Does Marxism have anything to say about a contract between two individuals? Say a famous author hires me to make his personal website. Is there any exploitation at play here, and can it be quantified?
Does Marxism have anything to say about a contract between two individuals...
Other urls found in this thread:
i never read marx so i'd assume it's tackled somewhere in his works, i think this is an important issue that he'd just have to adress
There are a bunch of buttblasted tankies false-flagging as Leftcoms
god tankies are retarded
that is true
In this case - no. The website is your product. You make it and you sell it to another person.
yes actually, the price he sells his website is still determined by the SNLT, which is caused by private property laws and bourgeoisie energy production
Post more of her!
just google her you wankers
As far as I know, it would not be allowed as the concept of 'hiring' would be outlawed.
What does that mean
Is Marxism really that hard to get?
If you save a file multiple times it will save as (1), (2), (3) etc
Employer-employee relationships are possible only thanks to private property.
Also, there is no such thing as voluntary transaction between two unequal parties, there is no such thing as voluntary transaction in capitalism
glorious soviet Stalin constitution has an answer right for U
1. buying and selling of labour is a crime
2. buying and selling of MOP is a crime
reminder that MOP meant to be used collecively, your personal pc is not a MOP, Mainframe whith a waiting line for computation time is a MOP
also reminder that SU had a shitton of light industrial coops in the 50s, so called artels
and also it was legal to be self-employed, i.e. barbers, tailors, shoemakers etc
meant to say "of labour power", i.e. ability to work
All contracts are burgoise, why would you need contract for a …voluntary… cooperation?
wtf is that prickly
People can lie about contracts, not paying you what they promised. YouTube networks do this a lot. Look up mashinima contract scandal.
Contracts suck ass.
But being paid to sing or write or such doesn't require property, only currency.
but without private property, non voluntary agreements would disappear. Are you suggesting that people won't be free until they are able to produce non-useful value?
Obvious false-flagger is obvious.
Well sure, but this is voluntary. He asked me to make a fancy drawing of his fiance, I said my price, both of us agreed. It's between equals and voluntary, as there's no capitalism forcing me to produce surplus-value or starve.
Thanks for the answers so far. How about the second part of the question:
One of the strengths of typical LTV examples is that they can frame the exploitation in raw numerical terms. Is the same somehow possible with my hypothetical?