CAPITAL AND LABOUR

Christopher. J. Arthur (University of Sussex)

This lecture offers alternatives to orthodox interpretations of Marx in The following areas:

(i) Contrary to Mandel, Carchedi, Mohun, and many others, the thesis that "labour is value" will be refuted; it will be argued that labour is not-value; conversely, value is reified labour.

(ii) Contrary to Marx, Dussel, and many others, the thesis that labour is the creator¹ of value will be refuted; it will be argued that capital Œcreates¹ value Œout of¹ living labour; thus Œdead labour¹ is the substance/stuff of value.

(iii) Contrary to orthodox Œtechnicist¹ readings of Œsocially necessary labour time¹, it will be argued that this time is that during which capital acts under the necessity of appropriating labour in order to valorize itself; such labour, being recalcitrant to its exploitation, is better termed Œcounter-productive labour¹ than Œproductive labour¹. (iv) Contrary to Ravenstone, Dussel, and many others, the thesis that Œlabour is everything¹ will be refuted; it will be argued that Capitalism is characterised by a Œcontradiction in essence¹ in that both capital And labour have a claim to be (everything¹. (v) Characterising capitalism as a Œcontradiction in essence¹ throws fresh light on the transformation problem. Rather than being a technical issue on the way to the determination of prices, it is the site of an ontological hiatus, where the ideal form of self-positing value collides with the material content of the capital relation. (vi) Because capitalism is a contradiction in essence (going back to the irreconcilable opposition between value and use-value) capital (value-for-itself) and labour (use-value-for-itself) are locked in a permanent struggle to negate each other. Capital proves its power through negating its negation; but only the critically adopted standpoint of labour allows a conceptualisation of the historical supersession of the capital system.