Marx und die Maschinen – WOHLSTAND FÜR ALLE Ep. 169

Prosperity for everyone talking about money with no one and Wolfgang m Schmidt hello and a warm welcome hello Wolfgang hello Ole this episode is about Karl Marx and machines, which is accompanied by the question of whether machines can free us from work in the penultimate episode was We talk about actionism and we have already pointed out that Marx never had the idea that technical progress could completely free us from work, but with the fragment of a machine that can be found in the outlines of the Critique of Political Economy, there is a text that precedes Many theorists of Paolo Viano Until Antonio Negri was inspired to outline an approaching post-capitalist society, this text is very confusing, some quotations are often used, but a discussion and analysis of Marx on the machines he has in capital does not takes place and that's why we want to start with this episode.

The foundations are laid by what Marx wrote about machines in Capital and we can promise that all the discourses about automation, digitalization and the question of why we don't work, much less will disappear immediately. become ten times smarter if you know Marx's considerations Once again we do advertising for Jacko Bean magazine. Price increases also cause problems for this independent magazine, because, for example, paper prices have increased enormously. Jacobin makes a very important contribution with his articles on politics, economics and culture. So that this can continue, Jacobin has funded through crowdfunding. If you can and want, you should support this magazine, unique in German-speaking countries.

In exchange, you will receive small gifts. of the editorial team and the design team. You can see all the information in the description from the Jacobin editorial team. We should thank you very much. We'll get to all machines an everyday idea of ​​it, but what exactly does it do? Does Marx mean by a machine that it is simply a bigger tool, there to make the job easier? First of all, we should note that we are talking here about machines that are owned by capitalists in a capitalist society. Means of production It is not about the machines we have at home, for example the dishwasher or the washing machine.

Of course, there is a connection between the machines in our home and the machines in companies, among other things because the machines in companies are the machines we buy, they may have been produced, although not completely alone, because human labor always plays a role. a role in one way or another, either because the machines need to be monitored or because the individual components that the machine screws have been produced. Fixed capital, as opposed to circulating capital, which includes the raw materials that are processed, means that a machine processes raw materials, for example rubber, to make automobile tires. , circulating capital has been transformed into real capital with the help of fixed capital, while the machine remains the same, except for possible wear and tear, but we will talk about this in more detail later.

First, machines play a crucial role in industrialization because they allow more people to perform certain physically demanding jobs than they are now capable of doing. For example, thanks to the steam engine, work can also be done by women and children and, in general, physical limitations can be overcome through mechanization. For example, before industrialization there were pulleys, but it is precisely electricity that can move a few workers. Secondly, thanks to technical progress productivity increases, that is, the machine is important for mass production and, thirdly, the worker receives from the machine more than a useful tool - now people seem to compete directly with machines - the machine replaces the workers, which leads to an increase in the number of workers Unemployment can also have an impact on the evolution of wages, because workers must not be more expensive than machines, otherwise they will be replaced quickly.

We have already commented in our episode on accelerationism that care robots will not be implemented, among other things because they probably will not be implemented in the long term because nursing staff are too cheap to be replaced by expensive technology. Already in the first half of the 19th century it was recognized as a problem that machines could make people superfluous, so there were even proposals to limit the working hours of machines to limit those of a worker, that is, if workers can only work 12 hours a day, machines should also be limited. As expected, Marx did not think much about such a proposal because he saw emancipatory potential in progress where people no longer have to work all day but have time for leisure and how to do so, of course, have higher activities, can liberate themselves Marc He was a friend of progress so only if socialism could be realized a relapse Friedrich Engels allowed entry into the pre-industrial era, although he did not turn a blind eye to the consequences of closed industrialization, and even before Marx, the poporization of the English working class was described by Max Geist when he thought about free time all the time.

From his own experience he knows very well what it was about: after all, he had to manage his time and money well to be able to draw up the capital, he had the financial support of the businessman's son, Friedrich Engels, and Marc wrote articles for the newspapers . ensure a livelihood to be able to dedicate themselves to their studies, a possibility of liberation through technology for everyone, so to speak, a liberation that does not occur with technical progress, but if it is organized capitalistically, progress. Even him in the first place. He benefits the capitalist and not the worker, so it can be said without exaggeration that his chapter on machinery in Capital revolves exactly around this point.

In the first volume of Capital, chapter 13 is titled Machinery and large industry. It opens with a question: Stewart Mill has already been asked that progress has always made the work of workers easier, we would intuitively affirm this, but Marx explained that this is in no way the purpose of machinery related to progress. capitalism, like any other development in the world. productive force of labor, had to be archived and the worker must shorten part of the working day to lengthen the other part of his working day, which he gives free of charge to the capitalist. The production of surplus value, that is, the progress that mechanization brings, is designed in capitalism to benefit the capitalist and the worker.

Now I can work more efficiently, that is, produce more goods, but this time saving in production, of course, is not transferred to the workers, so you don't say, oh, that's great, you can produce as many as before in a much longer time. shorter, then do it the same as before, work for less time, you get the same salary, but now it means you can produce more, which means the capitalist can exploit longer and therefore generate more surplus value. Of course, we can say that some machines do not make work easier in this sense. Muscular strength must be used, but Marx describes in detail how this leads to children and women being used to work in mines and factories.

Certainly, the conditions in the West today are no longer the same as in England in the 19th century, but we must be aware that there is a lot of work that is especially strenuous and harmful to health that has been outsourced, we only think of the textile industry in Bangladesh, where people have to work for poverty wages, like in the 19th century, and also have to inhale toxic fumes, or when it comes to This question of whether technical progress can make work easier It is best that we stay, We believe that there is a technical advance through applications with which we can receive food in just a few minutes.

These companies often operate with a poor line of people. , or if we go to checkout at the supermarket, the products are registered by scanning. Prices are added and various data is added. I'm always very fascinated when I walk around the world and see these technical advances. In fact, he was standing still. yesterday afternoon at the checkout of a supermarket and I looked at all these products like the cashier one was throwing away and then it occurred to me that I had never in my life experienced a scanner like this scanning a product incorrectly, so sometimes the hearts of Marxists accelerate that Of course, let's say what incredible progress people have made.

It just occurred to us and of course we can see in this example how inconvenient it is because it used to be like that at the corner store, for example, everything was quite slow. , yes, you went in there and put everything in the basket and today of course it's different, on the one hand there is the customer's job, so the customer has to put the things in the basket himself and then the staff has to chasing them at the checkout, which of course means that the work of individual cashiers is even more exhausting, the former employees always carry and of course many jobs are lost as a result, otherwise the whole thing is not profitable, but we will get In a moment we will get to that very briefly, of course, we will stop at this point about which you have already cited this idea because the machine can drive people away, oh God, that is why the machine is only allowed work as long as a person can, then you can use a machine or go back one day and that's very nice because it shows how people are trapped in this bourgeois way of thinking because Yes, normally you would say that.

If you somehow consciously do economics, if you say that now we are thinking about the economic system, then you would always say that there is nothing better than when work becomes superfluous when you can satisfy the needs of people with less work and in this system, Let's remember, no, that is a gigantic problem in this system because people depend on salaries and being able to capitalize in the first half of the 19th century, but you could also imagine that today from the same people who propose something like that again to "Get jobs. So getting it is always a very strange battle that is sometimes fought against mail order companies.

We will return to the supposed relief through machines. First of all, Max wants to clarify from an economic point of view what is a machine. In reality, it is not simply a machine tool and it is not actually a thing composed of different tools. Max differentiates between three types of machines: first, the moving machine, like the steam engine, which puts in motion a mechanism with its driving force, secondly, the transmission mechanism, which can transform the movement with gear shafts, gears, etc. and then maybe where. Thirdly, there is the machine tool, this is crucial for industrialization because it ensures that the business of craft and manufacturing is transferred to the business of the machine.

How does this machine tool work? They can also be c

alle

d work machines. The machine tool is not just a lever, a hammer or a needle, a tool with which the worker produces something, but the machine tool that does what the worker did before and Max makes the difference between a tool and a work machine clear. as follows: In Germany, a spinner first tries to kick two spinning wheels so that he can work with both hands and both feet at the same time. Later a pedal spinning wheel with two spindles was invented, but spinners who could spin two threads at the same time were almost as rare as people with two heads: the Jenny, as its name suggests, the first spinning machine from the year 1765 Max, however, rotates from the beginning with 12 to 18 spindles, highlighting how the machine tool separates itself from what he calls the organic barrier, while the tool is still attached to it, so it is no longer the hand. the one who has to hold the hammer.

It is irrelevant whether the driving force of the machine tool comes from man or from the animal straining from wind or water, the human being explains that Marx is in any case an imperfect element of production when it comes to continuous movement, which would then be c

alle

d in the course. With technical development, more and more machines can be combined with each other, so Max introduces an additional distinction between similar machines and similar machine systems. Machines are those that can perform different work steps. Marx mentions, for example, a machine that produces envelopes. This was done before industrialization in different work steps by workers with various tools and now a machine combines these tools, but that should not be a system of machines.

This only happens when different machines are combined with each other, once the working machine has everything necessary to process the raw material. The movements are carried out without human assistance and only need human assistance, we explain to Max an automatic system of machinery and then tells us about a mechanical monster whose body fills entire factory buildings and whose demonic power is only hidden by the almost solemnly measured movement of itsgiant limbs in a feverish state erupt a great whirling dance of their innumerable functioning organs. This is a surprising metaphor or let me make a literary observation.

It is no coincidence that with industrialization the genre of the Gothic novel is flourishing in England and Germany. Frankenstein and company are ultimately a reaction to the monstrous machines. These texts also raise the question of the human condition: what is the human being in the face of machines that seem to be overwhelming? Max does not do philosophical anthropology, but instead asks what the machine means to the worker and the capitalist. Once mechanization has been set in motion, it always triggers new revolutions in the mode of production, there is a general acceleration of transportation and trade production.

One milestone is particularly significant: the production of machines. By the machines. Max writes about this, so big industry had to take control of its character between the means of production of the machine itself and the production of machines through machines. He first sought his proper technical support and stood tall. Marx then "The machine tool is once again a focus of attention. This now appears in cyclopean size; in detail, Marx describes the steam hammers for shipbuilding or the giant drills where the machine gives rise to machines. Industrialization is developing rapidly. What is important now is that Marks traces these achievements back to the conscious application of natural sciences.

Why is it interesting? Now, suddenly, knowledge plays a decisive role. Suddenly, we are talking about something else. Knowledge as a component naturally brings with it an immaterialist game and this statement is immediately followed by the question of who really owns the knowledge. As is well known, it is not necessary to pay royalties to Pythagoras, who died some time ago, if His theorem is used to build a machine, but to whom does the logical conclusion belong? The next question then belongs to the machine, which was produced on the basis of free or rather social knowledge. We have already talked about Mariana Masokato's book The State Capital, in which she demonstrates how all the achievements of Silicon Valley are state investments, that is, public money comes from and can continue the discussion with Max that in general progress is based in knowledge, which actually belongs to everyone.

Here we only touch on general intellect, what does general knowledge mean? In a sense, we'll get into one of the next episodes. This idea through digitization has become relevant again, whether it is Wikipedia or an open source program. Marx explains that in the simple and even in the distribution of specific cooperation in work, the displacement of the isolated worker by the socialized still appears more or less accidental - the machinery only works in the hand direct socialization or joint work the cooperative character of the work process is now dictated by the nature of the work equipment itself technical need here it is interesting the mention of socialized work the machine tool is not simply created due to a brilliant business idea, but also contains the work and knowledge of previous stages .

There is a socialization of labor in the sense that the image of the individual worker, as it is still known as the feudal farmer, becomes increasingly rare. "Technical progress ensures the socialization of labor, even if the product then serves for private profit. But what happens now? With the worker Marx succinctly explains, instead of using the tools of the trade, capital now allows When the worker works with a machine that handles its own tools, the question naturally arises: Does the machine itself produce value? And it can deny it, which may surprise us at first. A machine that produces cocktail glasses, for example, also creates value, one might think, that is, glasses that can be used, but here a distinction is important, namely, the very basic in Marxian use and exchange value, the Max use value is very high.

I even think that everyone should have nice cocktail glasses. It's reasonable to have a house, of course, but the fact that a machine is capable of producing an incredible amount of use value, of producing many useful things, does not automatically mean that it itself produces an exchange value: the value of the commodity that, according to Marx, is created by human labor, that is, by spending human labor, that is, the machine does not create new value, but the machine only gives away value that is already in it. So a person creates a machine, then puts in a certain amount of work and when the machine wears out, it basically gives some value to the individual products.

But that does not mean that the machine adds its own value that somehow comes from itself, but rather that it simply transmits it and that is also what is important. That is to say, if in the end we ask ourselves the question: where does it come from?, the product is worth that on the one hand, of course, because the workers operate the machine, then as Max would say, the liquid work is added directly and then, of course , there is the old work that has already been done and that is in the machine, which is also in the raw products that are received there and then transmitted over time to the products and then the finished products are manufactured. so that one last time the machine loses value because it is a bearer of value but it does not create any new one.

We prefer to take this argument a step further, step by step with Marx, he writes, now it should be noted first of all that machinery always enters completely into the process of work and only partially into the process of utilization; It never adds more value than it loses on average through wear and tear, so there is a big difference between the value of the machines and the part of the value that is periodically transferred from them to the product. There is a big difference between the machine as a value-forming element and as a product-forming element. An incredible amount of products can be produced, which means significantly more use value.

But this does not mean that individual products have much more exchange value than received or contained. Marx explains here that the machine only adds value to the product that is not yet a commodity, which it loses through wear and tear. as fixed capital. Unlike raw materials, machines last longer, but they cannot be used without limits. The machine is a long-term investment that should pay for itself, for example, over several years. As he has already said, Wolfgang may have been very positive. "It's not about technical progress, but what about increased productivity? Under what circumstances does such a state of innovation occur?

What is it? A boost for the individual capitalist who simply wants to create more useful things, he says, or I should get more glasses, that's what worries me now and that's why I'm investing in a new machine, no, that was formulated very deeply. It's actually about an extra profit that can be made with big machines. What does that mean? How is it created when an entrepreneur first buys a new type of machine and let's say it can produce twice as much as the previous machine and also the same number of workers, but he only needs them.

Just like the previous machine, the capitalist has made sure that less labor is needed to produce the real thing than before, which means that by this logic the value of goods should fall, but all competitors continue to produce with the old technology, so innovation still has not been established. The entrepreneur can make a considerable profit and sell the goods at a price higher than they really are or he can try to undercut his competitors to force them out of the market. Marx writes that a capitalist obtains additional added value in this way, but what then happens just before he gets there?

We have already established this answer from the beginning of our consequences on capital: the value of the commodity that arises, that is, the value of the commodity that is composed of the socially necessary labor time as it does and of this socially necessary concept that actually contains exactly what you just said is socially necessary, the old working hours are still many working hours because the innovation has not yet been established and when the innovation has been established, the socially necessary working hours to produce the product are lower and then the value falls. "Again, this is just a quick clarification of concepts.

It's always nice when you can pick up terms from old episodes and explain how Max continues to pursue them over the course of Capital and you could actually deduce from that, yes, that's the case, great" . progress for workers, they have really saved time, you would think they have saved a lot of time, but we will explain in more detail in a moment why that doesn't work at all, but first the question you The only question is what happens. Because once this additional added value has been generated, the individual capitalist can, of course, try to maintain this additional added value for a long time with patents, but it is only a matter of time until competitors also buy or have patents.

They found more productive machines so that their competitors don't lose the field and that's what happens now we can say again, oh, they could form a cartel so that the two of them can get the extra added value, but that is only possible in a few areas and It is very difficult, especially due to international competition. In short, there is a price war that goes on and on. After that, more and more companies can produce cocktail glasses cheaper and with less effort, prices go down and with it the capitalist's profit. falls again, so the additional added value can only be obtained for a short period of time, let's say here, yes, now you can do twice as much.

Many glasses are produced, but only as long as the entrepreneur has an initial advantage can he make additional profits, so that the exchange value of each glass begins to fall, as soon as competitors produce in the same way, there necessarily occurs a price war, that is, with a view to exchange value. Market for educational price the value of goods decreases with technical progress. For many entrepreneurs this may not be so clear analytically, but of course we all have the experience, we only think about televisions, what kind of device will we get today if we put 500 euros on the table?

What was this device like 20 years ago if you paid 500 euros? Yes, I know from very close experience that really good things can be achieved today thanks to progress leading to cheaper products, even if not all jobs are replaced by machines. Marc writes that since capital does not pay for the labor used but rather for the value of the labor power used, its use of machines is limited by the difference between the value of the machine and the value of the labor power that replaces. Maybe it's a bit cryptic but it actually means a machine that is only introduced if its output is cheaper than labor and depending on the wage level this of course differs internationally and Marc rarely does either.

That is why machines are being invented in England. which today are only used in North America because, since workers there are still very cheap, is it worth putting the machine there? Now we can also see under what conditions significant innovations do not prevail, that is, innovations that would be technically possible, but which This is the reason why they fail under capitalism, that is, when they are not profitable, when commodity labor is Even more expensive than cheaper, the introduction of such a machine will not produce any significant innovation, so, as we see here, innovation in capitalism is not simply about making work easier for workers, or in the example of North America North, that is obviously the case.

Labor is already too expensive for machines to be installed there now in this market. Forgive me, you are absolutely right. I said it exactly the other way around. the workers are too expensive and that is why they make the machine well there yes, the profit of the machine for the capitalist depends on the price of the true labor force, whether it is worth using a machine depends on how expensive the workers are and how many can be replaced by the machine there are country-specific differences due to unequal wages, now you would suddenly have to produce materials in Germany for some reason.

Mechanization is much more worthwhile than in Bangladesh, where prices are very low, so you would probably be much more innovative simply because it is necessary because labor is very expensive - it is also interesting that if we see assistive robots in a nursing home elderly or something like that, but not in other cases, then you have to take into account wear and tear and this is also twice as important: once a machine wears out with use, that is, it wears out but also from not being used, that the machine is not used, this sounds a bit strange, but suppose a machine is used 16 hours a day for 8 years,after which it wears out with use and must be replaced. with a new one, but if the same machine is only used for 16 years for eight hours of use does not change the wear of the material, then the machine must be replaced after 16 years, but the value of the machine is transferred to the products in twice as long, so it makes sense to the businessman that the machines running day and night quickly adds value to the product and that is of course so that the worker who operates the machine also adds value to the finished product. , which means that when the machine is stopped no new value is created through work and that, of course, is to the benefit of the entrepreneurs.

In fact, let the machines work. Marx also describes in great detail in the first volume of Capital the terrible working conditions in which they find themselves. Max then introduces moral attrition as an additional form of attrition, which means that over time better and cheaper machines appear in the competition. Of course, this means that the old machine loses its value very quickly, so it is better to use it. for as long as possible so that in the end it runs out as quickly as possible, you can always buy a new one, which is what this logic boils down to, which must be clear about the extension of the working day and the disregard for those who carry out the work. work and of course they want time for themselves and relaxation.

The extended working day is especially important due to mechanization, because not only does added value increase, but the work equipment becomes cheaper because it is used for an especially long time and An English quote from the cotton magnarten can be cited: when a If a farmer leaves his shovel, he renders a capital of 18 pence useless during that period, if one of us leaves the factory, that is, the factory workers render useless a capital that cost £100,000. We actually need to remember this quote during lockdowns, which is why we have always pointed out that it is different if the service sector in the form of restaurants and cinemas is closed or if large corporations are told to stop the wheels here.

The assembly line is already ahead, but now everyone is locked in, you can see it very clearly, so of course there is a significant difference if you say here in the restaurant that now there is a change in the axis because we are making a lockdown and then a few plates of spaghetti do not overflow Counter, but it is a big difference when you say that the automobile industry is now in a lockdown and everyone stays at home, you can understand that here, especially, the Losses due to lack of use are even greater thanks to machines, especially in which everything is extraordinary profits.

Marx mockingly calls it the first period of young love, so you know the elevated feelings you have when you are in love and that is a bit like that with the businessman when he has a new machine and in order to take advantage of this young love, the businessman tries to squeeze the maximum to the worker, because as soon as the technology has consolidated and all competitors have followed suit, the individual product will soon be worth less and to obtain profits as high as before, more products in total will have to be produced, but not even then It is clear whether these will find a market.

Most likely, we still have the problem of overcapacity again and again. , which then answers the question of why, despite increased productivity, people don't work less. Yes, much more can be produced than before. Needs can be better met by saving previous earnings. So you have to produce more and we see. There are so many contradictory elements here: the capitalist wants to make the machine more productive to make labor superfluous, thus obtaining additional profits for a while, but then, when the value of the real thing has fallen due to competition, then you have to do it again. Hiring workers in order to realize the old value, which means that a superfluous population of workers is constantly produced here, as Markt writes, which is sometimes used and sometimes rejected by the industrial reserve army and is now almost a joke.

The idea that prominent entrepreneurs and thinkers in Silicon Valley do this They announce the end of work believe that this problem can be solved with an unconditional basic income, as if capitalism could soon overcome the iron law that only human work creates value by distributing money to non-working people as if machines produced it without human help or could not buy it on the market for the corresponding exchange value, we always wonder if no human being has to lift a finger anyway and only machines can do everything. , then even the liberal would have to be convinced that the liberal is really good.

So you can really do a planned economy, that's really the most fun, but well, Max also describes the efforts to shorten working hours in the 19th century, but this often goes hand in hand with the intensification of work, which which means that there are many employers who, for example, consider that workers are more productive if they only have to work 11 hours instead of 12, which of course also means the other way around, since While that is not the case and while the Reducing the working day does not lead to an increase in productivity, it obviously means that employers are also against it and, as already mentioned, women and child labor are a big issue. in the machinery chapter because only through industrialization are these workers available.

The working class does not benefit from technical advances under capitalism, while automatic digitalization offers the capitalist the possibility of additional profits, which means it does for the worker. Danger because it depends more on wages and threatens to starve if it is not suitable for the use of capital. On this basis, we will soon talk about the legendary frequency of machines. At the end of this episode, we would also like to point out an event where we are looking forward to meeting good friends in the late afternoon of January 20, 2023 at the St Pauli Theater in Hamburg. We will meet with the satirist Jean-Philipp Kindler and the rapper Disaster.

Advance ticket sales have already ended. started and the one on the left is, of course, in the description and we want Don't forget to ask them for financial support for the prosperity of all. This is very important because podcasting is labor intensive. We can make bank transfers. and standing orders. You can also find the podcast on Paypal. Thanks for the support. But now it's over for today because time is money, look, that was prosperity for everyone, you can support us financially through paypal.me/ole and Wolfgang or through the bank details in the description, thank you very much