Social Relations, Commodity-Fetishism and Marx's Critique of Political Economy

Abstract

Starting from Marx's theory of value and commodity-fetishism, I address the question of how fetishised categories of bourgeois economics are organically linked with the reality of the capitalist class relation of work and of class struggle. The paper is thus structured. I first point out that Marx's critique sees the limitation of classical political economy in the confusion between "substance" and "form" (the case of Smith) or in the inadequate treatment of "substance" and therefore the lack of a theory of "form" (Ricardo). I then discuss Marx's notion of substance of value and relate it to his theory of commodity-fetishism. In this discussion my central reference point is the category of abstract labor as a social relation. Consequently, I discuss the category of commodity-fetishism as cognitive apprehension of this social relation from a particular class perspective, that of capital. I go on to critically evaluate Rubin's interpretation of Marx's theory of fetishism in light of my interpretation of commodity-fetishism and its relation to the category of value. I then illustrate my argument by using the theory of commodity-fetishism to shed light on the social meaning of some economic categories. Finally, I move beyond Marx and suggest a general theoretical understanding of the evolution of economic theory in relation to these struggles and in the organic connection with the capitalist relation of work.