/lit/ - Literature

>>21400935
>you're free to provide examples of those useless things
See pic related

>use value is already there without Marxism
Correct, but the point is that Marxism exalts it in its servitude to social relations. It is not a question of what exists but what is being exalted.

>the problem is with its inversion, with people serving the object, the product of labour, when this product has the form of capital. but this is precisely what's abolished by communism
under communism people are already serving the object of social relations in their totality. It doesn’t need to take the form of capital. The totality of social relations is already the product of our labour. It is not a subject, we are not serving ourselves as ends in ourselves, we are subjects in servitude to the object that is the totality of social relations.

>if its produced explicitly with the intention not to be used
There is a difference between something being produced with the intention of not being used, and producing something useless. And nothing is produced with the intention of not being used, but there is plenty that is produced which is useless.

>if it were no more useful to people if they produced and then wasted it vs if they didn't, then they wouldn't bother doing it in the first place.
Precisely, see above. Production for the sake of waste doesn’t happen, but wasteful production happens all the time.