Karl Marx
Selection from: Section 4, "The Fetishism of Commodities and the Secret Thereof" from Capital, volume 1.
[Go here for the complete chapter section with its 37 footnotes if you prefer.]
A commodity is therefore a mysterious thing, simply because in it the social character of men’s labour appears to them as an objective character stamped upon the product of that labour; because the relation of the producers to the sum total of their own labour is presented to them as a social relation, existing not between themselves, but between the products of their labour. This is the reason why the products of labour become commodities, social things whose qualities are at the same time perceptible and imperceptible by the senses. In the same way the light from an object is perceived by us not as the subjective excitation of our optic nerve, but as the objective form of something outside the eye itself. But, in the act of seeing, there is at all events, an actual passage of light from one thing to another, from the external object to the eye. There is a physical relation between physical things. But it is different with commodities. There, the existence of the things quâ commodities, and the value relation between the products of labour which stamps them as commodities, have absolutely no connection with their physical properties and with the material relations arising therefrom. There it is a definite social relation between men, that assumes, in their eyes, the fantastic form of a relation between things. In order, therefore, to find an analogy, we must have recourse to the mist-enveloped regions of the religious world. In that world the productions of the human brain appear as independent beings endowed with life, and entering into relation both with one another and the human race. So it is in the world of commodities with the products of men’s hands. This I call the Fetishism which attaches itself to the products of labour, so soon as they are produced as commodities, and which is therefore inseparable from the production of commodities.
Selection from: Section 4, "The Fetishism of Commodities and the Secret Thereof" from Capital, volume 1.
[Go here for the complete chapter section with its 37 footnotes if you prefer.]
A
commodity appears, at first sight, a very trivial thing, and easily
understood. Its analysis shows that it is, in reality, a very queer
thing, abounding in metaphysical subtleties and theological niceties. So
far as it is a value in use, there is nothing mysterious about it,
whether we consider it from the point of view that by its properties it
is capable of satisfying human wants, or from the point that those
properties are the product of human labour. It is as clear as noon-day,
that man, by his industry, changes the forms of the materials furnished
by Nature, in such a way as to make them useful to him. The form of
wood, for instance, is altered, by making a table out of it. Yet, for
all that, the table continues to be that common, every-day thing, wood.
But, so soon as it steps forth as a commodity, it is changed into
something transcendent. It not only stands with its feet on the ground,
but, in relation to all other commodities, it stands on its head, and
evolves out of its wooden brain grotesque ideas, far more wonderful than
“table-turning” ever was.
The
mystical character of commodities does not originate, therefore, in
their use value. Just as little does it proceed from the nature of the
determining factors of value. For, in the first place, however varied
the useful kinds of labour, or productive activities, may be, it is a
physiological fact, that they are functions of the human organism, and
that each such function, whatever may be its nature or form, is
essentially the expenditure of human brain, nerves, muscles, &c.
Secondly, with regard to that which forms the ground-work for the
quantitative determination of value, namely, the duration of that
expenditure, or the quantity of labour, it is quite clear that there is a
palpable difference between its quantity and quality. In all states of
society, the labour time that it costs to produce the means of
subsistence, must necessarily be an object of interest to mankind,
though not of equal interest in different stages of development. And lastly, from the moment that men in any way work for one another, their labour assumes a social form.
Whence,
then, arises the enigmatical character of the product of labour, so
soon as it assumes the form of commodities? Clearly from this form
itself. The equality of all sorts of human labour is expressed
objectively by their products all being equally values; the measure of
the expenditure of labour power by the duration of that expenditure,
takes the form of the quantity of value of the products of labour; and
finally the mutual relations of the producers, within which the social
character of their labour affirms itself, take the form of a social
relation between the products.
A commodity is therefore a mysterious thing, simply because in it the social character of men’s labour appears to them as an objective character stamped upon the product of that labour; because the relation of the producers to the sum total of their own labour is presented to them as a social relation, existing not between themselves, but between the products of their labour. This is the reason why the products of labour become commodities, social things whose qualities are at the same time perceptible and imperceptible by the senses. In the same way the light from an object is perceived by us not as the subjective excitation of our optic nerve, but as the objective form of something outside the eye itself. But, in the act of seeing, there is at all events, an actual passage of light from one thing to another, from the external object to the eye. There is a physical relation between physical things. But it is different with commodities. There, the existence of the things quâ commodities, and the value relation between the products of labour which stamps them as commodities, have absolutely no connection with their physical properties and with the material relations arising therefrom. There it is a definite social relation between men, that assumes, in their eyes, the fantastic form of a relation between things. In order, therefore, to find an analogy, we must have recourse to the mist-enveloped regions of the religious world. In that world the productions of the human brain appear as independent beings endowed with life, and entering into relation both with one another and the human race. So it is in the world of commodities with the products of men’s hands. This I call the Fetishism which attaches itself to the products of labour, so soon as they are produced as commodities, and which is therefore inseparable from the production of commodities.
No comments:
Post a Comment