Bourgeois – bureaucrat assumption of power and transformation of labour power into a commodity and these Bourgeois – bureaucrats accumulating-consuming surplus-labour under restored capitalism is a well-known Titoite-Trot approach to the “defeat of revolution” and these “defeat of revolution theories” of the Trots are liberally used by the theories of restoration of capitalism we have mentioned before.
Let us take a good look at that issue for after all Trots were and are the vanguards of the reactionary bourgeoisie!
ECONOMIC STRUCTURE OF SOCIETY
Production forms the basis in the economic structure of the society. Its movement has its own laws and rules.
In order for products (means of production and means of consumption) to be exchanged (trade of products), it is clear that products must first be produced by different producers. Products must first be produced so that they can then be exchanged. There can be no exchange without production. Exchange (trade in products) is therefore a function of production, a product of it. Therefore, it falls into the category of reflection. Exchange (product trade) is a reflection of production, its first reflection. It is the first reflection.
Exchange (trade in products) is therefore strictly dependent on production. It couldn't have happened without production. But once it emerges, it also attains its own relatively independent laws and rules
In this context, production and exchange have a course of action that affects each other. Developments in production directly affect exchange. But developments in exchange also affect production in one way or another.
The process of exchange (trade in products) gives rise to money in its development, which is dependent on production. The main task of money is to be equivalent: products that are the product of different types of concrete labour (tailoring, blacksmithing, etc.) are also carriers of the abstract labour contained in all these different types of concrete labour (the amount of labour time required to produce the product). Every product is a product of certain amount of abstract labour. In the process of exchange, products of different types of concrete labour are equated with one another on the basis of the amount of (socially necessary) abstract labour they contain. They are equated and exchanged with each other according to the amount of socially necessary labour time spent on their production.
This process was initially done on the basis of equating different products to each other during the period when the exchange was in the form of barter. Each individual in the trade was the owner of this or that product, both as a buyer and a seller, and products were exchanged in certain quantities based on the amount of abstract labour they contained. A common feature of all products in this period is that they are all interchangeable. In this period, it is their common feature that all products can be exchanged with each other.
The process of exchange in its development has given rise to a particular product, money, which represents the amount of abstract labour in the products. Money has gathered the feature of being exchangeable with all products within itself and has monopolized this feature. The ability to be exchanged for all products has been monopolized by money. Thus, all other products have lost their ability of being exchangeable with other products, they have lost this quality.
The loss of a common feature in the relationship between two things by one side of the relationship and its collection only in the other side of the relationship reveals that this relationship is an antagonist-hostile relationship. Opposites that emerge under these conditions are called antagonists-irreconcilable opposites-enemies. This relationship that emerges between money and all other products during the development of exchange is an antagonistic one.
Once money has appeared, its position changes depending on developments in production and exchange. Money, which was originally a simple medium of exchange, in its development transforms, for example into capital (capital), and as an important development nowadays, a sphere of money exchange (money trade) emerges, where money itself is exchanged for money. For the field of product exchange (product trade), this, that is money exchange, is its primary reflection because there can be no money without exchange of goods, money is a product of it, of product exchange. The sphere of money exchange (money trade, not commodity trade) in which money itself is exchanged is the first reflection of exchange (product trade), and the second reflection of the production sphere. The sphere of money trading is the reflection of the reflection of the sphere of production.
Exchange of money (money trade) is therefore strictly dependent on production and exchange of products (trade). Without these it (money trade, could not have been. But once currency exchange (money trade) has emerged, it has its own relatively independent laws and rules.
In this context, production and exchange (trade in products) and exchange of money (trade in money) have a mode of action that affects each other. Developments in production affect exchange (product trade) directly, and money exchange (currency trade) both directly and through their effects on exchange (product trade). But developments in exchange (both in commodity trade and money trade) also affect production in one way or another. And likewise, developments in product exchange (product trade) affect developments in money exchange (currency trade). And vice versa.
The money trade has reached enormous dimensions where it is today and has produced many products (under the name of financial products) itself consisting of money. If money trade is a sphere that is very much disconnected from the production sphere, these 'products' (for example, 'futures') that emerged in the sphere of money trading are almost completely cut off from production. Money itself is drifting towards a position which is completely cut off from production and trade in products (crypto money). A money trading structuring which has reached enormous dimensions has emerged, which the financial oligarchy uses to control the world. This structure is a completely parasitic structure. The last crisis (2008) that this financial trade sphere developed and caused within itself and its effects on both product trade and production are well known. Today, when talking about a new economic crisis, the talk is again of financial crisis, the crisis in the field of money trading. Lenin's determination that commodity production started with usury and is progressing towards its end with a worldwide usury has reached such a stage that it is visible for all to see.
So we have seen that if there is no production of goods, there is no trade in goods; if there is no trade in goods there is no money and if there is no money there is no trade in money. Thus the very basis of our economic life is the production of goods.
What then is production?
5.PHYSICAL-DIRECT FORM OF CALCULATING LABOUR TIME NEEDED TO PRODUCE GOODS-THE PRODUCTS!
Every product has, deposited in them, some labour time spent to produce them. In fact they can become products only if labour is spent on their production-otherwise they are products of nature, and if they are to be used by men, they must be taken off the nature and thus labour must be spent on them.
Let us for now look in to how the labour time spent in production is to be calculated.
There are two forms of doing this. One is monetary, that is indirectly while the other is physically, that is directly.
We shall leave the indirect method to one side. For only looking at the physical, direct form of calculating labour time spent in production can we understand the labour time spent in production of products. Understanding this is also necessary to the understanding of how to get rid of money and commodity production. And the crises of capitalism!
This process is most clearly explained in “The Capital”, right at the beginning. But we shall take a cursory look at a particular product and this way we can see not only how the labour time spent in its production can be calculated directly, but also see how far the development of socialisation of production process has progressed these days.
Since we have all sorts of “smart people” such as Trotskyites and Anarchists and since even they use this product and since it is called “smart” let us have a look at the “smart phone”!
A Smart phone has many parts. Not all but some of these are batteries, micro-chips, camera, software, and glass in the front, metal/plastic in casing….For batteries you need lithium and others and somebody to produce the batteries. And somebody need to produce lithium etc. so that the battery can be produced. For micro-chips you need purified silica; gold etc. and somebody to produce the micro-chips. And somebody to produce the purified silica and gold and etc. For cameras you need lenses and others and somebody to produce the camera. And somebody need to produce lenses etc. so that the cameras can be produced. And of course somebody need to write the software that will run the smart phone. To charge the battery you need electricity. Somebody need to produce the electricity. To produce the electricity you need a power station. Somebody need to produce the power station. If the power station uses gas/oil/coal somebody need to produce these. To produce these somebody need to mine them. To mine them somebody should produce mining equipment. And the gas/oil/coal need to be transported to the power station. For transportation gas and oil pipes or tankers need to be produced. The oil etc., need to be transported to refineries for processing. Somebody need to build the refineries. And transport their products to the power stations. To build the power station and refineries and mines and means of transportation for the oil etc., one needs steel, concrete, etc. One may need roads. For the electricity to arrive at home of the smart Trot and Anarchist, one needs electricity cables all the way from the power station and inside the home, and a charger for the smart phone and cabling and connections to connect the smart phone to electricity at home-of the smart Trot and Anarchist. Furthermore, for this smart phone to talk to other smart phones and to all sorts of “service providers” one need satellites and masts and if they are to use the internet not directly but through the wi-fi at home, one needs internet connection at home. For the satellites one needs many parts and someone to produce them, and someone to produce rockets to send them to space….Of course somebody has to put the different parts of the smart phone together so that they do become a smart phone and these days somebody has to buy them in bulk and sell them to the smart Trot and Anarchist individually-and they might as well provide servicing for the smart phone in case the smart Trot and Anarchist damages it. And of course they have to provide the “connection” of the smart phone to the system for the smart Trot and Anarchist!
One could carry on and on!
Thus this simple smart phone is in fact a very much a social product. A very social product indeed. If one part of the production and servicing system fails, smart phone is no more and even if it is, it is of no use and is thus not a smart phone but a nice looking thing! If you like the way they look that is!
What have already mentioned that all these have to be produced by someone!
In other words somebody must spend a certain kind of labour for a certain amount of time!
For all these processes, for all these products that one need to produce and use the smart phone, there must be working people who have the ability to produce all these products. They must have the ability for these different kinds of labour to perform these different kinds of labours and thus to produce these products. They must also spent time performing these different kinds of labour to produce these products. Even at these days of micro-chips, at these times of “robots” and automated production, nothing can be done without the working people’s ability to perform different kinds of labour and them labouring certain amount of time using this ability they have to produce all those different things mentioned above.
It is they who produce the power station and then use it to produce electricity, it is they who distribute this electricity to different factories, mines etc. so that all other needed products and thus the smart phone can be produced, it is they who distribute this electricity to different homes so that smart phone can be charged. It is they who produce the satellites and rockets and the masts so that the signals can be transformed all around the world and be received by the smart phone. It is they with their ability to perform different kinds of labour and perform it for a certain time that makes the smart phone able to perform its functions!
Clearly, just as every power station represent certain amount of labour time spent in its production, so does every different kind of labour represent a certain amount of time spent in its production. Thus every kind of labour represent different intensity of labour, they are all different and every second of different kinds of labour represent different amount of time of labour spent. When labour time spent in production of this and that this must be taken into account. If it is not taken into account, the principle of equality would not be applied. And until we achieve plenty, and thus pass into using the principle of from each according to his ability to each according to his needs we need to apply this principle consistently! We shall come to that for the benefit of our smart Trots and Anarchists.
Going back to the calculation of labour time needed to produce a product in general to produce (and use) the smart phones, we need to know labour time spent in the production of each product, and there are many of these as pointed above. So much so that we not only need the knowledge of how much time was spent during the production of a product, say at a factory, we need to know how much labour time was spent in the production of the factory, raw materials etc. etc. too.
Is this possible?
First of all under capitalist conditions each process of production in each factory is very much planned, and thus it is very much timed. Each different process needed in the factory to produce the end product is planned so that not only the different kinds of labour needed at each stage of production but also the labour time to be spent using that kind of labour is timed. Otherwise the factory could not function properly. But while production in the factory is planned, in the wider society competition reigns supreme, that is it is not planned. Under monopoly capitalist conditions the planning in the factory is carried further, monopolies who dominate different processes (say from extracting oil, to transporting the oil to refineries and then transporting the end products of refineries to different factories or individuals (for example petrol for individual car transportation) is also planned and thus different kinds of labour needed for all these interrelated activities and the amount of different kinds of labour needed are also known to the monopolies who control all these interconnected process of production and sale. So planning of production in the wider society creeps in, but is not completed. Planning in the wider society, and indeed internationally, by the monopolies, exists side by side with the competition but this time amongst the monopolies, thus never assume the form of planning of all the interrelated production processes, of the whole social production.
HIGHER FORM OF SOCIETY
This development in the activities of monopolies, by itself, points to the possibility and nay more to the necessity of planning all production in the wider society as a whole. To a higher stage of society! To socialism!
It is thus that under socialism, under the rule of the proletarians we can and easily achieve the planning of all production.
What is needed for this is a knowledge of all the productive capacities of the society as a whole, thus all the different kinds of labour the society possesses and needs, as well as a knowledge of amount of labour time needed of each kind of labour to produce each product, and thus the whole, annual, products of the society as a whole. Thus the planning of further increases in the productive capacity of the whole socialist society-which calls for the creation of working people who can perform new kinds of labour and labour time needed by them to operate all the increased means of labour.
With computerisation of production and distribution this process of calculating the labour time deposited in each product becomes automated- this is the basis of control of all that is produced and consumed that Lenin talks-this becomes automated.
“the Communist principle of distribution which will be realised in the form of a direct accounting of the expenditure of labour in terms of labour time, when there will be no place for commodity circulation.” N. Smolin, Questions of Economics, Moscow, No. 1, 1953; Communist Review, London, September and October 1953; Transcribed by George Gruenthal)ş Revolutionary Democracy Vol. XIII, No. 1, April 2007