FEI #4

Reading Capital Politically

Shope

Part 1_ Factual question

What is Capital?  I found that in chapter one page 86 states that, “In Marx’s view capital was above all a social relation, more specifically a social relation of struggle between the classes of bourgeois society: capitalist and working classes.” A definition of capital is: Accumulated wealth; being the seat of government; relating to or being assets that add to the long term net worth. (Merriam Webster Dictionary, Page 121) Also on page 87, it says that we can define Capital as; “we can define capital as a social system based on the imposition of work through the commodity-form.”

What is relative surplus-value strategy? Relative Surplus Strategy makes it possible for the wealth and hence the power of both capital and labour to grow absolutely: while the value of labour-power falls relative to surplus value thus raising profits, the absolute amount of use-values acquired by the working class can still rise.¹⁸ The changing relation between price and productivity. (Page 95)

Part 2_ Evaluative statement

 I agree and understand Marx’s idea of the relation between commodities and class struggle. It makes perfect sense that most people spend much of their lives working their life away just to get paid. That money is then spent on basic needs of life like food, shelter, and other commodities. In turn, we gain social wealth. If we do not work, our children and families are impacted negatively. Except for people on government assistance, we are all part of the capitalist class that creates and maintains an organized society of social control.  Our taxes also make it possible for people on government assistance to survive. (L) Thanks to our hard work, we are able to control the means of production in society. I found it interesting to learn that when women and children were no longer included in the labor-power, factories still needed the power and shift coverage. Human labor was replaced by machines and increase capital through a strategic plan forced by workers’ power. For some reason this doesn’t make sense to me. In my mind this would make me think that less people were able to make an income due to machines creating more product on their own. It does however make sense that the concern went from how much of the commodity will be made to the price of the commodity.  I can relate to the relative Surplus strategy referring to the cost of housing versus the price of minimum wage. These are interrelated in that on various areas the living cost is different based on many factors. Minimum wage must be correlated with these factors in order for people to live and help keep up the area business and other commodities.

Part 3_ Interpretive question-

What does Marx mean when he says, “the twofold character of labour ‘is the pivot on which a clear comprehension of Political Economy turns.”?  I believe that he means that the commodity form assisted in controlling the overuse of labor in our society. Or does Marx mean that character of labor (How we view labor and how we use it to capitalize) helps in controlling the fact that people are innovating and working smarter and not harder? We use many different machines to help make work more efficient and less back breaking in every form of production. Or is the way we better understand the consumer market and use it to monitor production?