Welcome to the group, lets dive straight into it. >(((Discussion of the reading will start THURSDAY Feb 1st))) The group will be reading a part each week with time on the weekends off to catch up if you're behind, the schedule will be updated each Sunday night so that you can know where we're at (see pic), You can get any edition you'd like to discuss differences in editions but some have been provided. There is a YT series you can follow below and other links, let me know if you want links added to the OP. All suggestions are welcome so that we can have a good read through. Bump the thread throughout the week with discussion. If you want to practice your writing there are essay questions below which I'll be doing and encourage you all to do as well.
Videos: youtube.com/watch?v=gBazR59SZXk&list=PL0A7FFF28B99C1303 >Class 1 Introduction. An open course consisting of a close reading of the text of Volume I of Marx's Capital in 13 video lectures by Professor David Harvey. The page numbers Professor Harvey refers to are valid for both the Penguin Classics and Vintage Books editions of Capital. youtube.com/watch?v=fSQgCy_iIcc (Introduction)
There is a mistake in the calendar on the left, just follow the middle list calendar.
Tyler Jenkins
I generally support the intent of this thread and I'd like to throw some cold water on the idea: over the past month or two, Veeky Forums has seriously proposed reading groups for Capitalism and Schizophrenia (I just might keep this one going), Finnegans Wake, one other meme, and now this.
God bless whoever goes for this but there's like this "new year's resolution" thing happening at the moment. the FW thread did not even make it to week two.
Carter Kelly
yeah but there's no point in bothering with fw.
Logan Garcia
people dont follow though because it's just reading then posting, if anons can do the questions or essay topics, then it helps them to think about what they read and helps them write. its an interactive group. Plus it oesnt require all your time, which is why im trying to spread it out. im going to my best this one stays alive.
James Cook
Serious question: Are you willing to engage critical discussion? I'll join the reading and posting, but I'll be honest: I have strong disagreements with Marx's theory at various points. The LTV is one such point.
It's alright if you don't, it's bad enough to read Marx and get into his groove of thought without having someone making you second guess while trying to do so.
Joshua Anderson
Just to be certain, there will not be a discord, correct? I refuse to join a group that uses discord.
Hunter Robinson
no discord, its for autists. I'll make thread every week here on Veeky Forums.
Nicholas Scott
Not OP but I'm thinking of participating and I think this'd be good.
Amen. Fuck (((discord))) It's irc/mumble for retards who want to sell their privacy
Levi Long
I’m thinking of participating too.
Matrix is an open protocol which is attempting to replace irc/slack/discord etc. it also has bridges for all of those so you don’t lose contact. Riot.im is the best client if you’re curious.
Lincoln Evans
I just read the first section of chapter one. Here's my summary. >things have a use-value, which is basically how useful they are >things have an exchange value which is what we are willing to exchange them for >things have a labour value in how much labour is needed to produce them >exchange value is correlated with labour value and inversly correlated with productiveness Did I get anything wrong? Miss anything important?
Eli Jenkins
>Are you willing to engage critical discussion? yes >I have strong disagreements with Marx's theory at various points. thats fine, good for the group.
Justin Edwards
Looking forward to this and hoping it turns out
Always remember that Veeky Forums has had successful reading groups before. It's just important not to get put off if there's a drop off in the first few weeks. That's when most people shit the bed and think the group is "failing". But it's just inevitable that some of the people taking part in this won't be able to commit for unforeseen reasons or just laziness
Joshua Wright
its like im in college all over again
William Jenkins
I will try to read it.
Liam Reyes
Is capital the most influential Political science book of all time?
Elijah Clark
I'm just gonna read the manga version
Lucas Torres
unironically this
Benjamin Sullivan
Reading groups should be announced weeks before they get made t b h. I'm currently reading two books already and would love to join but I don't want to put aside the my current books. I had the same issue with the gravity's rainbow reading group. :-(
Jason Collins
chapters are pretty short familiamlaimlialmam
Isaiah Campbell
cant wait to actually read it and still roast all of you on the discussion
Liam Campbell
u couldnt roast a turkey bitch
Aiden Bailey
Where can I find it and who's best girl?
Blake Robinson
Let's do this comrade
Owen Lee
sounds good. I'm in
Luis Campbell
I'm in, I'll do my best to keep up with readings.
Kayden Cox
Just google Das Kapital manga and you'll easily find uploads of it. And the second answer is obvious
Anthony Cook
thanks for this gif
Logan Roberts
women are commodities kek
Blake Gray
OP here, just giving my answers to questions for section one to spark early discussion. That first section was pretty dense, for me at least, what do you guys think? Also, are these terms still used in modern economics/ politics science?
>1. Which of the following industries produce commodities: the movies, prostitution, the public education system, the private schools, public transport, the military, “housewives”, domestic servants? Karl Marx defines commodities as: "an object outside us, a thing that by its properties satisfies human wants of some sort or another.", Marx follows this by stating that the origin of the needs makes no difference and the way the commodity satisfies our needs should not concern us. The industries from the given list that I think produce commodities are all of them except domestic servants because they satisfy no human need in any way i can think of.
>2. Why is a ton of gold worth more than a ton of sugar? And is gold dug from a thousand metres underground worth more than gold found on the ground? The utility of a thing, i.e. how a thing is used makes it a use-value. A ton of gold is worth more than a ton of sugar because gold is utilized more than sugar is. Use-values only come to exisenct when the commodities are used or consumed. The gold dug from a thousand metres underground is worth more than gold found on the ground because the time taken to get the gold from underground increases its value aka labour-time.
>3. Does advertising add value to the products it advertises? No, advertising does not add value to the product, only the time taken to produce the product increases it's value.
Colton Evans
>Karl Marx defines commodities as: "an object outside us, a thing that by its properties satisfies human wants of some sort or another." Considering that a lot of Marxists complain about things like the commodification of art (and I agree with them here), surely there's more to a commodity than that? After all, the above definition would surely apply to any piece of art.
Jacob Murphy
I might be very wrong about this since I've never read any economics or Marxist theory outside of this reading group, but my impression from the first chapter here is that there's an important difference between an commodity having a use-value (i.e satisfying "a human want of some sort") and a commodity in the sense of having an exchange-value (i.e being able to be compared in value to another commodity quantitatively--so in the sense that 20 yards of linen=1 coat).
Where people complain about the commodification of art, I assume they're complaining about the ascribing an exchange-value to art, which has a number of consequences which we might be concerned about, especially as regards the artist's labour
So this I think is why he clarifies his definition with the phrase "in the first place" when he characterizes them in terms of use-value; it emphasizes that commodities have use-value prior to having exchange-value, but that commodities in capitalist societies are characterized primarily in terms of their exchange-value
Btw, I absolutely welcome correction on any of the above points by someone more knowledgeable on Marx, this is just working from what I've read so far of the text
