I'm a noob and just woke up so please forgive if my questions are stupid.
Isn't there a flaw with this reasoning in that the value of human life is itself just a fetish? I mean in the grand scheme of things, we only have worth because we say we have worth.
Second, how would Marxism handle a world in which all human labor has been replaced with machines owned equally by all mankind?
Humans have real value in their capacities and their feelings. So human life has intrinsic value, whereas commodities have 'fetishised' value.
As for the machine question. Firstly, no value would be created. Yet you could still have enterprise where prices are set on these machines' products, yet if there were no human labour there would be no one to buy the products. This would essentially over ride the requirement for a revolution, and all mankind could own them equally.
@DrStrangelove666 In other words, that would arouse in capitalism what Marx called 'fetters.' When fetters arise in the mode of production, i.e. it collapses, the economic system must throw them off and advance to a higher mode of production. This is almost universally applicable in history.
The world where everything is produced by machines could only be a communist world, i.e. one where all the machines are indeed owned equally by all mankind.
very nice
Forkroute 3 months ago
Am I listening to a fucking computer? Dammit....
MakeItJungle 6 months ago
@MakeItJungle What else would you be listening to?
TheCommunard 6 months ago
I'm a noob and just woke up so please forgive if my questions are stupid.
Isn't there a flaw with this reasoning in that the value of human life is itself just a fetish? I mean in the grand scheme of things, we only have worth because we say we have worth.
Second, how would Marxism handle a world in which all human labor has been replaced with machines owned equally by all mankind?
DrStrangelove666 9 months ago
@DrStrangelove666
Humans have real value in their capacities and their feelings. So human life has intrinsic value, whereas commodities have 'fetishised' value.
As for the machine question. Firstly, no value would be created. Yet you could still have enterprise where prices are set on these machines' products, yet if there were no human labour there would be no one to buy the products. This would essentially over ride the requirement for a revolution, and all mankind could own them equally.
TheCommunard 9 months ago
@DrStrangelove666 In other words, that would arouse in capitalism what Marx called 'fetters.' When fetters arise in the mode of production, i.e. it collapses, the economic system must throw them off and advance to a higher mode of production. This is almost universally applicable in history.
The world where everything is produced by machines could only be a communist world, i.e. one where all the machines are indeed owned equally by all mankind.
TheCommunard 9 months ago
@DrStrangelove666 Oh, just to clarify - human labour is fetishised, since it is a commodity.
TheCommunard 9 months ago