I was thinking about the various theories of labor value tonight and figured, I’d toss my hat in the ring on the topic.
The liberal view is easily defined as believing that all labor has or produces value for society, while the conservative view tends to define the value of labor in terms of exchange. What benefit can the individual expect in exchange for this labor? In this understanding “benefit” could be any number of things (monetary remuneration, exchange of goods, decrease in future labor expended, increase in knowledge and thus, increasing your skills and abilities [i.e. increasing the value of your labor]).
Thus, labor expended without benefit – has no value.
In the liberal mind, labor – no matter how useless – holds value and benefit to society. Labor value exists only to benefit the larger society.
The competing ideas of individual benefit versus societal benefit have been the fodder of much sharper minds than this writer, so I won’t enter the fray, except to say that consideration for the individual trumps the society at large, so long as said consideration doesn’t endanger the larger whole or impede on the exercise of any other individual’s natural rights.
Each man should be able to expend his labor in the manner he sees fit and reap the value (benefit) of his labor. No man should be able to take the value of that labor by force.
Labor value is the foundation of personal property, as Locke (John – not Load) believed that the expenditure of labor gave property it’s value – would it not stand that the very labor itself would then be property for an individual to possess and dispose of at his will?
The liberal believes otherwise. The liberal believes that the labor value of the individual is the property of the larger society and seeks to mete out a world in which the individual can keep a portion of their property (labor value) while expending the remaining value to the benefit of the whole. This is further evidenced in the flawed presumption that giving tax breaks (letting people keep their own money) is a government expenditure.
The liberal dictates that the larger whole use it’s monopoly on force to coerce the unrepentant individual to acquiesce to the demands of the majority.
This is social-Democracy. This is the new American Dream™ of the neo-marxist, western democratic socialist, blood-suckers we are fighting.
This is a dangerous ideology because it is so enticing. The initial decline of socialist democracies begins when the minority finally realize that there is no longer a benefit (value) in their labor.
The property they once happily produced, they can now seize through the strong arm tactics of the larger whole (government).
If you trace back the origins of society, you see that the social compact exists to make life easier on the individual through the existence and security of the larger whole.
This building block of human nature is the seed, from which grows (extrapolated, of course) the caustic idea of the larger “social” imperative ultimately supplanting the individual and his right to property – the most basic property being – the right of the individual to the value of his labor.
When property rights are not secured, there is no liberty. There is no individual. There is no hope. The right to property in all of it’s many forms is the strongest bulwark against the tyranny of the majority and must be preserved at all cost.
Marx believed that capitalism exploited laborers to the benefit of those in control of the means of production. He was absolutely right. Marxism, socialism, indentured servitude, and slavery are all forms of capitalism in the broader sense.
They all seek to exploit the value of labor from the laborer to achieve a benefit. The question becomes, who do you believe should reap the benefits of an individual’s labor?
The difference in values which we must articulate and defend is simple. Do you want to exploit the value of your labor or have the government exploit it for you?
Decide now and guard it with all your might. If you don’t, the choice will be made for you, soon enough.Share