What’s wrong with Marx’s Law of Value, and what’s wrong with the concept of a Vanguard? What “big book” are you referring to, Capital, or the Manifesto of the Communist Party?
Big Book → Capital, I’ve only read vol 1 though (2 & 3 are like a jillion pages 😭)
I started writing my complaints, but it’s taking longer than I thought. I’ll drop an update if I finish writing it. My issues are mainly about the assumptions Marx makes about the topology of production networks (particularly regarding cycles), and the classification system used to produce nodes (is a node one particular spindle, or all spindles generally: this has implications). I haven’t read any newer theory so IDK this has probably been adressed.
There’s also the transformation problem. I don’t think that’s as big of a deal as it’s made out, since you wouldn’t just be slotting these Labor-Theoretic Values in place of Market Values, but people do often suggest doing this and it’s really weird to me.
To be fair, I think my understanding of the theory has some errors in regards to the interaction of Work Intensity, Labor, and Productiveness, so I’ll have to do some more thinking. Might change my complaints.
Regarding Vanguardism, I don’t have a particularly sophisticated critique as I haven’t read the lit. The Vanguard’s position would change as a result of joining the Vanguard (now holding state-like power), this changes their relationship to the revolutionary masses and their stated mission, and would inevitably change their actions in much the same way that holding Capital would (i.e, probably they’d go mad with power). But again I don’t know if that’s been addressed.
If you can be more specific, I can take a crack at explaining, but I can’t really go off of what you’ve provided other than the transformation “problem,” which I can address in short and link what I believe to be a more in-depth explanation of common criticisms of Marx’s Law of Value.
Essentially, Marx’s hypothesis that there existed a formula that he was never able to find that could solve for the difference between Capital Intensity and the notion of profit equalization across industries ended up being wrong, in that such a formula did not exist. However, we can see with empirical evidence that Marx’s Law of Value ends up being correct, in that profitability is closely tied to Capital Intensity, and that equalization of profit across industries really just does not come into play outside of noise.
This wasn’t because Marx was stupid or anything, but because math itself had not advanced enough to show that such a transformation did not exist, but this does not disprove Marx’s Law of Value, rather, it affirms its more important foundations while dismissing a hypothesis of Marx’s that he never fully developed, nor could he have.
Ok, sorry to necro-post on this. I finally got around to working through my thoughts about the first part of this (cycles in labour graphs), and there is a resolution to the issue. Essentially my critique was that in an economy where there are cycles of production (i.e. literally every economy), the labor cost of items as described in Capital is recursively defined and can’t be calculated. However, it turns out that you can take the limit of that series, to calculate the approximate amount.
Here’s some of the models I was messing around with. Standard toy economy:
And some code to simulate it. As you add more zeros to the cutoff (which controls how far back in the tree we search), it does seem to correspond roughly to the actually produced goods and is able to predict when the agent will starve, even if you flick around with the parameters. It’s really fascinating that it can do that.
Oh shit, completely forgot about this convo! You’ll have to forgive me, but I want to come back to this later and check it out fully. Thanks for replying!
Edit: ah, it’s Ian Paul Wright! I am familiar with his work, and haven’t gotten around to checking up on it in more depth. I’ve been meaning to reread Capital before diving back.
What’s wrong with Marx’s Law of Value, and what’s wrong with the concept of a Vanguard? What “big book” are you referring to, Capital, or the Manifesto of the Communist Party?
Big Book → Capital, I’ve only read vol 1 though (2 & 3 are like a jillion pages 😭)
I started writing my complaints, but it’s taking longer than I thought. I’ll drop an update if I finish writing it. My issues are mainly about the assumptions Marx makes about the topology of production networks (particularly regarding cycles), and the classification system used to produce nodes (is a node one particular spindle, or all spindles generally: this has implications). I haven’t read any newer theory so IDK this has probably been adressed.
There’s also the transformation problem. I don’t think that’s as big of a deal as it’s made out, since you wouldn’t just be slotting these Labor-Theoretic Values in place of Market Values, but people do often suggest doing this and it’s really weird to me.
To be fair, I think my understanding of the theory has some errors in regards to the interaction of Work Intensity, Labor, and Productiveness, so I’ll have to do some more thinking. Might change my complaints.
Regarding Vanguardism, I don’t have a particularly sophisticated critique as I haven’t read the lit. The Vanguard’s position would change as a result of joining the Vanguard (now holding state-like power), this changes their relationship to the revolutionary masses and their stated mission, and would inevitably change their actions in much the same way that holding Capital would (i.e, probably they’d go mad with power). But again I don’t know if that’s been addressed.
If you can be more specific, I can take a crack at explaining, but I can’t really go off of what you’ve provided other than the transformation “problem,” which I can address in short and link what I believe to be a more in-depth explanation of common criticisms of Marx’s Law of Value.
Essentially, Marx’s hypothesis that there existed a formula that he was never able to find that could solve for the difference between Capital Intensity and the notion of profit equalization across industries ended up being wrong, in that such a formula did not exist. However, we can see with empirical evidence that Marx’s Law of Value ends up being correct, in that profitability is closely tied to Capital Intensity, and that equalization of profit across industries really just does not come into play outside of noise.
This wasn’t because Marx was stupid or anything, but because math itself had not advanced enough to show that such a transformation did not exist, but this does not disprove Marx’s Law of Value, rather, it affirms its more important foundations while dismissing a hypothesis of Marx’s that he never fully developed, nor could he have.
Here’s a link to the article.
As for the Vanguard, you should read about the Mass Line and Democratic Centralism, both address your issues.
Ok, sorry to necro-post on this. I finally got around to working through my thoughts about the first part of this (cycles in labour graphs), and there is a resolution to the issue. Essentially my critique was that in an economy where there are cycles of production (i.e. literally every economy), the labor cost of items as described in Capital is recursively defined and can’t be calculated. However, it turns out that you can take the limit of that series, to calculate the approximate amount.
I managed to find an article where they basically cover this better than I can, interesting read. https://ejpe.org/journal/article/view/155/149
Here’s some of the models I was messing around with. Standard toy economy:
And some code to simulate it. As you add more zeros to the cutoff (which controls how far back in the tree we search), it does seem to correspond roughly to the actually produced goods and is able to predict when the agent will starve, even if you flick around with the parameters. It’s really fascinating that it can do that.
LTV calculations: https://www.typescriptlang.org/play/#code/PQKhCgAIUhhBDANgYwK6PgFwJYHsB2kADvAE7wC2ApplaQM4B0UIw4yB9mkamuAZv0gBeSAAZGYqdJkBGANztO3TAAtSuAO4BZeAA8RkWTPmRgwSNiFqqkDACNcpSFT3IqVACb1Ia7PQAaX3UtSHh8TzD6elRqS24Ac1wqHz5LfH5sfGxMAE9IAApcG1JNf1scyAp4fIwEyFxUFVVbEgSqAEpwcFAIaEgAUQ58XAp8gAUySho6ehY2Ya54qgp6cboAQT1bUVkANlNzKtQl 1t4SE1VXERbfFiz0iV8JZyVtbpx7GQAa30dowHMwWCgnbhnMKXa63SD3CiPZ6vWirdakAASyUM 0OILBkAhFyuNzuDzoiO48GQOE4qIAYrhcJFdmJFOB Kh8FS8IR-l9fv8CnoAFxwx4dIWw0nOADeUEg8sW3FIKUMBgAPKJeAIhAB HhNbWQCUFADM-WwGnwgo6HUgAGpCgAmfpcb4-a22h0FIgYXJ0D2KeXyqwFZX0AB8wjUGh0 ltsqDieCMdhVE0g1IGlIBQAREQNPZ4PZEPkkiq0llMtk8jmOoGgwBfOXyqiIei2ZWYVCkQhhxRNtkcrkESDXKiCkVS8WS F0SAJoOKyBhwyQdWag2CSB6rVb43OmAWgge 1Ol04X4nr0 mr vQ2 vB-ihlKR6NaXT3 fNpPv9P4NMMyzXN81wQti1LZJUlwdIqxyXJa0fSAm0TVt22XGhu17FJ 26dlOWpQhXUvYVRToacyJlH8l3yUQDAsN4UU2bYkKXFdREgfINX1Pgtx3TchGNXk3QFXIbVPb1fX9MS6x-EMwzfEJYy-Bck2TUIAPTAZMycECCyLEtIDLaDYKyeDEJ-FCgzQjtMJ7DD6FwwcCO5SxLQnSiKKlb9Exo1UzGWJjSD5P4WOo5QHNXLiN143UeMNITthC0TxOvKTsxkpD5NfKMlM-eMf0TP9Uy0nTszzfSIKMqDfBgyszJrWTEysls21srt7L7cAB3w4dCHsZV4E8DypwlSifMXCLaLXALGI dFklYiL2PlaL4r49bBMKMcChkiSbz9DKHzk58FNymN8omtTis0oDdIqsCDMg8s6oyBqEKaxsfxsjCOuwxzurwodCOIdKRtnUgvIhq6eGWlUOMFSBuN3OKUaNGa0tvbM9GASlCPm lGVSwoBqoIbBVxvqCYZTwbU p8Xwjc6PzjGGiqUkq7vK0DwMM4zatM6sPqQlqXDa36sIcpz F0pckkZBohAAbWE-ltiCMcgmIn4giPfAglJoaAF0CvCl5EhpgAZIsnEMeXhtkenYZeYlGEQXAEgKQqg3t63HFIAJvflYwxAC32becI5QM8VB3EieB FoZwQ8gLgqCIegdR-WSGyAA
Simulated Environment: https://www.typescriptlang.org/play/#code/PQKhCgAIUhlBLAtpSAFAhgJ3YgpgF10wGcoRhwBjAewDtj9J5DFjUiBBAD10gF5IARgBsAbkjBgkRAFcGkAEa90kAO4ALagBtetGYiWYqdec1yt2mABLVeAkeMnS5jJZBUbtu-YeP1GZhZEqPCUANboPPxCYhJSsvJuHpo6kHoGRH7y6JT48CaWAGLU1AAm0YIADKLgWYz4Mpj0FZXVtfgAngAOvACiNLSw OiE0QDeUCiQ AAyuABm ABcaT5ENQC kABkkABKuDSYpQA8AOIlpQDS8LSlADSrGZgAfDXgnT2QF2U3d9GTFAAH0gACIGLgAG64YiguKQaiYSBaeBhXCPLToBSIx7qGS0ADmRAA-IDICDQZEYXCKV1QhEeLDyWDNNTmaD4Jg6HD2Qx6UyKQpMLh0KVQe9PrwOLl8rQAVNeWF4F1QWSQT9rrdSu9wPN8TK6ExiAAVIiIW7oLQACgYI1wK36dCGdoAlCtsV50HKJgqnPh1LwCTheLg7sQmPNpgH3ETaIxsHLqDJGNRI3jCZkFfB5jbhoQAHQQ6Hhk4CSouyA hVTAbELz5rTUAlW0EcWOMUrwXClfOgl01atTYUNJrTTAyXADqYbMlORHuRZEdyQYgEaZIXBk3BaVcR3N2-OzBaMUuQcuVskK2v1xvN0HGjfIpDMSDCnIBnt9qeD4eNOX4cdJymMkZwVbddzGV8CD-SB5ktVdxBnGddX1PJDWIGRKEofdCAdAZnUIR4cjQ2gVmlEi3UgR1BjzXgqxQbMrWI2V D4ARwUIYs4W2XZbQLIURXKF57Arejq1-UcxMHFB81kvj0UvaSj0WFZ5MPOZFkgABaIR7lqaTqwE0VVNo-MjPKHTBD0gyFSLGETIPOzw0syAAGp3ANegikuazpI2b9IFAqZwN4RjmMNNj2PM7jeNM1lwxeM9RMUlAJO9FLq1kwtaN8mzpg05YV1M5TGEsvSMtszj7KKxyquc3SKqmeKHILeLtIavKUHMlrcDMt9yncwI2CIGxNwMoKUAmyAQr3cK5UisFOW5HZYoPOlwipBKkovAy0p2zqsvk3KbJKnr1OPdqrP0zqnLOpzLuOgz1oZaq1OezaHsahiuVImqCyWuVBpYYbMBCDaeAyqappmsLPNY9i XCJkeL 3qPsS88pKHaDJK yBDpyvHTtR87NLK668tukn7vJzr3EZM6Ptpm68iRu7WbCcMgfMEHuDGvyQK3HdQpzNSAeEgBmFbqY54hhIAJmlub4bBTa 32n8cfSumCbtR6lIKs6Ss vGqbUmmOs6zbGcZNzLbygGzoB7SJf1wdEc59n W0 W3cCwWwOFvcxZ yXpfN2WFaVuGFtBd7GXVrHUq1jWbN1wiicNknjfJ026vZqEYU un49e0zS65 2bMdknna0128-5L2kZ9v2oaF3dGJDugo5RiP V73Zldj LE4yvak8yuTCbp4m1Jzhq88L4gC LYvOuakm2vcq66Zr7u5R033G7ZmXva04-xoD4Kg9hkiVfBJUVWS3aU8nhV04U2es-ngqTbps2pkLa7wFgqaGQdIL i5KoNIuAYG9EwFyTALYACStBISWngOUOavZ z 2QqAMAZBIDGnUPAcMXRtChA6JALomB8j0LyAALyLkGf0RBbgEncOGWQlB1CKH6tw2h1BiDEHgAoHQ YyAUD1LQOG5lUBUMoB0HC9oqL4VopRciLExJOGzGoXg6h0DQmmNQaaIxHginwGSLuplzKQAxuHIBdUVaCFElBEccoOLL3FP7X0Uh9GqEMcY5QK5GhdC0HIBEaZbDEEeHBTAiAO4i1UfmNqGN3F7VBNFRCs4AmRiCZAUodAADkjAjEmJGMiEU8h8CqDMamcxfDTHaEeJQbAml2GIHzLQ hiJmDwBYS0ncUYqmFIqbwHQojonJODqZcWfApZ92cQPPgitlkHg icIQkBMkp0pAnXJgdO6i3maHRZTjaqrPWatAsFdIDbMELsysHiYJx3pGrI5N8TmpIWTcs SNB5b1iQ8nZezPEslib48BPyD5hw2QWD2cs1mXILFsyAitwVvM X475KS4UXIRb1JFQK3ofNttszFLyskV2hbM2xB4-mouJZHFFRK0kgspc8yCWTR5fJQHogpvBim0DKZACZ01aBJgJPw4UdZGiUBhI8NhAYkRdPpacta5Ki6OPZc7bZEssWjg5D9Olxz8WmXRmeZl2VvaUqNV4pFZq8WpwVFk4gT9xSCwIWACA0ASFkIoUomhdCGEDJYeGFVHDCRCMQF6GhSKhGUNEeIyR0iUJyPvkixRKJlGqLwk6TRZE4a6PyQY8VITTHmPwJYkYNjNX8UEbq25LLl6uIdWCJyzqBVlvGZWlQGFMARKiY0tqXpsHCmRNQGBhp5g VglgJJ5q5kHnSda9l9jTwiA7dk-q3b4SBOFaU8p-bGA6HQLU p0Smn8PwCULQbSOn1ADN03pYbmG8DvdocM-oxnBJMVM8MqYNW-POUslttrAVsog ip5O6cUwotYysDNqSXQZJvcx53LXnGtpfy6at8G29SZeytD-y1JtSwzuvluKUAwyI-mBZ4GAWc1JZailGLsNZIQyBglzH 5QfI XbVJZOM7rw7RgjsKzk93QwJ1jcm4qcrE9S-ZNGpqCvLSKsVErQzStlTCJMmBFVxMgFGtVL7ePsZ1euiDiauVAhBAfBxAhDWqYhRxfk 76OpPuc22uP1QVuZ5fsgG3mIHj32R65UXqwHgB9UQ-1pDyHCNzSGvpjDBmsJGKqzhsbML8Odhe4RKaJG9XTbIuGAMc3UPzeowtrpi331LRGctEq73VtrdYrMDH7H Yjm2habj3NvK7fhzTfbKlhKHZEoDMSi7jvcJOxsM65RzrKPExdVnV0gv63YwRW7hA7pyZJibR7RUnsqWemp9Qr2NJFM0r9D7IDtPQJ0l9PTQ39I-cMn9RjGCTcmTCOb23-oodI6yoTmyONwZG8anjy6GVg9k-xlZgmbWYbBXDrxEnEMruR7QNjVz0fsso1jkLHn1Og I DuzkObXoqpRT7FhzJM b46h n7LMdM5wzjkT4XpPIdk1DxFXOINk957yqF43e3nZ05WvTMgZVQXlcZpVZmctLnVYjhjfnbMBcNAa8kTm0ecxcxindYX8Ps s1tSonO7WW x522Wgu6KRY89FlUAUkK1HADoRg8lxhkmJp4uJFMirLxWFUY6FcY-HWtlXZqIDvp0BWJUY6SKM-HW6meeLdRellEwiRAi4YBBiSppnsk8ezyJ4ZnXskm9q9Zh jnsk2fG8Kjz9X-ytRrySNvKo-s4ANDwB0FaAAhOQ00iSLTWnki6F NYTCMGHgIwSNW82L4CgP3qQ AAGbZQwdkOFg7sVa41okgAAEjGHNDYB R8KjyWOHIYQXv6BkJiPIJihovafW7A71UGYD4SYk8mX0HEoAvV4EfhiyWDxiMjCACivBgNdx8QQJLi5FKBL1lDLwAG05oABdVyPgOaEGYoMoFAmsNAk1bkTAzqOhYvTyAg4g0goaSwMGF6aglAaA3cTzJGUEBgvKJgnAlgvMYgQgzyEgvgDgzgHgHgl7Wg6KYQmyUQ3AhrfASQtg2Q4GSwUaRQ0oBYdAb-ZYPGdQ8QkYbQ6Q1yVyRQ7vN8ZA6 FADvWiaIDCLCVRIiCA3fEwG8JsYfTYf3K8PwwfAIg-QoefOACQyAK0O-cPLYcPF0A-e4Cw0vCQkfIAA
Oh shit, completely forgot about this convo! You’ll have to forgive me, but I want to come back to this later and check it out fully. Thanks for replying!
Edit: ah, it’s Ian Paul Wright! I am familiar with his work, and haven’t gotten around to checking up on it in more depth. I’ve been meaning to reread Capital before diving back.