Ask a Marxist anything.

Miscellaneous General
41

“Exchange-values are products with prices?”

No, exchange-value is a property of a commodity. For exchange-value to exist, a product can not be a use-value only to those that produce it.

“Use-values means consumer have a use for them meaning them want them?”

Use-value means utility yes.

“This seems to say a product’s value is due to labor.”

That is correct, and it is for the listed reasons.

“Are people putting guns to the heads of laborers, ordering them to obey society,”

It’s happened a few times historically yes. But more generally it’s work or starve for the proletariat.

“Why?”

It’s a pretty boring long-winded explanation, but to get right down to it, it’s Socialism or Barbarism at this point. Now that Keynesian economics have become unsustainable and Neo-liberalism is shifting the crises around, I fear the collapse of Neo-liberalism without a Socialist Alternative (goddamn I love how many organisations/newspapers/etc. the left has so I can reference them vaguely at random) will lead to Barbarism.

“Define “EG the M-C-M accumulation cycle” and exchange value”

M-C-M is the Capital accumulation cycle. You start with Money which you then invest in Commodities, which you then sell for more Money, rinse repeat. The cycle for Workers is just the opposite. C-M-C. They take their labour sell it for money and buy commodities to survive with. These two cycles cannot exist without each other.

“Does currency and money differ?”

I wouldn’t say so

“You believe you are being exploited by a capitalist system, yet I and others are saying that basis of communism (exploitation tied to the labor theory of value) is wrong.”

…okay.

“the comrades enjoy even more than the cars.”

If the comrades enjoyed it even more than the cars then they would request more of it therefor more resources would be designation to those sectors of production.

42

“For civilisation.”

You would deny that Feudal societies with class systems of aristocrats, knights, serfs, etc. was civilisation? Harsh bro.

“And it’d be more accurate to call it state-capitalism, or mercantilism.”

Anything with exchange-value and the Capital accumulation cycle of M-C-M is Capitalism to me.

“Why was that?”

The German Revolution failed, this screwed the USSR as they were banking HARD on receiving support from the Germans. Communism is a global thing, if the Revolution doesn’t spread it will be doomed. Despite what Stalin will tell you, Socialism cannot exist In One Country.

43

Two more:

  1. Do you feel fine living in a voluntaryist society, or would you force a voluntary community from acculating capital in their own ‘closed’ (for lack of better words) system?

  2. Don’t you feel like the best way to bring about communism is to try to make all scarce goods non-scarce, thus eliminating the need to acquire capital?

44

“Mate, you’re the one who requested “shits & giggles.” Just giving you what you said you wanted.”

Far point.

“And what do you believe the difference is?”

One is a step forward one is a step back?

“What’s your response to that?”

I’m not denying my intention to abolish currency or exchange value if that’s what you’re saying.

This is a classic example of Capitalists being unable to think outside of their mode of production. You can think outside of your MEANS of production, but the MODE is what I am seeking to change. Let me give you a basic outline of the historical changes in such things.

Primitive Communism, Socialised mean and mode of production, everyone contributed everyone starved life was shit.

Feudalism/slave Society, as technology progressed and agriculture was developed, the means and mode of production became individualised. Peasants worked their own damn farm for themselves and their exploiting landlords.

Capitalism, technology progressed further and we had the industrial revolution, this made factories which forced the means of production to become socialised, it takes tons of workers to maintain just one factory. Yet the mode of production remain individualsied, private interests controlled that factory.

Advanced Communism, Capitalism has now globalised the world and brought everyone under this socialised mean of production, we shall now socialised the MODE of production.

45

Why not move to the woods out in Montana and live, at least and for the meanwhile, by hunting and gathering?

By the way, are many fat people guilty of accumulating capital, that is to say, guilty of accumulating fat?

46

"Is that to say that use-value is tangible? "

Use-value is tangible only insofaras it is actually being consumed.

“Also, do you object to value being subjective?”

Economic value? Yes

Philosophic value? No

47

“Are you saying that the quote “‘The emancipation of the working class must be an act of the working class.’” swayed you to become Left Communist?”

Ehh not really, after studying some flaws of the USSR, Paris Commune, Anarchist Spain, Shanghai Commune, etc etc. It became clear to me that if anything was going to work that this was going to have tor emain true, so I naturally gravitated towards a tendency that concluded the same as I.

“If so, why do you maintain that “[w]ords do little to sway people […]”?”

It is not words alone that make me a Communist. Obviously being a Communist I want to see Communism implemented, so I’m going to work at the best I think will establish Communism. See above.

48

Is there or can there be economic value to philosophical value?

49

“1) Do you feel fine living in a voluntaryist society,”

I’m not really sure what this means, but it feels like more bourgeoisie wordplay with buzzwords like freedom and democracy. “Freedom of the press is only for those that own presses.” and all that.

“or would you force a voluntary community from acculating capital in their own ‘closed’ (for lack of better words) system?”

I’ll need to know what a voluntary community is.

“the need to acquire capital?”

The need to acquire Capital is endemic in Capitalism. Capitalism can NOT end scarcity. Without scarcity there are no profits and there is no profit-motive. Existing in a society that already upholds the profit-motive means it will not allow this to happen.

50

“But more generally it’s work or starve for the proletariat.”

People are entitled to resources? They do not have to work for them? That would be pleasant for the entitled, but who will be duty-bound to fulfill that entitlement? Communist slaves?

“It’s a pretty boring long-winded explanation, but to get right down to it, it’s Socialism or Barbarism at this point.”

I did not ask what you believe will happen. I asked why you are communist. Instead you seemingly downplay its importance when in this thread it is of utmost importance so I and others can understand the reason you adhere to your current beliefs.

“You start with Money which you then invest in Commodities”

Barter preceded money. When that became too difficult, money followed to ease transactions.

“…okay.”

What I and others are saying, in differing words, is value is subjective, an opinion, not a built-in fact like the parts of an organism.

Why do you dislike private property?

51

“Why not move to the woods out in Montana and live, at least and for the meanwhile, by hunting and gathering?”

Here’s a cute little essay I wrote a long time ago. It’s poorly written and all but it holds nostalgic value to me, if I need to clarify further do let me know. And excuse the angsty tone of the essay, it was written a while back.

http://pastebin.com/56tku2Vi

“By the way, are many fat people guilty of accumulating capital, that is to say, guilty of accumulating fat?”

Uhm, what?

52

“Is there or can there be economic value to philosophical value?”

Can someone purchase an idea? No

Can someone purchase the RIGHTS to an idea? Yes

I think that’s what you’re asking?

53

Can a person be a worker in some instances and a capitalist in other instances of the same day?

54

“People are entitled to resources? They do not have to work for them?”

Some of them yes, Marxists call them the Bourgeoisie.

“I asked why you are communist.”

I thought I’d answered this by saying its in my class interests.

“Barter preceded money. When that became too difficult, money followed to ease transactions.”

I was explaining the M-C-M process, not discussing history.

“What I and others are saying, in differing words, is value is subjective, an opinion, not a built-in fact like the parts of an organism.”

You’re using the word value in a non-economic fashion.

“Why do you dislike private property?”

It is the foundation for the individualised mode of production I have alluded to earlier.

55

“Can a person be a worker in some instances and a capitalist in other instances of the same day?”

Yes, Marx’s class analysis was NEVER meant to be applied to individual persons.

56

What is the purpose of the rights to an idea if the idea itself cannot be own?

57

“Some of them yes, Marxists call them the Bourgeoisie.”

A person homesteads resources, has job offers, hires some people, produces stuff, and sells it. This is capitalism, not current crony capitalism. What do you dislike about it?

“I thought I’d answered this by saying its in my class interests.”

The one paragraph defense of the labor theory of value you posted neither I nor likely others found persuasive. Without that exploitation, communism lacks a base. Justify the base. Use simple language if possible or if you do use foreign terminology, provide definitions.

“You’re using the word value in a non-economic fashion.”

I am rephrasing what I earlier stated: Austrian economist Joseph T. Salerno said, “Past expenses incurred during the production of a good are completely irrelevant to the determination of the current price of a good. The market price of a good is determined solely by the relative valuations of goods and money by the buyers and sellers of the good.” If the subjective theory of value, the one I and others have been trying to explain and defend is wrong, explain your reasoning.

58

What is the philosophical value of Marx’s class analysis if it analyzes an abstraction (the group) and not the individual persons of the group as actors whom compromise the group?

59

“The one good thing about Marx was that he wasn’t a Keynesian”-Murray Rothbard

60

“I’m not denying my intention to abolish currency or exchange value if that’s what you’re saying.”

Yeah, and the consequences of that is to see the vast number of humanity die. Which I don’t think you want.

So - go ahead and refute the logic & reasoning present in the video please.

“Advanced Communism, Capitalism has now globalised the world and brought everyone under this socialised mean of production, we shall now socialised the MODE of production.”

Yeah, sorry bro - it’s impossible. You better get used to capitalism.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h2Aqfp5iMnw

Can some mod change this to (view:) whatever.. so its embedded.

OP - What is wrong with anarcho-capitalism? What is wrong with self ownership?