Thanks for some further consideration! However, I do have a few things to say…
I’d say both adds to the value of the commodity being advertised and the value of the commodity advertisement itself. As such advertisement isn’t just not useless, but actually quite essential…
You do have a wonderful point about advertisements being necessary for commodity production. However, it almost feels as if I were to delve into philosophical idealism when agreeing to the idea of continuously more distant labor that creates value for an increasingly abstract commodity.
I would be reluctant to agree that advertisers bring value to commodities they make advertisements about. It seems more as if advertisements are commodities themselves that have their use-values realized when viewing said advertisement, and the ability to advertise is exchanged by host websites, radio waves, television, or even not viewing ads with a premium on websites.
Honestly, I’d avoid discussions around use-value with people like the one you were talking to. In my experience you don’t ever really get to anything, because you mostly just end up discussing semantics and terminology.
Yeah, unfortunately, I am arguing with a relative of mine(who is not Marxist but knows I am), and I have foolishly used many Marxist terms with either no or poor elaboration. They have even unironically told me, “We need more diverse oppressors!!!”
Why should we even make such a broad categorization [to advertisers and the labor aristocracy]?
We shouldn’t. I have had poor experiences with people working in advertising, so that’s coming out a little bit, I suppose… It’s certainly a stretch to even consider categorizing all advertisers in the labor aristocracy.
But anyway, I pretty much agree with most of what you have said. Great analysis!
I hope this image speaks for itself. They admit to not reading books, and they gain a following by making absurd takes.