On the limitations of Marxist labor theory of value

[Paper Keywords] Marxism, labor theory of value, object, direction, restrictions
[Abstract] accurate understanding of the scientific connotation of Labor is required to fully comprehend its scope and limitations, the study of Marxist labor theory of value, value "concept" and theory of development and so there are objective constraints . Marxist labor value theory must be restricted from its original range of conditions to persist and develop.


Dialectical materialism that any absolute truth, there are both relative, the Marxist labor theory of value no exception. Upholding and developing the Marxist labor theory of value, must adhere to the scientific method, in and of itself a prerequisite for the establishment under development. Currently there is a wrong theory of community trends, the Marxist labor theory of value is taken lightly trampled upon the way, either out of context, or to choose from a practical point of view, on the one hand that Labor should be able to explain all the problems, on the other hand Labor can not explain that the real problem, so its out of date. the same study by the Research point of view and different ideas, analyze problems of different systems have different concepts, different theories assume that the system also leaves room for development and different direction. any theory there are the conditions and limitations of the scope of this is the truth within. So its object of study of Marx's labor theory of value also formed a particular theory of special restrictions. We have the following three aspects of Marxism Labor constraints, then an accurate understanding of the meaning of their Labor.

First, the object of Marxist labor theory of value restrictions
Theory is a response to the study. Study included the range of objects, internal relations and logical possibility space. French structuralist Marxist Louis Althusser, called the "problem framework ", which means combining a series of questions posed by the problem structure or problem-specific system. Althusser's view that any" text "is a double or a double layer structure. The first layer is the text surface structure, that is," visible words, "the concept of performance, the logical links between sentences. The second layer is deep, hidden in the unconscious level of language structure. He hidden in the" text "deep structure called the" problem frame "." is the problem within the framework of the concepts revealed in the thinking of the various topics by the ideological composition of an objective system of internal relations, that is, decided that the thinking of how he answered the question the problem system. "think out of the" text " "problem frame" from the literal wording of the original and thought to read and understand, can easily result in errors and distortions off.

Economic theory is only used to describe the study and interpretation of a simple or idealized "model." Also constitutes a different Economic theory study of different answers. Therefore, we must sort out the value of the internal logic of development, to grasp Marx the deep structure of Marxist labor theory of value. Marxist labor theory of value to solve the problem of internal relations to constitute a particular object of study or "problem framework." values of classical political economy theory of logical contradictions or paradoxes found that, in fact, become the starting point of Marx's labor theory of value. classical political economy, the value of the ambiguity of the concept, leading to the chaos theory of value and lack of thoroughness. classical political economy in the value of logical contradictions that exist and show the evolution direction to become a critic of classical political economy and the successor - the established Marxist study of Labor and the theoretical premise, and decided to study the breakthrough point and entry point for Labor choice.

Adam Smith believed that when consuming production of goods and labor and commodity exchange in the purchase or disposal of the work, as are equal in quantity, and the same. To "the value of labor will never change" as the premise may out of the labor determines value and income value of binary value of the decision. Marx's Critique of "Smith, Malthus developed a theory of value one-sided error" when, clearly pointed out: the "value of the amount of labor and labor to equate these two terms," " pure tautology, "" directly with an exchange of wages is not working, but the ability to work, it is this confusion resulted in error "," but never again to draw from the above conclusion that: a certain amount of labor is equal to constitute wages or salary is included in the currency or commodity Value. ... ... can not say, the value of wages is equal to the representative (with an exchange of wages) the value of the products of labor, ... ... So, on behalf of labor can buy value of the work included in the value of those goods and to buy or control a certain amount of labor that the value of those goods is not the same. "Smith is sometimes attributed to a product's value quantity of labor time, advocated the" objective theory of value " also sometimes seen as the formation of workers labor value of "peace, freedom and happiness," the sacrifice, rather than working as a "human brain, muscles, nerves, hands, and so the production cost." (this to Labor made a subjective interpretation. Smith's theory of value is caused by the value of diversity in different directions of the source.

Ricardo confuse the products of labor as a commodity exchange between capital and labor (force) itself, the difference between the exchange of goods, value of goods exchanged between the labor force from the transfer of goods, there has been an exception to the law of value and abnormal. "Because he (Ricardo) always is in the distribution between capitalists and workers, the premise of the finished product, but not to examine the distribution of the intermediation process that led to this - the exchange. "" Ricardo on the performance of labor in the use of value and performance value in exchange Labor should not be different. ... ... Ricardo, where the value in use everywhere regarded the performance with the performance of labor on the exchange value of labor confused. "Other economists, confusing the distinction between use value and value, value and exchange value of the difference between the value of the difference between its independent form of currency, the difference between Value and value entities, forming a mistake of this or that. Through the above analysis, the Marxist theory of the value of a logical contradiction or error in understanding the root causes of also point to the "value of goods and commodities of special form - the relationship between the value of labor", found on a deeper level: the value of classical political economy theory of chaos, is not complete, vulgar and so on and can not correctly grasp the "value of commodities and labor value "of the" generality and individuality "relationship-related. commodity value and the value of labor issues of mutual support, cross-references, as two aspects of the same problems as the internal structure of the Marxist labor theory of value. Therefore, Marx from the commodity common value and labor value of commodities in the dialectical unity of personality, the establishment of a labor value monism, Labor achieved a revolution. Only starting from this particular structure, to understand the essence of Labor.

Second, the Marxist labor theory of value "concept" limit
Value of the concept of ambiguity and confusion in the use of a direct impact on the value of the mutual communication theory, theory of value have become part of the biggest obstacles. Marxist labor theory of value we must first clear the misunderstanding of the concept of value, meaning a clear concept of value, set the terms and scope of its application.

First, the value of social relationship, and not the same thing in itself "real" category or "property" category. Marx explicitly as opposed to the absolute value of something, to see the practice of the properties of crops. The "value into some things never become 'objects of property', rather than see it as only as a relative thing, as the relationship between physical and social labor, as private property and exchange-based social work relationship, in which social labor, material things are not as independent, but rather as a social production performance has been specified. "Marx emphasized the value of value is different from the other using a relative social existence, Labor is To illustrate: "Substance dependence" as the basis to "commodity exchange" for the media in society, how to achieve "universal social and material exchange, the overall relationship, many of the needs and the ability of a comprehensive system" problem. In short, what interest is revealed in the relations of production conditions, or can the private labor into social work, which is working with the specific characteristics of individual nothing.


Second, the value of social work, rather than specific work or private work. Value must be achieved by exchanging part of the private transfer of labor to social labor. For their own consumption of labor, not social work or use a specific value is not value. labor exchange and social labor is the value of nature. Marx emphasized, "as the value of goods is the amount of the community, so, and they, as 'objects' of the 'property' is absolutely different. just as the value of goods on behalf of people in their production activities relationship. value does contain the exchange, but this exchange is the exchange of objects between people, this exchange with the material itself is absolutely nothing to do. ... ... 'value' concept is based on the product does 'swap' as the prerequisite. PRODUCTS as a commodity exchange, the exchange of labor and the labor of each person's dependence on others for some form of labor, social work or social production of a certain way. ... So far, there is not a natural scientist found that snuff and painting each other because of what the natural properties of a certain percentage in accordance with the 'equivalent'. "
Third, the value is a measure of the scale of social labor, but a form of wealth, not wealth itself. With younger brother in the "" Taxes on the>> also mentioned that "labor is the father of wealth, land is the mother of wealth" . wealth is inherent in natural materials and human labor to create the sum of all use value, value is measured by a form of social labor, this form with the necessary labor cost reduction of human, social productivity, greatly improve the natural productivity become meaningless, after all, to withdraw from the stage of history. "With the development of big industry, real wealth creation, working time and less dependent on the amount of labor has been consumed, more dependent on the use of labor time the strength of the motivation, and this action due to their own - their great efficiency - and cost and production they disproportionate to the direct labor time, on the contrary it depends on the general level of science and technology, or on scientific application in production. "added:" Once direct forms of labor is no longer a great source of wealth, labor time and must no longer is no longer the measure of wealth. Marx and Engels repeatedly criticized the "labor is the only wealth source "," labor is the source of all wealth "argument. value as the history of wealth in the form of a temporary, not a measure of the value of all use, but the process of commodity exchange and comparison of the labor cost accounting. Goods The two sides exchanged their own to care about how much to spend for the production of goods and labor, calculated and compared between the two are equal, can compensate for each other, if possible, to deal. suffer who do not want to do is dry. here to care about and seek compensation The labor cost is the value.

Fourth, both a contradiction between the value, but also a means of resolving contradictions intermediary. Commodity production is included in the private labor and social labor, concrete labor and abstract labor relations are the underlying causes of the value generated. The process of case goods in a barter The difficulty is that these contradictions to the visual performance. the formation of general equivalence, namely, the concept of value from the form of development to an independent monetary form, to resolve this contradiction and to provide an effective means of mediation. People at labor cost calculation and compensation abstract away the concrete work of different characteristics, they are treated as the consumption of human labor in general, the homogeneity of the abstract labor consumption. Simply put, "value is spent for the production of commodities for human labor, The cost of labor and compensation due to the calculation, it is as a value. Value of goods on average by the social necessary labor time. the social average necessary labor time, only a theoretical abstraction, in fact it is the commodity producers to compete in different production conditions product. different conditions of social production of commodity producers, in fact, will never be the same, and is constantly changing. the same labor cost of goods different from that production conditions, technical conditions, labor experience and the labor intensity different. by the socially necessary labor time to determine the magnitude of value of goods, producers before production can not be foreseen and expected. producers can only do everything possible to reduce the individual necessary labor time, and does not realize a loss in the commodity exchange or profit.

Fifth, the value of labor is a special form of commodity value, and the commodity value is the relationship between individuality and commonality. Classical Economics, labor theory of value is out of the special form of the labor theory of value, they simply can not understand the wages of laborers, substantial capital profit, surplus value can not explain the anomalous for the law of value or away from. "Ricardo was not actually stated by the law of value (as contained in the working of goods when asked) for the exchange of goods, how to generate the capital and between living labor, the accumulation of a certain amount of labor and a certain amount of direct labor of the question of unequal exchange, that is, did not specify the origin of surplus value (as in Ricardo, where capital and labor, direct exchange, rather than the capabilities and labor exchange). "Only by understanding the value of labor issues in order to deeply understand the distinction between use value and value for the scientific understanding of the significance of the value of goods in order to get rid of all kinds of use value for value" entangled. "ultimate goal of Marx's Labor Theory of Value Analysis and the starting point is to illustrate the value and use value is different, only the use value and value of goods to distinguish in order to use the labor value of commodities and value of labor to distinguish. two mutually condition each other premise. shows the value of labor issues and the development of critical Marxist labor theory of value is a breakthrough and the starting point. reposted elsewhere in the Research Papers Download http://www.hi138.com Third, the direction of the Marxist labor theory of value restrictions
"In the recent period, with regard to upholding and developing Marxism deepening the discussion of labor, theorists have proposed many insightful and innovative ideas. But there have been some neglect of Marx's labor theory of value their own 'house' limit, the logic contradiction, or the views of Marx explicitly opposed by 'piecing together' and 'grafting' and other forms of surgery to achieve the new Marxist labor theory of value 'fusion' or new 'development', an objective understanding of the Marxist labor theory of value confusion, resulting in adverse effects to confuse. "Labor can not be divorced from the development of the original theory of Marxism-limiting conditions in the original theory of space, to explore in the right direction. not from the opposite direction to the labor theory of value vulgar and backward.

First, the Marxist labor theory of value is the theory of commodity exchange, the distribution of wealth not only as a theoretical basis. Because the distribution of material wealth have different specific ways the constraints. Such as the distribution of wealth in addition to the decisive role of production conditions, as well as non Economic factors such as political power, social violence, and moral philosophy, religious thought, etc. play a very important role in the economy of these super powers may be allocated above the top of the physical economy of the "baton", and then cover up the nature of Economic activity. Although the creation of a scientific Marxist labor theory of value, but he did not serve as the basis for allocation. labor theory of value and surplus value theory, is to reveal the internal economic relations of capitalism, does not mean that only participate in value creation , have the right to participate in the distribution. should value creation and value distribution separate. Marx, profits, interest, rent, capital ownership, land ownership in the economic implementation. capital, land and other production factors participate in the distribution in accordance with is the capital, ownership of land and other economic factors, reflecting the commodity production and exchange of unequal status, not because the value created. So the implementation of Marx's labor theory of value and socialist theory with distribution according to work together, that by labor-based allocation of the labor theory of value is a theoretical misunderstanding. For Marx envisioned the future of the socialist system, is the demise of commodity production, value no longer work as a measure of scale, distribution according to work is the physical distribution of personal consumption, no longer exists value distribution. shows that the labor theory of value can only show that Marx's labor cost commodity exchange problems in non-commodity society has lost its future existence of the social and economic infrastructure, and have lost the theoretical significance of their own existence. Therefore, Marx never to explain the socialist distribution according to work by Labor. Even if the existence of socialist countries in fact the value of the commodity economy and relations should also be the value of the value of the production and distribution separate. The existence of a variety of modes of distribution at this stage to allow and encourage the various production factors in distribution, there is a way according to factors of production, does not mean the negation of Labor. because the labor theory of value social work is to achieve one of the most advantageous mode of production, not the content of production all, is only applicable to commodity production and exchange of historical conditions.


Second, capital, land and machinery and equipment and other physical and chemical work is to create "value" of the problem. We must clear the concept of value. If the "value equal to the value of material wealth or" where there is no doubt, natural resources, natural tool man-made tools are in the labor used to create new value in the auxiliary conditions, is a source of wealth. Marx in the "<Critique of the Gotha Programme>> also stressed the" nature "with the value of labor is also used as the source of the material wealth and pointed out that "nature" is also "all objects of labor and the first source of labor." Although these materialized labor can be commercialized, but not the value of their own, not the value of the entity, but not the source of value. because they are " entity "of the elements as" objects "attribute exists an absolute constant. does not reflect the exchange of commodities relative to those social relations, they are just as important factor of social production conditions, production conditions of social progress. They are social conditions of production itself, rather than such social conditions of social production relations. The impact of individual materialized labor necessary labor time as a decisive factor, highlighting the individual and the average necessary labor time socially necessary labor time there's competition. of these materialized labor the right to possession and use of different, reflecting the different producers in the production process of production status, production conditions, and other historical situation. Moreover, it needs to clarify the concept of "labor" and "create", "labor creates value" and "labor to create wealth," This two sentences in the "labor" and "create" the meaning is different. In the semantic framework of the Marxist labor theory of value, the labor to create value refers to the work carried out in the commodity production that is consumed by labor-consuming physical, mental expenditure , in order to smooth the exchange of commodities to be compared in value in the form or give compensation, where "labor" is abstract labor, "created" is the general labor of the "condensation" in this sense labor is the only source of value. Labor creates wealth, is that the use of production workers to transform some objects, change their original state, people need to create a suitable new use value, where "labor" refers to the specific work, "create" is change the physical state. "materialized labor" (capital, land, machinery and equipment, etc.) only as a specific form of labor or conditions, in the process of changing the object of labor play a role in the original state. "materialized labor" should be commercialized for general labor "abstract" and give up all the labor in the specific "look" and "important." The reason why people will have materialized labor misunderstandings that can create value, mainly due to the different production conditions, individual social necessary labor time is less than the average necessary labor time, the results of the average necessary labor time by the same scale, bringing profits, with less labor to dominate more labor, labor to create wealth in the formation of social inequality, uneven possession. Marx's labor theory of value is In order to reveal and criticize the limitations of this economic relationship. can not criticize the "object" to steal into critical "tool", so that the "tools" the loss of its critical functions and critical mission.

Third, technology, knowledge, information and other mental factors, the labor force work products and annoying problem in itself create value. With the development of productivity and technological progress, science and technology and promote wealth creation is increasingly becoming the decisive force. Knowledge economy, knowledge and information as a huge intangible resources, human activities play an increasingly important role. Similarly, technology, knowledge, information such as social conditions of production and capital, land, machinery and equipment and other "hardware" compared to the social conditions of production "software", they decided to spend the mental strength of commodity producers, but also to measure, compare the average, normal conditions of social production, one important factor. Likewise, it is the social conditions of production itself, rather than under production conditions in which social relations of production.

In short, Marx's labor value perish based on the following premises. Not of the Marxist labor theory of value of commodity production conditions of social production, but to "the existing conditions of social production", "social work an average proficiency "and" the same labor intensity "as a commodity exchange value of the premise of the established conditions, commodity producers this premise is the basis of full and free competition. In other words, regardless of the conditions of social production to produce goods the specific characteristics of how, as long as Society is full of free competition, social average necessary labor time there is a relatively established trend. Marx said, not fully free competition, there is no labor from one sector to another sector of the free movement of labor can only be specific labor, abstract labor is a fiction, there is no commodity value to determine any scientific. Another premise is that private ownership of production. So Labor can we develop a prerequisite in the analysis of Labor, Labor Which is not to develop any of our subjective choice. Research in public ownership and market economy status of non-fully competitive conditions, how to improve labor productivity and the competitiveness of commodity production, to maximize the socialization of labor, in overcoming the social ideology commodity fetishism of the hazards, achieve social fairness and common prosperity, this is the development of Marx's labor theory of value should adhere to the correct orientation and choice. Links http://www.hi138.com Research Papers Download