Message 00896 [Homepage] [Navigation]
Thread: joxT00881 Message: 44/89 L2 [In date index] [In thread index]
[First in Thread] [Last in Thread] [Date Next] [Date Prev]
[Next in Thread] [Prev in Thread] [Next Thread] [Prev Thread]

Re: [jox] A response to Michel and Jakob

[Converted from multipart/alternative]

[1 text/plain]
David Graeber wrote a long trans-historical anthropological examination of
value .. his answer ... there is nothing that we can consistently call
value that exists over time across all cultures ... it has always been
contextual .. so stefan, yes, when I say use value, I mean utility as in
'valuable' to someone

On Fri, Mar 16, 2012 at 2:56 PM, Jakob Rigi <rigij> wrote:

InMarx, value, of course not use value, is congealed energy.

Stefan Meretz <stefan> 03/15/12 7:34 AM >>>
Hash: SHA1

Am 15.03.2012 11:51, schrieb Michel Bauwens:
so even as we work with a new conception of value as peer
producers contributing to our commons, we are embedded in a
capitalist logic where capital is extracting their kind of value
from our work, and as I argued in Al Jazeera, the feedback loop
between the two kinds of value is broken, hence both a crisis of
capital accumulation and a crisis of precarity

If not metaphorical speeking, but stricly in the Marxian: Capital is
not extracting "value", because value is not an essence which can be
extracted like sucking soda from a bottle. Capital is extracting our
energy and creativity to privatly produce a commodity, which it then
traded on markets has a value (be it a material product or offering an
advertisement platform like Facebook as you mentioned).

So I would always prefer to says: Capital is turning human energy and
creativity into value. But reading your usage of the term "value" more
metaphorically I am fine with your description.

so, by talking about the marxian theory of value, or any other one,
we are describing one aspect of these social processes .. but this
does not mean that "we" are re-importing the logic, it's the
'reality' we are facing

There are two realities: the capitalist to get rid off, and the p2p to
get flourished. They have qualitatively different logics, but today
they necessarily always appear in mixed modes. Marxian theory made for
the old does not apply to the new. The new quality needs new notions
and theory. Thus I see and observe the danger of re-importing old

so the real problem remains, i.e. insuring the social reproduction
of the commoners, 'outside' or 'in parallel' with, the processes of
capital accumulation?

Yes! We do not get rid of real problems by only creating nice new
theories ;)


- --
Start here:
OpenPGP-ID: 0x1D4BB160
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla -


P2P Foundation:  -

Connect:; Discuss:


[2 text/html]

Thread: joxT00881 Message: 44/89 L2 [In date index] [In thread index]
Message 00896 [Homepage] [Navigation]