Das Kapital Thoughts

June 17, 2020

Chapter 3. Money, or the Circulation of Commodities

I. The Measure of Values

Page 132

"As measure of Value, and as standard of price, money has two entirely distinct functions to perform. It is the measure of value inasmuch as it is the socially recognised incarnation of human labour; it is the standard of price inasmuch as it is a fixed weight of metal." 

My Thoughts:

Basically, money has two purposes:

1. Determine the value of human labor (ex: getting a paycheck)

2. Determine the value of a commodity (ex: how much something is priced)

In theory, a commodity should cost the baseline value of said commodity + the human labor that was put into making it. However, this equation gets messed up when we take into account that the mass amount of people producing commodities (the proletariat) work for another person (the bourgeoise). If the bourgeoise priced a commodity at simply its use value + the labor value, then they would not be able to profit off of it. When it comes down to it, the bourgeoise has two options to ensure that they profit:

a) Turn the equation into "labor value" + "use value" + "extra (money for the bourgeoise to pocket)" = price of commodity 

or

b) Undervalue the proletariat's labor value (underpay workers)

Both of these instances yield pretty much the same results: benefits the bourgeoise and damages the proletariat. In example a, the bourgeoise gets an explicit benefit (this would be the "extra"), but the proletariat is indirectly damaged. While their paycheck will remain the same as before, the commodities that they need to buy with said paycheck will rise in price. Meanwhile, in example b, the bourgeoise indirectly benefits, but the proletariat is explicitly damaged. The bourgeoise, while still making the same amount in profits, will now pay less for labor, resulting in them gaining money. The proletariat, on the other hand, is explicitly losing money. Simply put, the proletariat now has less money to buy the same amount of items. 

This would be part of the reason people say that there is no ethical consumption under capitalism. The bourgeoise will always be exploiting the proletariat in some way. 

Chapter 3. Money, or the Circulation of Commodities

I. The Measure of Values

Page 136

"The debasing of money carried on for centuries by kings and princes to such an extent that, oof the original weights of the coins, nothing in fact remained but the names"

My Thoughts:

I never thought I'd be saying this, but I'm actually curious how the USD originated, now. I think I'll look into it tomorrow/later today (it's currently 2AM). If I end up looking into it, my findings will be here: 

I kind of looked into, but not enough to have a deep understanding. It is interesting to see how much less $1 is worth today than it was even just 50 years ago. I'm curious about economic projects on the value of the USD and how long it can continue to decrease in value until there are major impacts. 

Chapter 3. Money, or the Circulation of Commodities

I. The Measure of Values

Page 142

"A price therefor implies both that a commodity is exchangeable for money, and also that it must be so exchanged." 

My Thoughts:

I cannot go to a store and attempt to buy something with say a $15 dollar shirt that I own. Instead, I would first have to sell my shirt (whether that be to a friend, online, or at a second hand store), then I could take the money that I made from selling my shirt to buy something at the store. This process seems like common sense, but when I begin to think about it more and more, it actually seems a little weird. Obviously, I understand that there will never be a day where I can go to Target and just exchange them for something I already own, but how cool would that be?  And how much easier!!! 

Chapter 3. Money, or the Circulation of Commodities

II. The Medium of Circulation

Page 144 & 145

"Gold, as gold, is exchange-value itself. As t its use-value, that has only an ideal existence, represented by the series of expressions of relative value in which it stands face too face with all other commodities, the sum of whose uses makes up the sum of the various uses of gold. These antagonistic forms of commodities are the real forms in which the process of their exchange moves and takes place."

My Thoughts:

Money has no practical value except when other commodities are brought into the equation. Money is, quite literally, worthless. Going off of what I said above, the whole point of selling a commodity is to get money so that you can then trade that money for another commodity. Think about that for a few minutes and tell me you don't want to smash your head through a wall.

Note: Marx goes on to call this "two metamorphoses of opposite yet supplementary character..." (page 145)

Chapter 3. Money, or the Circulation of Commodities

II. The Medium of Circulation

Page 165

"Hence although the movement of money is merely the expression of the circulation of commodities, yet the contrary appears to be the actual fact, and the circulation of commodities seems to be the result of the movement of money." 

My Thoughts:

Money appears to move simply due to the circulation of commodities. Say that I give 5 dollars to someone in exchange for a bracelet, then that person uses the same $5 to buy a children's book, then that person uses the $5 to buy something else, etc. It would seem as if this $5 is following the circulation of commodities. Marx argues that, instead, the circulation of commodities is the result of moving money. Basically, I only have the bracelet because of the $5, the other person only has the children's book because of the $5, etc. Both make sense to me, but I'm interested to see why Marx made this distinction.