The Washington socialist. [volume] (Everett, Wash.) 1914-1915, 1915-05-27

(From Chap. vi. of value, Price
and Profit.")
What Determines Value
The first question we have to put
Is; What is the value of n commod-
ity? How is 1t determined?
AT first sight It would seem that the
value of a commodity Is thing quite
relative, and not to be settled without
considering one commodity In its rela-
lions to all other comodities. In fact,
In speaking of the value, the value in
exchange of commodity. we mean
the proportional quantities In which
II exchanges with all other commodi-
ties. But then arises the question:
HOW ARE THE PROPORTIONS IN
WHICH COMMODITIES EXCHANGE
WITH EACH OTHER REGULATED?
We know from experience that
these proportions vary infinitely. TAX
ing one single commodity, wheat, for
instance, we shall find that a quarter
of wheat exchanges in almost count
less variations of proportion with diff
ferent commodities. YET IT'S VAL
UE REMAINING ALWAYS THE
SAME, WHETHER EXPRESSED IN
SILK, GOLD. OR ANY OTHER COM
Modify, IT MUST BE SOMETHING
DISTINCT FROM, AND INDEPEN-
DENT OF THESE DIFFERENT
RATES OF EXCHANGE WITH DIFF
FERENT ARTICLES. 1t must be pos
sible to express, in very different
form, these various equations with va
rious commodities.
BESIDES, IF SAY A QUARTER
OF WHEAT EXCHANGES WITH
IRON IN A CERTAIN PROPORTION,
OR THE VALUE OF A QUARTER
OF WHEAT is EXPRESSED IN A
CERTAIN AMOUNT OF IRON, / SAY
THAT THE VALUE OF WHEAT
AND IT'S EQUIVALENT IN IRON
ARE EQUAL TO SOME THIRD
THING, WHICH is NEITHER
WHEAT NOR IRON, BECAUSE
SUPPOSE THEM TO EXPRESS THE
SAME MAGNITUDE IN TWO DIFF
FERENT SHAPES. EITHER OF
THEM, THE WHEAT OR THE
IRON, MUST, THEREFORE,, INDIE
PENDENTLY OF THE OTHER, BE
REDUCIBLE TO THIS THIRD
THING WHICH is THEIR COMMON
MEASURE.
X X
The same mode of procedure must
obtain with the values of all commodi
ties. WE MUST BE ABLE TO RE-
DUCE ALL OF THEM TO AN Elk
PRECISION COMMON TO ALL, AND
DISTINGUISHING THEM ONLY BY
THE PROPORTIONS IN WHICH
THEY CONTAIN THAT IDENTICAL
MEASURE.
AS the exchangeabe values of COM
modities are only social functions of
those things, and have nothing at all
to do with the natural qualities, we
must first ask, What is the common
social substance of all commodities?
1t is Labor. To produce a commodity
a certain amount of labor must be
bestowed upon it. And / will say not
only Labor, but Social Labor. A man
who produces an article for his own
immediate use, to consume it himself,
creates a product, but not commod-
ity. AS a self-sustaining producer he
has nothing to do with society. But
to produce a commodity, man must
not only produce an article satisfying
some social want, but his labor itself
must form part and parcel of the total
sum of labor expended by society. 1t
is nothing without the other divisions
of labor, and on it's part is required to
integrate them.
If we consider commodities as val
ues, we consider them exclusively I'M
der the single aspect of realized, fixed,
or, If you like, crystallized social la
Dor. IN THIS RESPECT THEY CAN
DIFFER ONLY BY REPRESENTING
GREATER OR SMALLER QUANTI-
TIES OF LABOR, as, for example, a
greater amount of labor may be work
ed up in silken handkerchief than
in brick. But how does one meas
ure quantities of labor? BY the time
the labor lasts, in measuring the la
Dor by the hour, the day, etc. OF
course, to apply this measure, all sorts
of labor are reduced to average or
simple labor as their unit.
WE ARRIVE, THEREFORE,, AT
THIS CONCLUSION. A COMMOD-
ITY HAS A VALUE, BECAUSE IT
is A CRYSTALLIZATION OF So
CIAL LABOR. THE GREATNESS
OF IT'S VALUE, OR IT'S RELATIVE
VALUE, DEPENDS UPON THE