Format

  • Reading Volumes 1, 2, and 3 in one year. This will repeat yearly until communism is achieved. (Volume IV, often published under the title Theories of Surplus Value, will not be included, but comrades are welcome to set up other bookclubs.) This works out to about 6½ pages a day for a year, 46 pages a week.

  • I’ll post the readings at the start of each week and @mention anybody interested. Discuss the week’s reading in the comments.

  • Use any translation/edition you like.

Resources

(These are not expected reading, these are here to help you if you so choose)

  • Sasuke [comrade/them]@hexbear.netEnglish
    4·
    11 months ago

    trying to answer with only my copy of capital in front of me (disclaimer: i might be completely and embarassingly wrong here)

    use-value is something that fulfills a specific need (wool having a use-value in the production of yarn). it does not have to be a product of human labour, or be turned into a commodity, but it does need to have some sort of utility

    exchange value is independent of utility. yarn here does not contain value by being tied to a specific type of labour (i.e. weaving), it only gains value from the general expenditure of labour-power, and by its social relation to other commodities

    • quarrk [he/him]@hexbear.netEnglish
      5·
      11 months ago

      This is really good.

      In defining exchange value, you point to the way that commodities gain value but I think it could be a little more exact. Apologies in advance for emoji use but I find it easier to follow visually.

      Exchange-value is a relation between two commodities, e.g. “2 🍎 = 1 🍌”. That entire equation is an exchange value. This equation implies two things:

      1. Quantitative equivalence. There is a thing or “substance” that is common to both 🍎 and 🍌, and the amount of this substance in 1 🍌 is equal to the amount of the substance in 2 🍎
      2. Qualitative equivalence. That substance is qualitatively identical in both 🍎 and 🍌. This is required so that the quantity can be compared, like converting lengths to be in centimeters before they can be summed up.

      That third thing, the common substance is value. Value is the thing being expressed in an exchange value.

      As an analogy, instead of exchange value and value, think about weight and mass. Mass is the substance of an object which is expressed through its weight. When you put two objects on a scale, you abstract from the qualitative difference of the things and consider them only as masses.

      • Sasuke [comrade/them]@hexbear.netEnglish
        4·
        11 months ago

        thank you for the explanation! the emojis really did help 🍎♥️🍌

        i know I’m skipping ahead in our reading here, but do we still use the term exchange value when talking about money?

        • quarrk [he/him]@hexbear.netEnglish
          5·
          11 months ago

          When Marx wants to emphasize that he is talking about money in particular, he will use the term price (exchange value in terms of the money commodity). But he will sometimes write exchange value when that distinction does not matter. He has a helpful tendency to repeat things, so he might say “such and such is the price, or exchange value with respect to money, of so-and-so…”