this post was submitted on 08 Jan 2025
59 points (100.0% liked)

theory

654 readers
50 users here now

A community for in-depth discussion of books, posts that are better suited for !literature@www.hexbear.net will be removed.

The hexbear rules against sectarian posts or comments will be strictly enforced here.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Hop in, comrades, we are reading Capital Volumes I-III this year, and we will every year until Communism is achieved. (Volume IV, often published under the title Theories of Surplus Value, will not be included, but comrades are welcome to set up other bookclubs.) This works out to about 6½ pages a day for a year, 46 pages a week.

I'll post the readings at the start of each week and @mention anybody interested. Let me know if you want to be added or removed.

31 members! Excited to see this taking off, and proud of us for making it thus far. We have now read ¹⁄₁₈ of Volume I. The first three weeks are the densest, onwards it's smooth sailing and only needs about 20 minutes a day. We're gonna make it, comrades!

Week 2, Jan 8-14, we are reading Volume 1, Chapter 2 & Chapter 3 Sections 1 & 2.

Discuss the week's reading in the comments.

Use any translation/edition you like. Marxists.org has the Moore and Aveling translation in various file formats including epub and PDF: https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1867-c1/

Ben Fowkes translation, PDF: https://libgen.is/book/index.php?md5=AA342398FDEC44DFA0E732357783FD48

(Unsure about the quality of the Reitter translation, I'd love to see some input on it as it's the newest one)

AernaLingus says: I noticed that the linked copy of the Fowkes translation doesn't have bookmarks, so I took the liberty of adding them myself. You can either download my version with the bookmarks added or if you're a bit paranoid (can't blame ya) and don't mind some light command line work you can use the same simple script that I did with my formatted plaintext bookmarks to take the PDF from libgen and add the bookmarks yourself. Also, please let me know if you spot any errors with the bookmarks so I can fix them!


Resources

(These are not expected reading, these are here to help you if you so choose)


2024 Archived Discussions

If you want to dig back into older discussions, this is an excellent way to do so.

Archives: Week 1Week 2Week 3Week 4Week 5Week 6Week 7Week 8Week 9Week 10Week 11Week 12Week 13Week 14Week 15Week 16Week 17Week 18Week 19Week 20Week 21Week 22Week 23Week 24Week 25Week 26Week 27Week 28Week 29Week 30Week 31Week 32Week 33Week 34Week 35Week 36Week 37Week 38Week 39Week 40Week 41Week 42Week 43Week 44Week 45Week 46Week 47Week 48Week 49Week 50Week 51Week 52


2025 Archived Discussions

Just joining us? You can use the archives below to help you reading up to where the group is. There is another reading group on a different schedule at https://lemmygrad.ml/c/genzhou (federated at !genzhou@lemmygrad.ml ) (Note: Seems to be on hiatus for now) which may fit your schedule better. The idea is for the bookclub to repeat annually, so there's always next year.

Week 1

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] blackbread@lemmygrad.ml 4 points 1 day ago (1 children)

It's helpful reading others notes, as it helps me focus in on things I may have missed.

I found chapter 2 harder than chapter 1 (even though it's much shorter) because the focus seems more diffuse. It starts by looking at commodity owners, before going into the money commodity.

I found the part about commodity owners especially interesting. The presence of commodities shapes human behavior:

  • Humans with commodities view other humans as commodities. (So my take: a commodity owner doesn't see charity cases, doesn't see immorality; They just see somebody to trade with. That at least is what the exchange process encourages and is different from more direct collaboration or trade where you probably care much more about such details).
  • When you have commodity owners, they effectively "vouch" for each others ownership in the trade; Regardless of what the law says. So the idea of commodity ownership is more fundamental than human laws and is "enforced" by mutual recognition between commodity owners.
  • Commodities want to be exchanged; This is an anthropomorphism, but the idea is if someone is calling something a commodity, it's because they don't want it. So, in a way, commodity owners become chaperones for their commodities.

Marx also mentioned a "rebound effect" where external commodities (for example a nation trading for gas) creates an internal commodities market as people become used to the idea of the externally provided commodity being part of their local economy. I imagine it's true, but wonder if it's as consistent as some of his other statements. A planned economy can probably avoid this -- and small economies probably can avoid this behavior also.

[–] Sebrof@hexbear.net 2 points 22 hours ago

I noted that "rebound effect" when I read it as well. I related it to what I've read about cybernetics and complexity science as an examples of Ashby's Law, and I recently shared some notes about cybernetics in a discussion @yogthos@lemmygrad.ml and I were having about complex systems.

It's possible this is a stretch and these are my quack pet-theories, so be forwarned, but I see parallels with what Marx said to Ashby's Law of Variety in cybernetics. If viewed from this perspective, it is as if that once a community (system) becomes exposed to commodity exchange (from an environment), it is confronted with a system of higher "complexity" or "variety", and this forces an adaptation (or "extinction") of the previous non-commodity modes. Commodity exchange is able to encode more information and can increase the scale and efficiency of the production of use-values by having a "rebound effect" on the communities division of labor. That isn't meant to be a moral judgement, though. Commodity exchange isn't "good" or "better" than the pre-commodity systems, but commodity exchange allows for an increase in information encoding, and so societies that adopt to it are then able to further reproduce. This is how I interpret Marx when he says that exchange bursts local bonds and expands more and more.

Now, this may sound like some Hayekian market triumphalism ("only the Holy Market can encode all economic information, kneel before my prices!"), but Ashby's Law would be no stranger to cyberneticians like Stafford Beer who worked on Project Cybersyn and tried to build these planned economies. Someone like Beer may just respond that once we are able to design a planned economy that can "outcompete" the market, then planned economies will be that which rebounds and bursts through their local bonds. Quantity transforming to quality.