Main Critical Comments Regarding A. Emmanuel’s Theory of Unequal Exchange

Introduction. Contemporary challenges of globalization and increasing economic inequality make critique theory of unequal exchange relevant. Analyzing its limitations helps to better understand the mechanisms of international relations and contributes to the development of more accurate and fair models of economic interaction amidst ongoing changes. Materials and Methods. The study employs conceptual, historical, logical, and critical methods. These approaches allow for analyzing concepts of value, tracing historical reasons for global price differences, illustrating mechanisms of value formation, and critically assessing modern research. Results. This study critiques the theory of unequal exchange, revealing its fundamental flaw: the equivalence of one hour of labor to another across different countries, without considering the differences in socially necessary energy invested in the reproduction of labor power. The study shows that international price disparities stem from monetary distortions resulting from colonial plunder and from imbalances in the reproduction of labor power. In this context, it proposes adopting the Necessary Calorie (N.C) as a material measure of value, as it reflects the living and embodied human energy inherent in labor power. Under this measure, exchanges governed by the law of value are fair; what appears as unequal exchange is, in fact, the result of distortions in the monetary expression of value and the leakage of surplus value. Labor-hour-based measures misrepresent value and may lead to misleading calculations regarding the scale of global exploitation. The study further shows how dependency, technological monopoly, and the lack of control over the reproduction of social labor continually impose a transfer of value from the underdeveloped parts of the global capitalist system to its advanced parts. Conclusion. The author concludes that unequal exchange is not a violation of the law of value, but arises from distortions in the monetary expression of value caused by historical and global asymmetries. Differences in social production costs and uneven development of the world explain the emergence of inequality, rather than the fundamental failure of this law.