Charles Brown wrote:
> These universally developed individuals will not be totally
> economically self-sufficient, will they ? An individual won't
> produce
> every use-value they use. There will be economic exchange between
> these universally developed individuals.
"Use-values" are means for the end in itself activity that defines the realm of freedom. The instrumental activity that creates them defines what Marx calls the "realm of natural necessity." As conceived by him, activity in this realm would also be the activity of such individuals, i.e. it would require the fully developed powers that define them, and, for this reason, would not be divided and specialized. It would also be characterized by relations of mutual recognition. The activity would provide each individual with what each "needs" for life in the realm of freedom.
Whatever "exchange" is involved is not an expression of the division of labour since this no longer exists. The instrumental activity and the use-values it creates are freely "shared" in accordance with the principle specified in The Critique of the Gotha Programme. Each contributes to the activity "according to her ability" and receives a share of the resulting use-values "according to her needs" in the above sense.
"In a higher phase of communist society, after the enslaving subordination of the individual to the division of labor, and therewith also the antithesis between mental and physical labor, has vanished; after labor has become not only a means of life but life's prime want; after the productive forces have also increased with the all-around development of the individual, and all the springs of co- operative wealth flow more abundantly -- only then then can the narrow horizon of bourgeois right be crossed in its entirety and society inscribe on its banners: From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs!"
Ted