• plinky [he/him]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    81
    ·
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    Argentinian worker in one month: how come i help produce 100 milk bottles a day, yet receive 20 milk bottles per day marx-hi

    • Tachanka [comrade/them]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      They’ll just do the usual porky-happy retort that obfuscates the entire question by appealing to the abstract social nature of labor. If you’re only at one spot on the assembly line and you contribute to a small part of the manufacturing of the commodity, it’s a lot harder to measure how many commodities you make a day, since you never really make an entire commodity with your hands the way an artisan would. Someone milks the cow. Someone bottles the milk. Someone screws the cap on. Someone puts the label on. Someone makes the bottle. Obviously it’s even more complex than that, but this is a simplified example. If a process of making a commodity is divided into 5 separate jobs, each worker only creates on average 20% of the commodity at a time. So if a given individual in that process does their job 100 times they really only “created” 20 commodities. And at this point the question becomes abstract enough for people to not really know exactly how much they’re individually doing for the capitalist and it becomes harder for them to measure whether they’re being paid the full value of their work or not. Intuitively of course most people know they aren’t, because otherwise profit and hence surplus value/surplus product couldn’t exist. And collectively the workers definitely are getting less than they give on average.

        • Tachanka [comrade/them]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          edit-2
          11 months ago

          That’s a tough question. I’m not quoting Marx above, I’m casually using intuition and memory. Honestly if I were strictly going off of Marx directly I wouldn’t have talked so casually about the “full value of their work” since Marx draws a distinction between labor power (the commodity sold by the worker to the capitalist), living labor (work as it is actually performed) and dead labor (i.e. the products of past labor, including means of production). But yeah. This is mostly stuff you can find explained much better in Volume 1, Wage Labour and Capital, Value Price and Profit, and maybe a little bit of Volume 2.

          If you want a full citation I’d have to put in some time and frankly it’s the Saturday before Christmas and I’m feeling very lazy lol

  • Mardoniush [she/her]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    49
    ·
    11 months ago

    More like Russia in the 1890s. Dude is speedrunning the conditions for a communist revolution to the point im beginning to suspect he’s a left accelerationist.

      • Red_Sunshine_Over_Florida [he/him]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        11 months ago

        Based on commentary I’ve heard from communists way more well read than me I’d say no, though it was what I thought of immediately when I heard of bringing back payment in kind. My imagination is informed that way based on reading of stuff in the Middle Ages like the Byzantines having a flexible tax policy after conquering Bulgaria, with the allowance of payment in kind.

  • hotcouchguy [he/him]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    42
    ·
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    the “Kubrick Stare” is one of Stanley Kubrick’s most recognizable directorial techniques. A method of shot composition, where a character stares at the camera with a forward tilt to convey to the audience that they are at the peak of their derangement.

    • Tachanka [comrade/them]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      21
      ·
      11 months ago

      astronaut-1 astronaut-2

      Always has been. it’s just that instead of being a wage slave in exchange for money they’re being a wage slave in exchange for commodities. “payment in kind” I believe it’s called

  • buh [she/her]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    38
    ·
    11 months ago

    Chuds when a libertarian gets elected: oh boy, I can’t wait to be paid in gold coins! so-true

    Bosses when a libertarian gets elected: here’s a can of our finest Spam for an honest day’s work porky-happy

  • Tachanka [comrade/them]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    29
    ·
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    Retvrn to barter society (which was never real, read graeber’s debt)

    Milei really out here trying to swindle workers with LP-C exchanges

    ancaptain “I will trade you 1 smoking-fish for 3 of your best worker” statements dreamed up by the utterly deranged