Download Sweezy - econ310-fall10

Sweezy
Chapter 1
The Qualitative – Value Problem
Sweezy starts with the point that Smith and Marx have different conceptions of the
division of labor. According to Sweezy the salient part of Smith’s view can be
captured in the following: the production of commodities is a necessary condition for
the division of labor. Marx rejects that position, instead Marx would say that the
division of labor is a necessary condition for the production of commodities, but there
are several important examples of societies with varying degrees of division of labor
that are not commodity producing economies.
Sweezy quotes Marx:
“Only such products can become commodities with regard to each other as a result
from different kinds of labor, each kind being carried on independently and for the
account of private individuals.” Vol. 1 page 49
Sweezy’s main points here are (1) that the division of labor is separate from
commodity production and therefore exchange, and (2) that “commodity production
is withdrawn from the realm of natural phenomena and becomes the valid subject of
socio-historical investigation… (The economist) must also direct his attention to the
character of social relations which underlie the commodity form.” Page 25
I think what Sweezy is driving at is there is nothing natural or universal about a
commodity or commodity producing economy. Therefore we should not approach the
study of a commodity producing economy like we would the study of Newtonian
physics. We will not find anything analogous to universal natural laws or as Sweezy
says the commodity producing economy is not a manifestation of human nature.
When we study any economy what we will find are social relations.
Sweezy goes on to state that Marx saw that “behind (exchange value) is a specific
historically determined relation between producers.”
So the commodity has a quantitative dimension –exchange value- that must be
explained, and a qualitative dimension- value- that must be explained.
Use Value
Sweezy states “use value is an expression of a certain relation between the
consumer and the object consumed. (For example the relation between the
consumer and an ice cream cone is one to be examined by a biologist, or a
nutritionist, or a dietitian, but not an economist). Political economy, on the other
hand, is a social science of the relations between people. It follows that the ‘use
value as such lies outside the sphere of investigation of political economy.”
Marx was only concerned with social relations.
Exchange Value
Only commodities have exchange value. How is exchange value a social relation?
Marx’s answer, the exchange value is a quantum of value. Value indicates a
particular social relationship between producers of the commodities. “(The exchange
value) is an expression of the fact that individual producers are, each working in
isolation, are in fact working for each other… What finds expression in the form of
exchange value is therefore the fact that the commodities involved are the products
of human labor in a society based on the division of labor in which producers work
privately and independently.” Sweezy page 27
Sweezy quotes Franz Petry on page 28
“Only one property of a commodity enables us to assume it as the bearer and
expression of social relations, namely its property as the product of labor, since as
such we consider it no longer from the standpoint of consumption but from the
standpoint of production, as materialized human activity… (labor).”
What do Seezy and Petry mean?
Sweezy has claimed that economics as a social science is concerned exclusively with
social relations. Marx sees the exchange of commodities as representing particular
social relations. Furthermore, Petry implicitly claims that consumption is not social,
but production is.
In what sense is production social? What about the example of a commodity
producer laboring alone. Isn’t that a refutation of the idea of production being
social?
I think the answer lies in the context of the division of labor. For Marx the division of
labor is a great force of production. It results in the immense increase in production.
Commodity production is the economic relation necessary to realize the great
productive potential of the division of labor. But commodity production is a set of
social relations because it is the particular way in which society’s abstract labor is
allocated. Allocating society’s labor is a social activity.