From: "Harald Beyer-Arnesen" <haraldba-AT-online.no>
Subject: Re: AUT: Re: Immeasurable value
Date: Mon, 5 Apr 2004 05:34:49 +0200



----- Original Message ----- 
From: Nate Holdren 
To: aut-op-sy-AT-lists.village.Virginia.EDU 
Sent: 5. april 2004 00.04
Subject: Re: AUT: Re: Immeasurable value

Just a quite superficial comment to this thread. I, for one, I am
glad for Harry's comments on this., and am looking forward to
George C's piece on the matter. As fas as I can see, this claimed beyond
meausure, which I find irrational, should be at the core of a
critique of Negri (without throwing out what is of value there).  
In my opinion, belonging to the transcendence faction,  the
question is also interlinked with the very questionable
celebration of "immanence". 

As long as we live in material world, and 'private' property
continue to exist in some form or the other,  value (labour
power) will be measured (through the mediation of the
market ) as sure as exploitation and oppression will exist.
Assembly lines are not moving to places as China due our
bosses being attracted by the exoctic, nor is it umeasurbility that
drives the bosses to use the whip and sweet phrases to
make us work harder. I will believe in unmeasurbility the day
my boss tells me: Work at your own pace and as much or
little you like, come and go as you wish, take a nap every
now and then, as it does not matter one way or the other,
and when the members of the traditional petty
bourgeoisie starts acting in the same way. 

The real absurdity in all this is that theory is put forth precisly at
a time when everything is increasingly measured, here there
and everywhere, even what was not so yesterday.  Competiton
is no mere illusion, and it is does not revolve around thin air,
even if it might seem so at times. 
        If _on average_ what  is _on average_ produced within 100
labour hours could at the very same moment _on average_ be produced
within 10 labour hours, then capitalist value surely would be
beyond measure.  Although it is more than doubtful that capitalism
would be around at all, had that been the case.
        The whole idea of unmeasurable exploitation is also quite
interesting? Maybe exploitation is only an illusion?


There is no fundamental difference between "immateral"
and more traditional manual work here. The average social
necessary labour time remains a good short-hand for all this. This applies
for the scientific field as well, in relation to commodity
production that is. Just don't forget the word: average.

Further, that capitalists will take in use knowledge, skills and
experience gained outside of waged hours, and even outside
of any direct control of any authority, what's really so new and
sensational about that? It more likely was even more so the
case in preceding periods, and even today, often more a
factor within traditional manual work, as within the building
and construction industry. But up to now, at least, perhaps
the best example is the information technology. But what
has been particular about that sector is that in some sense skills were
first gained, as in the early days of capitalism, prior to
entering the sphere of of waged work, and largely outside
of formal education.

You write, Nate: "I'm still not very clear on what it would mean to
measure value,  given that value is not a substance but a social
relation ... " 

Well, it is not simply a social relation, it is materially mediated
social relation, and that makes a difference. And that social
relation very much revolves around labour-time and intensity.
And there still are not that many people around willing to
exchange 10 sigarettes for one if they've given a choice. I of course
would claim a) that there still on average takes more labour to
produce 10 sigarettes than 1,  b) that I am not the only one
around aware of this, and c) that this fact is related to that
most of the times 10 sigarettes costs me more than 1. Things
get more complex, a lot of other variables enters in, but in
the final instance one cannot within a commodity economy on
average and over time depart too far from the amount of human
energy and time spent in bringing something about. 
        
Harald









     --- from list aut-op-sy-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---