Re: [Marxism] Zizek on Marx at "Marxism 2007",

[Angelus Novus <fuerdenkommunismus@xxxxxxxxx>]

--- Sayan Bhattacharyya 

> Can you possibly quote the passage? I don't have
> access to the edition.


"As soon as labour in the direct form has ceased to be
the great well-spring of wealth, labour time ceases
and must cease to be its measure, and hence exchange
value [must cease to be the measure] of use value. The
surplus labour of the mass has ceased to be the
condition for the development of general wealth, just
as the non-labour of the few, for the development of
the general powers of the human head. With that,
production based on exchange value breaks down[...]"

<http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1857/grundrisse/ch14.htm#p704>

The original passage is:

"Sobald die Arbeit in umittelbarer Form aufgehört hat,
die große Quelle des Reichtums zu sein, hört und muß
aufhören die Arbeitszeit sein Maß zu sein und daher
der Tauschwert des Gebrauchswerts.  Die Surplusarbeit
der Masse hat aufgehört, Bedingung für die Entwicklung
des allgemeinen Reichtums zu sein, ebenso wie die
Nichtarbeit der wenigen für die Entwicklung der
allgemeinen Mächte des menschlichen Kopfes.  Damit
bricht die auf dem Tauschwert ruhnde Produktionsweise
zusammen [...]"

Quoted from Michael Heinrich, _Kritik der politischen
Ökonomie.  Eine Einführung_
<http://www.oekonomiekritik.de/101Einfuehrung-Inhalt.htm>

A passage that *could* be read as indicating some sort
of "final collapse" of the system (this is exactly how
Robert Kurz and his epigones of the Krisis group
interpret it) or as a breakdown in the law of value
(this is how Negri and his epigones interpret it).

However, a capitalist is not concerned with the
absolute value of his commodity, only with profit.  It
makes little difference if the surplus value is
distributed among many commodities with reduced value
or a few commodities of greater value:

"The value of a commodity is, in itself, of no
interest to the capitalist. What alone interests him,
is the surplus-value that dwells in it, and is
realisable by sale. Realisation of the surplus-value
necessarily carries with it the refunding of the value
that was advanced. Now, since relative surplus-value
increases in direct proportion to the development of
the productiveness of labour, while, on the other
hand, the value of commodities diminishes in the same
proportion; since one and the same process cheapens
commodities, and augments the surplus-value contained
in them; we have here the solution of the riddle: why
does the capitalist, whose sole concern is the
production of exchange-value, continually strive to
depress the exchange-value of commodities?"

<http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1867-c1/ch12.htm>





       
____________________________________________________________________________________
Sick sense of humor? Visit Yahoo! TV's 
Comedy with an Edge to see what's on, when. 
http://tv.yahoo.com/collections/222

________________________________________________
YOU MUST clip all extraneous text before replying to a message.
Send list submissions to: Marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Set your options at: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism