The app for independent voices
Marx labor theory of value (LTV) leads to the conclusion that trade is inherently exploitative. According to the LTV, a good’s value is objectively determined by the amount of socially necessary labor required to produce it.
If value is objective rather than subjective (as most economists today believe), then trade is either irrational or fraudulent. Suppose, for example, that two different products have objectively determinable values. There are two possibilities:
1. One good is more valuable than the other
2. The two are of equal value
In the first case, a trade would make no sense — who would willingly exchange a good of greater value for one of lesser value? Such a trade could occur only if one party is cheated. In the second case, trade is also unlikely since it would leave neither party better off and wouldn’t justify the transaction costs involved.
If people will not trade goods of unequal value and have no reason to trade goods of equal value, then any exchange that does occur likely involves fraud. Marx, therefore, envisioned a world in which trade would be abolished and replaced by centrally planned distribution.
Marx’s claims require the belief that the millions of people who had engaged in voluntary trade over millennia were deluded — foolishly making themselves worse off. He, with his superior insight, proposed to correct this by forcibly depriving people of the freedom to decide how to dispose of their own property.
The fact that trade had persisted for millennia didn’t cause Marx to reconsider his theory. Because he knew he was right, he concluded that people were irrational — and that enlightened individuals like himself needed to make their decisions for them.
.
Update:
I revised this post per an objection by John Ruf who correctly pointed out that Marx didn’t explicitly declare that trade was exploitive (a link to our exchange is provided below). The fact remains that Marx’s Labor Theory of Value logically leads to the conclusion that exchange is exploitive.