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.
Marx mentions that rarity is also a source of value. I remember he gives the specific example of pearls in Capital. I've only had to bring this up like one time though, when a liberal was trying to say Marx was debunked by replicas of famous art not having the same value as the original piece, even if the replica had a more complicated labor process.
Liberals really like to invent very convoluted brain puzzles that go nowhere.
I feel like this is just the ship of Theseus with extra steps.
And I haven't read Capital but I'd be shocked if Marx doesn't mention speculation somewhere, and the value of art is entirely based on speculation.
The price of art is based on speculation, the value of art is equal to the material and labor inputs
Where the labor value is calculated using labor time normalized on the average consumption of social product the laborer/artist needs to maintain their standard of living.
They don't read. Neither do I, but you know