| In this thesis, I tried to show that the Marxist theory of surplus value has not been rigorously established. Unquestionably and anonymously it has been accepted that the theory of surplus value was the most essential achievement of Karl Marx. According to Marx, the theory of surplus value provides the material content of the antagonistic conflict between the bourgeoisie and the proletariat. Therefore, the basic structure of Marxism is founded upon the theory of surplus value. My critique states that the theory of surplus value was mistaken in its derivation of all economic values from labor-power, essentially from the proletariat, because the natural sciences, engineering, and the development of organizational also capacity create economic values, yet these do not originate from the proletariat. This means that Marx, who inherited the notion of Master/slave dialectic from Hegel, did not evaluate the importance of the intellectual labor in the totality of human praxis. The critique of surplus value in Marxism leads one also to analyze the other categories of Marxism such as capital, labor, and the bourgeoisie. A survey of these concepts shows that any critique of the theory of surplus value would thus lead to criticism of the other dimensions of Marxism. First of all, if the theory of surplus value cannot be defended as it is in Das Kapital , then the theory of antagonistic class conflict between the bourgeoisie and the proletariat cannot be framed as it is in the theory. The Marxist theory of revolution would loose its material basis. The explanation of ideological structure of society based on the antagonistic class conflicts must be rejected. |
