Wil leftcoms and all ultras who REEE 'state capitalism' at all attempts at socialism admit that 'production for use' is impossible until full automation i.e surplus value is abolished.
Regardless of how you order the economy (management) the mode of production's character does not change until you get to that point. So really the most historically revolutionary thing is to advance the valorisation of capital as fast as possible.
*FLEX*
Yes
No.
Maybe
wat
WAT?
Das Kapital honey, read it.
...
What does this even mean? The current level of technology does not mandate exploitation. It isn't written into the circuitry of factory machines that they must always be used to produce for exchange. There's no law that states that surplus value always has to be reinvested in the reproduction of more capital. The only requirement is that enough capital is reinvested back in the machinery to keep it running. What happens with all the rest is changeable.
The greatest shitpost of all time tbh. You get pretty much all terms wrong.
Brainlets the lot of y'all
let me break it down for you chuckleheads:
The commodity form of production has three key components.
C, V, S.
In order for production for use and not exchange to occur, there can no longer be any surplus value generated through commodity production. This can only be achieved through an Organic composition of Capital that is so high that no labor is included in production. As long as there is V, there is an accompanying S. Surplus value which must be realized through exchange.
The only situation in which surplus value is not created in production is through machines shout out Marx. So we need to get on that automation train, increase capital investment y'all get them robots out here to free us from wage labour.
Oh so you guys can chat shit, but you can't reply to this answer?
Huh figures, I knew y'all aint shit
That's fucking retarded. What you're saying implies that subsistence production under a feudal lord qualifies as commodity production. You've confused surplus value with surplus product, when they aren't the same fucking thing at all.
No you're mistaken, there is no generalized commodity production under feudalism. You air headed retard
There's no surplus value in production for use because there's no value at all. Where there is no exchange, there's no value. Do you understand?
my ego, the thread
You know what type of zone this is mane?
I was saying your post implied that you raging dipshit, not that it was actually the case. My point was that there is a difference between the production of a surplus product and surplus value, the latter of which only exists under conditions of commodity production, which doesn't fucking exist if you abolish market exchange. In other words whether or not there is human labour is completely beside the fucking point.
If there is no commodity exchange, there is no value, and if there is no value there can be no fucking surplus value.
You blithering idiot, have you ever bothered to read Marx?
Surplus value is created in commodity production NOT FUKCING COMMODITY EXHCNAG EYOU ASFNDASBDNKSABFJKLDSANFKLDSNAKLD NSJIAFBDPSKOABFJSAKNFKLD SMAJKLRBFNDSJKLANFD;KLSANFLKAS
Just like you said: in COMMODITY production.
Commodity production cannot exist without market exchange you fucking dumbass. You're the one that's contradicting marx here. Not once did he ever imply that all work would need to be fully automated (something which couldn't have even been foreseen at the time) in order for communism to exist. In fact he out right states that work would "become life's prime want" under communism.
You eejits how can you say that commodity is able when production is obviously there to ibbi sat for the machines. You arw rarted
wat?