"Labor" and "Value" -- Can [Dushulang] and Others Really Not Even Understand the Relationship Between the Two?

[Dushulang] asks: "Value itself is determined by labor, so how can it be turned around and used to measure labor? This is a classic 'circular definition.'" From this question alone it's clear that [Dushulang] and others can't even understand the most basic Marxian categories of labor and value, yet still dare to discuss Marx. I truly don't know how to describe them!

"Labor determines value" is not an abstract a priori premise. All of Marx's categories are historical. No category is a priori determined. The emergence of the value category is closely tied to the historical period of capitalism and did not fall from the sky. Before and after the historical period of capitalism, the value category does not exist. All categories in Marx's theory have birth, development, and extinction.

The labor category emerged before the value category. The emergence of the value category is the result of the historical development of the labor category, corresponding to the fact that with the historical evolution of the labor category, the historical period of capitalism appeared, and consequently the value category emerged. The emergence of the value category was determined by the historical evolution of the labor category. This is the first layer of meaning of "labor determines value."

Similarly, with the historical evolution of the labor category, the value category ultimately expands and eventually completes its history and perishes. All of this too is determined by the historical evolution of the labor category. That is, the birth, development, and extinction of the value category are all determined by the historical evolution of the labor category. This is the second layer of meaning of "labor determines value."

The labor category is closely related to the relations of production in society. The value category is closely related to the exchange relations of capitalism. Relations of production determine exchange relations. This is the third layer of meaning of the labor category determining the value category.

Without understanding these three layers of meaning, one fundamentally doesn't understand the Marxian proposition "labor determines value." And when the value category emerges under capitalist historical conditions, it turns around and becomes the tool for measuring and gauging the labor category. This precisely reflects one of capitalism's profound contradictions, which Marx once discussed using the category of "alienation." One could say this: labor being measured by value is capitalism's most core contradiction, its greatest alienation. That is, it is the historical evolution of the labor category that determined the birth, development, and extinction of the value category, yet under capitalist conditions the value category is used to measure the labor category. For example, value is used to gauge the labor-power commodity, which is the specific form of the labor category under capitalist historical conditions. It's like a mother giving birth to a child, only to make the child's standards her own standards, becoming the child's slave, and eventually the child even devours the mother. This is the true face of capitalism.

Only by deeply understanding the meanings of labor and value can one truly understand the true face of capitalism. Marx's logical relationships here are very clear. Marx's theory is a rigorous system. Please do not comment on it carelessly!