Marx versus Walras on Labour Exchange

Abstract

This paper compares Leon Walrass and Marxs thoughts on labour exchange thereby illuminating the latters perspective that can lead to a forceful counterargument to the neoclassical principle of labour exchange for which the former affords a foundation. Both Walras and Marx distinguish between labour ability as a factor of production and labour as its service but exhibit a striking contrast in their explanations of the distinction. Walrass distinction betweenpersonal facultiesand labour never attempts to re- veal the peculiarities of the relationship they share. Walras essentially equates the re- lationship between the two with that between non-human factors and their respective services by stripping the former of human elements. This not only allows labour ex- change to be incorporated into Walrass general equilibrium system but also provides the groundwork for its neoclassical principle which on the basis of marginal theory assumes work conditions to be determinable through the stylised market adjustment of the demand and supply of labour on each entrepreneurs and workers maximisa- tion behaviour. In contrast especially in his pre-Capital writings Marx underlines the workers subjectivity in deciding her labour performance. This implies that the type and inten- sity of time-unit labour varies depending on the workers will and the constraints upon it. Accentuating the particular characteristics of the relationship between labour power and labour in this way Marxs arguments lead to the invalidation of the neo- classical principle of labour exchange and rationalise the intervention of socio-politi- cal factors represented by the labour-capital class struggle in the determination of work conditions. Thus this study focuses on the potential of Marxs labour power-la- bour distinction independent of his exploitation theory-the basis of a weighty refu- tation of the neoclassical system.