There’s this new video by a good YouTuber - Value by Unlearning Economics. There was also an article by Ben Burgis for the Jacobin which argued the same.
Is it possible, as both these people argue, to separate Marx’s critique of capitalism from his theory of value? To keep the former and discard the latter?
Edit - I’m not siding with the video or with Burgis, btw. I think Marx’s value theory is correct. I’m just looking for people who can shine some light on this new(?) phenomena of leftists speaking out against LTV while trying “save” Marx’s critique of capital. To me, that just seems like a pointless and hopeless endeavour.
I am currently reading it! Marx is such a good, but dense writer. I tried reading some “introductions” and “explanations” by others but tbh, it’s just better to read him directly.
The video goes in-depth about testing the theory and concludes there isn’t any empirical proof for it. Not so much challenging it on philosophical grounds.
I would suggest then reading the text again very carefully and potentially even delving into Value, Price and Profit.
Also this title has big :bait: energy
I would actually say read VP+P and Wage Labour and Capital before reading Capital. It gets across 90% of the main ideas from Marx that you’d want to explain to a friend or co-worker to try and set them down the commie path.
Plus they’re much shorter and easier to read.
Man…this has happened multiple times to me. I don’t know what to do.
Stop being a lib.
:angery:
As long as youre putting in the effort, its all good, youre a comrade.
:soviet-heart:
The simplest test of the theory is to just imagine how an economy reacts when certain products are removed from it.
Corn? Maybe a famine, or an increase in potato farming.
Iron? Reversion to stick building and subsistence farming.
Gold? More use of banknotes and state backed fiat currency.
Labor? Total and complete collapse of the entire social economy. All sectors. Mass famine or possibly a return to subsistence farming
deleted by creator