| This question <98|117> overall <111|113> Kevin: <604|191>. |
| Question 60: Labor power creates products. The value of the products comes from the value of labor power, and the use value from the use value of labor power. Is this a correct rendering of Marx's theory? |
| [112] Kevin: Civil Society and Alienation Re: Wolf's answer Wolf writes in [98] |
| I agree and dissagree with your rendering of Marx's theory. I say this because, labor power consists of two parts singularly or together. Labor power is abstract labor and or concrete labor the difference of the two is qualitative. Abstract labor is synonomyous with unskilled labor, labor that is monotnous, with the main focus on producing a utility that is demanded. It is the least rewarding and with the highest turnover rate of the two. Where as concrete labor is the same as saying creative / skilled labor. This is innovative and more rewarding because it is aimed at makeing or doing something new and exciting, bigger and better with or with out a commodity (in demand). |
| The one thing I would tend to disagree with in your analysis is the qualitative description of abstract labor as monotonous, rather Marx defines abstract labor as alienated commodity production. Skill level, or the psychologically rewarding value of the task does not change the nature of commodity production. |
| But however, this is where I dissagree. Labor, it's value and use value can't simply define labor power, because something is still lost / wasted. The reason for this being, that laborers, capitalists or anyone for that fact aren't able to reap these powers we speek of because it may be the case that laborers are forced to bottle up their creative and innovative tallents all in the name of producing something for the market, something with value, not use value, something to be a carrier of exchange value. On top of it all, a laborer has to deal with a sence of alienation / depression / oppression, thus slowing their production and then even the capitalists suffer. |
| Here we venture into the territory of alienation, which I would like to get a perspective on from anyone on the list with interest in psychology, and especially its related Frankfurt School of Marxism. The question is the subject of much debate and of much importance; whether Marx adequately developed a theory of subjectivity from the perspective of both the worker and the capitalist. By subjectivity I mean it in a broader context than it is sometimes used, that is the modern relationship between action, and reaction in civil society and class struggle. Perhaps this is an issue that Hans would like to begin a sub-thread on, as this list seems to have become too much of a critique parlor in which involvement in extracurricular discourse has been low. |
| On a different topic, for those interested in extra reading I would strongly recommend the letters of Antonio Gramsci in addressing the question of subjectivity and its relationship with alienation. Lukacs, Sartre, and Adorno could also be interesting additions to a mini-reading list to pursue. Suggestions or thoughts from anyone else? |
|
|
|||||