The labor theory of value and the strategic role of alienation.
Capital & Class › Nbr. 2002, September 2002
Linked as:
Extract
The labor theory of value and the strategic role of alienation.
In order to avoid reifying Marx's social theory, it is important to focus on the social relations that Marx's analytical categories denote. By focusing on value formation as the process of reproducing social control, the imposition of alienation takes on a richer meaning. Not only is alienation a process of human degradation, it is also a strategic instrument in the valorization process.
Introduction Marx's analysis of capitalism has been subject to a plethora of interpretations as well as employed in a number of distinct, often diametrically opposed, projects. Some interpreters of Marx propose a 'scientific' reading, in which Marx's categories are given 'objective' meanings and are assigned immutable roles in the structural 'laws of capitalism.' John Holloway (1995) recently denounced this tradition for objectifying and reifying Marx's categories and for transforming the analysis into vulgar determinism. In order to go beyond such Marxist fetishism and to re-establish Marx's analysis as a useful radical critique of capitalism, it is necessary to examine the social relations denoted by Marx's analytical categories. For example, in reference to the labor theory of value, what is the social content of value? What is the social meaning of abstract labor? What is the social rationale for imposing alienating work? How is conflict represented in these categories? The realization that Marx's theoretical categori es frame important moments of the contentious accumulation process, opens the possibility for reading Marx politically and for restoring Marxian analysis as a 'theory against society.' (1) In the present moment of resistance and protest against the dynamics and trajectory of western political, cultural, and economic institutions, the focus is primarily on macrosocietal categories such as globalization, global injustice, marketization, and structural adjustments. These categories are politically important and useful, but focusing too extensively on relations and conflicts far removed from people's immediate experience is at the same time problematic. While the discourse that surrounds this movement must be carried out on numerous planes, it is important that the discourse remains grounded in categories that reflect the reality and agency of most people. In this context, it is therefore particularly timely that Harry Cleaver's Reading Capital Politically...See the full content of this document
Sponsored links
