Surplus Value

2021 ◽  
pp. 90-109
Keyword(s):  
2004 ◽  
pp. 111-130 ◽  
Author(s):  
V. Kudrov

Substantive provisions of the Marx-Engels-Lenin economic theory in comparison with vital realities of XX century are critically considered in the article. Theories of surplus value, labor value, general law of capitalist accumulation, absolute and relative impoverishment of proletariat are examined. The author points to utopianism and inconsistency of Marx's theory and calls Russian economists for creation of new economic theory adequate to challenges of XXI century.


2019 ◽  
Vol 29 (6) ◽  
pp. 215-228

This paper deals with the impact that Karl Marx"s Das Kapital (and especially its fourth volume, the theory of Surplus Value) had on the category of economy in Kazimir Malevich"s output. In a series of texts, Malevich proclaims economy the new criterion of art and the Black Square its embodiment in contemporary painting. While the author was analyzing Marx"s views on labor and human nature, echoes of them turned up in Malevich"s manifestos and philosophical essays where the artist pondered the idea of the liberation of creative exaltation. The article others an interpretation of the creative process itself from the standpoint of economy, which for Malevich provided an opportunity to lay down the foundation for a new kind of art that was consistent with the prevailing ideology. The author points out that while Malevich was in Vitebsk he studied Marx"s works with idea of incorporating economic studies into art: his speculations on the relationships between the ideological superstructure and the practical, economic base were written in the manner of Marxist philosophy and provided the basis for his main essays, The World as Non-Objectivity (1923) and Suprematism: Thee World as Non-Objectivity or Eternal Rest (1923-1924). They defined the new art as an independent ideological superstructure positioned “outside of other contents and ideologies.” Parallel to that, the author examines the correspondence between Malevich"s theory of the surplus element and Marxist doctrines on surplus value. It is also shown that Malevich hoped to prove that, as in dialectical materialism, his new surplus element opens the way to a new artistic structure that is emerging from the womb of the old system in the same way that communism comes about as a kind of heterogeneous body from within the underpinnings of bourgeois society.


2021 ◽  
pp. 194277862110126
Author(s):  
Bosman Batubara

This article engages with Swyngedouw’s puzzle, that is, how is surplus-value production under capitalism conceptualised given the entanglement of humans and non-human entities. It identifies how Swyngedouw’s socionature – a concept/way to express the oneness of human and non-human under capitalism – posed a critique to the tendency of labour-centred analysis in Marxist thought such as Neil Smith’s concept of ‘production of nature’ but did not engage with how surplus-value is produced. This article makes visible the role of non-wage-labour in surplus-value production through reference to Moore’s concept of value-relations and oikeios.


2021 ◽  
pp. 1468795X2199162
Author(s):  
Georges Gurvitch ◽  
Shaun Murdock

This is a translation from French of a speech given by Georges Gurvitch (1894–1965) originally published in Cahiers Internationaux de Sociologie in 1966 under the title ‘Proudhon et Marx’. Gurvitch, who succeeded Émile Durkheim as chair of sociology at the Sorbonne, discusses the significance of the revolutionary socialists Pierre-Joseph Proudhon (1809–1865) and Karl Marx (1818–1883) for the field of sociology. In particular, Gurvitch highlights similarities in their thought such as Proudhon’s collective force and Marx’s surplus value and their shared concern for worker self-management. He argues that their mutual antipathy towards each other was rooted in personal feelings rather than in the incompatibility of their ideas, and calls for a synthesis of their ideas which would correct their errors and inspire ‘a new collectivism, neither Marxist nor Proudhonian, but surpassing both’. Lastly, Gurvitch emphasises the recurrent threat of fascism and stresses ‘decentralised collectivism’ as the only viable alternative going forward.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document