It is, in fact, impossible to obtain a rational understanding of exchange-value, here, without also accepting the existence of value, as an independent, and antecedent category. Measuring the exchange-value of any commodity, in terms of some other use value, can only indicate the proportional relation, and changes in it. Yet, the proportional changes can arise as a result of a rise or fall in the value of either commodity, or both. Nor can anything be determined, in this regard, by comparing changes in the exchange value of a commodity in relation to two other commodities.
If 1 metre of linen exchanges for 1 litre of wine, and 1 gram of gold, and subsequently exchanges for only 0.5 litres of wine, but 2 grams of gold, is this because the value of linen has risen, but not as much as the value of wine, or has the value of wine risen, whilst the value of linen has remained the same, whilst the value of gold has fallen?
“(Thus when corn becomes dearer, the value of labour falls because less corn is exchanged for it. On the other hand, if cloth becomes cheaper at the same time, the value of labour rises simultaneously, because more cloth can be exchanged for it. Thus the value of labour both rises and falls at the same time and the two expressions of its value—in corn and in cloth—are not identical, not equivalent, because its increased value cannot be equal to its reduced value.” (p 151)
“Accordingly it can also be said of every other commodity that a rise in its value does not imply a fall in the value of the other commodity with which it exchanges, nay, may even imply a rise in value on the other side. For instance, supposing the same labour which produced 1 quarter of corn, now produces 3 quarters. The 3 quarters cost £1, as the one quarter did before. If 2 quarters are now exchanged for £1, the value of money has risen, because it is expressed in 2 quarters instead of one. Thus the purchaser of corn gets a greater value for his money. But the seller who sells for £1 what has cost him only ⅔ [of £1] gains ⅓. And thus the value of his corn has risen at the same time that the money price of corn has fallen.” (p 151-2)
In other words, value and exchange value, are two entirely separate categories. The value of a commodity might rise, i.e. the labour-time required for its production rises, and yet its exchange value-as against some other commodity/ies may fall, simply because the value of these other commodities has risen by a greater extent.
No comments:
Post a Comment