Revealing the Twofold Character of Labour, Analyzing the Forms of Value, and Critiquing Fetishism: Logical Progression and Dialectics of the “Commodities” Chapter in Capital
Cui Chenxi, Liu Zhaofeng
School of Marxism, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310058, China
Abstract：In order to respond to the discussions concerning the relationship between abstract labour and the value form, the value substance and the value form, the value form and the nature of fetishism, exchange value and the value form, as well as the relationship between Marx’s analysis of the value form and his theory of the critique of fetishism, and to present the rich connotations of Marx’s dialectics, it is necessary to analyze the logical structure of the “Commodities” chapter in Capital.By inquiring into the sameness within the difference of various commodities, Marx reveals the twofold character of the labour embodied in commodities. In Capital, Marx takes the commodity as the starting point for his exposition and analysis. Labour as concrete labour is difference (qualitative distinctions), while labour as abstract labour is sameness (quantitative variations without qualitative distinctions); the difference in use value arises from the difference in concrete labour, whereas the sameness in exchange value arises from the sameness of abstract labour embodied therein. The response to the inquiry into the sameness within difference discusses value substance only in the sense of abstract labour (general), without yet addressing how labour is manifested as value, and therefore still cannot explain the specificity of the commodity.Further analysis of the value form addresses how labour, as abstract labour, is manifested as value. Marx proposes the roundabout way of value manifestation, which is the key to grasping the theory of the value form. The value of one commodity is expressed by the use value of another. This unique, materialized, and indirect form of abstract human labour’s expression is the value form. This does not yet explain what kind of labour it is that creates value, and why it does so, nor does it distinguish between commodities and non-commodities.Finally, through the critique of fetishism, the question of what kind of labour it is that creates value, and why it does so is addressed, and on this basis, the historicity of labour manifesting as value is revealed, along with a critique of the fetishistic conception held by bourgeois economists who eternalize value. Once commodities appear as commodities, or once labour products possess the value form, they acquire a mysterious character. Only by placing the value form within a specific social formation and examining it from a historically transient perspective can a clear critical stance on fetishism be achieved.The logical progression of Marx’s analysis of the commodity contains a rich and profound dialectic: in terms of the relationship between phenomenon and essence, the dialectic in the analysis of the commodity in Capital examines the value form (phenomenon) of abstract labour as the substance (essence). In terms of the relationship between content and form, it explores the combination and separation of the material content of production and its specific social form. In terms of revealing the historicity and temporality of the commodity, the dialectic in the analysis of the commodity in Capital is a historical dialectic, embodying a historical consciousness.The dialectic in Marx’s analysis of the commodity is a constructive dialectic, rich in historical content and characterized by concreteness. Only by employing a dialectical mode of thinking and carefully analyzing the “inverted” world of commodities can we truly grasp the brilliance of Marx’s dialectic.
崔晨茜, 刘召峰. 劳动二重性揭示、价值形式分析、拜物教批判[J]. 浙江大学学报(人文社会科学版), 2026, 56(3): 82-91.
Cui Chenxi, Liu Zhaofeng. Revealing the Twofold Character of Labour, Analyzing the Forms of Value, and Critiquing Fetishism: Logical Progression and Dialectics of the “Commodities” Chapter in Capital. JOURNAL OF ZHEJIANG UNIVERSITY, 2026, 56(3): 82-91.
2026, Vol. 56 
