#14
The
social, not beyond the dynamics of Kapital, controls the rational
excess of surplus-value. The power to extract this through the
commodity of labour is at the heart of the concept of production.
Production is our reference for the mode of social production around
which we can form a critique of political economy. Surplus-value is
measurable. Social labour and its rational operation is distinctly
assigned to value. Labour of every kind is generally equivalent to
the law of value and the production of value depends on wealth and
its natural distribution.1
The law of value is desired vertiginously, Kapital is desired
profoundly, and exchange bears the quality of a certain humanist
morality. Kapital makes a profit from labour power which is traded
off against productivity.2
Kapitalismo-sozjietie
self-evidently contains the abstract quantity that forms the immanent
system in which Kapital becomes embroiled in a flux of signs, where
signs undo what has been done and social relations are rendered
virtual - a reappropriation of the actualization of Kapital. Static,
industrial Kapital is being transferred to the virtual.
Surplus-value
is realized in the order of simulacra, united by a common feature,
embodied by the concrete.3
We often remain unaware of the concrete ways that specifically
affect our capacity to act due to the way that Kapital invests our
desires, our impulses, and, the assemblages of our specific drives.
It channels them into channels of simulation.
Surplus-value,
that is, labour productivity, contributes to the immanent system that
makes Kapitalismo-sozjietie unique.4
“{S}urplus value ... expresses the movement and contradictions of
immanent relations of capitalist exploitation.”5
Surplus-value and its procurement stem from the immanent and
incessant drives that come from the decoded flux of signs that are
contained within social flows.6
Kapitalismo-sozjietie measures the quantity of the decoded flux of
signs, their abstractions and their universal impositions, and
surplus-value is generated with a constant necessity, without
limitations, from the flow of social relations.7
Kapitalismo-sozjietie's virtual spheres of actuality contain the
means of production from which labour and its division is associated
with the exploitation and alienation of the immanent event expressed
by the productivity of labour which generates surplus-value.8
Surplus-value
within a socialist system, Kapital amassed by labour productivity,
reappropriates material accumulation for redistribution to meet
people's needs. We can view this through the lens of China's
economic system in the immaediate wake of Chairman Mao's legacy
preceding globalizations' hegemony.
Citizen
Anonymous, writing for The Spokesman-Review in 1977, explains how
“China called on its people ... to help raise 'enormous funds' to
build a modern Socialist state ... 'entirely different' from
capitalism.”9
In capitalist states, economic growth and prosperity can often be
sacrificed for the sake of ideological purity, where the maintenance
of the status quo would rather leadership remain static than be
pragmatic. If the means of surplus-value is to increase accumulation
for the state then its end is towards its redistribution amongst its
citizens and not lining the pockets of its upper-echelon denizens.
The
situation requires a radical divergence from all ideologies of
leadership parties, a 'cultural revolution' of people and polities,
and the installation of a new international economic order that can
guarantee the interests of developing countries. Socialist ends can
be met by the correct appropriation and remuneration of funds
channeled into agriculture, industry, science, technology, and
protectionism in trade relations. By the end of this century the
continent of Africa shall be united by an economic union in its
entirety. The creation of a new international economic order for
developing nations can safeguard the labour of Africa from being
expropriated from the worker and the manufacturer. It is the union
of the union led by the chairperson and the delegation coalition.
The
gains of enterprise under socialism differ essentially from
capitalist profit. Citizen Anonymous tells us: “{t}he gains of a
Socialist enterprise are a manifestation of the workers' conscious
effort to create material wealth, provide funds for consumption and
accumulate capital for building socialism.”10
A manifestation of cooperation, not a manifestation of prestation.
In
our contemporary day, China manipulates economic accounting in
enterprise to increase accumulation for socialism, but it does this,
like any other outfit that is nominally
socialist, by putting profit in command. Returning to our epoch of
1977, Citizen Anonymous writes that “Peking has experienced trouble
within the economy because 'people became wary of finance and
accounting.'”11
The same rings true in our contemporary day. Suspicions have been
raised, doubts have been confirmed, and the people and their polity
under the prestation of capitalist hegemony are beginning to demand
revisions to the decisions within our global economy.
2Ibid.,
p.47, n.21.
3Roberts,
J. M. (2012) “Poststructuralism against poststructuralism:
Actor-network theory, organizations and economic markets.”
European Journal of
Social Theory, Vol.15,
No.1; p.48.
4Ibid.,
p.49.
5Ibid.,
p.37.
6Ibid.,
p.46.
7Ibid.
8Ibid.,
p.37.
9Citizen
Anonymous (1977) “China calls for economic growth.” The
Spokesman-Review, Aug. 28.
10Ibid.
No comments:
Post a Comment