[cardguy]

Just stumbled across this. It is an excellent overview of the law of value in the work of Karl Marx.

I am definitely no leftie. But I find Marx's work in this area to be really interesting. And it will get you looking at simple questions relation to price, profit and value in a way which is novel and new. For instance - exactly why does a car always cost more than a toothbrush? And no - the answer isn't due to supply and demand.

Also - the YouTube videos are creatively put together (in an Adam Curtis type of fast-cutting way using archived footage). So - you will not find a more interesting approach to this topic.

I recommend starting the series with the second episode (linked to below). Since the earlier episodes are slightly shitty introductions which are really annoying.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D4MbUx-il...99C91FC6F7

Anyway - I have only being studying Marx for the past 6 months. So - I still feel like I am drowning in terms of trying to understand all the new concepts.

It is a hell of a journey. And I cannot really debate these issues yet - since I am still awhile a way from being able to say if Marx was a genius or a crank.

Either way - I have yet to see an economist question the fundamental assumptions which underpin economics and our free-market system in such a detailed manner.

For me. I find the debates over such fundamental questions more interesting than any dreams about creating a future Utopia.

Anyway - just wanted to pass along the link. Since it is rare to see such a dry subject covered in such a creative and interesting way. And I want to support such efforts...

[DiogoFC]

Been there during College. It so happens that, insightful as it seems [and useful as it indeed may be], that theory has been dismantled [no less] by MISES and his austrian crew.

I encourage you to dig deeper, cos there's plenty of subjects worth a reflection and MARX is no worse [or better] guide for this than others. But don't do like me and go so far as to think planned economies may lead to more fairness among social/economic relations. History is plentiful with examples. Free markets bring up a great load of shit as moral is concerned but we didn't get to figure anything bette,r and certainly giving up on freedom is not the path.

Sorry for the poor grammar.

[ElBorrachoInfamoso]

Marx produced a lot of ideas worth studying, but his take on the labor theory of value isn't one of those ideas.

[cardguy]

I am no leftie utopian. I just find the fundamental questions of economics to be interesting. Particularly since alot of the subjects that Marx addresses are ignored by most orthodox economists.

It seems the stumbling blocks for his work are Okishio's Theorem (which rebuts Marx's Rate of Falling Profit analysis) and The Transformation Problem. Also - Steve Keen has an interesting critique in his book 'Debunking Economics' which is original. And which I am about to study soon.

So - these are three major stumbling points. Yet - alot of the Marxist thinkers say they have rebuttals which answer all three concerns. For instance - the YouTube channel above has some videos answering The Transformation Problem:

Now - I fnd it hard enough to fully grasp Marx's work. So - I am certainly out of my depth judging the criticisms and rebuttals. So - it still an interesting adventure for me since I am still unsure whether I am dealing with a genius or a crank. Or a bit of both.

Lastly - I would appreciate any rebuttals of Marx's work which are worth checking out. I find analysing the criticisms of Marx's ideas helps to clarify those same ideas in my mind.

You mention the Austrian School. Did you have 'The Road To Serfdom' by Hayek in mind? If so - I thought that addressed how Socialism leads to tyranny. Which is more of a political analysis. As opposed to a fundamental examination of Marx's economic concepts.

Anyway - I may be wrong. So I will check out the book just to be sure. It is just I am mostly interested in the key economic claims that Marx makes (as regards the concepts of profit, value and wages for example) as opposed to his revolutionary political ideas.

With all that said. I would be very grateful for any pointers towards works which criticise Marx's economic work.

[cardguy]

Okay - I have found 'Marxism Unmasked' by von Mises. I will check it out.

[Divorco]

(04-27-2013 12:47 PM)cardguy Wrote:  

an excellent overview of the law of value in the work of Karl Marx.

Don't learn economics from people who can't or won't do math, such as Marx. It is like listening to hamster-driven women who will say anything to justify their preconceptions.

Samuelson devastated Marx's analysis of the transformation problem by showing that it was based on algebraic errors. People continually agonize over the vagueness and internal inconsistencies of Marx. They don't do that with Adam Smith or Isaac Newton. Even when Smith or Newton made errors, their reasoning and intuition were clear. Marxism is just a confused clusterfuck.

Basically the labor theory of value does not admit other factors of production such as land and capital. It is about as relevant and useful as phlogiston theory of matter.

[cardguy]

I recently got hold of a book which has an essay praising Samuelson's critique. Look forward to checking it out.

[DiogoFC]

(05-02-2013 04:47 PM)cardguy Wrote:  

Okay - I have found 'Marxism Unmasked' by von Mises. I will check it out.

Yep. Chief point: there's no reason to say a bottle of water costs 50 cents because it's the amount of labor somehow embedded in it. The vendor may as well sell it for 2 bucks in the airport. Strange as it may seem, value is not objective.

[Captain Ahab]

I am reading Capital Vol 1. Pretty fucking revealing.

Marx as a revolutionary is a failure. Marx as a sociologist is ...dear God...

[cardguy]

Yeah - Marx's insights into the class power plays underpinning the introduction of the corn laws, and the maximum working week/child labor laws are fascinating.

There is alot of things of interest in his work. I have never being so intrigued by a writer - even though I am pretty right-wing.

Really weird...

[ms224]

Here is a better book on marx.

http://books.google.com/books?id=OW0poTn...CDEQ6AEwAA

[cardguy]

That is harsh. Too many people try and blame Marx for Stalinism.

That is like blaming Nietzsche and Darwin for Hitler.

And - as I have said before - I say this as a right wing libertarian. With an interest in expanding my horizons and learning more.

[Captain Ahab]

(05-02-2013 07:37 PM)cardguy Wrote:  

That is harsh. Too many people try and blame Marx for Stalinism.

That is like blaming Nietzsche and Darwin for Hitler.

And - as I have said before - I say this as a right wing libertarian. With an interest in expanding my horizons and learning more.

As I said, Marx as a revolutionary is a failure. Socialism has no future.

But seriously, with all the right wing libertarian/free market cumshots all over the manosphere, I wonder why Marx isn't seriously considered a bit red pill. He is for men OWNING their own means of production=Freedom from the capitalist class employment= no beta worker bee bullshit.

Oh well, not looking to get into a political conversation. Just an observation.

Also, I plan on reading David Ricardo, Adam Smith, Thomas Malthus, etc. I totally slept on my classical economics in my undergraduate years.

But yeah, Capital Vol 1, Communist Manifesto, Poverty of Philosophy, etc, great stuff. Marx was no doubt a genius.

I can see why capitalist societies are hell bent on the masses not reading his works. It is like taking the blinders off and seeing the capitalist mode of production as an orgy of dehumanizing exploitation right in front of your face.

And the commodities take on a life of their own...

*tosses his fucking smart phone*

[ru2486]

I've been waiting for this moment in the manosphere - when guys start to look at what marxist writers have been saying about capitalism for decades (and together with the red pill, understanding feminism as a capitalist ideology), they will see that so many of the ills we see in the West is the product of postmodern, post-1970s capitalist transformation.

Equating Marxist theory with what the fuck happened in Stalinist Russia in the Gulags is just like as somebody said above, its like holding Nietzsche responsible for what the Nazis did in the death camps. Apart from Stalinism and Maoism, there is a whole current of Marxist thought and critical inquiry called Western Marxism: Althusser, Adorno, Gramsci, Frankfurt school, et al, and today: Zizek, Harvey, and Jameson, et al. The goal of Western Marxism is the liberation of man from both the false social relations engendered by capitalism and the dismantling of the state (so right libertarians, take note, there is a whole tradition of Marxist opposition to the liberal-parliamentary state, and left libertarianism is a real thing - search on wikipedia "libertarian marxism").

I'm not a political hack, or rabid ideologue, but in terms of the exchange of ideas, I encourage guys to think about how the ills of contemporary capitalism (wealth gap, social alienation produced by modern technologies e.g. Iphone, etc), and how these are the product more generally of capitalism's alienating tendencies.

[Divorco]

(05-02-2013 08:00 PM)Captain Ahab Wrote:  

I plan on reading David Ricardo, Adam Smith, Thomas Malthus, etc. I totally slept on my classical economics in my undergraduate years.

Your comment reveals that you almost completely neglected math and science classes. You don't learn math or physics by reading classic literature; you get a modern textbook with the right equations. Same with economics. Reading 200-year-old economics is like reading 2000-year-old math.

[ru2486]

I like these introductory videos as well:

Harvey on the global economic crash of 2008: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qOP2V_np2c0

Zizek: on the nature of contemporary postmodern "cultural capitalism": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hpAMbpQ8J7g
-in particular, note his description of how capitalism functions today, in terms of appealing to wealthy Western consumers' altruistic tendencies. think about all the annoying SWPL capitalist bullshit (buy local, buy organic, etc).

I can recommend a list of books in these areas as well...

[Kabal]

(05-02-2013 06:23 PM)Divorco Wrote:  

(04-27-2013 12:47 PM)cardguy Wrote:  

an excellent overview of the law of value in the work of Karl Marx.

Don't learn economics from people who can't or won't do math, such as Marx. It is like listening to hamster-driven women who will say anything to justify their preconceptions.

Samuelson devastated Marx's analysis of the transformation problem by showing that it was based on algebraic errors. People continually agonize over the vagueness and internal inconsistencies of Marx. They don't do that with Adam Smith or Isaac Newton. Even when Smith or Newton made errors, their reasoning and intuition were clear. Marxism is just a confused clusterfuck.

Basically the labor theory of value does not admit other factors of production such as land and capital. It is about as relevant and useful as phlogiston theory of matter.

Verbal pontification without supplementation from applied mathematics is indeed mere hamster-spinning.

That's how you end up with "academic" fields such as social anthropology, cultural studies, women's studies, or post-modern literature.

[ru2486]

(05-02-2013 09:33 PM)Divorco Wrote:  

(05-02-2013 08:00 PM)Captain Ahab Wrote:  

I plan on reading David Ricardo, Adam Smith, Thomas Malthus, etc. I totally slept on my classical economics in my undergraduate years.

Your comment reveals that you almost completely neglected math and science classes. You don't learn math or physics by reading classic literature; you get a modern textbook with the right equations. Same with economics. Reading 200-year-old economics is like reading 2000-year-old math.

One of the things to keep in mind is that Marx's work is not simply "economic." It is rather "political economy," or even more accurately, a critique of economics as a bourgeois discipline in and of itself. the critique, (i'm radically oversimplifying here), isn't about the positing of socialism vs. capitalism as economic theories, but more fundamentally, the critique of economics as a "science" and capitalism in the totality of the social relations it produces along epistemic, historical, and philosophical grounds.

[cardguy]

My interest in Marx can be summed up by a single question that Marx once asked.

"What is the price of money?"