Archivo

Posts Tagged ‘Forma mercancía’

“Capitalism In The Age of The Internet”: Guglielmo Carchedi

06/06/2014 Deja un comentario

The Internet has given a new shape to modern capitalism. These new features have drawn the attention of numerous studies and have become the focus of highly topical and controversial questions. However, as a rule, the literature has not taken as its starting point the development of a Marxist epistemology. The reason for this is that this is perhaps the most underdeveloped area of Marxism, arguably the consequence of the failure to derive a Marxist theory of knowledge from Marx’s value theory. In this lecture, I will first conceptualise mental versus objective labour processes and reject the notion of the non-materiality of knowledge. Then, I will build on this conceptualisation and deal with three interrelated questions, namely whether mental labour can be productive of value and surplus value and whether the distinctions between productive and unproductive labour, on one side, and, on the other, between production and consumption retain their validity in mental production. Finally, I will explore the class nature of knowledge with particular reference to the Internet. The analysis of the Internet is a case study designed to test and validate Marx’s value theory and theory of knowledge in contemporary capitalism. Leer más…

“Towards an unknown Marx: a commentary on the manuscripts of 1861-63″: Enrique Dussel

28/03/2014 Deja un comentario

This book is the first complete commentary on Marx’s manuscripts of 1861-63, works that guide our understanding of fundamental concepts such as ‘surplus-value’ and ‘production price’.

Towards an Unknown Marx: A Commentary on the Manuscripts of 1861-63. By Enrique Dussel. Translated by Yolanda Angulo. London: Routledge, 2001. xl; 273 pp. This work, originally written in Spanish, is the first analysis of Marx’s voluminous notebooks written between 1861 and 1863. These notebooks contain the well-known Theories of Surplus Value, a second draft (after the Grundrisse) of parts 2-4 of the first volume of Capital, and a first draft of most of volume 3 of Capital.

Leer más…

“Introduction to Marxist Economics”: Ben Fine

26/03/2014 Deja un comentario

Ben Fine from SOAS University explains the fundamental ideas of Marxist Economics as a part of lecture series “What you won’t learn in an economics degree: an introduction to heterodox economics”.

The lecture was hosted by Post-Crash Economics Society Manchester and Manchester’s Political Economy Institute.

To watch the videos of the previous lectures go to
http://www.post-crasheconomics.com/ev…

On the 4th of February we are lucky to have the Marxist economist Ben Fine from SOAS University in London for the fifth instalment in our lecture series “What You Won’t Learn in an Economics Degree: an Introduction to Heterodox Economics”. Fine is one of the Uk’s best known Marxists and has authored and co-authored a number of books on the subject, including an introduction to Marx’s capital. Marxist economics is often misunderstood or even scoffed at because of its perceived political implications. However, with the global economy in crisis, some believe it’s now hard not to take seriously many of the things Marx wrote about capitalism’s systemic tendency toward catastrophe.

According to the Marxist analysis, labour is the sole source of ‘value’, and capitalists make a profit by paying labourers wages lower than the value the labourers produce. However, as technology develops, capitalists tend to substitute capital for labour to increase productivity. This has the perverse effect of lowering the amount of labour performed – and therefore the surplus produced – in the economy as a whole. As the rate of profit falls, this manifests itself in periodic crises as capitalists cut back to try and recover profits.

Leer más…

“Marx e la fondazione macro-monetaria della microeconomia”: Riccardo Bellofiore

24/01/2014 Deja un comentario

In molti dei suoi scritti recenti, Fred Moseley ha sottolineato che la teoria di Marx deve essere interpretata secondo un approccio tanto «macro» quanto «monetario», e che su di esso poggia la determinazione dei prezzi di produzione[1]. Moseley riconosce che anche altri interpreti hanno proposto una lettura «macro-monetaria» della teoria marxiana. Piuttosto che aprire un dialogo con queste altre prospettive interpretative, Moseley si è accontentato di sviluppare la propria. Un confronto aperto e una critica rigorosa sono perciò opportuni per individuare similitudini e differenze tra le varie posizioni.

Non posso che essere d’accordo con l’idea secondo cui l’originalità di Marx risiederebbe in quella che ho altrove definito come una vera e propria «teoria monetaria del valore-lavoro» e nella sua prospettiva «macro-sociale»: due elementi che caratterizzano la mia lettura di questo autore fin dagli anni ottanta. Tali affermazioni devono essere tuttavia vagliate attentamente, poiché non è per niente ovvio che il primo libro del Capitale di Marx possa essere letto alla maniera di Moseley, sia per quanto riguarda il versante «macro» che per quel che riguarda il versante «monetario». Una prima ragione sta nel fatto che, con poche eccezioni, il collegamento fondamentale tra il denaro e il valore ha soltanto recentemente catalizzato l’attenzione degli studiosi di Marx, ed è ancora oggi uno dei punti più controversi di tutta l’economia marxiana. Un’altra ragione sta nel fatto che la distinzione tra macro e micro è un risultato della rivoluzione keynesiana, essa stessa alquanto controversa nel suo significato. L’applicazione di questi aggettivi a Marx deve essere chiarita fin nei minimi dettagli.

Leer más…

“La Determinación de la “Expresión Monetaria del Tiempo de Trabajo” (“MELT”) en el caso del Dinero no mercancía”: Fred Moseley

22/11/2013 1 comentario

Abstract

This paper suggests a way to determine the “monetary expression of labor” (the “MELT”) in today’s regime of inconvertible credit money, a way that is consistent with Marx’s general theory of money and is quantitatively the same as Marx’s determination of the MELT in the case of the inconvertible fiat money of his time. In order to explain this method of determination of the MELT in the case of modern inconvertible credit money, the paper first reviews Marx’s determination of the MELT in the case of commodity money and in the case of the inconvertible fiat money of his time. The final section of the paper discusses the similarities and the differences between my interpretation and Saros’s (2007) interpretation of the MELT in the case of inconvertible fiat money.
JEL classification: B51, E11

Keywords: commodity money, fiat money, credit money, monetary expression of labor time

Resumen

Este trabajo sugiera una manera para determinar la “expresión monetaria del tiempo de trabajo” (el “MELT” por sus siglas en inglés, monetary expression of labor time) en el régimen actual de dinero crédito inconvertible, una manera que es consistente con la teoría general del dinero de Marx y que es cuantitativamente igual a la determinación de Marx del MELT para el caso de dinero fiduciario inconvertible de su tiempo. Para explicar este método de determinación del MELT en el caso de dinero crédito inconvertible moderno el trabajo primero revisa la determinación del MELT que hace Marx en el caso del dinero mercancía y en el caso del dinero fiduciario inconvertible de su tiempo. La sección final del trabajo discute las similitudes y diferencias entre mi interpretación y la interpretación de Saros (2007) del MELT en el caso de dinero fiduciario inconvertible
Clasificación JEL: B51, E11

Leer más…

“Il Capitale come Feticcio Automatico e come Soggetto, e la sua costituzione: sulla (dis)continuità Marx-Hegel”: Riccardo Bellofiore

06/11/2013 Deja un comentario

Abstract: This article will deal in two steps with the Marx–Hegel (dis)connection in Capital. First, I’ll present a survey of what I take to be the most relevant positions about the role of dialectics in Marx. Second, after reviewing Marx’s criticisms of Hegel, I’ll consider the debate within the International Symposium on Marxian Theory. Third, I will argue that it is exactly Hegel’s idealism which made the Stuttgart philosopher crucial for the understanding of the capital relation. Here, I will refer to the ‘Hegelian’ Colletti of the late 1960s-early 1970s, to Backhaus’ dialectic of the form of value, and to Rubin’s interpretation of abstract labour as a process. At this point, I will provide my reading of Marx’s movement from commodity to money, and then to capital, in the first 5 chapters of Capital. Marx is moving on following a dual path. The first path reconstructs the ‘circularity’ of Capital as Subject, as an Automatic Fetish: it is here that Hegel’s idealistic method of ‘positing the presupposition’ served Marx well. The second path leads him to dig into the ‘constitution’ of the capital-relation, and therefore into the ‘linear’ exploitation of workers and class-struggle in production. Here we meet Marx’s radical break from Hegel, and understand the materialist foundation of the critique of political economy.

Introduzione

In questo articolo mi interrogherò sul rapporto di continuità/discontinuità tra Marx e Hegel. Inizierò con una rassegna personale idiosincratica delle posizioni più importanti che hanno influenzato la mia posizione. A seguire, prima ricorderò le critiche principali di Marx a Hegel, poi alcuni momenti del vivace dibattito all’interno dell’International Symposium on Marxian Theory (ISMT). Sosterrò quindi che è proprio l’idealismo assoluto di Hegel che ha reso il filosofo di Stoccarda così importante per la comprensione del ‘rapporto di capitale’. Lo farò ricordando la lettura, a suo modo hegeliana, che Colletti dà del valore di Marx a cavallo tra anni Sessanta e Settanta. Userò pure il rimando a Backhaus e alla sua dialettica della forma di valore, e a Rubin e alla sua interpretazione del lavoro astratto, autori che aiutano ad approfondire il discorso di Colletti in una prospettiva a mio parere convergente.

Leer más…

“El valor de las obras de arte desde una perspectiva marxista”: José María Durán Medraño

30/10/2013 Deja un comentario

Resumen

Este artículo trata de plantear una serie de cuestiones preliminares en torno al estudio del valor de las obras de arte desde una perspectiva marxista, es decir, desde una perspectiva que tenga en cuenta la teoría laboral del valor desarrollada por Marx. El artículo comienza con una serie de cuestiones preliminares que desde nuestro punta de vista son fundamentales a la hora de exponer el  problema del valor/precio de las obras de arte. Continúa examinando críticamente planteamientos recientes sobre la teoría de formación precios en Adam Smith; y concluye volviendo a Marx y la teoría laboral del valor con el fin de proponer un posible camino para la investigación futura.

Palabras clave: Valor, precio, arte, mercancía, trabajo.

Abstract

The article examines several questions regarding the value of works of art from a Marxist point of view, that is, from a point of view that takes into account Marx’s labour theory of value. The article begins with a series of preliminary questions that from our point of view are basic in order to present the value/price problem of works of art. It follows by a critical examination of some recent approaches regarding Smith’s theory of price formation; and it ends turning to Marx and his labour theory of value to put forward a possible direction for future investigations.
Key words: Value, price, art, commodity, labour.

Leer más…

“Social and Physical Form: Ilyenkov on the Ideal and Marx on the Value-Form”: Andrew Chitty

23/10/2013 Deja un comentario

E.V. Ilyenkov’s philosophy represents an extraordinarily ambitious attempt to use the idea that human social activity has determinate ‘forms’ to achieve three different goals: an account of the categories of thought, an account of our knowledge of the natural world, and an account of human consciousness. Overarching these goals, and incorporating them, is another: that of giving an account of mind based on social activity.

Ilyenkov’s conception of the ideal, or of ideality, plays a central role in this project. We could go as far as to say that for Ilyenkov ‘ideality’ is the most fundamental feature of human mindedness. By demonstrating that ideality is an objective yet non-physical feature of social activities, and of the things used and produced by social activities, Ilyenkov aims to show that an elementary human mindedness inheres in these activities and things, which makes possible the fully-fledged human mindedness that characterises individual reflective human beings.

Leer más…

“Examen de la crítica de C. Benetti y J. Cartelier a la teoría del dinero de Marx”: Abelardo Mariña Flores y Mario L. Robles Báez

02/09/2013 Deja un comentario

En la parte tercera de Merchands, salariat et capitalistes (1980), Benetti y Cartelier realizan un examen crítico a la consistencia lógica de algunas de las proposiciones teóricas inherentes a la teoría del capital de Marx en El Capital. Algunas de estas críticas son desarrolladas y reproducidas en trabajos posteriores, por separado, por un lado, en el capítulo v del libro de Benetti Moneda y teoria del valor (1990), y por otro lado, en el articulo de Cartelier “Marx’s theory of value, exchange and surplus value: a suggested reformulation” (1991). La presentación de las formas del valor de Marx es uno de los problemas críticamente analizados por ellos; particularrnente, ellos intentan mostrar que Marx no tuvo éxito en la derivación del concepto de dinero a partir del de la mercancía y, por lo tanto, de las relaciones de intercarmbio mercantil. Una irnportante crítica a los argumentos que presentan Benetti y Cartelier en Merchands, salariat et capitalistes a este respecto se encuentra en Fausto (1983); Williams (1992) objeta algunos de los argurnentos desarrollados en el artículo de Cartelier; y, en su respuesta al texto de Benetti, Robles (1992 y 1997) desarrolla algunos de los argumentos críticos de Fausto relacionados con la interpretación de Benetti y Cartelier respecto a la presentación de la génesis de la forma-dinero del valor de Marx.

Leer más…

“Marx e Hegel. Contributi a una rilettura”: Roberto Fineschi

28/08/2013 Deja un comentario

Indice

Introduzione

1. Premessa. 1
2. Per una periodizzazione del pensiero marxiano. 4
3. Il capitale, la dialettica e Hegel 12
4. Argomento e struttura del libro. 17

“Lliçons sobre el capítol sisè (inèdit) de Marx de Claudio Napoleoni”: Ivan Gordillo

22/05/2013 Deja un comentario

“El capital, llibre I, capítol VI (inèdit). Resultats del procés immediat de producció”1 més conegut amb el nom d’Inèdit és un text escrit per Marx als voltants de 1865 que finalment no va incloure en la versió definitiva del llibre I de El capital que va aparèixer per primera vegada el 1867. Aquest text es pot trobar individualment en edicions en format llibre que no superen les 150 pàgines. És, per tant, un text de reduïdes dimensions si ho comparem amb altres obres del pensador alemany.

Tot i el caràcter de treball previ no definitiu, l’Inèdit és d’especial interès perquè conté gran part del contingut teòric essencial del llibre I de El capital. A més, està escrit en un estil força menys farragós que d’altres obres de l’autor pel que creiem pot ser de gran utilitat als lectors novells en el pensament de Marx o aquells que volen iniciar-se en la lectura de El capital.

Leer más…

“Things Fall Apart: Cosmovision under Capitalism”: Chris Gilbert

17/05/2013 Deja un comentario

Capitalism has the dubious honor of being the first civilization lacking in a cosmovision. From original communitarianism forward, we encounter societies that see man as part of a more or less inviolable socio-natural order: these ordering systems range from the totemic structures of original communitary societies to medieval conceptions such as the “great chain of being.”

The best explanation for this nearly universal characteristic is that in all previous societies human beings were in the dominated pole of the society-nature dyad. As a consequence, there evolved rich mythological apparatuses. Myth served to mediate the relation to a natural world that could not be controlled or dominated.

Socio-natural ideas of order even informed practices of governance in as much as rulers inevitably sought to maintain – and were responsible for – a harmonious relation with nature. The classical scholar George Derwent Thomson refers to how Chinese emperors of the Zhou Dynasty were charged with maintaining a correct relation with the elements:

“If the emperor did not govern in harmony with the celestial movements – Thomson writes – bad omens would appear and society would fall into disorder. At the same time, the society’s good government was a necessary condition for maintaining the natural order.” [1]

In the modern world this type of relation is relegated to literature. For example, in the Elizabethan drama King Lear, the political crisis is linked to an environmental one. A real tempest runs parallel (with its “fretful elements”) to the political and social disorder unleashed in the kingdom.

Leer más…

“16 Tesis de Economía Política. Tesis III″: Enrique Dussel

06/03/2013 Deja un comentario

El ciclo equivalencial: valor de cambio, dinero y mercado“: tercera conferencia de Enrique Dussel sobre la crítica de la economía política de Marx de su curso ” 16 Tesis de Economía Política”

 

 

 

Leer más…

“16 Tesis de Economía Política. Tesis II″: Enrique Dussel

25/02/2013 Deja un comentario

El ciclo productivo, trabajo vivo y valor” segunda conferencia de Enrique Dussel sobre la crítica de la economía política de Marx de su curso ” 16 Tesis de Economía Política”

Leer más…

“La dialéctica del altermundismo y el anticapitalismo”: Wolfgang Fritz Haug

28/01/2013 Deja un comentario

El eruptivo aparecer de un movimiento multiforme de críticos de la globalización en Seattle, 1999, que fuera celebrado como el “nuevo Aurora” (Ramonet 2000) no ha iniciado un vuelco revolucionario mundial. Sin embargo, la forma de volcarse contra los dominadores del capitalismo mundial, redirigió la mirada de los antiglobalizadores al globo en el sentido de nuestro mundo. Una dialéctica memorable los transformó en luchadores de una mundialización de abajo. En francés se llaman ahora los “altermondialistes”. Tras el trauma paralizador del fracaso del socialismo de Estado, este movimiento ha hecho aparecer el nuevo sueño de un mundo que no fuera capitalista, sin degenerar en la omnipotencia de un aparato de Estado. Desde entonces tienen resonancia progresiva consignas, no sólo críticas del capitalismo actual, sino en contra del capitalismo como tal. Junto con ellas crece la necesidad de clarificación.

Leer más…