essay on commodity fetishism by james

THE THEORY OF COMMODITY FETISHISM

by JAMES O'TOOLE

1.Importance of the theory

"..an enchanted, perverted, topsy-turvy world, in which Monsieur le Capital and Madame la Terre (Land) do their ghost walking as social characters and at the same time directly as mere things" (1)

One of the things that always struck me as being one of the most powerful arguments against Capitalism was the idea that human working activity was regulated through and by 'things', that 'Capital', the product of a productive relationship between people, could also be the producer of working relations between people, the idea that 'Value' was not only the product of human labour and particular productive relations but, in a Commodity society, is the regulator of Labour. Just stop and think about that for a second…just think about how obscene that is. The rule of 'things' over people.

Marx's theory of Commodity Fetishism is central to a complete understanding of much of his economic theory and represents a concrete expression and further development of his theory of Alienation.

We can see that the theory that "a definite social relation between men.." takes on "the fantastic form of a relation between things" not only is of utmost importance in unravelling the secrets of economic categories such as 'value' and 'capital' and demonstrating that these 'things' veil and bear productive relations amongst people but also is an important generalisation which is key to an understanding of consciousness under Capitalism.

2.Basis of Commodity Fetishism

'Every child knows', stated Marx in a letter, that a society that ceased to work would, in a very short period, starve to death, and so the fundamental basis of every society is this 'natural law'. So in any given type of society there must be a division of labour i.e. people appointed to different tasks based on his necessity of labouring on nature as a basis. In a commodity society where no overall plan exists and where the unity of society and the productive process is only established through exchange people are appointed to differing tasks according.not to need, but according to the profitability of each task. Obviously the product of each sphere must satisfy a particular need (that is have a use value) but what's important in this society is it's exchange value, the ability to exchange this commodity for any other or for a commodity that acts as a general equivalent (money).

A change in productive technique in a certain sector, an improvement of machinery. Leads to a change in the value of the product as less of society's total labour is expended on each unit.

This change in value leads to a drop in prices . We see that the fall and rise of value in different spheres on production would then lead, due to the profitability or non- profitability of a sphere of production to the transfer of workers. The 'thing' value . a product of human working activity, becomes a social regulator, it moves workers from one area to another.

"because of the atomistic structure of the commodity society, because of the absense of direct social regulation of the working activity of the members of society, the connections between, individual, autonomous,private firms are realised and maintained through commodities, things" (2)

In a Commodity society, like Capitalism, where there is no overall plan for production the connections between seperate commodity owners are only established through exchange. When Capitalist 'A' exchanges with Capitalist 'B' he not only enters into a direct relation with 'B' but also enters into indirect relations with all other members of society (with all manufacturers of the same product, with buyers of the product etc). The individual must take the market into account before he begins production ('is it profitable to produce a certain product?' and 'how much?' etc) and when he takes his product to market he is connected to all other producers of the same product ,for example, if there is an improvement in productive technique by one manufacturer of the same product ,which means the lowering of the value of the product, then he must introduce improved techniques (or sell his product below cost which would be suicide). We can see that a close connection is brought about only through exchange, through things.

Ownership of the thing 'Capital', itself the product of a relationship between capitalists and workers (a relationship established through ownership of the things 'labour-power' and 'capital' and realised by the exchange of a sum of value i.e. through a 'thing') directs it's onwer to set up particular set working relationships with other people. The capitalist must combine the elements of production which belong to 3 different classes under capitalism into one enterprise (Land, Labour-Power and Means of Production(factories,offices etc) belong to the Landlord,Worker and Capitalist). So we can see the Ownership of the thing 'Capital', not only is established by but ,establishes working relations between people.

This is the true horror of the Capitalist system, human labour is congealed in things which then come to rule over human labour.Fetishism then isnt just an aspect of social consciouness of thought under capitalsim i.e. it's not just an illusion or a habit that can be shaken off, commodity fetishism is the product of social being. It doesnt just 'seem' that human productive relations are realised through things or productive relations are 'hidden' under things. Human working relations in a commodity market society can only be realised through things, the things are the bearers of the relationship,but not only that, the things come to determine these relationships.

The Capitalist enters into a relationship with the Landlord through an act of purchase, he enters into a relationship with the worker through an act of purchase.The exploitation of the worker 'dissappears' under a seemingly fair exchange of one thing for another (variable capital, i.e.wages, for labour power). The exchange takes place between formally equal commodity producers and thus disguises class etc.

The owership of a 'thing' dictates how you enter into the productive process.Once 'things' posess a given social form they influence people shaping decisions and motivations. The capitalist 'glows' with the reflected glory of his capital because it reflects a given productive relationship amongst people which is realised in a thing. The capitalist is 'subsumed' (he is covered or integrated) under the thing 'capital'. It is no longer his human traits that matter, in the process of the production of commodities and human life he acts as the representative of capital.

Vulgar Economics (as Marx termed the economics of the bourgeois thinkers) sees Money, Capital, Value etc as attribute of things ,that is, from their purely material existance. Whereas Marx saw that these things had both a material content (a physical body) but also a social form (depending on which relations between people they realise). In Dialectics (a from of logic used by Marx and developed from the philospher Hegel) a particular thing should not only be examined as an isolated atom but we need to show it's relationship to the 'whole' and see it as a process in constant interaction with both the whole and the other parts. It's important to emphasise the difference between Marx's method and both Empiricist and Idealist methods. Marx took the material-technical process of production into account as the basis of his anaysis but it's important to remember that although you have to have use-value (the property of a thing to satisfy a need) before you can have exchange value that you cant reduce exchange value to use value. Exchange value represents a paticular productive relationship between people. And is not the attribute of the 'thing'.

For example, if you look at Money from the point of view of it's material existance you can examine the paper, you can point to the differences between coin and paper money but as soon as you turn to how money functions in society and the different relationships it bears and establishes then you get quite lost. But money is not just a symbol either because money is the bearer of certain social relationships. Money can serve various differing functions without any alteration of it's physical body. Money can serve as a Means of Payment , a Medium of Circulation or as a Hoard, each of these differing functions representing a different productive relationship.

Vulgar economy tries to find in the material existance of a thing it's social form and ends up assigning social properties to things.They believe Capital is a thing that has the property to produce Profit, Labour's return is Wages and Land produces Rent. Marx sarcastically called this the 'Holy Trinity'.As i quoted above this is the magical mystical world where Mister Capital and Mistress Land walk about as social characters and at the same time as mere things! This is no accident as this consciouness, assigning things social traits and the objectification of relations between people, is itself a product of commodity fetishism!

As we've already seen - Money, for example, isnt just a 'symbol' of productive relations nor can it be reduced to it's material existance. In the exchange of commodities money acts as a medium of exchange, it enables the transfer of goods. Paper money can enable this transfer of goods just a easily, in fact money's social function is indifferent to it's material existence.What matters is the productive relations amongst people it bears and, because profits for example are taken into account before production begins etc, establishes.

"The value of the worker rises or falls in accordance with supply and demand,and even in the physical sense his existence, his life,was and is treated as a supply of a commodity, like any other….as soon as it occurs to capital…not to exist any longer for the worker, he no longer exists for himself; he has no work, and hence no wages, and since he exists not as a man but as a worker, he might as well have himself buried, starve to death.." (3)

The system of class and human relations becomes a world of relations through things. If the bearer of the 'thing' labour-power cant enter into a relation with the owner of the thing 'capital' then he starves. Society functions as a whole only through exchange and we live under the blind tyranny of things.

3. Breaking Free

"there is both an objective and subjective side to this phenomena. Objectively a world of objects and relations between things springs into being (the world of commodities and their movements on the market).The laws governing these objects… confront him as invisible forces that generate their own power…Subjectively…a man's activity becomes estranged from himself, it turns into a commodity..just like any other consumer article" (4)

So how do we break out of this world of things and end the domination by 'dead labour' of 'living labour' and free ourselves from the rule of the market? The Objective rule of Commodity Fetishism and the Alienation from one's self and others?

Well in a world based on the sale of commodities one of those commodites (labour-power) has the unfortunate (for the capitalists) attribute of also being a human, a worker. According to the laws of the market the Capitalist is within his right as the purchaser of labour-power to try to squeeze as much from it as he can but the 'thing' labour-power is a worker's activity and he accompanies it wherever he goes, in work he argues day in and day out for a better deal for the sale of his labour.

"there is an antinomy, right against right, both equally bearing the seal of the law of exchanges .Between equal rights force decides." (5)

The very heart of the system belongs to a contradiction which constantly tears at the grip of commodity fetishism, Once the truth of the commodity 'Labour' is revealed it becomes possible to understand that human relations, and relations of class exploitation, are the truth of economic categories. But the smashing of the rule of 'things' is no shaking off of 'phantoms' Capital is a physical force and the rule of Capital and it's representatives can only come to an end through the revolutionary overthrow of the entire system.

notes-

(1)Marx Capital III p.830

(2)Rubin Essays on Marx's theory of value p.8

(3)Marx Economic Philosophical manuscript 1844 in Early Writings p.335

(4)Luckacs history and class consciousness p.87

(5)Marx Capital Vol I quoted in Luckacs ibid p.178