时间：2016-06-26 Source: jajshop.com Time: 2016-06-26
Reading "Capital" 3,000 words
"Capital" is Marx's work. It is guided by the basic ideas of historical materialism. Through in-depth analysis of capitalist production methods, it reveals the laws of the development of capitalist society. At the same time, historical materialism has been scientifically verified and Further enrichment and development. "Capital" uses the viewpoints and methods of historical materialism to attribute social relations to productive relations and productive relations to the height of productive forces, thus proving that the development of social formation is a natural historical process that does not transfer by human will .
Marx's theory of surplus value, as a theory that explains the distribution relationship in combination with production relations, not only scientifically analyzes the issue of exploitation, but also lays the theoretical foundation for scientifically explaining the actual role and deserved benefits of people at all levels of society under the conditions of a market economy. . However, we should see that it currently faces challenges from two aspects. One is that some people are trying to use the western mainstream economics' distribution theory to deny the academic achievements of surplus value theory. The other is that some people are looking at surplus value theory. Cheng is a natural science theory that does not need to evolve with changes in socio-economic conditions, thereby stifling the development path of the theory of surplus value. Therefore, it is of great theoretical and practical significance to respond to the above challenges and deepen the understanding of the theory of surplus value. Regarding the essential explanation of the theory of surplus value, Marx proposed a very famous formula: C + V + M when analyzing the formation structure of commodity value. C refers to the value of the means of production including equipment, raw materials, etc., V is the value of the labor force in the form of wages, and M is the residual value in the form of the profit of the business owner. Marx believes that as the input capital, C only transfers the value of the purchased equipment and raw materials to new commodities, and does not increase the new value. Only the value V of the living labor paid by the workers creates new value M The only factor. Marx thus explained that the surplus value or profit of the business owner was created by the labor of the hired worker, and this process of creation was not compensated by any wages. Marx's description of exploitation in "Capital" is actually a combination of empirical and abstract methods. Although the theory of surplus value has not been established, it does not affect the "capital" to become a worker's Bible because:
First, the phenomenon of exploitation exists objectively and is experienced by workers. Marx described the value created by workers' labor as part of the necessary labor to make up for labor reproduction and part of the surplus labor created for capitalists. It is very intuitive and simple and easy for workers to accept. Second, although Marx did not prove the existence of exploitation by means of strict logical forces, in Capital, he listed a lot of appalling examples and described the fact that capitalists brutally exploited workers. This empirical method has great power. It made up for the shortcomings of his abstract thinking method, and even made many people who faithfully believe in his theory never have the slightest doubt about the science of the theory of surplus value. That is to say, although Marx's theory of surplus value failed, his empirical description of the phenomenon of exploitation has achieved great success, and ultimately achieved the fundamental purpose of writing Capital.
In Marx's view, capitalists can always obtain surplus value or profits. Capitalists are always capitalists, and workers can only maintain the reproduction of labor, and they can only be absolutely poor. Workers are always hired workers. There is no condition for conversion between the two. He did not provide a theoretical basis for the mutual transformation of labor-capital relations, and could not explain the gradual relaxation of the contradictions in capitalist society and the relative poverty of the working class. According to Joan Robinson's theory, the private monopoly of property leads to exploitation. If the conditions of the monopoly are changed, it may cause some capitalists to become hired workers because of bankruptcy, and may also cause some workers to develop into labor because of the accumulation of labor results. Capitalist, her theory can explain both the opposition of labor-management relations and the transformation of labor-management relations. In the real life of our country, there is no insurmountable gulf between the capital owner and the laborer. The laborer may also be the stock holder. Many people already have the dual status of laborer and capital owner.
Joan Robinson explains the phenomenon of exploitation from the social relations of monopoly or unequal competition. Its theory has broad applicability, which can not only explain the exploitation by capital, but also the exploitation by other monopoly conditions. Explain the power exploitation of corrupt officials by virtue of the power in their hands to seize social wealth. Exploitation is an economic category established on the basis of certain social value judgments. Under the conditions of a market economy, although the occurrence of exploitation is premised on unequal exchanges, unequal exchanges are not all exploitation. This is because of the many factors that determine the market price of monopolies and competition, including natural monopoly factors, monopoly factors formed by history, artificial monopoly factors, monopoly factors caused by social institutions, monopoly factors that occur occasionally in the process of commodity exchange, Monopoly factors caused by changes in supply and demand, and so on.
Market entities using these monopolistic conditions to participate in competition will have unequal exchanges. Obviously these unequal exchanges cannot be regarded as exploitation. Because economic behaviors include the use of monopolistic conditions, it is impossible to distinguish between exploitative and non-exploitative economic behaviors in terms of the use of monopolistic conditions for competition. Socialism recognizes the regulating role of the price mechanism in the market economy, and it must inevitably recognize the rationality of unequal exchanges within a certain range and to a certain extent, that is, it is reasonable to recognize that market entities use prices to obtain a certain profit through legitimate monopoly and competition. Sexual and protected by legal system. Profit, as a manifestation of the relationship between the cost and profit of a commodity, also reflects the relationship of income distribution among market entities. It is a unique phenomenon of the market economy, not a unique phenomenon of capitalism.
If profits are wiped out, the market economy will not exist. There is no need to deny that affirming the rationality of unequal exchanges within a certain range and to a certain extent includes acknowledging the rationality of unequal exchanges in the labor market to a certain extent. There is a buyer's monopoly factor in the labor market itself. In fact, this is equivalent to acknowledging the existence of a certain degree of exploitation. Therefore, historically and developmentally, socialism is a long-term development process that restricts and gradually reduces the scope of exploitation until it is finally eliminated. Measured in accordance with current legal norms, the unequal exchange of labor markets and other markets permitted by society is not an act of unfair competition in nature, it is not a phenomenon of exploitation, and only those that exceed the scope and degree of legal restrictions Improper economic behavior is an unreasonable economic behavior. Because exploitation is an economic category that contains moral standards, accurate interpretation can only be made according to different social conditions or historical stages, so whether in theory or in practice, profits cannot be completely regarded as the result of exploitation. According to the changes of the times, different meanings are given to the concept of exploitation in different times.
Exploitation in the traditional sense refers to the unequal exchange relationship of buying and selling labor. As long as the unequal exchange is based on the buyer's monopoly in the labor market, it is the exploitation or appropriation of the seller's labor results, as long as labor is passively sold as a commodity. , Itself means exploitation. In this sense, solving the problem that labor should not be a commodity and completely eliminating the phenomenon of exploitation is a long-term historical task of socialist society. Exploitation, as a theoretical description of an economic phenomenon in China, is premised on the recognition of the existence of unequal exchanges in the labor sale relationship. It refers to the unequal exchange relationship in which the purchase and sale of labor exceeds a certain limit. Constitutive exploitation constitutes exploitation only if the use of a monopoly condition exceeds a prescribed limit. This is the objective criterion for judging exploitation at this stage. The ultimate goal of socialism is to eliminate all exploitation phenomena, including exploitation of the monopolistic conditions of the labor market, so that labor no longer has the attributes of commodities, and workers truly become the masters of society and become real social subjects. The goal of socialism at this stage is to control the traditional phenomenon of exploitation within a certain range, to recognize that a certain degree of monopoly in the labor market is reasonable, and to treat monopoly in the labor market that exceeds the prescribed limits as an phenomenon of exploitation, and treat it according to law. ban. This determines what we call the eradication of exploitation, not the utopian state of utopian socialism, but the actual movement and development process that unites ideals and reality dialectically. At this point, we not only implement socialism as an advanced social system and consider it as a great undertaking before us, but more importantly, take socialism as a step-by-step development from the primary stage to the advanced stage. The gradual historical development process cannot achieve the ideal goal in a short period of time, and the elimination of the exploitation phenomenon will inevitably go through a fairly long historical stage and a difficult and difficult struggle. The five discussions of Marx's labor theory of value in the field of economics in our country in the past 50 years have left people with profound and lasting thoughts and concerns.
In general, although the subject of each argument is not exactly the same, the direction of the dispute development is the same, that is, adhere to and develop Marx's theory of labor value on the basis of following the scientific guiding ideology, following the changes of the times. Judging from the achievements, the expansion of labor extension has been recognized by more and more scholars. Whether the labor of the tertiary industry creates value, whether the labor of scientific and technological personnel creates value, and whether the labor of business owners also has a value-creating side. These issues can be found in Marx's discourse on the duality of social labor and management labor. . And from the perspective of logical deduction and historical evolution, these labors becoming a source of value do not really constitute a problem. Significant progress has been made in the debate over Marx's theory of labor value for decades. It points out the direction for the development and innovation of Marx's labor value theory, accumulates a large amount of rich theoretical wealth, and makes a historic contribution to the innovation of labor value theory.
Reading "Capital" 3,000 words
I. Original meaning of Marx's theory of labor value
Labor value theory refers to the theory that labor creates value. Marx critically absorbed the rational content of the bourgeois classical economists' value theory in The Capital, and established a scientific theory of labor value. The original meaning of Marx's theory of labor value can be summarized as follows: First, value is the social attribute of the commodity, it is the basis of the proportion of different commodities exchanged, it reflects the social relationship between the producers of the commodity; second, it creates value The only element of labor is labor in the material production sector. Any other element of production is not a source of value. Labor that creates value is abstract labor, that is, the indiscriminate consumption of human brain and physical strength. Specific labor creates use value, but it is not the source of value The third is that the labor that creates value is living labor, that is, the abstract labor consumed in the ongoing production process. Materialized labor, as a condensate of past labor, can only transfer its own value in the process of new commodity production, but cannot create value. Commodity value does not contain any atom of natural matter. The value of a commodity is determined by the socially necessary labor time to produce it. Marx's theory of labor value is a thorough monistic value theory.
The Necessity of Developing and Innovating Marx's Labor Value Theory
(I) There is a huge difference between the objective historical conditions of Marx's establishment of labor value theory and the present era
Social existence determines social awareness. Any scientific principle is an analysis of a specific problem under specific conditions. Marx's theory of labor value originated in the steam engine era of the early industrialization more than 130 years ago, and the production methods, labor patterns, commodity forms, and wealth composition at that time were greatly different from today. Therefore, the analysis of Marx's theory of labor value cannot be separated from the analysis of the characteristics of that particular era. In summary, the objective historical conditions for the establishment of Marx's theory of labor value are as follows.
First, the form of labor is mainly manifested as manual labor. In the early stage of industrialization, social production was mainly concentrated in the field of material production, and the proportion of non-material production sectors was relatively small. The form of labor was mainly manifested in manual labor in workshop handicrafts and large-scale industrial production. Therefore, Marx's labor theory of value takes physical labor in the field of material production as the main research object. Although Marx also involved the analysis of the non-material production field (service trade industry), because these sectors accounted for a small proportion of the entire social production at that time, the influence was minimal, so when Marx said about trade in services: All these manifestations of capitalist production in this field are insignificant compared to the entire production. Therefore, it can be completely ignored.
Second, the knowledge content of the labor process is not high. In the early stage of industrialization, knowledge, science, and technology were not sufficiently developed, and the mental expenditure and knowledge content of the labor process were not high. Simple, labor-based, time-based labor was the main form of labor. Therefore, it is impossible for Marx to systematically discuss the unique role of scientific and technological innovation labor in creating value.
Third, command and management of labor cannot be regarded as an independent form of labor. In the early stage of industrialization, with the industrial revolution and the development of productive forces, one side was the accumulation of bourgeois wealth and the other was the deepening of the proletariat's poverty, and the contradiction between the bourgeoisie and the proletariat deepened. At the beginning of the establishment of Marx's labor theory of value, he faced the keen struggle between the proletariat and the bourgeoisie. The mission of labor theory of value was to reveal the irrationality of the capitalist economic system and the necessity of being replaced by a new social system. At that time, command and management were mainly the functions of capitalists, and capitalists exercised the functions of command and management with the purpose of exploitation, and most workers were directed, managed, and exploited. Therefore, it is impossible for Marx to study command and management labor as an independent labor form that creates value.
(2) Changes in Contemporary Labor Characteristics Challenge Marx's Theory of Labor Value
With the continuous advancement of the socialist market economy process, a large number of new situations and new problems have emerged, many new characteristics of social labor have emerged, and Marx's labor theory of value has new soil for practice. However, according to the original meaning of labor value theory, service labor, scientific research labor, labor for producing spiritual products, and management labor do not directly create material products or create value. This original meaning has a huge contradiction with real economic activities, and Marx's labor theory of value has encountered a series of challenges.
First, service labor. The tertiary industry is also called service industry, and labor engaged in the tertiary industry can be called service labor. The problem of the tertiary industry is an economic phenomenon abstracted for the convenience of research when Marx founded the theory of labor value. The rapid development of the tertiary industry in the socialist commodity economy is an economic phenomenon that Marx had not expected. With the development of social economy, the development level of the tertiary industry has become an important indicator of a country's economic development level. According to statistics, in the western developed countries and some emerging countries in Asia, the proportion of the output value of the tertiary industry has reached 60% to 70%. In China, since the reform and opening up, the tertiary industry has also developed rapidly. At present, it has accounted for more than 1/3 of GDP. The contribution rate of tertiary industry to GDP has greatly increased, becoming an important component of the increasing proportion of China's national economy. section. The rapid development of the tertiary industry has raised a series of theoretical questions that need to be addressed to the theoretical community: Is service labor productive? Does service labor all create value?
Second, scientific research labor. The development of science and technology in the contemporary world is changing with each passing day, especially in the era of knowledge economy and new economy. The number and level of scientific research talents, the level of scientific and technological innovation capabilities, the extent to which science and technology are used in production and equipment, and the popularity of economic life have long become important factors that determine the overall strength of a country. As an important form of labor, scientific research work can increase the production efficiency of existing products or invent new products in production and management, which can create huge social wealth and greatly increase the total value of goods in society. If we insist that all labor in scientific research does not create value, we will severely suppress and crack down on the enthusiasm of these people.
Third, labor that produces spiritual products. In line with the development stage of capitalism at that time, Marx focused on studying and discussing material production labor. Marx also mentioned the concept of spiritual productivity, but did not study and discuss it further. Under modern economic conditions, people ’s consumption of material life has been greatly satisfied. The consumption structure has changed from food and clothing to development and enjoyment. People are paying more and more attention to the satisfaction and enjoyment of spiritual and cultural life. It has developed a lot and is also taking on more and more important production tasks. The labor status and role of producing spiritual products are becoming increasingly prominent. Spiritual labor is a kind of arduous, exploratory and complicated labor. It creates a spiritual product, and this spiritual product greatly meets people's hunger for spiritual culture. As a developing socialist China, labor for producing spiritual products should be studied and discussed as an important subject.
Fourth, manage labor. With the development of social division of labor, the expansion of production scope, and the increasingly sophisticated and rich products, more and more scientific organization and management are required. Operation and management labor is playing an increasingly important role in the development of the national economy. Especially in the modern high-tech era, the requirements for management are higher. Modern economic and social managers must have specialized knowledge reserves. Compared with the simple labor of ordinary workers, management activities are complex labors performed by managers. Management labor is not ordinary mental labor and physical labor, but high-level mental labor. Therefore, management labor not only creates value, but with the progress of society, the value it creates will be much higher than that of ordinary workers.
Development and Innovation of Marx's Labor Value Theory
(I) The economic category in labor theory of value will change with the changes in the actual socio-economic relationship
The important watershed in methodology between Marx and historical economists, especially bourgeois economists, is that Marx believes that the economic category is the scientific abstraction of the relationship between economic reality, and as the relationship between economic reality changes, so does the economic category. It should change accordingly. Marx pointed out that from a methodological point of view, economic life, socioeconomic structure, and production methods are not crystals, but a changing organism. Therefore, people's understanding of the category of social production methods and the laws of economic change is not eternal, but in the process of continuous development and denial. The connotation of some economic categories will constantly update its content and nature as economic reality changes. Some economic categories only explain economic phenomena at a certain historical stage. With the development of history, it is no longer applicable in practice. At this time, it only It will remain as a historical trace of people's understanding of economic phenomena, and some new economic categories will replace the old economic categories.
Marx founded the theory of labor value based on the commodity economy and society. The theory of labor value is a theoretical reflection of the actual relationship of the commodity economy. Without the existence of a commodity economy and society, there would be no labor value theory. We should see that the history of the development of the commodity economy is long-term and phased. This development process must determine that the theory of labor value must be continuously advanced along with historical development. Therefore, Marx's labor value theory is not a rigid dogma, but a scientific system that continues to develop with the development of practice. Innovating and developing Marx's labor value theory is a precise reflection of the real relationship of the commodity economy and an inevitable way for the development of the scientific system .
(2) Marx left a broad theoretical space for the development and innovation of labor value theory
Marx's exposition on productive labor has important implications for us, leaving a broad theoretical space for the development and innovation of Marx's labor value theory.
Marx pointed out in "The Capital" that if the whole process is examined from the perspective of its results and from the perspective of products, then the labor materials and labor objects appear as means of production, and labor itself appears as productive labor. He went on to say that this definition of productive labor from a simple labor process point of view is absolutely not sufficient for the capitalist production process. Marx pointed out that with the development of the cooperative nature of the labor process itself, the concept of productive labor and its bearer, that is, the production worker, will inevitably expand. In order to engage in productive labor, it is not necessary to do it yourself now, as long as it becomes an organ of the overall worker and completes one of his functions. Marx also pointed out at the same time, but, on the other hand, the concept of productive labor has shrunk. Capitalist production is not only the production of commodities, it is essentially the production of surplus value. The above discussion shows that Marx's connotation of the category of productive labor also expands with the development of its research issues, and the meaning of the concept of productive labor is not fixed. In the general labor of socialized mass production, the scope of production labor is not only labor for the direct production of material products, but also scientific research and management work that does not necessarily need to be done by oneself.
According to Marx, this distinction between productive labor and non-productive labor has nothing to do with the peculiar particularity of labor, and it has nothing to do with the special use value through which this particularity of labor manifests itself. When Marx examined service labor, he clearly pointed out that services are consumer goods in the form of labor services, and services have a certain use value (imaginary or realistic) and a certain exchange value. Under today's socialist conditions, with the vigorous development of the tertiary industry, the meaning of socialist productive labor should also develop and change. The role of service labor in value creation must be explored and re-understood.
(3) Five controversies in China's academic circles have made historic contributions to the development and innovation of the labor price theory
In the more than 50 years since the founding of the People's Republic of China, there have been five large-scale discussions of Marx's labor theory of value in China's academic circles, including the first three discussions of the basic content of labor theory of value including socially necessary labor time, value law, and production labor in two meanings , And the latter two discussions about the source of value creation in the early 1990s, and the deepening of labor and labor value theory at the turn of the century.
The five discussions of Marx's labor theory of value in the field of economics in our country in the past 50 years have left people with profound and lasting thoughts and concerns. In general, although the subject of each argument is not exactly the same, the direction of the dispute development is the same, that is, adhere to and develop Marx's theory of labor value on the basis of following the scientific guiding ideology, following the changes of the times. Judging from the achievements, the expansion of labor extension has been recognized by more and more scholars. Whether the labor of the tertiary industry creates value, whether the labor of scientific and technological personnel creates value, and whether the labor of business owners also has a value-creating side. These issues can be found in Marx's discourse on the duality of social labor and management labor. . And from the perspective of logical deduction and historical evolution, these labors becoming a source of value do not really constitute a problem. Significant progress has been made in the debate over Marx's theory of labor value for decades. It points out the direction for the development and innovation of Marx's labor value theory, accumulates a large amount of rich theoretical wealth, and makes a historic contribution to the innovation of labor value theory.
After reading, Feel Network welcomes you to reprint and share: http://jajshop.com/zw/16180.html