willow: "i don’t care if it’s an owner despotically or my peers (and myself) democratically cracking the whip. and frankly i’d prefer not to deform myself into a petit bourgeois in the process. as you correctly point out, the form of the firm changes nothing meaningful while the law of value remains intact."

Alt Text

Home Timeline Search

Show parent replies

The post below is a reply to another user

view in bsky.app

willowFeb 28, 2025

cool story but the appropriator of surplus value is entirely irrelevant to the degree and magnitude of exploitation.

Marx, Capital Volume 1, 159
Although the rate of surplus-value is an exact expression for the degree of exploitation of labour-power, it is, in no sense, an expression for the absolute amount of exploitation. For example, if the necessary labour = 5 hours and the surplus labour = 5 hours, the degree of exploitation is 100%. The amount of exploitation is here measured by 5 hours. If, on the other hand, the necessary labour = 6 hours and the surplus labour = 6 hours, the degree of exploitation remains, as before, 100%, while the actual amount of exploitation has increased 20%, namely from five hours to six.

willow @dreary.dev

i don’t care if it’s an owner despotically or my peers (and myself) democratically cracking the whip. and frankly i’d prefer not to deform myself into a petit bourgeois in the process. as you correctly point out, the form of the firm changes nothing meaningful while the law of value remains intact.

February 28, 2025 at 3:48 PM