This video on Patreon: www.patreon.com/posts/capital-vol-1-2-117314129?Link& This video on Souncloud (audio only): soundcloud.com/socialismforall/capital-vol-1-chapter-2-1867-by-karl-marx-audiobook-discussion-of-marxist-theory-economics This video on Spotify: creators.spotify.com/pod/show/socialismforall/episodes/Capital-Vol--1-Chapter-2-1867-by-Karl-Marx--Audiobook--Discussion-of-Marxist-Theory--Economics-e2rudq0 This video on Substack: open.substack.com/pub/socialismforall/p/capital-vol-1-chapter-2-1867-by-karl?r=2wwfgr&showWelcomeOnShare=true
Done. The part regarding the value of money being imaginary. I remember coming to this conclusion myself years ago when thinking about the value of money.....how wrong I was. Thank you.
I have a question, and Marx might answer later, but how does we analyze money whose exchange value is not the same as the crystalized labor in it? The biggest example I can think of is how a ten dollar bill, and a 100 dollar bill take the same amount of labor to physically produce, but whose exchange value is radically different? Is this connected to Marx discussing states making it illegal to buy money, ie for people outside the state to create and sell? I think on metal coins and how different valued coins. How one coin that is worth ten times the other coin may be of different size, but does not contain 10 times the labor needed to produce it? I'm hoping Marx clarifies this further as at present, I am assuming that the value of currency for states is being artificially inflated or deflated to the labor required to produce it.
Short answer, yes, there are still 30 chapters left so a lot of ground to cover. To start on the longer answer though, Marx in these early chapters is talking about a commodity which is well-suited to being treated as a universal equivalent (such as a precious metal) emerging as the money form which then allows for a simple expression of the exchange value of any commodity in universal, easy compared terms. However, over the 20th century, imperialism started moving away from commodity money toward "fiat" currencies backed only by the faith and credit of the governments backing them. (This also highlights the distinction between money as a store and measure of value versus a currency, which is used for circulation and may only be a representation of money. Any kind of paper or cheap metal currency of course is not inherently as valuable as its stated "face value," but it may be redeemable in gold, silver, or another more valuable commodity (an actual store of value) -- or it may not be redeemable and usable only because the government said so, which is that case right now.) After WW2, there was the Bretton Woods system from the 1940s-70s, which saw capitalism trying to stabilize itself around the US, which owned 2/3rds of the world's gold. However, Nixon in 1971 ended the US's commitment to redeeming dollars for gold, effectively ending the gold standard, putting the world on the road to the current situation. The bottom line is that all of these moves were born out of the needs and contradictions of capitalism, which requires a level of cooperation among its participants which the system ultimately cannot sustain. They try one scheme and then the other, but they cannot stave off forever the ultimate collapse of this system under the weight of its contradictions.
@SocialismForAll thank you for the in depth answer. I never considered that money and currency are in fact related but distinct things. I look forward to going through the rest of Capital as there are quite a few questions I have been left wondering every time I go through wage labor and capital and value price and profit. I look forward to potentially getting a more thorough explanation as I remember seeing a comment on e that cautioned against starting with capital, but also recommended reading it as "everything is in there"
Nice drop. Refuse all bourgeois wars! Land back free Palestine, workers stand with the oppressed peoples of the world, unite! Bienvenidos camarada trabajadores del mundo!
I like understanding concepts through juxtaposition, which Marx did in spades here. Am I understanding correctly that Marx sees his contribution to the theory of money as the social dynamic that determines the relative exchange values of commodities and which commodity becomes the money form by expressing all other exchange values within itself?
This video on Patreon: www.patreon.com/posts/capital-vol-1-2-117314129?Link&
This video on Souncloud (audio only): soundcloud.com/socialismforall/capital-vol-1-chapter-2-1867-by-karl-marx-audiobook-discussion-of-marxist-theory-economics
This video on Spotify: creators.spotify.com/pod/show/socialismforall/episodes/Capital-Vol--1-Chapter-2-1867-by-Karl-Marx--Audiobook--Discussion-of-Marxist-Theory--Economics-e2rudq0
This video on Substack: open.substack.com/pub/socialismforall/p/capital-vol-1-chapter-2-1867-by-karl?r=2wwfgr&showWelcomeOnShare=true
Thank you comrade. ❤
Halfway through, my heart skip a beat
So excited for this!
Done. The part regarding the value of money being imaginary. I remember coming to this conclusion myself years ago when thinking about the value of money.....how wrong I was.
Thank you.
I went over chapter two to get a better understanding.
Thanks, I always wanted to get into reading theory but I don’t really have the money to spend on actual books. Much appreciated
Marxists.org
marx2mao.com/
november8ph.ca/catalogue/
foreignlanguages.press/
Awesome ❤
LMAO that cut in is crazy
Thanks again.
Lmao at 18:15
well hello golum meme, i wasnt expecting that ^^
I actually thought something went wrong in the audio but ended up with a good laugh.
@@JohnT.4321 same, I had to check my phone because I thought I had bumped it and started a different video
I have a question, and Marx might answer later, but how does we analyze money whose exchange value is not the same as the crystalized labor in it? The biggest example I can think of is how a ten dollar bill, and a 100 dollar bill take the same amount of labor to physically produce, but whose exchange value is radically different? Is this connected to Marx discussing states making it illegal to buy money, ie for people outside the state to create and sell? I think on metal coins and how different valued coins. How one coin that is worth ten times the other coin may be of different size, but does not contain 10 times the labor needed to produce it? I'm hoping Marx clarifies this further as at present, I am assuming that the value of currency for states is being artificially inflated or deflated to the labor required to produce it.
Short answer, yes, there are still 30 chapters left so a lot of ground to cover.
To start on the longer answer though, Marx in these early chapters is talking about a commodity which is well-suited to being treated as a universal equivalent (such as a precious metal) emerging as the money form which then allows for a simple expression of the exchange value of any commodity in universal, easy compared terms. However, over the 20th century, imperialism started moving away from commodity money toward "fiat" currencies backed only by the faith and credit of the governments backing them. (This also highlights the distinction between money as a store and measure of value versus a currency, which is used for circulation and may only be a representation of money. Any kind of paper or cheap metal currency of course is not inherently as valuable as its stated "face value," but it may be redeemable in gold, silver, or another more valuable commodity (an actual store of value) -- or it may not be redeemable and usable only because the government said so, which is that case right now.)
After WW2, there was the Bretton Woods system from the 1940s-70s, which saw capitalism trying to stabilize itself around the US, which owned 2/3rds of the world's gold. However, Nixon in 1971 ended the US's commitment to redeeming dollars for gold, effectively ending the gold standard, putting the world on the road to the current situation.
The bottom line is that all of these moves were born out of the needs and contradictions of capitalism, which requires a level of cooperation among its participants which the system ultimately cannot sustain. They try one scheme and then the other, but they cannot stave off forever the ultimate collapse of this system under the weight of its contradictions.
@SocialismForAll thank you for the in depth answer. I never considered that money and currency are in fact related but distinct things. I look forward to going through the rest of Capital as there are quite a few questions I have been left wondering every time I go through wage labor and capital and value price and profit. I look forward to potentially getting a more thorough explanation as I remember seeing a comment on e that cautioned against starting with capital, but also recommended reading it as "everything is in there"
Nice drop.
Refuse all bourgeois wars! Land back free Palestine, workers stand with the oppressed peoples of the world, unite! Bienvenidos camarada trabajadores del mundo!
I like understanding concepts through juxtaposition, which Marx did in spades here. Am I understanding correctly that Marx sees his contribution to the theory of money as the social dynamic that determines the relative exchange values of commodities and which commodity becomes the money form by expressing all other exchange values within itself?