Michael Heinrich talks about the difference between classical political economy's Labour Theory of Value and Value-Form in Marx. From • Michael Heinrich: Valu... See also: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Value-form
Hi Michael , I do not want to hurt your feelings, you seem like a nice guy ... but Marx's Theory of Value is garbage, sad but true , please if you want to help do not waste your time on this Marxist rabbit hole of nonsense. Sadly Marxism is a new form of veiled anti-Semitic Racism, promoting marxism hurts the Jewish people more than others. Yes I know you have no doubt recived "public" tax funding to "study" and valadate this nonsense. Your funding from of course from tax victims who simply do not want to go to jail. Nobody pays freely for goverment services like Marxist edifying propaganda or any other forced goverment monopoly services because they are of such poor value. Think for yourself. Connect the dots , figure out why a tax violence system needs "marxist theory". Here is a quick video... it might help ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-ohmSlu3rzw8.html or this essay on a violence free ( no taxation) funding of public services www.nationalaffairs.com/public_interest/detail/the-end-of-taxation You might be interested in a few essays here , which underscores the social violence intrinsic to forced taxation. voluntaryist.com/taxation/RenderNot.pdf Anyway back to the nonsense of Karl Mearx .... Karl Marx’s “economic/social” theories always fail. Recalling the Marxist socialist utopias of the USSR( remember that "super-power"), East Germany (remember them), Albania, Yugoslavia (remember them), North Korea, Cambodia, Czechoslovakia (remember them), Romania, Somalia, Ethiopia, China, Cuba, Mugabe land, Venezuela all evidence the absolute and appalling failures of Marx’s hate based envy/theft “theories”. The failure of Marxist theory is so complete that if a Marxist society needs economic growth they are compelled to imitate the economic models of the west. When Marxist one party systems engage in their crude aping of the economic models that evolve naturally in open western societies it breeds a whole new layer of structural corruption, as China has so clearly evidenced. The end result is for many is really worst of both worlds. The Oxford scholar Leszek Kołakowski an ex-marxist who escaped the from behind the iron curtain, exposed some of the hypocrisy of Marxist “theory” in his critical text Main Currents of Marxism, it provides an analysis of the origins, philosophical roots of Marxist “theory”. Kolakowski describes Marxism as "the greatest fantasy of the twentieth century", a dream of a perfect society, which became a foundation for "a monstrous edifice of lies, exploitation and oppression." From the torture gulags of the USSR and the killing fields of Cambodia to todays food riots in Venezuela, and the toxic self-righteousness of Antifata violence the appalling failures and cultural offensiveness of Marxist dementia can never be overstated. Karl Marx was a mentally unstable ego-centric individual, his self- aggrandizing writings model a rhetorically closed self-justifying system, subjective definitions, an absence of natural economic or independent price signals, lack of internal consistency, the pagan wackiness of “historical materialism”, sectarian intolerance, racism, anti-Semitism a series of rather glaring epistemological problems and so on. It was just so much egocentric nuttiness. Sadly Marxism is a new form of anti-Semitic Racism In all Karl Marx’s " writings" it is very difficult to miss his anti-Semitic bigotry, take this quote from his 1844 essay “On the Jewish Question,” or as it is also known " A world without Jews" which clearly establishes Karl Marx as an anti-Semitic racist. "What is the worldly religion of the Jew? Huckstering. What is his worldly God? Money. … Money is the jealous god of Israel, in face of which no other god may exist. Money degrades all the gods of man-and turns them into commodities. … The bill of exchange is the real god of the Jew. His god is only an illusory bill of exchange. … The chimerical nationality of the Jew is the nationality of the merchant, of the man of money in general." .......The words of Karl Marx clearly anti-Semitic, and words which underscores his obsession with Jewishness and a wider economic culture. Although most economists laugh at Marxist economic “theory” , as informed people do at most of his nutty writings , but in one aspect of Karl’s writing he was quite noteworthy. Bernard Lewis of Princeton University and a leading American scholar has described Marx’s "On the Jewish Question" as "one of the classics of anti-Semitic propaganda”. This is as close to success as Marx ever got, as a writer of anti-Semitic propaganda and the founder of an anti-Semitic political culture that now resonates through socialist, leftist politics, the cultures of political correctness, the Frankfurt School, and Postmodrenism. Marx considered Jews to be the embodiment of capitalism and the representation of all its evils, his “critique” of capitalism is in reality anti-Semitism concealed by social /class /economic mumbo-jumbo. Karl’s obscuring rhetoric of class, capital, bankers, false consciousness, and so on cunningly veiled the anti-Semitic characteristic of his ‘theories” and the disportinate impact they would have on the Jewish people. Marx’s tactic helped propel his repackaged anti Semitism into new fields of structural popularity. . His theoretical mumbo-jumbo, is only useful in inspiring resentment and discord focused on those classes of society where Jews are more highly represented, a form of high grading, with the final “solution” a violence enforced social uniformity. As an economist, Karl was an unmitigated failure, as all countries that adopted his “theories” have found out, sadly after the demise of 200,million people. After writing " A world without Jews" Karl spent the rest of his life concocting screwy pseudo economic rationales for policies that inflicted disproportionate economic and social displacement on the Jewish people and culture followed by his own final solution of gradual “assimilation” and the elimination of the Jews as the answer to the “question” of the Jewish people. His mumbo jumbo, includes his ever- nutty “labour theory of value” , and his unique delusional utopianism as the eschatological “promised land”. Ardent Marxist have spent years covering up Karl Marx's racism, his raping the maid, his drinking, fraudulent “research”, deceitful politics, violent behavior, lack of personal hygiene, all to promote or defend his kooky ego aggrandizing theories, (that often “bolsters” their own low self esteem), and perpetuate his anti-Semitic bigotry. Today Marxist racists, (or as they are now known Cultural Marxists, the Politically Correct, or social liberals) still hate Israel, and rhetorically “high grade” the Jewish people using a host of rhetorical tactics and terms like “patriarchy” (as a pejorative) “the 1%”, “white males”, “bankers”, “capitalist class”, “critical theory” and so on. Virtually every aspect of Marxist “cultural policies” have a disproportionate negative impact on the Jewish people, the facts speak for themselves, Marxism is racism, a repackaged form of Anti-Semitism, dressed up in economic mumbo jumbo. Lenin the mass murder and close follower of Karl, loved the quote “ Anti-Semitism is the socialism of fools” the inverse that “ Socialism is the anti-Semitism of a self-serving power class” is just as true. At the end of the day it is not possible to be a Marxist without being an anti-Semitic racist. Karl Marx’s multivariate hostility to Jewish and Judeo-Christian values that define open and free western societies (Christendom) is a manifestation of his explicit anti-Semitic racism, a racism as well documented as it is denied by his sadly deluded followers. It is the same left wing anti-Semitic racism that pervades the cultural Marxists, the Politically Correct and Socialist to this day as an implicit / explicit racism. Recently this anti Semitic racism expressed by the Labor Party of Great Britain has been in the news. news.sky.com/story/hundreds-of-anti-semitism-protesters-gather-to-tell-jeremy-corbyn-enough-is-enough-11305208 news.sky.com/story/jeremy-corbyn-figurehead-of-anti-semitic-culture-jewish-leaders-11304618 Karl Marx’s anti-Semitism has been well documented, Marxism = Racism. It is all very sad, but very true. A helpful reading list regarding socialism as an expression of racism and other problems with marxist "theory". The Socialism of Fools?: Leftist Origins of Modern Anti-Semitism by William I Brustein and Louisa Roberts Karl Marx, Racist, By Weyl Nathaniel ( Recommended) The Road to Serfdom, by Friedrich von Hayek A World Without Jews. By (the racist) Karl Marx The Open Society and its Enemies, by Karl Popper Marx's Religion of Revolution: Regeneration Through Chaos by Gary North PhD. Communist Eschatology, by Francis Nigel Lee PhD. Socialism, by Ludwig Von Mises Main Currents of Marxism, by Leszek Kołakowski
Ah yes, the Anti-Semitic Jew, Karl Marx. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-YMb-Cb9-bt8.html Next time you wish to voice your half-baked take on a topic, at least make a conscientious effort to put forth a coherent argument outside pure ideology backed by fact and argument as opposed to a ridiculous meta-narrative of Cultural Marxism - which if you took the time to Google, you'd see is the argument of Neo-Nazis who ig don't fall into the racist camp by your distinctions.
The argument that tax is theft is not so convincing. You should be more outraged, that corporate oligarchs have found a way to keep wages and buying power stagnant for over 50 years while their paychecks and foreign tax hoarding havens are growing exponentially, but you never hear this criticism towards them from corporcrat worshippers like yourself. Why don't you try to understand the fact that we have become so productive, more than ever before, producing such an astounding amount of wealth, yet wages have increased with 1% or 2%? This trend goes against the classical economist (Adam Smith, Richardo, etc.) idea that the totality of society benefits from capital accumulation. The idea that government services are always of poor value is another classic Koch brothers propaganda piece which you seem to be a victim of. Last time I checked universal government healthcare is ranked among the best in the world in some countries, like Sweden. Of course, this has nothing to do with the Marxian Value Theory nor the video either way. ----Your "argument": (Anyway back to the nonsense of Karl Mearx .... Karl Marx’s “economic/social” theories always fail. Recalling the Marxist socialist utopias of the USSR( remember that "super-power"), East Germany (remember them), Albania, Yugoslavia (remember them), North Korea, Cambodia, Czechoslovakia (remember them), Romania, Somalia, Ethiopia, China, Cuba, Mugabe land, Venezuela all evidence the absolute and appalling failures of Marx’s hate based envy/theft “theories”.) ---- This is again a classic lolbertatian notion. The idea that Marx (or Engels) is in any way the "let's-nationalize-everything-and-do-central-planning-lol" guy is, of course, a lazy and intentional non-reading of Marxian law of value-theory and theory on surplus-value (LISTEN AND TRY TO UNDERSTAND WHAT THE NICE MAN IN THE VIDEO IS TRYING TO EXPLAIN). Here's what he and Engels had to say on when the state takes the role of centralized commodity producer and planner instead of abstract market forces: "The social capital is equal to the sum of the individual capitals (including ... state capital, in so far as governments employ productive wage-labour in mines, railways, etc. and function as industrial capitalists" - Marx in Capital vol 2 "Where the state itself in a capitalist producer, as in the exploitation of mines, forests, etc., its product in a commodity and hence possesses the specific character of every other commodity (commodities out of capitalist production process)." - Marx in his notes on Adolph Wagner. Centralization of capital "would reach its extreme limits ... [i]n a given society ... only when the entire social capital was united in the hands of either a single capitalist or a single capitalist company." - Marx in Capital vol 1 "state ownership does not do away with the capitalistic nature of the productive forces ...The more (of them the state takes over), 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." Engels in his Anti-Duhring. If anybody wants to read more on the nature of state capitalist, take a look at The Nature of the Russian Economy by Dunayevskaya. She explains that the USSR "to compete effectively in the world market, governed by the law of value, "[the plan must be] "governed by the necessity to pay the laborer the minimum ... and the extract from him the maximum surplus value." [as long as that is the case.] "that is how long capitalist relations of production exist, no matter what you name the social order." THUS "Perhaps the replacement of private ownership by social ownership on all the commanding heights is merely a formal juridical act which involves no change in the essence of the system?" - Probrazhensky Of course, the idea of nationalization and intensification of the productive labor-forces is a certain strain (like dozens of strains in modern economics) of communist (but not Marxian) thought, especially associated with early Russian communists. It was an important development in non-capital and so weak countries and especially Russia. Countries that were absolutely backward in relation to the West. In such places capital (both machines and investments) did not exist and almost everybody lived in an agricultural post-medieval society. Here Leninism prevailed because it utilized the coercive powers of the state on its populace to modernize the country as soon as possible. Lenin knew that state capitalism was not Marxian in any way, but he believed that state-capitalism is probably the only way to modernize Russia as soon as possible, which they kinda did, going from a post-medieval society to launching a cosmonaut in less than 50 years. If you truly cared for the truth and understanding history you would know that Russian communism borrowed insights from Adam Smith, Richardo, Hendry Ford, Marx, and many others. Most of your countries followed this idea so. Yugoslavia was not so communist, all small and medium-sized companies were privately owned, by grandparents were business owners. Also, Venezuela is a typical "newcomer" because you hear it everywhere on the internet that it's supposedly socialist or whatever. Of course, who knows under what definition, certainly not under yours because 75% of the Venezuelan workforce is working in the private sector. According to your logic, every Baltic country is also communist/socialist/whatever considering 25% - 30% of employees are working in the public sector and the rest in working in the private sector. SUCH GOBBUNISM. ---- Your claim: (The Oxford scholar Leszek Kołakowski an ex-marxist who escaped the from behind the iron curtain, exposed some of the hypocrisy of Marxist “theory” in his critical text Main Currents of Marxism, it provides an analysis of the origins, philosophical roots of Marxist “theory”.) ---- Funny thing is that I have read this book, and while it is a piece of academic achievement, there are serious issues with it. 1) Kołakowski explicitly states that he never read Marx, but instead learned about Marx from another orthodox Marxist. So much for being an academic, not even going through the effort of researching and studying primary sources. 2) He claims that Marx agrees with Feuerbach's notion of human nature. This is not true Marx rejects it, he says in his 1844 manuscripts: Feuerbach resolves the essence of religion into the essence of man. But the essence of man is no abstraction inherent in each single individual. In reality, it is the ensemble of the social relations. Feuerbach, who does not enter upon a criticism of this real essence is hence obliged: 1. To abstract from the historical process and to define the religious sentiment regarded by itself, and to presuppose an abstract - isolated - human individual. 2. The essence, therefore, can by him only be regarded as ‘species’, as an inner ‘dumb’ generality which unites many individuals only in a natural way. in Capital, he also writes a critique to utilitarians 'human nature in general, and then with human nature as modified in each historical epoch'. Anyhow Kołakowski is a great intellectual, but he's a bit clueless on Marx. 3) Kołakowski never addresses any economic arguments. What is the point of writing on Marx if you don't even address any of his points on the working of capitalism? Kołakowski, proving you never read his book, states clearly multiple times that he considers Marx to be great thinker. Continued in the next post.
---- Your "claim" that Marx is a anti-semitic racist and bigot: (In all Karl Marx’s " writings" it is very difficult to miss his anti-Semitic bigotry, take this quote from his 1844 essay “On the Jewish Question,” or as it is also known " A world without Jews" which clearly establishes Karl Marx as an anti-Semitic racist.) ---- Lol, what a mess. "A world without Jews" was never a title given to anything by Marx. Dagobert D. Runes published some works by Marx to show his alleged antisemitism, of course, clueless people like you (or maybe not so clueless) are never told this is not a tile by Marx. Marx's anti-semitism is probably just his aversion for Judaism and religion in general. He wrote to the Jews in Germany: I have just been visited by the chief of the Jewish community here, who has asked me for a petition for the Jews to the Provincial Assembly, and I am willing to do it. However much I dislike the Jewish faith, Bauer's view seems to me too abstract. The thing is to make as many breaches as possible in the Christian state and to smuggle in as much as we can of what is rational. At least, it must be attempted-and the embitterment grows with every petition that is rejected with protestations." Postscript of a Letter from Marx to Arnold Ruge in Dresden, written: Cologne, March 13, 1843 He wrote to Abraham Lincoln that he should free the slaves. "The workingmen of Europe feel sure that, as the American War of Independence initiated a new era of ascendancy for the middle class, so the American Antislavery War will do for the working classes. They consider it an earnest of the epoch to come that it fell to the lot of Abraham Lincoln, the single-minded son of the working class, to lead his country through the matchless struggle for the rescue of an enchained race and the reconstruction of a social world." - Marx to Lincoln's secretariat 1864 Marx wrote thousand of pages defending victims from colonialism, women, poor workers and people of color. People who want to discredit him viciously and cowardly just nick pick the wackiest shit between the lines and don't care about overwhelming evidence on the contrary. Also the word "negro" was extremely common then, used by everybody, it did not attain yet the disdainfulness as it has today. Abolitions and pro-slavery advocates used it interchangeably, sorry. ----(Your claim: (Ardent Marxist have spent years covering up Karl Marx's racism, his raping the maid, his drinking, fraudulent “research”, deceitful politics, violent behavior, lack of personal hygiene, all to promote or defend his kooky ego aggrandizing theories, (that often “bolsters” their own low self esteem), and perpetuate his anti-Semitic bigotry. ---- Nonsense, You're obviously very biased and arguing out of bad faith and willful ignorance. ---- Your claim: Today Marxist racists, (or as they are now known Cultural Marxists, the Politically Correct, or social liberals) still hate Israel, and rhetorically “high grade” the Jewish people using a host of rhetorical tactics and terms like “patriarchy” (as a pejorative) “the 1%”, “white males”, “bankers”, “capitalist class”, “critical theory” and so on. Virtually every aspect of Marxist “cultural policies” have a disproportionate negative impact on the Jewish people, the facts speak for themselves, Marxism is racism, a repackaged form of Anti-Semitism, dressed up in economic mumbo jumbo. ----- This is just insanity of somebody obviously spending too much time on the internet and conspiracy theory channels. Cultural Marxism is a modern updated version of Cultural Bolshevism, a Nazi conspiracy theory. You're either naive and stupid or deceitful and cunning. ---- Your claim: (Ardent Marxist have spent years covering up Karl Marx's racism, his raping the maid, his drinking, fraudulent “research”, deceitful politics, violent behavior, lack of personal hygiene, all to promote or defend his kooky ego aggrandizing theories, (that often “bolsters” their own low self esteem), and perpetuate his anti-Semitic bigotry.) ---- Very reasonable and not batshit insane nonsense. Get a grip, go outside. ---- Your claim: (It is the same left wing anti-Semitic racism that pervades the cultural Marxists, the Politically Correct and Socialist to this day as an implicit / explicit racism. Recently this anti Semitic racism expressed by the Labor Party of Great Britain has been in the news.) ---- Jeremy Corbyn attacked Zionism, not the Jewish people in general. This is typical media race-baiting lol. Skynews, get a grip. Then some books by libertarians that believed Marxism is state capitalism and centralized planning. Waste of time to read these if you want to understand Marxism. However, they are very good if you want to understand capitalism, but it is very biased on left-wing ideas. Did you know that Friedman originally came up with Universal Basic Income? Wow huh. Other books are just bait lol.
Services are a type of "immaterial" commodity, but nonetheless they require someone to work in order for that service to exist, just like a regular commodity. In essence, services and material commodities differ in the way production and consumption relate to each other: whereas in material commodities one must first produce them in order to consume them, services are consumed as they are produced, simultaneously. So yes, it's a possibility.
heinrich doesn't entirely disregard alienation so much as doesn't read capital as a continuation of that theory- in an introduction to the three volumes of capital he has this to say: "In section 1.3 we noted that the young Marx understood capitalism as the “alienation” from “human species being.” Marx’s analysis of the fetish character of commodities was understood by some authors as a continuation of this theory of alienation. However, a close reading yields that Marx does not refer to any sort of “human essence” when dealing with the fetish character of commodities." He probably goes into more detail in his works about Marx's ambivalences bc he doesn't go quite as far as Althusser does
I've read Capital and I've never come across anything that would imply that abstract labor can not measured in labor time - that would fundamentally disprove the LTV, and I don't think Marx tries to do that. Where the fuck does Heinrich arrive at this conclusion?
In my opinion, the idea of socially necessary labour time necessitates that the labour that is measured must be of a uniform character, hence not labour in kind but abstract labour. However, that doesn't disprove the LTV.
I also wondering this, and I think it must be that money is the necessary expression in a society based on generalized exchange i.e. we could not swap from money to a direct measure of socially necessary labor time, but that none-the-less it could be measured. But I'm still trying to work it out
Read the book, concrete labour can be measured but not labour in the abstract since it’s a “relation of social validation”. Concrete labour still acts as a quantum of value-constituting abstract labour but only in exchange. If you think about it makes a lot more sense than a naturalistic interpretation.
@@antrim7008 then you are basically turning Marx on his head with this. I'd love someone to measure concrete labor instead of its denomination in abstract labor the same way someone would try to quantify use values. It honestly feels like you are mystifying "value" here to go around the LTV. Clearly the muscular movements and neurological brain functions of acts of concrete labor, such as pulling up a fishing rod or blowing glass, are impossible to quantify in the social sphere in any observable way. The labor measured in time of a fisherman or a glass blower however is.
@@xasthurwithin4178 Concrete labour is very easily quantifiable in labour-time. Any type of labour whether or not it works to produce commodities can be measured using labour-time.
