Money as Displaced Social Form: Why Value cannot be Independent of Price

  • Patrick Murray

Abstract

Money may be a mirror in which the value of a commodity is reflected, but Marx’s theory of money is a window on to what is most distinctive about his theory of value and his critique of political economy. Widespread misconception holds that Marx adopted the classical (Ricardian) labour theory of value and then drew radical consequences from it in his theory of exploitation: surplus value is expropriated surplus labour. For Marx, value was strictly a ‘social substance’, a ‘phantom-like objectivity’, a congealed quantity of ‘socially necessary’ ‘homogeneous human labour’ of a particular social sort: namely, privately undertaken labour that produces goods and services for sale. Value necessarily appears as money. But, for the classical theory, labour of whatever social sort was the source of value, and money was an afterthought, a ‘ceremonial form’ Ricardo called it, the answer to a merely technical problem. The radical Ricardian Thomas Hodgskin pushed this approach to the limit, expelling money from economic discourse:

Keywords

Cage Steam Posit Ghost Culmination 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Arthur, Christopher J. (2002), The New Dialectic and Marx’s ‘Capital’ (Leiden: Boston; Cologne: Brill).Google Scholar
  2. Campbell, Martha (1997), ‘Marx’s theory of money: A defense’, in Fred Moseley and Martha Campbell (eds), New Investigations of Marx’s Method (Atlantic Highlands, NJ: Humanities Press International).Google Scholar
  3. Hegel, G. W. F. (1830), Hegel’s Logic (Being part one of The Encyclopedia of the Philosophical Sciences). Translated by William Wallace (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1975).Google Scholar
  4. Marx, Karl (1867), Capital, Volume I. Translation by Ben Fowkes of the 4th edn (1894), (New York: Vintage, 1977).Google Scholar
  5. Marx, Karl (1939), Grundrisse. Translated by Martin Nicolaus (Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1973).Google Scholar
  6. Marx, Karl (1843), ‘On the Jewish Question’, in David McLellan (ed.), Karl Marx: Selected Writings (Oxford: Oxford University Press 1977).Google Scholar
  7. Marx, Karl (1847), The Poverty of Philosophy (New York: International Publishers, 1963).Google Scholar
  8. Marx, Karl (1858), Urtext, in Grundrisse der Kritik der politischen Oekonomie (Frankfurt am Main: Europaeische Verlagsanstalt, 1939 and 1941).Google Scholar
  9. Marx, Karl (1859), A Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy. Translated by S. W. Ryazanskaya and edited by Maurice Dobb (New York: International Publishers, 1970).Google Scholar
  10. Marx, Karl (1894), Capital, Volume III (1st German edn 1894, 1st English edn 1909). Translation by David Fernbach (Harmondsworth: Penguin/NLB, 1981).Google Scholar
  11. Murray, Patrick (2002), ‘The illusion of the economic: The trinity formula and the “religion of everyday life”:’, in Martha Campbell and Geert Reuten (eds), The Culmination of Capital: Essays on Volume III of Marx’s Capital (London/New York: Palgrave-Macmillan).Google Scholar
  12. Murray, Patrick (1988), Marx’s Theory of Scientific Knowledge (New Jersey: Humanities Press).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Patrick Murray 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Patrick Murray

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations