Intro to Theory of Values | Chapter 1

This video covers Chapter 1 - 'Commodities' of Das Kapital by Karl Marx. In this chapter, Karl Marx lays out the foundations of his Theory of Values and other ideas to be explored in Das Kapital.

0:00 Intro
0:49 Commodities
1:52 Use-values
2:52 Exchange-value
3:50 Value
5:55 Labor-time
9:10 Two-fold nature of Labor within commodities
9:39 Useful labor
11:20 The Social Division of Labor
12:21 Labor’s relationship with productive power
13:42 The Money-form of value

pages summarized: 47

[capsandnumbers]

Finally, a theory channel for dumbasses like me who refuse to read

[YaBoiHakim]

Lovely work! This is a great resource for beginners. Will you do all of the first volume of capital?

[bosuacjafari]

Does this count as reading theory? Trying to stop being a lib.

[rorysmith]

This came at the perfect time, I’m currently struggling with the book and I was very happy to see this pop up. Keep up the good work comrade

[aidanfogelsmith]

Thank god I found you I just bought this book and i feel like I’m reading hieroglyphics. You’re hilarious and made it so easy to understand 🖤

[NeroLizard]

H a t c h e t


Awesome video, can't wait for more

[KoruGo]

> a commodity is defined as an object that through its physical properties is able to satisfy some sort of human need and is additionally traded for something else thought of to be of equal value

A commodity is not an "object". Service can also be a commodity.

Also, commodity should be defined as something produced for exchange.Simply adding "satisfaction of some human need" as necessary quality can be misleading, as it suggests possibility of something that does not qualify as such - i.e. does not satisfy some human need in a way commodities do. For example, one can assume that raw materials are not "real" commodities, as they are not consumed by the immediate buyer. It is good that this bit is clarified later, but it does not excuse this mess.

> my hair is tangled - here's commodity for that
> I'm hungry - here's the ... here's the commodity for that

If pizza is consumed by the immediate producer, it is production for use. I.e. pizza does not function as a commodity (ingredients might).
Either way, it is not commodities that are presented here, but use-values (and specifically use-values of non-service variety).

> so now Marx begins to lay out his theory of values

That's not really *Marx's* theory of values. Marx even made multiple references to preceding economists,

> there are three sorts of values for us to talk about
> here use value, exchange value, and value

There are two values: Use-Value and Exchange-Value. Marx is talking about Exchange-Value when he is talking about "Value".

> first use values are the utility of the thing
> the utility of a commodity is limited by the physical properties of that object and has no existence outside of that object

This is literally *the opposite* of Marxist theory.
Use-Value of commodity is determined *subjectively* - Use-Value is different for each person. There is no some special *inherent* - and imperceptible - value.
I.e. it does depend on actual quality of goods/service, but it exists only outside of object (in the eye of the beholder, yes).

For example:
"His commodity possesses *for himself* no immediate use-value. Otherwise, he would not bring it to the market. It has use-value *for others*; but *for himself* its only direct use-value is that of being a depository of exchange-value, and, consequently, a means of exchange.[3] Therefore, he makes up his mind to part with it for commodities whose value in use is of service *to him*. All commodities are non-use-values *for their owners*, and use-values *for their non-owners*. Consequently, they must all change hands. But this change of hands is what constitutes their exchange, and the latter puts them in relation with each other as values, and realises them as values. Hence commodities must be realised as values before they can be realised as use-values."

The whole existence of the concept of Use-Value in Marxist theory is to demonstrate the difference between evaluation of commodities by different people, to account for the *personal* component of the exchange (and to permit Exchange-Value to be purely *social* factor).

The idea that objects have inherent value - that cannot be measured, as it exists *independently from actual humans*, but still *somehow* "exists" - is a blatant Idealism. I.e. religious thinking that is the opposite of Marxist materialism that deals with the things as they actually exist.

> I know that's a bit confusing

Because it's *wrong*.

> so let's think for a moment about this glass cup
> so the utility of a glass cup for us is I can hold water and we can drink from it and it's able to do so because of the properties of glass
> essentially that th water doesn't seep through the class and all over the floor
> so those are the physical properties of the glass which allow it to become a utility for us

So how the fuck does it become a utility if not through *being useful* to _specific_ humans for _specific_ purpose?

If the utility is determined by specific situation, then why would it have some fixed value that "has no existence outside of that object"?

> however the only reason it's being a utility because I'm actively taking the glass building up with water and drinking from it

BECAUSE YOU _DESIRE_ THE UTILITY IT PROVIDES
It doesn't matter what you are *doing* with it.

> next let's look at exchange value

Please, no. Stop.

> exchange value as the value created entirely by humans and influenced by the quantity of the commodity

Quality doesn't matter? I'm pretty sure that I'll pay more for commodities of higher quality.
Maybe Marx had meant the Exchange-Value (i.e. price) - and not the commodity itself - when he was talking about quantity? No? Are you absolutely certain?

[johnnynick]

Take one thousand everyday workers and put them in a big open empty factory and give them the keys. How long do you think it would take them to make a pencil?

Marx's concept of value created by labor is idiotic. Mules do labor. Leave them alone in an open field with a plow and see how productive they are.

If you are smart enough to create something, and you work really hard to earn the capital required to build a factory to make it...there is STILL no guarantee you will be successful. You then need to risk all your capital and time and energy...all in the hope that you will succeed. That is why successful business owners deserve every dime they earn.

Workers don't risk anything. They don't invest in a business. They don't spend countless hours figuring out how to make the business work. They sell their labor for a guaranteed payment. That is all they deserve. You want more? Do what the business owner had to do...earn it?

[stephenhemingway]

Very nice. This is a chapter I have struggled to understand for a long time and you have summarized it extremely professionally. I hope you will continue through all 3 volumes of Kapital.

[connorjolley]

I feel so much much better about my life after watching this. My brain melted down midway through chapter 3 and I didn't realise just how much tension had built up in my psyche that I couldn't get past it. I know it's no substitute for reading it but I feel now I can tackle it again with the basic parameters of what I'm reading set out. If I had any money I would seek out a way of giving some of it to you fine young people. Thank you!!!

[lorenbooker]

Next time someone says "Socialists don't understand basic economics" I'm going to show them this video.

[CarlosRamirez-trsm]

As a new Economics student, I thank you!

[dcguy]

9:44 - When discussing useful labor, did you mean "quantitatively" and not "qualitatively"?

"Useful labor: this difference in labor that gives these two commodities such {qualitatively} different values and if it wasn't for this difference in quality of Labor we wouldn't see such a big difference in their final values"

[Whateverisavailableworksforme]

Super well done; the review sessions in the middle of the video and timestamps with corresponding terms/ideas are really helpful!

[mctomans]

I don’t think you people who watch this or Marx knew simple economics.

Things will just “happen”!
Workers know best!

[acevanitas]

I started reading das kapital a few days ago and was struggling a lot, but watching this alongside reading the book has made the material much more digestibl, this video was extremely helpful, thank you!

[arhisikrimue]

That fucking music killed me inside but else good video

[englituremalayalam]

Excellent presentation! finally a beautiful commodity.... Thank you for your labor🥰

[yaprakcetin]

I wish there was no music on the background. can't focus :(

[josublanco]

Hi! I'd love to make CC in Spanish and English. Can we get in touch? Maybe activate user submitted closed captions? Beautiful job!
EDIT: Nevermind, it's activated. I'll do them :)