17:00 Socially nessessary abstract labour time. Socially necessary because it is the average. Abstract because iit is involved of production of this as a commodity
19:00 Silent exchange/trade - tribes even do not meet during silent exchange. To perform a silent trade, one group of traders would go to a specific location, leave their trading goods and then withdraw to a distance. Then play a drum to signal the other traders that a silent trade was taking place. The other group of traders would then approach and inspect the goods (most commonly salt or gold). If the goods met with approval, the second group would then take the goods, leave their own goods in return, and depart.
but professor, both definition illustrates the same essential point if wholeselling and retailing are viewed as adding value, which I would like to argue they do, they buy the produce from the producers or manufacturers and make it accessible to the the final consumer, it adds to the value of the good in the sense of availability, just as a cargo ships adds to the value of good for transporting it from one place to another, anything which is not available to an individual can serve no use value to him
I’m sure the good professor will revise his thesis now that you’ve now so lucidly expounded the issue for him in this seminal RU-vid comment - be sure to look out for this in the 2nd edition of his book.
Shaikh ending with a somewhat pessimistic view of the future, while at the same time paraphrasing Marx "I dont mean that humanity is doomed, I mean that capitalism is doomed" (1:33:50). Great stuff as always
