{"resolved":true,"match_type":"uuid","source_type":"original_book","book_id":"4a3d22bd-c5b9-47a4-a022-bd35d44d9bfe","title":"Zombie Capitalism Global Crisis and the Relevance of Marx","author":null,"edition":null,"publisher":null,"year":null,"isbn":"9781608461042","requested_by":"printed_page","book":{"source_type":"original_book","book_id":"4a3d22bd-c5b9-47a4-a022-bd35d44d9bfe","id":"4a3d22bd-c5b9-47a4-a022-bd35d44d9bfe","uuid":"4a3d22bd-c5b9-47a4-a022-bd35d44d9bfe","title":"Zombie Capitalism Global Crisis and the Relevance of Marx","normalized_title":"zombiecapitalismglobalcrisisandtherelevanceofmarx","author":null,"edition":null,"publisher":null,"year":null,"isbn":"9781608461042","isbns":["9781608461042"],"parsed":true,"ai_readable":true,"document_type":"book","page_count":426,"navigation_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/ai/book/4a3d22bd-c5b9-47a4-a022-bd35d44d9bfe","title_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/ai/title/Zombie%20Capitalism%20Global%20Crisis%20and%20the%20Relevance%20of%20Marx","fixed_page_url_template":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/ai/book/4a3d22bd-c5b9-47a4-a022-bd35d44d9bfe/page/{printed_page}","path_api_url_template":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/api/ai/book/4a3d22bd-c5b9-47a4-a022-bd35d44d9bfe/page/{printed_page}","read_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/api/ai/read/4a3d22bd-c5b9-47a4-a022-bd35d44d9bfe","page_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/api/ai/books/4a3d22bd-c5b9-47a4-a022-bd35d44d9bfe/page","search_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/api/ai/books/4a3d22bd-c5b9-47a4-a022-bd35d44d9bfe/search"},"page":{"printed_page":23,"pdf_page":23,"physical_index":23,"physical_index_base":0,"printed_page_status":"recognized","page_sha256":"9ccb55f7ee3abb876a430ed5bbfbd8024a8511fc6349ee94109dac3b6bb3abba"},"chapter":"Zombie Capitalism Global Crisis and the Relevance of Marx","content":"The utility of a thing makes it a use value . . . Being limited by the physical properties of the commodity, it has no existence apart from that commodity. A commodity, such as iron, corn, or a diamond, is therefore, so far as it is a material thing, a use value, something useful. This property of a commodity is independent of the amount of labour required to appropriate its useful qualities.\n\nBut commodities are also:\n\nthe material depositories of exchange value [which] presents itself as a quantitative relation, as the proportion in which values in use of one sort are exchanged for those of another sort, a relation constantly changing with time and place. 3\n\nThis distinction is not made by today's mainstream neoclassical economists.4 The only sort of value they see is \"marginal utility\", based on people's subjective appreciation of use values. Nor is it made by some of those dissident economists who claim to be in the tradition of Ricardo (the so-called \"Sraffians\" ).5 Their model is based on the inputs and outputs of physical objects, in other words, again on use values. Finally there are some present day Marxists who argue the distinction is not relevant, since the important point Marx was making was about exploitation, not value. 6\n\nIn erasing the distinction made by Smith, Ricardo and Marx, all such theories miss something essential to a system based on commodity production: everything that happens in it is subject to two different sets of scientific laws.\n\nOn the one side there are the laws of the physical world-of physics, chemistry, biology, geology and so on. It is these which determine the ways in which different things have to be combined to produce goods (the different components of a machine, the material structure of a factory, the techniques used in a surgical operation and so on) and also the usefulness of those goods to those who finally consume them (the nutritional value of food, the warmth provided by fuels and electricity, the number of children who can be accommodated in a school or patients in a hospital, etc).\n\nOn the other side, there is the way things relate to each other as exchange values. These often behave in a very diferent way to use values. The exchange value of something can fall while its use value remains unaltered. This has happened to the price of computers in recent years-the computer I used to write my last book was twice the price of the much more powerful one I am using now. What is more, exchange values are infinitely divisible while use values are usually not; you might say that a bicycle is worth one twentieth of a car, but if you cut a car up into twenty parts it is of nil use to anyone. This matters immensely when it comes to things which are important for modern capitalism like factories, oil wells, airliners, schools and hospitals. The market treats these as exchange values that can be infinitely divided into parts (worth so many pounds, pence, etc); but they have a physical existence that cannot usually be divided in that way.\n\nMarx's Concepts\n\n23","previous_page":22,"next_page":24}