Cohen - History, Labour and Freedom: Themes from Marx
The Labour Theory of Value and the Concept of Exploitation
● Labour theory of value claims that value is determined by socially necessary labour (i.e.
labour necessary at currently level of productive forces/relations
○ Alternatively, we might claim that value determines equilibrium price
○ But the two cannot both be true, because they would entail that socially
necessary labour time determines equilibrium price, which is not true (apparently)
● Labour power under capitalism is a commodity. The value of labour power is (according
to labour theory of value) the amount of time necessary to produce it; hence the amount of time
necessary to produce the means of subsistence for a worker.
○ Thus when capitalists profit, they do so because the amount of time
necessary to produce subsistence for workers is less than the amount of time workers
spend producing - this profit is surplus value
● This looks like exploitation. Many Marxists claim this exploitation is a scientific and
non-moral concept
● Popular and strict doctrines:
○ Popular doctrine - labour and labour alone creates value
○ Strict doctrine - value is determined by socially necessary labour time
● Popular doctrine is wrong because labour doesn’t create value, it creates products that
have value
● Strict doctrine is wrong because other things determine exchange value e.g. monopoly
control over means of production. If strict doctrine claims that value is distinct from exchange
value (price) and hence that value is still solely determined by necessary labour time then it is
committed to popular doctrine, which is false
● Hence the two doctrines, though incompatible, only appear to be true when they seem to
support each other
● So the theory of exploitation is rather that the labourer creates products which have value,
and some of this value is appropriated by the capitalist, so that the labourer receives less value
than the value of what he creates
● Under feudalism, the serf produces the whole product, but the feudal lord appropriates
part of the product
● Under capitalism, the proletarian produces the whole product, but the capitalist
appropriates part of the value of the product
● Is this appropriation exploitation?
○ Is it fair that capitalists have the bargaining power that they do?
○ Apologists for capitalism claim that the capitalists are not exploiters
because of their contribution of the means of production
○ Marxists must claim in response that though this contribution is made,
the ownership of the means of production is morally illegitimate; it is theft, and hence the
capitalist is providing what ought not to be his to provide
○ Does the contract between capitalist and proletarian arise out of an unfair
bargaining position?
The Labour Theory of Value and the Concept of Exploitation
● Labour theory of value claims that value is determined by socially necessary labour (i.e.
labour necessary at currently level of productive forces/relations
○ Alternatively, we might claim that value determines equilibrium price
○ But the two cannot both be true, because they would entail that socially
necessary labour time determines equilibrium price, which is not true (apparently)
● Labour power under capitalism is a commodity. The value of labour power is (according
to labour theory of value) the amount of time necessary to produce it; hence the amount of time
necessary to produce the means of subsistence for a worker.
○ Thus when capitalists profit, they do so because the amount of time
necessary to produce subsistence for workers is less than the amount of time workers
spend producing - this profit is surplus value
● This looks like exploitation. Many Marxists claim this exploitation is a scientific and
non-moral concept
● Popular and strict doctrines:
○ Popular doctrine - labour and labour alone creates value
○ Strict doctrine - value is determined by socially necessary labour time
● Popular doctrine is wrong because labour doesn’t create value, it creates products that
have value
● Strict doctrine is wrong because other things determine exchange value e.g. monopoly
control over means of production. If strict doctrine claims that value is distinct from exchange
value (price) and hence that value is still solely determined by necessary labour time then it is
committed to popular doctrine, which is false
● Hence the two doctrines, though incompatible, only appear to be true when they seem to
support each other
● So the theory of exploitation is rather that the labourer creates products which have value,
and some of this value is appropriated by the capitalist, so that the labourer receives less value
than the value of what he creates
● Under feudalism, the serf produces the whole product, but the feudal lord appropriates
part of the product
● Under capitalism, the proletarian produces the whole product, but the capitalist
appropriates part of the value of the product
● Is this appropriation exploitation?
○ Is it fair that capitalists have the bargaining power that they do?
○ Apologists for capitalism claim that the capitalists are not exploiters
because of their contribution of the means of production
○ Marxists must claim in response that though this contribution is made,
the ownership of the means of production is morally illegitimate; it is theft, and hence the
capitalist is providing what ought not to be his to provide
○ Does the contract between capitalist and proletarian arise out of an unfair
bargaining position?
