View source for Capital Redefined

'''* Book: Hosseini, S A Hamed; Gills, Barry K. (2024) : Capital Redefined: A [[Commonist Value Theory]] for Liberating Life, Rethinking Globalizations/ Routledge, 2024 [https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003340386 doi]'''

URL = https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/290382/1/9781003805588.pdf


=Contextual Quote=

"The axiological turn is about giving primacy to the ‘true value’ that emanates from life and nourishes life. The true sources of
value are all in commons form. Life itself is a commons, perhaps the most fundamental of them all after the cosmos. Life is a unity emerging out of a web of diversity. It is dynamic and in constant motion, cyclical yet self-enduring and self-flourishing, if its boundaries are not transgressed and if its capacities to thrive are not undermined, especially ironically in the name of ‘value’!"

- S.A. Hamed and Barry K. Gils [https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/290382/1/9781003805588.pdf]


=Description=

From the publisher:

"Capital Redefined presents a unique perspective on the nature of “capital,”
departing from the prevailing reductionist accounts. Hosseini and Gills offer
an expanded perspective on Marxian value theory by addressing its main
limitations and building their own integrative value theory. They argue that
the current understanding of “value” must be re-examined and liberated from
its subservient ties to capital while acknowledging the ways in which capital
appropriates value. This is achieved by differentiating between “fetish value”
created by capital and “true value” generated through various commons-based
forms of coexistence.

The authors propose a defetishization of value by rejecting the commonly
accepted idea of its objectivity. They introduce their “commonist value
theory,” which redefines capital as both the product and process of perverting
the fundamental commoning causes of true value into sources of fetish
value. Capital is theorized through a “modular” framework, where multiple
intersecting processes constitute a comprehensive power structure, a “value
regime,” representing an unprecedented degree of the domination of capital
over life. Their theory reconciles two apparently incompatible views on the
notion of value. One view encompasses all inputs involved in capitalist value
production and conflates intrinsic and commodity values. The other warns
against this conflation as it treats capital as an entity tightly associated only
with commodity production and wage labor.

The authors believe that establishing alternative forms of value creation
based on normative principles of living in commons is crucial as an analytical
base for criticizing existing power structures and economic systems."

(https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/290382/1/9781003805588.pdf)


=Contents=

From the authors:

"In Chapter 2, we identify four key limitations in traditional Marxian ideas
of capital, given the current state of the capitalist world system and the various global crises we face. We also offer potential solutions to overcome these limitations. Each of these limitations has been detected and addressed by a
different line of reflexive criticism in critical scholarship. However, interestingly, each one corresponds to an irreducible source of ‘true value’ (or a fundamental commons) as introduced above. We aim to bring these critical
reflections together through our proposed modular framework since all four
ultimate sources of true value are closely intertwined, and their interactions
require an integrative approach. This integrative approach, which we call the
‘commonist framework,’ is distinctive in the sense that it attempts to outline a
new definition of capital, considering it as ‘fetish value regime,’ which makes
the development of a more coherent praxeology possible.

In Chapters 3 and 4, we expound on the ‘architecture of capital’ in the form
of ideally constructed modules of (inter/in)dependent social (infra-)processes
and (meta-) mechanisms. Capital is analytically deconstructed into its constituting processes (modules), and its evolution is discussed closely in association with alter- and counter-processes, and thus perceived more dynamically
rather than as a fixed notion, a singular mode of social relations, or a singular process. Chapter 3, by taking a critical realist perspective, discusses the metatheoretical bases of the model, preparing the ground for Chapter 4 to
introduce the commonist modular framework.


Chapter 5 revisits and reconstructs Marxian value theory by drawing on
the commonist modular framework. We argue that ‘labor’ is the result of the
decommonization of (more than) human creative power through abstraction
and appropriation processes. To clarify, ‘real abstraction’ in the Marxian tradition refers to the process of extracting and reducing complex social relations to a simple measure of value, such as labor time. We will expand this
notion by distinguishing between ‘primary’ and ‘secondary’ abstractions.

‘Primary abstraction’ creates labor and labor power outside capitalist production relations, while ‘secondary abstraction’ results in abstract labor and productive capitalist value represented by exchange value and surplus value.
By delineating the two types of real abstraction, we offer potential solutions
to disagreements over the suitability of Marxian value theory in the context of
post-industrial capitalism.

Chapter 6, drawing on the commonist modular framework, examines
recent debates around the capacity of Marxian labor theory of value (LTV)
in adequately theorizing affective work, automation, and the ecological profile of capital. The chapter provides an overview of these major debates and discusses how the commonist perception of value can help overcome some of
the underlying confusion."

=Excerpts=


==Preface==

From the preface,

S.A. Hamed and Barry K. Gils:

"This book [[Capital Redefined]] proposes a novel approach to theorizing capital and ‘capitalism’ by incorporating the ‘normativity of life’ into its critical analysis and recognizing the absence of inherent true value in capital. It challenges the prevailing belief that capital is the ultimate source of worth and redirects our attention to the flourishing of life and the preservation and enhancement of its thriving capacities. This transformative perspective calls for a fundamental reevaluation of our socio-economic and political systems, aiming to transcend the destructive contradictions and deficiencies of capitalism.

Redefining capital necessitates redefining ‘value’ in the process. Although the notion of value has been neglected in most modern social theories (Pitts, 2021), Marx’s assertion that “value forms the foundation of capital” (Marx, 1993: 421) remains as relevant as ever. This, however, raises the question of how to redefine capital while also acknowledging the value of socio-ecological relations in shaping it. These relations should not be seen simply as a context or precondition, but rather as a set of interrelated causal mechanisms that are embedded in and against capital. Merely contemplating the socioecological, cultural, and (geo-)political dimensions of capitalist functionality as the vital conditions for economic exploitation, without theorizing their re/ construction in the process of capitalist value production, is inadequate to grasp the complex challenges posed by capital, and the prospects for profound conflicts and paradigm shifts.

Redefining capital and value entails revisiting and expanding upon Marxian conceptions while deploying a new perspective inspired by a new discourse on the ‘commons’ and ‘commoning’ developed here in the form of a ‘modular conceptual framework.’ This framework, built on a critical realist ontology, conceptualizes capital as an ensemble of multiple interrelated socio-historical (infra)processes, rather than as an analytically isolated inner structure of ‘the capitalist system’ (see Chapters 3 and 4). This perspective goes beyond the limitations of productivism, economism, and the post-value turn while emphasizing intersectional and ecological dimensions and complex relationships with post-capitalist alternatives and transformative movements. This book reflects on the strengths, potentialities, and limitations of the Marxian tradition of understanding capital in terms of value. It then argues for expanding on these limitations and proposes relevant solutions by presenting a new normative value theory that prioritizes the sources of life as commons and their intrinsic value. Thus, offering a commonist value theory.

This theory encompasses both critical and analytical elements. According to this new theory, the ultimate sources of what we call ‘true value’ are precisely the organized life’s condiciones sine quibus non, which under capitalist relations are perverted into the causal sources of what we call ‘fetish value’ as the essence of capital (Hosseini, 2022a).

True value is sustainably (re)produced only through the commoning modes of living and interconnecting. A commons, whether material or immaterial, naturally occurring or manufactured, is a living organism made up of communities of interconnected and interdependent entities. In normal conditions, the activities of these entities borrow their vitality from the entirety of the commons and, in return, contribute to the survival and thriving of the whole, inclusive of all individual (living) entities. One for all, all for one, and unity in diversity – this is how true value is regenerated.

Under the supremacy of capital, however, the so-called modern civilization emerged as a development through which not only were commons expropriated, but also de-commonized, losing their essence as commons.

Capitalism has now become capitality, a life-killing mode deeply coded into the genetics of our daily lives, thanks to its axiological primacy. Only a profound (re-) commonization of our modern socio-ecological relations can liberate life from the immense grip and power of capital; a transformative process that holds the potential to effectively transcend the predicament of mere survival, while also transforming ubiquitous capitalist relations."

(https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/290382/1/9781003805588.pdf)



==Considerations on Value==

S.A. Hamed and Barry K. Gils:

"Four points are worth mentioning here:

(1) The polarity between labor and nature/ecology is one of the significant
contradictions of capital. Labor, in its ‘natural form,’ when considered
outside the confines of capitalist social structures, is a manifestation of
humanity’s innate creative potential, a faculty that has evolved naturally
but has been ‘abstracted’ and profoundly alienated from its natural context by capitalism. In this book, we will argue that this dualism needs to be resolved at the normative level since the two (when unalienated) are
not only ontologically entwined but must also restore their lost integration to allow a meaningful transition beyond capital. However, we do not suggest equating or hybridizing the two in our critical ‘analyses’ of
capital, as their effects on capitalist value are distinct. We will explore
these effects in more detail later in Chapters 5 and 6.

(2) We need to differentiate between ‘labor’ and ‘creative power’ (or the
‘humans’ capacity to be creative’) beyond producing the necessary means
of subsistence. Work is one of the socially natural forms of humans’ creative power that is reified into ‘labor’ and, thereby, commodity and value forms (made abstract and homogeneous) under the capitalist mode of
production, as Marx’s value theory entails. In this way, we also distance
ourselves from productivist interpretations of Marx without marginalizing commodity production (see also Vitale, 2020).

(3) Although we argue for closely relating the definition of ‘true value’ to
‘well-living,’ i.e., good life, consciously and conscientiously defined by
the associations/communities of free commoners (Hosseini, 2018b), the
proposition would still be ‘crude’ as a practical approach if we consider
achieving the communal good life as an ultimate goal, i.e., as an end in
itself, while ignoring the necessity of what Marx terms as the “transcendence of human self-estrangement” (Marx et al., 1988, p. 102) as well as what we may call ‘existential liberation,’ that is, ‘exploring and living up
to the purpose of Existence.’

(4) Although we may occasionally, loosely, and interchangeably use terms
like ‘organized life,’ ‘lifeworld(s),’ ‘earth system,’ and ‘web of life,’ we
are mindful of their specific disciplinary and theoretical connotations,
which may limit their compatibilities with our critical social theory.

Therefore, we introduce the concept of ‘life-domain’ as the interconnected system of all living things and their environment on planet Earth.

Life-domain encompasses the biosphere, atmosphere, hydrosphere, and
lithosphere and includes all forms of life, from microorganisms to plants
and animals. The concept of life-domain emphasizes the interconnectedness and interdependence of all living things and highlights the importance of maintaining the health and balance of the natural world for the
well-being of (more than) human societies and future generations. The
life-domain includes human social systems and cultural practices that
shape and are shaped by the living world. It is a holistic domain that
encompasses all domains of life, including social, economic, and ecological dimensions of (more-than-human) life, without ignoring their relative autonomy. The use of the word ‘domain’ is intended to imply both
control and power relations but also responsibility and stewardship. The
life-domain, unlike the web of life and the like, is more inclusive of the
sociology and anthropology of conflictual power relations."

(https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/290382/1/9781003805588.pdf)



==[[Fetish Value]]==

S.A. Hamed and Barry K. Gils:

"In this book, we introduce the term ‘fetish value’ to distinguish our conception of value from that of classical political economy and its Marxian critique, encompassing Marx’s idea of (commodity) value but extending beyond it, as
we will elaborate. Fetish value should not be confused with Marx’s ‘fictitious
value’ that refers to ‘fictitious capital’ as its embodiment versus ‘real value’
embodied in productive capital. While keeping the notion of value within the
contours of production relations, David Harvey instead prefers the notion of
‘anti-value’ (Harvey, 2018b). To avoid confusion, we have chosen to use the
terms ‘fetish value’ (not to be confused with Baudrillard’s concept either) and
‘true value’ instead."

(https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/290382/1/9781003805588.pdf)


==The [[Four Fundamental Categories of Commons That Create True Value]]==

S.A. Hamed and Barry K. Gils:

"Following an Aristotelian fourfold model of causality (i.e., the efficient,
material, formal, and final causes), we consider four irreducible categories as
the ‘fundamental commons’ that (only when) together cause true value: 

(1) Creativity as the ‘efficient’ commoning cause of true value, comprising (more
than) humans’ creative capacities to conscientiously achieve and sustain selffulfilling levels of collective living in balanced coexistence with the (rest of the) life-domain; 

(2) Liveability as the ‘material’ commoning cause, consisting
of the material and immaterial substances, components and inputs necessary
for producing true value. These sources evolve naturally through self-sustaining, restorative, and regenerative practices under shared stewardship and collective decision-making across socio-ecological networks of communal life;

(3) Conviviality as the ‘formal’ commoning cause entailing deep interdependence among (more than) human populations, pluriversality of their modes of living and caring, and their communal solidarity inclusive of non-humans,
or in other words, the convivial modes of ‘living well together’ (well-living,
buen vivir) through (and despite) frictions, tension, disputes, and diversities;
and finally; 

(4) Alterity as the ‘final’ commoning cause of true value, such
as organized prefigurative practices and subjectivities (imaginative, symbolic,
proactivist) essential for transcending the dominant hierarchical structures and
for actualizing rightful ideals, moralities, dreams, more-than-human liberation,
purposeful ‘well-living,’ and a ‘free life.’ "

(https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/290382/1/9781003805588.pdf)


[[Category:P2P_Accounting]]
[[Category:P2P_Theory]]
[[Category:Commons_Economics]]
[[Category:Books]]