物神性と商品 : 内的関連論から物象化論へ(<特集>マルクス商品論の現代的可能性)

DOI Web Site

書誌事項

タイトル別名
  • Fetishism and Commodity : From Inner Coherence Theory to Reification(<SPECIAL ISSUE>Contemporary Capitalism and Commodity Theory)
  • 物神性と商品 : 内的関連論から物象化論へ
  • ブッシンセイ ト ショウヒン : ナイテキ カンレンロン カラ ブッショウカロン エ

この論文をさがす

抄録

Marx says, "socially speaking, ...(an individual) remains the creature of relations" in the Preface for the first edition of Capital, Vol.1. The current author's interest is how social relations operate individuals. But we can find for the first time that "individuals are personifications of economic categories" and few explanations about social relations working against economic agents in Capital. This article contains 3 parts. First: Why does Marx neglect the role of economic agents in his economic theory? The response to the question is Marx's excessive inclination toward Ricardo's theory in his latter years, where 'inner coherence' is the key word and significant character of the value theory promulgated Capital. The inner coherence is the obscure, or rather hidden, structure of the current mode of production. Ever-changing circulation and competition function as only noises or veils. It follows that personal relations in circulation (exchange) need no analysis and that research can concentrate on the inner coherence, which describes 'the economic law of modern society motion' as an bjective natural law bearing no relations to human will or behavior. Second: Is the inner coherence theory to be developed consistently and successfully? Value induction, a so-called distillation method, is so transcendental that there are no describing indispensable prerequisites, making value and abstract human labor hard to understand. Moreover, quantity of value defines technically, concerned with no changing market prices. In this way Marx make his point clear by revealing the economic law of motion purely without the prevention of phenomena pertaining to circulation. However, the changing price is the most important element of the mechanism of social labor allocation through the market. This is the core of the capitalist mode of production. Ignoring this is high risk to misunderstand peculiarity of this mode of production. By the inner coherence theory the form of value is also enabled to describe: The necessity of describing the form of value has the predominance over everything else here. Commodities have a 'dual nature': value and use-value, necessitating the possession of 'a double form', with their natural form being use-value which needs to have the expression of value. Marx tries to develop a simple form of value together with a total form of value, but the inner coherence theory makes any commodities general equivalents. Marx fails to induce the money form. Third: Private labor and economic agents are to have been required. The failure comes from having neglected private production as a most significant character of the capitalist mode of production, As Marx himself says, money is one element of mechanism the private labor in order to examine or evaluate as social labor, so money only induces private actors' behavior. In the section of 'Fetishism', though Marx refers private-social labor relationships, he fails in analyzing them. Revealing the value and the labor relationships hinders an analysis of the private-social labor relationships. In Grundisse, however, Marx describes private actors' behavior, the reification of personal relations, and the ruling mechanism of the reification to some extent. The reconstruction of Marxian value theory requires first and foremost the reconsideration of his relation theory.

収録刊行物

キーワード

詳細情報 詳細情報について

問題の指摘

ページトップへ