Sign in

efrain

@efrain.bsky.social
333 followers 199 following 285 posts

Abolitionist. Decolonialist. Anti-imperialist. Communist ☭ Demisexual and Polysexual. Nonbinary (they/him). AuDHD. On the pedagogical front of the real movement.

PostsRepliesMedia
efrain @efrain.bsky.social · 09/05/2026
If by stuns you mean completely underwhelms in the most milquetoast beige and white outfit possible, accompanied by the worst hairstyle possible, then sure.
050
efrain @efrain.bsky.social · 09/05/2026
You’re so pretty 😸
140
Reposted by efrain
Ahhhhh @nerdjpg.com · 26/03/2026
www.marxists.org/archive/leni...
marxists.org
Lenin: Leo Tolstoy as the Mirror of the Russian Revolution
Leo Tolstoy as the Mirror of the Russian Revolution
372
Reposted by efrain
chimera @chimeraxmachina.bsky.social · 25/08/2025
Colonialism never disappeared. We have to fight it, even if all we have are stones or an Expo marker.
0115
Reposted by efrain
Michael @therightarticle.bsky.social · 14/04/2024
“Displaced Palestinians targeted during attempt to return to northern Gaza” Israeli soldiers have opened fire on Palestinians in Gaza City who were attempting to return to their homes in the north of the strip. www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yj7Ur9hbIUk
051
efrain @efrain.bsky.social · 14/04/2024
Labor is not just a cost of production; it is the substance of value itself, irrespective of the subjective assessments of individuals. Therefore, Marx's theory of value remains robust and relevant in understanding the dynamics of capitalist society.
0324
efrain @efrain.bsky.social · 14/04/2024
The assertion that labor only has intrinsic value when it has extrinsic value overlooks the dialectical relationship between labor and the means of production within capitalism.
111
efrain @efrain.bsky.social · 14/04/2024
The value of labor power is determined by the socially necessary labor time required for its reproduction, including the provision of the means of subsistence for the worker and their family.
110
efrain @efrain.bsky.social · 14/04/2024
Also, Marx distinguishes between labor power, the capacity to work, and labor itself, the actual expenditure of that capacity.
110
efrain @efrain.bsky.social · 14/04/2024
Labor, in Marx’s analysis, possesses intrinsic value precisely because it is the fundamental activity through which society reproduces itself. It is not merely a subjective assessment but a recognition of the essential role labor plays in the creation of value within a capitalist economy.
120
efrain @efrain.bsky.social · 14/04/2024
Marx's conception of labor as the source of value is not subjective but rather rooted in the objective conditions of capitalist society.
130
efrain @efrain.bsky.social · 14/04/2024
Marx's theory of value goes beyond a mere calculation of the labor required to produce a commodity. It delves into the social relations and structures that underpin the capitalist mode of production.
110
efrain @efrain.bsky.social · 14/04/2024
Respectfully, I’ve noticed that your responses are consistently a reflection of your own assumptions and misunderstandings of Marx’s work rather than Marx’s claims or analyses. Simplifying it to labor is YOUR incorrectly projected claim to Marx. I’d ask that you provide direct quotes w/ your claims.
110
efrain @efrain.bsky.social · 02/04/2024
Rather, it provides a framework for understanding the social and economic dynamics of capitalist production relations, wherein the extraction of surplus value from labor is a defining characteristic of capitalist exploitation.
030
efrain @efrain.bsky.social · 02/04/2024
Therefore, the labor theory of value does not posit labor as objectively the cost or value of a good or service in isolation, nor does it inherently lead to the belief that exploitation is objectively occurring.
220
efrain @efrain.bsky.social · 02/04/2024
"Labour-power, however, becomes a commodity only under specific historical conditions...The value of labour-power is determined, as in the case of every other commodity, by the labour-time necessary for the production, and consequently also the reproduction, of this specific article."
130
efrain @efrain.bsky.social · 02/04/2024
Also, Marx explicitly distinguishes between labor as a source of value and labor as a commodity within capitalist relations of production. He explains:
120
efrain @efrain.bsky.social · 02/04/2024
Marx himself addressed this misconception: "The value of commodities is determined by the socially necessary labour time embodied in them, and this, under the conditions of production normal for a given society, is regulated by the socially average intensity of labour." - Marx, "Capital, Vol I"
120
efrain @efrain.bsky.social · 02/04/2024
However, this does not imply that labor itself possesses an objective or intrinsic value outside of its social context within capitalist society.
130
efrain @efrain.bsky.social · 02/04/2024
Marx's labor theory of value is based on the premise that the value of a commodity is determined by the amount of socially necessary labor time required for its production.
130
efrain @efrain.bsky.social · 02/04/2024
This misinterprets the principles of the labor theory of value as expounded by Marx. In Marxist theory, the labor theory of value does not assert an extrinsic or inherent value of labor itself, but rather it seeks to understand the social relations embedded within the capitalist mode of production.
130
efrain @efrain.bsky.social · 13/03/2024
Thanks for the constructive exchange. A rarity on social media for things to not devolve into a match of insults these days!
120
efrain @efrain.bsky.social · 13/03/2024
This is to say that his analysis is based on what could be materially observed, dialectical and historically. No one should stop you from basing your own analysis using a belief in an unobservable phenomenon, but it won’t be very compelling as an analysis. I’m sure you understand that.
120
efrain @efrain.bsky.social · 13/03/2024
By exposing the social relations of production and the unequal distribution of value within capitalist society, the labor theory of value sheds light on the systemic injustices inherent in capitalist production.
020
efrain @efrain.bsky.social · 13/03/2024
So, while the labor theory of value may not capture every aspect of subjective evaluations of labor, it remains a crucial tool for understanding the exploitation of labor under capitalism.
120
efrain @efrain.bsky.social · 13/03/2024
Under capitalism, the value of labor is determined not by its intrinsic worth or the satisfaction it brings to the worker, but by its exchange value in the capitalist market.
110
efrain @efrain.bsky.social · 13/03/2024
Moreover, Marx's labor theory of value acknowledges that the capitalist mode of production distorts the intrinsic value of labor by reducing it to a commodity to be bought and sold on the market.
110
efrain @efrain.bsky.social · 13/03/2024
In a capitalist society, labor is commodified and exchanged for a wage, regardless of whether it is considered pleasant or meaningful by the worker.
130
efrain @efrain.bsky.social · 13/03/2024
Additionally, while individuals may subjectively evaluate their labor differently based on extrinsic or intrinsic factors, Marx's analysis focuses on the social relations of production that shape labor under capitalism.
110
efrain @efrain.bsky.social · 13/03/2024
This objective measure of value exposes the exploitation of labor within capitalist production, where workers are often paid less than the value they create.
120
efrain @efrain.bsky.social · 13/03/2024
For instance, Marx's labor theory of value highlights how the value of commodities is ultimately determined by the socially necessary labor time required for their production.
110
efrain @efrain.bsky.social · 13/03/2024
While it may not fully account for subjective evaluations of labor, it remains a powerful tool for analyzing the exploitation inherent in capitalist production.
120
efrain @efrain.bsky.social · 13/03/2024
The labor theory of value isn't flawed; it provides a critical framework for understanding the fundamental role of labor in the production of value under capitalism.
120
efrain @efrain.bsky.social · 13/03/2024
By examining the specific mode of production and its inherent contradictions, Marx provides a comprehensive framework for understanding the dynamics of social change and class struggle.
020
efrain @efrain.bsky.social · 13/03/2024
So, while scarcity and other factors may influence social organization, Marx's analysis underscores the central role of the forces of production in shaping society.
110
efrain @efrain.bsky.social · 13/03/2024
For example, technological advancements can alter production processes, leading to changes in social organization and class relations.
110
efrain @efrain.bsky.social · 13/03/2024
Marx's analysis emphasizes the dialectical relationship between the forces of production and social relations, with changes in one sphere influencing and shaping the other.
120
efrain @efrain.bsky.social · 13/03/2024
Furthermore, while scarcity may play a role in shaping social organization, it's not the sole determinant, which I’m sure you recognize.
240
efrain @efrain.bsky.social · 13/03/2024
In capitalist society, for example, scarcity is often exacerbated by the dynamics of capitalist accumulation, which prioritize profit over meeting human needs.
120
efrain @efrain.bsky.social · 13/03/2024
Scarcity undoubtedly influences social organization, but Marx's historical materialism goes beyond this simplistic view by examining how social relations and production relations are shaped by the specific mode of production.
110
efrain @efrain.bsky.social · 13/03/2024
The capitalist mode of production, characterized by private ownership of the means of production and the pursuit of profit, creates conditions of exploitation and inequality that profoundly impact social structures and relations.
130
efrain @efrain.bsky.social · 13/03/2024
For instance, Marx's analysis of capitalism in "Capital" emphasizes how the mode of production shapes social organization and relationships.
130
efrain @efrain.bsky.social · 13/03/2024
While it's true that higher levels can influence lower levels in society, Marx's analysis recognizes the complex interplay of various factors, including scarcity and the forces of production.
110
efrain @efrain.bsky.social · 13/03/2024
Instead, it provides a dialectical framework for understanding the multifaceted nature of historical development, incorporating emergent properties and multilevel processes into its analysis.
030
efrain @efrain.bsky.social · 13/03/2024
…while historical materialism highlights the significance of the forces of production in driving social change, it doesn't oversimplify history or neglect other factors.
120
efrain @efrain.bsky.social · 13/03/2024
The emergence of new social formations and institutions reflects the complex interaction of multiple factors, including economic, cultural, and political dynamics.
130
efrain @efrain.bsky.social · 13/03/2024
Moreover, historical materialism doesn't reduce social change to a deterministic process driven solely by economic factors. Marx himself emphasized the role of class struggle, ideological conflicts, and revolutionary agency in shaping historical development.
130
efrain @efrain.bsky.social · 13/03/2024
He recognizes the dialectical relationship between the base (forces and relations of production) and the superstructure (ideology, law, politics), with each influencing and shaping the other.
120
efrain @efrain.bsky.social · 13/03/2024
For instance, Marx's analysis of capitalism in "Capital" acknowledges the complex interplay of economic, social, political, and cultural factors in shaping society.
110
efrain @efrain.bsky.social · 13/03/2024
Historical materialism isn't flawed; it offers a comprehensive framework for understanding social change. While it emphasizes the role of the forces of production, it doesn't neglect other factors or emergent properties in history.
120