[lbo-talk] value form

Rakesh Bhandari bhandari at berkeley.edu
Mon Sep 25 09:43:24 PDT 2006


Hi Angelus and others, Noted the favorable reference to Polanyi; do you know the critiques by John Lie and Maurice Godelier?

At any rate, I am trying to explain to myself why you put importance on the abolition of what you are calling the value form.

This is how I understand the argument.

1. The Ontological Primacy of Social Labor Activity

Social labor time must be distributed to allow for the use of the otherwise inactive factors of production (land, means of production, draught animals) and the reproduction of society thereby. Any economics which effaces the ontological primacy of social productive labor is fetishistic. As therefore is all talk of the qualitative equality of all the factors of production or the putative production of commodities by commodities.

2. The Implications of Reification

2.a. People relate to each other only through commodities

2.b. The social labor time which is to be distributed to an activity must manifest itself (from 1)and can only manifest itself in the expression of one commodity in another commodity (from 2a).

2.c. This mode of expression distorts within strict limits the value of a commodity (chaotic price movements still gravitate around values, and the double divergence of profit from counterfactually imputed surplus value embodied in an individual commodity and the cost price of the used up means of production from their value creates only a small divergence between the price and value of a commodity). But this distortion, though strictly limited as empirically confirmed, is the most important reason that the price form appears as a hieroglyphic, yet price must remain a function of value (this simply follows from 1, 2a and 2b).

3. The Nature of Surplus Value Moreover, the redistribution of value effected by the distorting price form does not affect the conclusion that the only source of new value in the system as a whole is the exploitation of labor, i.e. the 'labor fund' which the capitalist class apportions to the working class for its reproduction is less than the new value the defacto enslaved workers have created and the capitalist class 'rightfully' appropriated.

4. Capital as living contradiction Competitive production works at cross purposes: it strives to lower unit values yet it does just that by raising the organic composition of capital and thereby depressing the general profit rate and putting out the flames of expanded reproduction.

5. The transience of value

Once the nature of value is understood, all belief in the necessity of the bourgeois mode of production vanishes.

Where would you disagree with this?

Yours, Rakesh



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list