The following is a translation by Robin Terence Halpin of a commentary by people from around GegenStandpunkt.

Subject: The labour-process is subsumed under the valorisation process, the latter being the condition of the former and the means by which it operates. In this way the moments of the labour process become component parts of the valorisation process. As such they are of interest only insofar as they contribute to valorisation. The topic here is what function they have for the increase in the capital advanced.

Constant Capital

Creation and preservation of value unified in the same labour-process …

… is the result of the double character of labour …

The labourer adds fresh value to the of his labour…on the other hand…The value of the means of production is therefore preserved…it is plain that this two-fold nature of the result can be explained only by the two-fold nature of his labour.

… which as concrete, useful labour transfers the value of the means of production to the new product, and indeed precisely for the reason that this labour only makes products through purposive activity, because the particular precursor products are necessary component parts of the end product:

Hence, the labourer preserves the values of the consumed means of production … not by virtue of his additional labour, abstractedly considered, but by virtue of the particular useful character of that labour …

… and which as abstract labour adds new value to the product.

Consequently, we see, first, that the addition of new value takes place by virtue of his labour being spinning in particular, or joinering in particular, but because it is labour in the abstract…

Transfer of value as gratuitous gift

He is unable to add new labour, to create new value, without at the same time preserving old values,… The property therefore which labour-power in action, living labour, possesses of preserving value, at the same time that it adds it, is a gift of Nature which costs the labourer nothing, but which is very advantageous to the capitalist inasmuch as it preserves the existing value of his capital.

Changes in value brought about by changes in productivity reveal themselves in, …

… that the two properties of labour, by virtue of which it is enabled in one case to preserve value, and in the other create value, are essentially different.

Raising the productivity of living labour increases the transferred value per unit of time, while correspondingly less labour that creates new value is absorbed.

With changes in the value of the objective moments of the labour process the transferred value also changes (the single commodity as average of its kind), whereas the newly created value remains untouched.

Differentiation of the means of production in respect of the valorisation process

The objective factors (=means of production) of the valorisation process go into the value of the product differently according to their role in the labour process. Their function of making a contribution to forming the product is here related to value. It is through concrete labour that they are confirmed as a necessary contribution. The importance of their being necessary is illustrated by the opposite case: the value that they have as a result of the labour process from which they come is lost if they are not used appropriately.

Hence it follows that in the labour process the means of production transfer their value to the product only so far as along with their use-value they lose also their exchange-value. They give up to the product that value alone which they themselves lose as means of production. But in this respect the material factors of the labour process do not all behave alike.

Raw materials and auxiliaries These enter entirely with their use-value and also with their value into the new value of the product.

Means of labour (depreciation) Release their value only according to their wear and tear in proportion to their total operational period.

It is thus strikingly clear, that means of production never transfer more value to the product than they themselves lose during the labour-process by the destruction of their own use-value. (Ehrbar 1375)… Thus it appears, that one factor of the labour-process, a means of production, continually enters as a whole into that process, while it enters into the process of the formation of value by fractions only. The difference between the two processes is here reflected in their material factors, by the same instrument of production taking part as a whole in the labour-process, while at the same time as an element in the formation of value, it enters only by fractions.

What is fundamentally true of all objective factors is that they …

… can never add more value to the product than they themselves possess independently of the process in which they assist.

Conclusion

That part of capital then, which is represented by the means of production, by raw material, auxiliary material and the instruments of labour does not, in the process of production, undergo any quantitative alteration of value. I therefore call it the constant part of capital, or, more shortly, constant capital.

Incidentally, the value of the means of production, unlike that of living labour is not reproduced, since:

As regards the means of production, what is really consumed is their use-value, and the consumption of this use-value by labour results in the product. There is no consumption of their value, and it would therefore be inaccurate to say that it is reproduced.

Looked at from the standpoint of value both appear as component parts of value, the difference being merely quantitative. The point is precisely their different quality: the transfer of dead labour and the absorption of living labour.

Variable Capital

In contrast the subjective factor of the labour-process, the active labour power is reproduced:

It is otherwise with the subjective factor of the labour-process,… But [it is] really reproduced, unlike the value of the means of production, which only seems reproduced. The replacement of one value by another is here mediated by the creation of new value.

The significance of labour-power for valorisation: its expenditure creates value. I the place of value and representing it here, steps productive power, the consumption of use-value. This manufactures new value, the value-component of the product that is itself manufactured by the labour-process. This is a totally different relation than with the objective factors whose value is preserved, because their use-value was necessary for the creation of new products. Labour-power, on the contrary, creates new value which has nothing to do with the value of these objective factors. In this way labour-power reproduces its own value: a part of the new value produced serves for the reproduction of the capital laid out for the purchase of labour-power. Not only that:

On the other hand, that part of capital represented by labour-power, does, in the process of production, undergo an alteration of value. It both reproduces the equivalent of its own value, and also produces an excess, a surplus-value, which may itself vary, may be more or less according to circumstances. This part of capital is continually being transformed from a constant into a variable magnitude. I therefore call it the variable part of capital, or, shortly, variable capital.

That is the point of this part of the capital advanced: it does not only reproduce its own equivalent, but also an excess above and beyond that, surplus-value.

Comment

No capitalist knows of the difference between constant and variable capital an yet, however, they act according to it in that they apply it, for instance in their unit cost calculations: with the depreciation dates of machines that will have been amortised after so and so many years. Their performance is fixed. It stands out that with variable capital the performance is not yet fixed upon purchase. The capitalist can make it work more intensively and if necessary make it redundant. He uses this means when he sets up the technical organisation for which he spares himself no cost if it is worth it at first sight. When he seeks to lower unit costs through purchasing new machinery, this difference strikes him in that he incurs costs that save him costs.

Ideology

Theory of the Factors of Production As if the different moments of the valorisation processes of capital were natural elements of production.