{"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":355,"pdf_page":355,"physical_index":355,"physical_index_base":0,"printed_page_status":"recognized","page_sha256":"7efa050b8cfbe8d968bf22fe8ff4f4931bab9505d257fffd95be8d2bb2bef460"},"chapter":"Zombie Capitalism Global Crisis and the Relevance of Marx","content":"24 Karl Marx, Grundrisse (London, Penguin, 1973). Also available at   \n25 Marx, Capital, Volume One, p409.\n\n26 So the chapters in Capital on manufacturing and machinery fall within the section of the work entitled \"The Production of Relative Surplus Value\", Capital, Volume One, pp336-504.\n\nMarx, Capital, Volume One, p411. There is a minor ambiguity in Marx's work as to whether the intensification of the labour without any changing of technique amounts to \"relative\" or \"absolute surplus value\", since a passage on page 410 seems to imply the latter, and this is how some people read Marx. The point has no wide significance. I prefer the \"relative surplus value\" option since it is invariably combined with the introduction of machinery which, as Marx points out repeatedly, usually increases rather than diminishes the burden on the worker-and produces a different sort of resistance to that produced by extending the working day.\n\n28 Marx, Capital, Volume One, p410.\n\n29 As above, p411.\n\n3 0 Engels, \"Socialism: Scientific and Utopian,\" in Marx, Engels and Lenin, The Essential Left (London, Unwin Books, 1960), p130. There is sometimes confusion among Marxists about this. Some contend competition cannot be constitutive of capital since Marx's method in Volume One of Capital is to arrive at the general laws of the system by abstracting from the impact of competition over the distribution of surplus value between the different units of the system. Competition then supposedly belongs to the sphere of distribution, not that of production. But the competition is between producing units. It arises from the fact that their interaction with each other is not planned. This then imposes on each the general features of the system Marx analyses in Volume One. Without it there would be no reason for the individual capitals to abide by the law of value, even if some of the necessary efects of competition express themselves in the sphere of distribution. As Marx puts it, \"The inner law [of value] enforces itself only through their competition, their mutual pressure upon one another.\" Hence it is absurd for some theorists to claim that the notion of capital does not include the notion of many competing capitals; the concept of capital presupposes commodity production. It is similar to substituting input-output tables relating particular industries to each other for the competition between capitals and then claiming to have a model of capitalist society, as do the \"Ricardian\" critics of Marx's theories.   \n3 1 Marx, Capital, Volume One.\n\n32 \"Valorisation\" is the French translation of the German term used by Marx, Verwertung. \"Valorisation\" in French means an expansion in the value of something (eg a company share). But the general English meaning of the word is different, meaning simply \"fixing the price or value of a commodity, etc, especially by a centralised organised scheme\" (Shorter Oxford English Dictionary, Third Edition). This usage leads to confusion with the very different concept of \"realisation\" (ie getting the monetary value of commodities), which is how the term valorization is used in the English translation of the Grundrisse by Martin Nicolaus. All this is confusing for newcomers to Marx's writings-and encourages an academicist tendency to dense, often nearly unintelligible, expositions of Marx's analyses.\n\n33 Marx, Capital, Volume One, p751.\n\n34 As above, p716.\n\n35 This is something David Harvey slips into in his books The New Imperialism (Oxford, 2005) and A Short History of Neoliberalism (Oxford, 2007).\n\n27\n\nNotes\n\n355","previous_page":354,"next_page":356}