Marx on exploitation

[autotrophic]

Hey everyone

I've been trying to understand marx's idea of exploitation, and how it differs from proudhons. Marx says in Capital:



The rate of surplus-value is therefore an exact expression for the degree of exploitation of labour-power by capital, or of the labourer by the capitalist.



So then it seem like marx equates profit with exploitation. Is this true?

[Niccolò Rossi]

To express it in as few words as possible:

Exploitation, that is, the extraction of surplus-value from the workers is the basis of capitalist profit. However, profit and surplus-value are two distinct phenomena.

Surplus-value is the quantity of socially-necessary labour time crystallised within a commodity in excess of the value of producing the labour-power of the worker. Profit on the other hand is the value of the socially-necessary labour over and above the value of components and materials used in the production process (i.e. constant and variable capital).

The rate of surplus value, that is the rate of exploitation, can be expressed mathematically by the formula: s/v where s = surplus value and v = value of variable capital. The rate of profit on the other hand is expressed mathematically by the forumla: s/(c+v) where c = value of constant capital

[autotrophic]

Ok, so I looked up some definitions on marxists.org, correct me if I'm still wrong

So, from what I understand, surplus-value is a class phenomenon. And it's essentially all the unpaid labour time that goes into production, if we are to assume that the laborer should own the product.

Exploitation is simply when capitalists extract this surplus-value, in the form of profit (in a capitalist society).

[Niccolò Rossi]

Correct. One note however; exploitation, that is the extraction of surplus-labour, is a class phenomenon. Surplus-labour under capitalism takes the form of surplus-value, with exploitation being mediated by the wage-labour relation.

Hope that helps.

On a side note, what is your specific interest in Marx given you are a self-described "anarchist without adjectives". To be honest, I don't think Bakunin, Kropotkin or Proudhon are of any worth to the modern socialist movement or a scientific understanding of capitalism.

[Die Neue Zeit]

The rate of surplus value, that is the rate of exploitation, can be expressed mathematically by the formula: s/v where s = surplus value and v = value of variable capital. The rate of profit on the other hand is expressed mathematically by the forumla: s/(c+v) where c = value of constant capital

Given my particular educational background, would surplus value then be akin to contribution margin, while "profit" being the typical operating income?

[autotrophic]

Thanks for the info, I've got it now.


On a side note, what is your specific interest in Marx given you are a self-described "anarchist without adjectives". To be honest, I don't think Bakunin, Kropotkin or Proudhon are of any worth to the modern socialist movement or a scientific understanding of capitalism.

As far as my interest in Marx, it's just a matter of understanding the concepts that he wrote about. I generally agree with Marx's idea of exploitation, but I think that the main source of exploitation comes from the state; without the state, there can be no capitalist exploitation. Therefore, the state and capitalism must be simultaneously abolished.


Obviously I read more than just Bakunin, Kropotkin, and Proudhon, but I think they are important because they were the first popular anti-statist socialists, and, being an anarchist, I don't view the state as being a legitimate institution. So that is what they have to offer, a critique of using statist methods.

And also, "anarchism without adjectives" is simply acknowledging all the different forms of anarchism as legitimate, with no particular variant to be universally implemented. It is simply advocating a plurality of economic systems, according to different regional area's interests.

[Niccolò Rossi]

Given my particular educational background, would surplus value then be akin to contribution margin, while "profit" being the typical operating income?

Given my particular educational background, why ask me? I trust you know what you're on about however. :p


I think that the main source of exploitation comes from the state; without the state, there can be no capitalist exploitation.

On the contrary, one of the central contributions of Marx was to discredit this idealistic and essentially petit-bourgeois (:ohmy:) conception.

In the social production of their existence, men inevitably enter into definite relations, which are independent of their will, namely relations of production appropriate to a given stage in the development of their material forces of production. The totality of these relations of production constitutes the economic structure of society, the real foundation, on which arises a legal and political superstructure and to which correspond definite forms of social consciousness. The mode of production of material life conditions the general process of social, political and intellectual life. It is not the consciousness of men that determines their existence, but their social existence that determines their consciousness. - Marx, A Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy (http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1859/critique-pol-economy/preface.htm) (1859)

Therefore, the state and capitalism must be simultaneously abolished.

As so often with anarchism I think this is a matter of how one analysis's and defines the "state".


Obviously I read more than just Bakunin, Kropotkin, and Proudhon, but I think they are important because they were the first popular anti-statist socialists

I think the only value early anarchist and socialist theorists have today is an historical value.


It is simply advocating a plurality of economic systems, according to different regional area's interests.

Once again, I think this anarchist fetish for localism and abstract democracy is fundamentally petit-bourgeois in origin and historically outdated.

This is all rather off-topic however and should probably be dropped here. If you would like to discuss any of these issue further please feel free to make another thread. :)

[Die Neue Zeit]

Given my particular educational background, why ask me? I trust you know what you're on about however. :p


Contribution margin measures revenues less variable costs, while "OI" (pardon the pun) is the typical bottom line.