When
I first read the writing of Karl Marx I had no idea what was going on, there
were so many ideas and points that were brought up it was hard to differentiate
what point he was trying to make. But what was most eye appealing was his
concentration on commodities and money, the idea of value. First off what is a
commodity? Marx explains to us that a commodity is something we don’t
necessarily need to survive but it does satisfy the needs and wants in society.
Commodity is structured into a way that ties into capitalism, “usefulness,” and
does pose a value for exchange. While reading through Marx’s piece I felt that
he was arguing the idea that production of commodities does stand as a social
process. He demonstrates that commodities are dependent on an economic aspect.
He focuses on the nature of value to show that the idea of production and
exchange is not what we think it is. Use
value can be defined as ‘the utility of a thing it makes.’ Use value can vary
and limited based on the physical properties of the commodity which tends to
not matter. However if we exclude the concept of money and focus solely on a
society that operates only in trade, we are able to see a practical application
of Marx’s theory of value.
When
I first began to analyze the theory the first thing I thought of was the Disney
movie Pocahontas, There was conflict between both parties, one being Native
Americans and the other being the English, which came about because of owning
land. Use- values of the land becomes more than just land that is owned, it
becomes a reality that we can use to show wealth within a class. Now the idea of
exchange value is presented. It was presented as a quantitative relation, which
Marx mentioned. With time and place owning a piece of land can be beneficial,
again depending on where it is or season of the year it is. But are people
really using these commodities because they truly need and want them? Or they
trying to live up to a name, and seem they are more than what they are? This can
be contradicting. In the movie if they were to have a trade let just say gold
for the land, is that a fair trade? Marx brings in the idea of labour. The land
itself had to be maintained for long periods of time to keep the crops growing
for people to even consider this piece of land. This point seems to be over
looked. Now let us look the other way, gold. How was gold earned? How was it
made it? Who made it? These are all questions that take part in what the actual
value is. It is taken to another level and no longer looked as a material thing.
All in all human labour is what forms the theory for the value of commodities
making it a necessary production.
I first read the writing of Karl Marx I had no idea what was going on, there
were so many ideas and points that were brought up it was hard to differentiate
what point he was trying to make. But what was most eye appealing was his
concentration on commodities and money, the idea of value. First off what is a
commodity? Marx explains to us that a commodity is something we don’t
necessarily need to survive but it does satisfy the needs and wants in society.
Commodity is structured into a way that ties into capitalism, “usefulness,” and
does pose a value for exchange. While reading through Marx’s piece I felt that
he was arguing the idea that production of commodities does stand as a social
process. He demonstrates that commodities are dependent on an economic aspect.
He focuses on the nature of value to show that the idea of production and
exchange is not what we think it is. Use
value can be defined as ‘the utility of a thing it makes.’ Use value can vary
and limited based on the physical properties of the commodity which tends to
not matter. However if we exclude the concept of money and focus solely on a
society that operates only in trade, we are able to see a practical application
of Marx’s theory of value.
When
I first began to analyze the theory the first thing I thought of was the Disney
movie Pocahontas, There was conflict between both parties, one being Native
Americans and the other being the English, which came about because of owning
land. Use- values of the land becomes more than just land that is owned, it
becomes a reality that we can use to show wealth within a class. Now the idea of
exchange value is presented. It was presented as a quantitative relation, which
Marx mentioned. With time and place owning a piece of land can be beneficial,
again depending on where it is or season of the year it is. But are people
really using these commodities because they truly need and want them? Or they
trying to live up to a name, and seem they are more than what they are? This can
be contradicting. In the movie if they were to have a trade let just say gold
for the land, is that a fair trade? Marx brings in the idea of labour. The land
itself had to be maintained for long periods of time to keep the crops growing
for people to even consider this piece of land. This point seems to be over
looked. Now let us look the other way, gold. How was gold earned? How was it
made it? Who made it? These are all questions that take part in what the actual
value is. It is taken to another level and no longer looked as a material thing.
All in all human labour is what forms the theory for the value of commodities
making it a necessary production.