Money does not arise immediately, because the occasional exchange of surplus products, as it turns into trade of commodities, first takes the form of barter.
“Exchange-value does not acquire an independent form, but is still directly tied to use-value. This is manifested in two ways. Use-value, not exchange-value, is the purpose of the whole system of production, and use- values accordingly cease to be use-values and become means of exchange, or commodities, only when a larger amount of them has been produced than is required for consumption. On the other hand, they become commodities only within the limits set by their immediate use-value, even when this function is polarised so that the commodities to be exchanged by their owners must be use-values for both of them, but each commodity must be a use-value for its non-owner.” (p 50)
Again, this is the point Marx makes in Theories of Surplus Value, Chapter 17. In other words, what we have is a system of natural economy, based upon direct producers, be they communes, or peasant households. The purpose of the direct production is the creation of use-values for consumption – products. But, some of these products are produced in excess of needs, meaning they can be exchanged for other use-values, which are surplus for other producers. The purpose of the exchange is still use-value, just the acquisition of different use-values to those given up in the exchange. It takes the form C-C.
The fact that some producers have a comparative advantage in the production of certain products leads inevitably towards specialisation, by them, in the production of these commodities, solely for the purpose of exchange.
“In fact, the exchange of commodities evolves originally not within primitive communities, but on their margins, on their borders, the few points where they come into contact with other communities.” (p 50)
It is why international trade develops at a fairly early stage. As Marx says, in Theories of Surplus Value, Chapter 17, its this that leads to the error of Ricardo, in his statement, cited earlier. Under barter, the purpose remains use-value/products for consumption, C-C, and, on this basis, producers do only produce what they desire to consume or to exchange for other products to consume. But, that no longer applies in a money economy, let alone capitalism. In a money economy, instead of C-C, we first have C – M – C, which means that it breaks down into C -M, followed by M – C, so that, having sold and obtained money, there is no necessary second leg of M – C. The aim can now be the acquisition of money itself, exchange-value incarnate, and so production can now be directed not towards use-value, but towards exchange-value.
“The gradual extension of barter, the growing number of exchange transactions, and the increasing variety of commodities bartered lead, therefore, to the further development of the commodity as exchange-value, stimulates the formation of money and consequently has a disintegrating effect on direct barter.” (p 50)
This forms part of the process by which the various forms of extended family, and social structures founded on them, dissolve, resulting in the formation of the individual family, private property and the state, as discussed by Engels.
No comments:
Post a Comment