efrain

Colonialism never disappeared. We have to fight it, even if all we have are stones or an Expo marker.

“Displaced Palestinians targeted during attempt to return to northern Gaza”

Israeli soldiers have opened fire on Palestinians in Gaza City who were attempting to return to their homes in the north of the strip.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yj7Ur9hbIUk

Labor is not just a cost of production; it is the substance of value itself, irrespective of the subjective assessments of individuals. Therefore, Marx's theory of value remains robust and relevant in understanding the dynamics of capitalist society.

The assertion that labor only has intrinsic value when it has extrinsic value overlooks the dialectical relationship between labor and the means of production within capitalism.

The value of labor power is determined by the socially necessary labor time required for its reproduction, including the provision of the means of subsistence for the worker and their family.

Also, Marx distinguishes between labor power, the capacity to work, and labor itself, the actual expenditure of that capacity.

Labor, in Marx’s analysis, possesses intrinsic value precisely because it is the fundamental activity through which society reproduces itself. It is not merely a subjective assessment but a recognition of the essential role labor plays in the creation of value within a capitalist economy.

Marx's conception of labor as the source of value is not subjective but rather rooted in the objective conditions of capitalist society.

Marx's theory of value goes beyond a mere calculation of the labor required to produce a commodity. It delves into the social relations and structures that underpin the capitalist mode of production.

Respectfully, I’ve noticed that your responses are consistently a reflection of your own assumptions and misunderstandings of Marx’s work rather than Marx’s claims or analyses. Simplifying it to labor is YOUR incorrectly projected claim to Marx. I’d ask that you provide direct quotes w/ your claims.

Rather, it provides a framework for understanding the social and economic dynamics of capitalist production relations, wherein the extraction of surplus value from labor is a defining characteristic of capitalist exploitation.

Therefore, the labor theory of value does not posit labor as objectively the cost or value of a good or service in isolation, nor does it inherently lead to the belief that exploitation is objectively occurring.

"Labour-power, however, becomes a commodity only under specific historical conditions...The value of labour-power is determined, as in the case of every other commodity, by the labour-time necessary for the production, and consequently also the reproduction, of this specific article."

Also, Marx explicitly distinguishes between labor as a source of value and labor as a commodity within capitalist relations of production. He explains:

Marx himself addressed this misconception:

"The value of commodities is determined by the socially necessary labour time embodied in them, and this, under the conditions of production normal for a given society, is regulated by the socially average intensity of labour." - Marx, "Capital, Vol I"

However, this does not imply that labor itself possesses an objective or intrinsic value outside of its social context within capitalist society.

Marx's labor theory of value is based on the premise that the value of a commodity is determined by the amount of socially necessary labor time required for its production.

This misinterprets the principles of the labor theory of value as expounded by Marx. In Marxist theory, the labor theory of value does not assert an extrinsic or inherent value of labor itself, but rather it seeks to understand the social relations embedded within the capitalist mode of production.

Thanks for the constructive exchange. A rarity on social media for things to not devolve into a match of insults these days!

This is to say that his analysis is based on what could be materially observed, dialectical and historically. No one should stop you from basing your own analysis using a belief in an unobservable phenomenon, but it won’t be very compelling as an analysis. I’m sure you understand that.

By exposing the social relations of production and the unequal distribution of value within capitalist society, the labor theory of value sheds light on the systemic injustices inherent in capitalist production.

So, while the labor theory of value may not capture every aspect of subjective evaluations of labor, it remains a crucial tool for understanding the exploitation of labor under capitalism.

Under capitalism, the value of labor is determined not by its intrinsic worth or the satisfaction it brings to the worker, but by its exchange value in the capitalist market.

Moreover, Marx's labor theory of value acknowledges that the capitalist mode of production distorts the intrinsic value of labor by reducing it to a commodity to be bought and sold on the market.

In a capitalist society, labor is commodified and exchanged for a wage, regardless of whether it is considered pleasant or meaningful by the worker.

Additionally, while individuals may subjectively evaluate their labor differently based on extrinsic or intrinsic factors, Marx's analysis focuses on the social relations of production that shape labor under capitalism.

This objective measure of value exposes the exploitation of labor within capitalist production, where workers are often paid less than the value they create.

For instance, Marx's labor theory of value highlights how the value of commodities is ultimately determined by the socially necessary labor time required for their production.

While it may not fully account for subjective evaluations of labor, it remains a powerful tool for analyzing the exploitation inherent in capitalist production.

The labor theory of value isn't flawed; it provides a critical framework for understanding the fundamental role of labor in the production of value under capitalism.