ALB
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
This article from rt.com explains how a Transnistria came to be inhabited by Russian-speakers:
https://www.rt.com/russia/554330-uprising-transnistria-donbass-ukraine/
Whether he was right or wrong, Marx undoubtedly held the view that there were some things that had a price but not “value” in the sense of being the product of socially necessary labour. You mention some of them such as uncultivated land, honour, conscience, etc.
Uncultivated land is clearly not the product of any labour but can still have a price. Once it has been cultivated then it does contain an element of labour. Even so, the price of land doesn’t have to bear any relation to this. The price of land is a capitalisation of the rent it can bring in and this depends on its location and the uses to which this allows it to be put. It does not reflect any socially necessary labour that might also have been incorporated in it.
The value of a commodity, according to Marx, is a reflection not so much of the amount of socially necessary labour expended to produce it from start to finish as the amount that has to be expended to reproduce it. This means that if something cannot be reproduced then the labour theory value does not explain its price. Its price depends on the demand for it. Land is in this position.
There are other things that are also in this position, even though they are the product of labour. Works of art would be a typical example but also performing talents such as Messi and film stars. Because they cannot be reproduced the labour theory of value does not apply to them.
Louis Boudin has explained this well in his The Theoretical System of Karl Marx:
“This group includes all those things which, although produced by labour, are essentially the product of some higher natural gift or power, and are, therefore, irreproducible by mere labour. This includes all works of art and the like. Not being the subject of production or reproduction by labour they are, naturally not subject to the laws of value”.
So your defence of Marx’s Labour Theory of Value on the grounds that everything that has a price is in fact a product of some labour is unnecessary. It is not merely being the product of some labour that gives something a price reflecting the amount of socially necessary labour expended to produce it. The Labour Theory of Value only applies to “commodities” in the sense of something produced for sale that can be reproduced. Products of labour such as works of art or the exercise of sporting or acting skills are not commodities in this strict sense.
That’s yet further proof of the malign influence of the British government in the Ukraine. Having succeeded in sabotaging previous peace negotiations, they now want to escalate the war by supplying Ukraine with planes with permission to use them to bomb Russia.
All done, not for any material economic interest of the British capitalist, but simply to advance the political careers of the two main persins involved, Borys and the unspeakable Truss.
But also without any opposition from the Labour opposition, the self-proclaimed “party of NATO”.
Meanwhile even in the US there is some opposition amongst elected representatives. Here is a report of an exchange yesterday in the Senate between the Secretary of State and an isolationist senator, Rand Paul:
“In a heated exchange during a Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing Tuesday, Paul accused the Biden administration of “beating the drums to admit Ukraine to NATO” even though it was a position Russia “absolutely hated and said was a red line.” (…)
Blinken said the White House would be open to an eventual deal between Russia and Ukraine that results in Ukraine becoming “an unaligned, neutral nation.”
“We, Senator, are not going to be more Ukrainian than the Ukrainians. These are decisions for them to make,” Blinken said to Paul.
“Our purpose is to make sure that they have within their hands the ability to repel the Russian aggression and indeed to strengthen their hand at an eventual negotiating table,” he added.”It is hard to imagine such an exchange taking place in the House of Commons. If any Labour MP were to suggest, like Rand Paul, that NATO might have provoked Russia over Ukraine joining (or at least provided Russia with a pretext to invade) they would be expelled from the parliamentary party. Starmer has stated that one reason why Corbyn won’t be re-admitted is precisely that he has dared to criticise NATO.
This makes Labour complicit in the aggravation of the cost of living crisis (even higher heating and fuel costs) due to the sanctions imposed on Russia.
There speaks a military man (though probably out of turn). But then he will also understand, as “entirely legitimate” from a military point of view, Russia’s bombing of railway hubs, oil depots, storage facilities, etc (and any collateral damage to civilians) — and leave it to the Ukrainian propaganda machine to describe this as “genocide”.
As the Russian Foreign Minister has said, “war means war.” (https://www.aljazeera.com/amp/news/2022/4/26/russia-ukraine-war-lavrov-warns-of-risk-of-nuclear-conflict)
There speaks a military man (though probably out of turn). But then he will also understand, as “entirely legitimate” from a military point of view, Russia’s bombing of railway hubs, oil depots, storages, etc (and any collateral damage to civilians) and leave it to the Ukrainian propaganda machine to describe this as “genocide”. As the Russian Foreign Minister has said, war is war.
Just heard a reporter on Al Jazeera give as an example of the “derussification” campaign in Ukraine the decision of a church in Lvov to conduct its services in Ukrainian instead of the traditional Church Slavonic. But that’s not the same as Russian. Anyway Church Slavonic will only be understood by a few obscurantist priests and will have influenced Ukrainian as well as Russian, won’t it?
From the BBC live reports:
“Lavrov: ‘Nato, in essence, is engaged in a war with Russia’
Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov has said deliveries of Western weaponry to Ukraine mean that the Nato alliance is “in essence engaged in war with Russia”.
In an interview aired on Monday, he said: “These weapons will be a legitimate target for Russia’s military acting within the context of the special operation.”
Lavrov also told state television: “Nato, in essence, is engaged in a war with Russia through a proxy and is arming that proxy. War means war.”Meanwhile the US minister of war, Lloyd Austin, had made NATO’s war aims clear:
“US wants to see a weakened Russia”
It leaves you wondering whether this wasn’t its aim from the start.
Following the visit today of the US Secretary of State and Minister of War to Kiev and their statements, it is now patently clear that what is going on in Ukraine is a war against Russia by the US and its allies, particularly Britain, with Ukrainian armed forces as their proxies. A war between one capitalist bloc and another capitalist state. I can’t see how anybody can deny this any more.
Yes of course. But how can you compare the usefulness of a bulb to, say, a clock or the usefulness of either of these to different people? How can you compare apples and oranges?
To close the file. When we out leafletting in Brixton yesterday for the local elections, we were given a leaflet saying that Maoist cult leader Aravindan Balakrishnan had died on 8 April.
“Murdered by the British fascist state for telling the truth! Unique proletarian internationalist fighter who loved and humbly served the people of Brixton and the world: He died a martyr in Dartmoor Prison fighting racism and fascism!”
“His legendary daring and courage in the face of fascist terror will be remembered for ever!”Evidently the cult lives on (or one of them does).
Despite our Annual Conference taking place at the same time, election activity continued in Clapham yesterday. We covered a “day of action” by local campaigning groups in Windrush square. The were half-a-dozen stalls but not many takers. After giving the stallholders a leaflet we moved on to outside Brixton tube station where (amongst the Christian and Muslim religious fanatics who are always there) we gave out leaflets to the many passers-by.
There are now only 300-400 leaflets left.
There are quite a few Latin Americans living in the area. We met two with contrasting political views. One, from Venezuela, was hostile to the word “socialism”. The other, who came to Britain as a child when Pinochet overthrew the Allende government in 1973, took a leaflet to give to her daughter who is an elector in Clapham East ward.
H. M. Hyndman, the leader of the Social Democratic Federation in Britain, gave a lecture in 1894 with expressive title of “The Final Futiity of Final Utility”:
https://www.marxists.org/archive/hyndman/1896/economics/7-futility.htm
More on the Lambeth hustings to which we were not invited. After being assured yesterday evening, concerning the statement we had submitted, that
“I’ll make sure this is read out tomorrow”
this morning we received the following email:
“A number of relevant questions have come through overnight from residents that we need to prioritise in the schedule for tonight, and so won’t be able to fit the statement in I’m afraid. Sorry about that. I hope the remainder of your campaign goes well.”
To this feeble excuse — it would only have taken a minute or so read out our 170-word statement — we replied:
“We note your undemocratic decision to no-platform us, even to the extent of not mentioning that we are standing. We would like to think that it wasn’t made behind closed doors by a small handful of selected insiders.”
We could have openly called the organisers hypocrites, as called “Lambeth Ref 2002” (www.lambethref.co.uk), they are campaigning for a referendum in Lambeth to end the present system under which a full-time cabinet runs the council and return to a previous system where committees of councillors make the decisions.
