By Raya Dunayevslcaya (freddie forest)






~ _r<......



ChIcago, IL eoeoa

News & Letters 36S. Wabash Room 1440


Published by


News and Letters,.Comrn1ffies -------


It was the deep, structural econeaic crisis of 1974-75 that brought forth a new English translatien of Capital, the greatest of Marx's theeretica1 werks. * At the same tiae, it was both the urgency of understanding todaJ's global crisis and the need to answer the vulgarizations contained in the Introduction to that new edition by the Tretskyist-Marxist, Ernest Mandel, that led News and Letters Committees to reproduce, in 1978, the four chapters by Raya Dunayevskaya on all three volumes of Capital that had first appeared in Marxisa and Freedo. in 1957. ** All crises have called upon a new re-examination of Marx's Capital '!hus, the Outline of Capital we are reproducing here was prepared in the mid-1940s, when it had become clear that the totality of the crises which culminated in World War II had ushered in a whole new economic stage -- state-capitalism -- as well as a new stage of revolt, arising within each orbit, against both Russia and the U.S. Although Raya Dunayevskaya did not develop the dialectic in the Outline as deeply as it was later te be develeped in both Marxism and Freedom and PhilosophY and Revolution, we reproduce it here in response te requests from students who wish seriously t. study Marx's work, because it can now be studied together with both the section on Capital froIa Marxisa and Freedom, and the section on "The Adventures of the Commodity as Fetish" from Philosophy and Revolution.
and its historic laws of motion.

It was precisely that new and original Marxian category, "Fetish1SJl of C... odities" which has been made pivotal for our age by the birth of a new generation of revolutionaries and a new Third World, who have demonstrated in life that it is not only the so-called "advanced" countries, but all huaankind which is determined to destroy the false idels that keep us imprisoned under capitalism and begin the creation of a new, human society of freely associated men and wOlRen. -- News and Letters C...ittees August, 1979


Ben Fowkes' translation was published by Penguin Books, London, 1976. It is available also from Vintage Books, New York, 1977. Because the pagination of the quotations from Capital in the original Outline is for the Kerr edition, we have appended a list of comparable pages for the more readily available Vintage/Penguin edition. See Marx's Capital and Toda,y's Global Crisis by Raya Dunayevskaya. Copies of this pamphlet, as well as Marxism and Freedom and PhilosophY and Revolution are available from News & Letters, 28)2 E. Grand Blvd., Detroit, Mich. 48211, See back page ad.




- How To Tea.ch CAF ITAL IIII TROIiUC t res Lecture

1 - The A1~, structure


Scope of CAP TAL I


ejEOT j.CN '11- TEE i'HENO~E1iA OF CAP I TAL Id.lli: TiiE BUYING AL,n SELL n~ OF COMit&ODITIES c Leoture Lecture Lecture ~ECTIC.:;III-ThE 2 - Part 3 - Part 4 - Part I, Chapter 1 I, Chapters 2-3 II 12 15


A: TliE CAPITAL Lecture Leoture Lecture Leoture Lecture
5 6 7 8 -



Part Part Part Part 9 - Part

Chapters 7-9 Chapters 10-11 Chapters 12-14 Chapter 15

19. 23 27 30


B:TnE RE~LT~ OF .TEE CAPITAL!.:T LABORPRCoCESa: The Tra~s ormation of the Value of Labor Power into Wages Lecture 10 - Part VI ~OCIETY 41
46 35


&EOTICN N - THE LA\l OJ' ...OTI~N 0F CA?ITALI~T Leoture L eoture Leoture dECTION V 11 -Part 12 -Part 13 -Part VII, VII, VIII

Chapters 23-24 Cbapt er 25

CONCLUtSION Lecture 14


PRUACE How To Teach CAPITAL It 18 possible to teach CAPITAL in fcurteen lectUres. A few elementary suggesticns will facilitate the orientation of both teacher and pupil. For example, chalk and a blackboarddo a lot to make visual complex fo~ulae. It is easier to remember any fomula when it is written white on black than "hen it is spoken. It aleo becomes a matter of course under these circumstanoes to initial oft-repeated Marxian categories. This is true not only of such ex~ressions as constant capital (c.c.), variable c~pital (v.c.) and· surplus value (s.v.) but even the lengtc.ier and never-abbreviated one, sooially-necessary .labor time (s.n.l.t.). With the exception of the introductory and concluding lectures, questions are appended at the end of each lecture. However, a word of caution 18 necessary •. The question and answer method does not lend itself too well to the study of Part I. The questions, however, can be of help here teo, provided th'e tea.cher is well aware that it is as essential to grasp Marx's dialectic method as it is to comprehend the economic analysis. In fact, unless we get hold of this method of analysis, the analyeis itself cannot be fully understood. It is necessary, tharefore, tv emphasize that if we were to &nswer "use-value and value" tc the question: "What are the characeeristic8 of a commodity?" we simply would not begin to cover the importance of the two-fold' nature of commodities. This is so because the "and" in this case is not so much a conjunction as a counterposition, that is, it is a use-varue on the 9ne hand and a vall,le the otber hand. on
In the use-value and value of a commodi·ty is contained, in germ the Whole contradiction of the capitalist system; it is the reflection cf the class strugg1e itself. It is important, therefore, that along with the questions, the teacher devise key ~entences to this section to help;the student comprehend not merely the answer to the question, but the method of answering. Here is an sxample: The teacher explains that the key sentence for eection 1 of Chanter I is - the two factors of a commodity. use-value and value, are of polllr cont:tast and yet are interdependent. Here too, th·eblaokboard does muoh to mak~ the meaning stick. Written out on the blackboard, this key eentence, extended also to include exchange value, would lOJk like this:
Use value.~
0': c






Chapter I is the most diff icul t sect ion of all of OAP ITAL • Hence, G. lot of work should be put into it. In addition to the outline of the lecture, the questions, the key sentences, attention should be drawn to the examples of historical materialism contained in it. I have appended a partial listing of

them at the end of the questions. Cross references are important both bec811se they inolude various aspeots of the same question, and beoause they help keep the student interested sinoe they give him a bird's dye view of the sections of the book far ahead of the particular one being studied. Cross references are included both within the text of the outline and in some questions .. Three methods of teaohing may be applied thtoughout the course: I. A student is asked to be teaoher'for one session, or II.The class is divided into four sections and eaoh seotion is asked to read a partioular chapter and submit, in written form, two types of questions: ~l) the ktndthe pupil would like to have explained to him or (2) the kind the pup il would ask if he were teaoher. this method should be used tow3.rd the end of each part of the work oovered. The questions should be read out to the olass and. analyzed from two points of view: (1) whether the teacher had made himself ~ derstood by dealing with the ~estions the pupils had in mind, and (2) to compare the different reaotions to the same material by the differen.t s~udents, which generally depend on "'hat previous aoquaintance wita the subjeot eaoh had. III.The material that is to be dealt with in the given lecture is divided up and assigned to various students who are not asked to make a report. HOWever, While the teaoher is del ivaring the lecture, he stops and di-rects questions to the r::tudentsregarding the speCial aSSignments each was to cover. The first lecture is of primary import&lce beoause it does much to decide whether the students wUl remain throughout the course or whether they will drift away. This introduotory lecture, entitled "The Aim, Struoture and Soope of CAPITAL" comprises the prefaoes to OAPITAL, the Marx-Engels oorrespondence regerding the work and an explanation of the structure of the eight parts of CAPITAL. The teacher should note the oontents pace where the fourteen lectures are listed WIder five divisions: (I) In~ troduction; (II) The Phenomena of Oapi tal ism; the Buying and Selling of Commodities; (III) the Essenoe of Capitalism which is subdivided into (1) The Capitalist Labor Process or the Production of SUrplus Value and (2) The Results of the Capitalist Labor Frocess or the Transformation of the Value of Labor Fower into Wages; (IV) The Law of Motion of Capitalist SOCiety; and (V) Conclusion. These divisions will help 10 giving the lectures a certain cohesiveness and directiont instead of letting each individual lecture hang by itselr. By the time the members of the olass have reaohed the end of this course, they should be well aware of the faot the,t CAfIT~ has net been e tu~ied as ntheory for theory's sake," but as a guide to action. In the ensuing discussion the class should be encouraged to try to apply the main postul~tes of CA¥IT~ to the American eoonomy. Streesehould

therefore be laid on Trotsky's Living Thoughts of Karl Marx, where he does precisely that. ho method of teaching OAPITAL can be an adequate substitute fer its serious study by each individual. It is hoped that this outline will lead the student to such stUdy. In add1 tion to CAPITAL, the following reading should be undertalCen: ~arx: Engels: liarx-Engels: Lenin: Trotsky: Blake: Dweezy: Lobb: Rol'!: Robinson: Critique of Political Economy The Critique of the Gotha Programme Review of Marx's Critique of Politioal Eoonomy On Capital Correspondenoe The Teachings of !C'arl Marx of Ka.rl Marx Development,
L iv ing Thoughts


An Amerioan Looks at !Carl Marx

The Theory of Capitalist Palt I

Polit~cal Economy and Capitalism, Chapters I-IV

A History of Economic Thought,
Chapt ers V-V II An Essay on Marxian Economics

All references to CAPITAL, except where otherwise specified, are to the Kerr Edition. If possible the teacher should try to get a copy of the Dona Torr Edition (International Publishers 1939) as that includes ilarx's historic preface to the french edition of CAPITAL and other valuable notes.




.I:tm10DUC lION

Lecture I The Aim, structure and Seepe ot CAPITAL Tbe Aim and the Method

"I~ is the ultimate aim ot this work," Marx wri\es in the Pretace to Volume I. "to lay bare the economic law ot motion ot modern. society." (p.14) This a1m is as tar removed trom the subject matter otbourgeois economics as 1s t~ espousal ot revolution trom the detense ot"the status guo. M~rxism is wrongly Qonsidered to be a new "political oconom~ It is true that, loosely speaking, even Marxists reter to Marx's analysis of capitalist production as "Marxian political economy". Bu~ "Marxian political eQonomy" ie, in reality, a critique ot the very toundatlons ot politicaleconolDY, which is nothlng else than the bourgeois mode ot thougbt ot the bourgeois mode ot preduction. Marx subtitled CAPITAL, "A Critique ot Political Economy". It would hOave been 1mpossible tully to analyze the laws ot development ot the bourgeois mode ot production through an "exten81on~ ot political economy sipce political Qconomy deals wlth economlc categor1es, such as, commod~ties, wages, money, protits, as it they were things ~nstead ot expressions ot soclal relations. It 1s true, ot course, that man's card1na1 tie 1n this society is exchange, and \hat tp1s makes social relations appear as relations ot things. But these things belie, instead ot man1test, the essence. To separate the essence--the 'soclal or class relations-.trom the appearance--the exchange ot commoditles-·required a new science. This new sQience--Marxlsm--means the application ot dialectic"sto the developmental laws ot the bourgeoi s economic system.' "Hegel's dialectic is the basic torm ot all dialectiC," Marx wrote to Kugelman, "but only atter it has been stripped ot its mystical torm, and it 1s precisely this wbich distingu1shes my method." (Marx-Engels Correspondence, p.234) In the Pretace to CAPITAL Marx explains that dialectiCS, in its rational torm, is "the comprehension ot the atfirmative recognition of the existing state ot things, at the same time also the recognition of the negation ot that state, ot its inevitable breaking up.• Engels detines dialectics as "the science of the " general laws ot motion both ot tb~ external world and ot human thought." (LUdptg Feuerbach)'1'0 discern the law ot motion or capitalist society, its inevitable collapse, one has to be capable of seeing this specitic mode ot production tor what it is-an Distorle stage 1n the development ot 8oal~1 production.

The Hist~rlcal Approach The multitude ot pro~uctive torces available to men determine the nature of their society. Man is essentially a tool-making animal, an~ the process of the pro~uctlon of his material lite, the process of labor~ means the process of the growth of the productive forces and his commanu over nature. "Inaustry," Marx explains, "is the real historic relation ot neture, an", consequently of the science of nature, to man." CPriva!:.f! Prop~rll.alli!Communl!m.1._n Ru ssIan an..l ~ German oni y) The ln~ostrial revolution, the progress ot natural science, anu the general technological a~vance ~ave so r~volutionize~ the m~ae of proJuction that there ls, finally, the basis of true free~om--free~om from want and from exploitation. However. "in the first instance" (this phrase Ma.r~ uses to refer to the entire hi3tory of capitalism) this' has taken the contraJictory form of labor's enslauement to capt tal. This capital-labor relationship Marx sets out to analyze with the theoretical tool first ~iscovered by classical politlcal economy--the labor theory of value. It labor'is the source of value, as the classicists aiscovereu, then it is also the source of surplus value, says Marx. This loglcal conclusion from its own theory, classical political economy could not o.educe because, Marx eX1-;l ains, it ccul j not get out of its "bourgeois skin". It viewe~ the capital-labor relationship as a law of n&ture, instea~ of a law of an historic mouo of prouuctlon.
II Ira 50 far a s Pol itical Ec onomy rema.ins wi thin that f!lourgeoi hori z on , in so far, i.e .. a s the capi tal i Et ref!J , gime is lookeu upon as the absolute final form of social production .• insteay ()f a passing historical phase of its evolution, Pelitical Economy can remain a science only so lon~ as the class-struggle is latent or manifests itselt only in lsoLa t e c and sporaulc nhenomena ;" (p.17) That periou began in 1776, wlth the pUblication of Auam .Smith's Wealth of Nations, anu enue a wi t~ the ;"'~ tiv.e eJi tion ot Ri earuc ' s Poli ticEll fin1 ~I1omy, in 1821.

With the full conquest of political power by the bourgeoisie in the revolutions of 18~O, "The class struggle practically as well as theoretically took on.more and more outspoken and threatening forms. It sounJeu the ueath-knell of scientific bourgeois economy. It was thence:orth no longer a question whether th1s theorem or thet was true, but whether it was useful or harmful. In place of disinterestea enqUirers there were hired prize-fighters." (~.19) The period, 1820 to 18:30, marks the close of the c1as~ical periou an~ is charact8rized by Marx as the ".)isintegration of the Rt car-ut School". The 'peak of en the claSSical perioy was reacheu in the work of RicaruO. Political economy as an inuepenuent science coul~ go no further, an~ went no further.

The Sx.~ture_anu


, Marx wrote A Contribution to the Critique ot, Political Economy 1n 1859~ thIs-waS the tIrst torm in whIch his major theoretical work was written. He ha~ put in most ot his a~ult life in stu~y~ng an~ analyzing the bourgeois mOde ot production betore he publisheJ this work, an~ another eight years elapse", betore this work was rewritten an&l assumed .. fe initive shape as the tirst volume ot CAPITAL. What method was usedOto art all the mass ot Jata, and how waa it molded to assume the structure that we now have? Marx tells us: "In the methou ot treatment the tact that by mere acciv.ent I have again glance\.i. through Hegel '.sLogic has been of great service to me •••" (Mar!-Engels Corresponuence, p.I02) Anj Engels writes Conrad Schmiut: "It you just compare the uevelopment ot the commouity into capital in Marx wi th the development trom Being to Essence 1n Hegel, you wi 11 get qUite a goo~ parallel from the concrete development which results trom tacts •••" (Ibi9. p.495) With this in view it is easy to see that .the eight parts into which CAPITAL 1s divide:.!,can be comprise..1within three general sections: (I) The Phenomena ot Capitalism, or the Buylng and Selling ot OcmmoQlties. Unuer this hea~ing are incluQed Part It Commodities ang ~oneYJ an~ Part II, The Transf~r~~1ion ot Money i·n!2..Gru>!.t51.l. (II) The Essence ot Capit.Alism--The Capttalist ·Labor Process. This section 1s subdivided into two: (l)The Proauction of hbsolute an~ Relative§.~rplus Value, which incluJes Parts III, IV anu V; an~ (2) 'lbeResults ot the Processot Prouuction: or 'the Trans""'rmatlon of' the Value of Labor Power into WaBeR~ (Part VI- \ It is true that wages isth~ phenomenal afpearance ot the val ue ot lab or power. but slnce l:.e deal s wi th thi s phenomena atter he has deal t wl th the essential labor process, Marx d·1seus·sealt in essential terms. Thus, while consi:ter1ng the buying and selling of labor power while we: were in the market, in Part II, Marx wrote that the l~borer"an~ the owner ot money meet in the market, a nu ~eal with each other as on the basis of equal rights, with this ditterence alone, thet one 1s buyer, the other seller; both, therefore, equal ~n the eyes ot the law," (p,186) ~arx, now that we have ex&minea the inner aboue of production, write"s of this Same money relationship. thus: "This phenomenal form, which makes the actual relation invisible, an~, inueea, shows the ~lrect opposite of that relation, forms the basi_ or ell the juriu1cal notions ot both laborer and capitalist, ot all the mystifications ot the ~apltalist. 1c mo:e ot pro~uctlon. ot all its illusions as to liberty, of all the apologetic shitts ot the vulgar economi~ts," (p.591)


(III) The Law of Motion of Capitalist Society, Under this heading can be comprised Part VII, Ihe Accumulation of capital, and :part VIII, Soo 1 d r itive ocum at ion. Where the first (Part VII is the theoretioal culmination of the book, the second (~art VIlI) depicts the historical beginnings of capitalism. however, theory and history are not divided, but interwoven, and it is precisely in the historical section, where Marx includes the justly famous "Hi&torical Tendency of Capitalist Accumulation", thus: nAlong with the oonstantly diminishing number of magnates of capital, who usurp and monopolise all adv&'ltages of this process of transformation, grows the mass of misery, oppression, slavery, degradation, exploitation; but with this too grows the revolt of the working class, a class always increasing in numbers, and disciplined, united, organized, by the very meohanism of the process of capitalist production itself. The monopoly of oapital becomes a fetter upon the mode of produotion, "whien. has sprung up, and flourished along with, and under it. Centralisation of the means of production and socialisation of labour at last reach a point where they become incompatible with their oapitalist integument. This integument is burst asunder. The knell of capitalist private .property sounds. The expropriators are expropriated." (pp .836-837)
With in the f'ramework of .i1darx 'own description of the aim ts of his work, the dialectiC method by which he hopes to accomplish his aim, and the struoture into which he molds his analysis of "the capitalist mode of production, and the oonditions of production and exohange corresponding to that mode", it should not be toodifficul t to begin the study of CAPITAL.



or 0RJtALtBM; m~

,EoI IQB :,11
Ql 001040DITIES
L epW,'


Part I, Ohiot,;


U,e=Yalua Sf! Val'll "The wealth of those ,001etle, in wh1ch the cap1tal1,t mode of production prevalls, a Marx wr1tel at the beg1nn1ng of the work, 'present' 1tself a8 '~ bumenseaccumulation of oommodities , its unit being a sinale COJDDlodity. ur investiga.O tion must therefore begin with the analysis of a commodity.' (p.41) . !tarx begins his analy,i, of tion of ite two-fold nature; u§c all oommodities are only definite time." (p.46) It is important to does not here stop to analyze tbe ohange valQO. Rather he proceeds pOint, which is nct the dual form dual form 1.Apor. a oomodi ty with a descripvalue IPS valul. lAs values masses of congealed labor note that Marx mentions., but fQm of vtMuI, whioh is aai.rectly to the crucial of the commodity, but the


"I was the first to point out and to examine oritical.y this two-fold nature of the labour contained in oommoditie8,· Marx writes. lAs this i, the pivot on whioh a olear comprehension of polit10~ eoonomyturn" we must go more into detail." (p.4S) It is impol8ible 10 understand Marxi,t political eoonomywithout a thorough understanding of the piY2$ on whioh it revolves. lirat, Marx explatns the antagoni8Pl latent in the twofold character of labor: IAn increase in the quant'i t1 of use values is an inorease of material wealthe W1th two coats two men oan be clothed, with one coat only one man. leverthe18ss, an increased quant1ty of material wealth may correspond to a si,multaneous fall in the magnitude of its value. Thi8 an:tagonistic movementhas its origin in the two-fold character of labor. n (p.53)

In order to comprehend thiS, we m~t keep clearly in mind this two-fold character: abstract labor creata value and concrete labor creats use value.. "On the one hana, all,labor is speaking physiologically, en expenditure of humanla]:)o; power and in ita oharacter of ldent10al abstract human labor it oreates and forms the value of commodities. On the other hand all labor is the expendit~re of hUm~ labor power in a speoial fonn and with a definite a1Dl~d in thiS, its Ohafaoter of conorete, useful labor it produce, use-values.' p.S4)

four forms are:

loma Marx next Qonsiders tbe va+ue tQ~' of a c~odlty.

(1) the element;afY or acc1(lente]. form of value;


(a) the total or expan~ed form; (3) the general form; and (4) th e money form. .

(The teacher will have ·to be pat ientin going ovel' this section where Marx is very d1alec~ical and the concepts are quite complex. The task wil~ be made easier, however, if the historical development is constantly held in view. As for example, the following.) The fi;rst or elementary form - 20 yards of linen equal one coat - shows us not only the theoretical aspect of the development of a commodityb'Q,tits historic root: n•.• the elementary value-form is also the pr~it1ve form under which· a. product of labor appears historically as a commodity and the gradual tr~~sformat1on of such products into commodities proceeds RAr1 passu with the dev~lopment of the value-form.l(p.7l~ . Note how the historical approaoh is used to explain why . such a great thinker as Ar1stot~e could not see that it 1s the cornmon substance of human labor, which makes Sl ch different , use-values as beds and houses commensurate in certain propor-l' t ions:

nThere was, however, an important fact whioh prevented Aristotle from 'seeing that, to attribute value to commodities, is merely a mode"'of expressing all labor as equal human labor and consequently as labor of equal quality. Greek society was founded upon slavery and had, therefore,for its natural basis, the inequality of men and their labor powers. The secret of the expression of value, namely, that all kinds of law bor are equal and equivalent because and so _far as they are humanlabor in general' 9 annot be deciphered until the notion of human equality has already acquired the fixity of a popular prejudice.· (p.69) . Before leavL~g the section dealing with the form of value or exchange value, let us bear in mind what Marx says on page 70: "Whenat the beginning of this chapter, we said, in common parlance, that a commodity is both a use-value and an excasnge value, we were, accurately speaking wrong. A commodity is a us~value or objeot of utility and a value. It manifests itself as this two-fold thing, that "it is,ae soon as its v!J.lue assumes an independent fo;rm - viz. '"' the f"rm of exchange va.Lua , It never assumes this t orm when isolated. but only wpen plaoed in a value or exohange relation w1thanother oommodity of a different kind." The Feti~hism



As important as the concept of value in Ohapter I is the concept of the fetishism of commodities. To stamp an object of util,ity as a value, says iatia.rx,is as much a social product as is language. Whence, indeed., arises the enigmetioal character of products of labor so soon as they assume the form of commodities? "Olearly," answers 14arx, "from this form itself,lI It is this form which makes "a definite social relation be-


, twe~m,nn ISS", things; (p.83 mine F .r.)

l;tlta. (APlAstic fo~ of hi. i8 the tetilb1 of

a relat19D barWaen com=odit1ee.ltalios


''Value does not stalk abcut with a label descrtbing what it is. It is value, rathert_that oonvert. every produot 1nto a sooial hieroglyphio.· (p. fjO) , "The categories of bourgeois eoonomy are forme of ••• thought expressing with sooial valid1ty the conditions and relations of a definite historioally determ,ine4 mode of production, viz., the production of, commodities; '1'bewhole mystery of oommodities, all the magic and necromancy that surrounds the produot of labor as long as they take the fo= of commodities, vanish, therefore, '80 soon as we Oometo ,other forms of production.n (p.S7) , In other aoc1et ies, where the product of labor did not assume the fOrm at a oommodity, social relations were olear: nOompulsory labor is just a8 properly measured by time, as commodity-produoing labour; but every serf knows that what he expends in the servioe of his lord, is a definite quantity of his own personal labour-power. The tithe to be rendered to the priest is more matter of faot than his blessing. 'No :na.tter, then, What we may think of the parte played by the dif~ ferent classes of' people tllemselves in this sooiety, the sooial relations between individuals in the performance of their labor, appear at all events as their own mut,ua).personal re1 ations, ~nd are not disguised under the shape of ao01al r elaticns between the products of labor.R (p.8S) finally, Marx shows that only produotion by treeli[ associated men will hold no mysteries. "The life-prooess of society, which is based on the process of material product ion does not strip off its ~1atical veil until it 1s tfeated as production by freely assooiated men and is oonsoiously regulated by them in ao.oordanoe with a settled plan." (p~a2) Questi2ne 1. What is the two-fold nature of commodities' 2~ Eow is the socially-neoessary labor time defined? 3. Explain; "As values, all commodities are only definite masses of congealed labof-t ime(,. It 4. What is the two-fold characuer of labor? Whydoes Marx' call this the pivot of political economy' 5. What is abstract labor~ ,What is concrete labor? Why is there an antagonistic movementbetween the two? . 6. Howmayan inorease in the quantity of use-values nevertheless correspond to a fall in the magnitude of value? 7. What is exchange-value' Howdoes it differ from usevalue? From value? 8. &tate the four manlfes~ations of exchange-value. 9. What is the Illeaning of the exprelSslon "Value of commodl-10

10. 11.




17. 18.

ties has no foi:~ apart from their bodily form "?How is this statement related to the relative form of value? State the three peculiarities of the equivalent form of value. ~ow does use-value become "the form of manifestations, the phenomenal form of manifestation of its opposite, value. "? How is it that the elementary l'alue form is also lithe primitive form under wh~ch a product of labour appears historically as a commodity"? 'hat 1s the detect in the total or expanded form of v~lue? Explain: "Gold is now money with reference to all other commodities only because it was previously, with reference to them a simple commodity." What determines the vl3lue of gold? Does the mystical oharacter of commodities arise from their us~value? Whence does it? Explain: "There it 1s a definite social relation between men, that assumes, 1n their eyes the fantastic form of ~ relation between things.1I Is this what JAarx calls the "fetishism of commodities'" . How does the law of value assert itself? Why? How do the categories of bourgeois economy ~xpress the conditions and relations of production?

.. .

Ex~olfs qf Dia~~ctica* Materialism: Eegel on reflex categor ies; king-subj eet relationship. (p .6 E J f tn. )'" 2. Aristotle's thinking limited by the Greek society based on slave la.bor. (p.GS) 3. Relationship of elementary form of value to a definite historical period. (p.71) 4. Qociel relations of men hidden 'under the fantastic form of relations ·between things. (p.83) 5. Assertion of law of v~lue in societies unoonscious of its operation. (p.8S) e. Re18.tionehip of eoonomic categorit"s to 1I10deof production. (p.87) . 7. How oompulsory labor appeared under other economic orders. (p.89) 8. Immature development of men as indiViduals and the rela.tionship of th1s to anct ent forms of production. (p.Sl) S. Relat10aship of "freely associated men" to planning; failure of political economy to gras'O reason why "labour is represented by the value of its product and the labour time by the m~gnit'.ldeof that value." (p.92) 10. Relations of produotion and superstruotUl'Oof society. Pp.S2-93 (footnotes) 11. Rel~tionship of Pfoudhon's "ideal of justice" to the production of commodities.


Leoture Eart


I, Ohapter@


and 3

Exchange apd MopeI Marx noW deals with "Exohange": "It is plain that oommodi ties cannot go to marjet and malte exohanges of. their own account. We must therefore h~e recourse to their gu~.rd1ans who ar e also their owners., •They must, therefore, mutually recogn ise in eaoh other the righ'" of private proprietors. This jur1dic~1 relation, whioh thus expresses itself in a contract, whetber such contract'oe 'part of a developed legal system or not, is a relation 'oetween two w1~ls, and. 1s but the reflex of th:3 real eoonomioal relation b.tween the two." (p.96) Marx next cons1dex:s ·.one1 i or the C1rcula t ion of Oommodities", the conclucl1ng chapter m Part I. Here he deals with the two aspeots of money: (1)' 88 a measure of value, and (2) as a stantiard of prioe. "As "''»ire of v~Y§. and a8 ,standatd QL.QI.tce., money has two entirely different functions to perform. It is the measure of value as it is the sooi~lly recognised mcarnae tcn of b\1lDanlabour; 1t is the standard of price inasmuoh as it is a f1x~ we1gbt of metal, A8 the measure of value 1t serve$ to convert the values of all the man1fold conmodities into prices, 1nto imaginary quantities of gold; as the standa!'d of price 1t ..zneasures those quant1ties of gold."(lC9) Before anelyzing the form~a, O-K-O,(commod1ty, money, com:nodity) let us observe the all-important ooncept of "socially-ne:cess5ry labor time", in its relat10nsh ip to the total la.bor time of a oommunity '3Ild a8 reflected in the market sClle. After esta'b11sh1ng the fE-oct that the ptice II is merely the money-name of the quantity of soclal labor realised in his commodity", (p.120) Marx prooeeds to cite an example Where, "without the leave, and beh~d the back, of our weaver, the old fushioned mode of weaving undergoeQ a change. The labor ti(ne that y.esterday was without doubt socially necessary to the production of a yard o;f linen, ceases to be so today, a fact whlob the owner of the a:.oney is only too eager to prove from the pr~ces quoted by our f~iend'8 competitors ••• Lastly, suppose that every pieoe of linea 10 the m~rket contains no more lAbor time than 1s sooi~lly neoessary. 1n spite of all this, ~ll these pieces taken as a whole, may have had sUperfluous labor time 6I.ent on them. If the :Dr:Jrkctc~.nnot stomach the whole quantity at tna normal price of two shillings a yard, this proves that too grea.t a port ion of the total 1 abour of the community he.• been expended in the form of weav1.ni. II (p.120) . '. . Juet as the emph~81B here 18 la1d on the. 800ially necessary l~ibor tir:e And n·.)t on the market, so the stress, 1n the question of the formula for the oiroulationof commodities, is put on the commodity, and not on the money: "••• the result brought about by the oirculation of oommodities, namely, the

replacing of one co~~odity by another take the appearance of having been ef·f ected not by means of the change of form of the commodities but rather by the money acting as a medium of circulet ion ••• Hence, al though the movement of money is merely the expression of the circulation of oommodities, yet the contrary appears to be the actu~l fact, and the circul~ tion of commodities seems to be the result of the movement of mcn ey ;" (p.130) furchas§, Bal;s 9nd Crisis

Furthermol'e, the fo'mulA, C-lv1-C, 8%1--1'e888& two sepR.l'ate acts--C-M and M-Cj henoe, there is an interval of time between selling the oommodity for money and using the money to buy enother commodity. If the split between sale and purch~se is teo great these two antith~.cU acts may produce a crisis. Marx points out that this money crisiS only reflects the deeper, underlying oon~radiction between use-value snd value: nThe I=Intithesis 'use-v91ue and vRlue; the contradictions that nr Lvat e labour 1s bound to manifest itself as direct soci1.1 iab("l!" tt.t:'t a partioularized conczeue kind of l~bor has to peS~ for abstract human labour; the contradiotion between the ~~rsonification of objects and the representation of persons by thL'1gs; all these antithesr">s and contra,dictions, ~hich are rnmaneu t in coanodities, assert themselves, and develop their mc.c ee of motien, in the anti~hetical pha.ee. of the met amorpao exs of a. commodily." (p.128) Note well the phrase. "the contradiction between the personification of objects and the repr~sentation of persons by tlUn.€,s". (The latter part of the phra se is somet1m(;s transla.ted as lithe reificat10n of people' .) In the analysls of the contradictory nature of a c,ommo(lity--the contradiction between use-value and value--Marx presents us with the basis of analysis of tte whole of capit~ist production, and hence of capitalist society. That does not me=n thet Marx in any way a.v.O,idsdealing with the ques't Lon of c ircule.t icn, but merely that',he givesi tits properly subordinate pl ace , It is true, in fact, as Marx does not hesitate to stress, that "CiroullJtion sweats money from every pere", and t hat "the exchange of cornmodi i es bre'lko through all loc~ and t p er acnak bounds inseparable from di'rect carter, and develops tha c t rcul.e t i.on of th.e p:t'nducts of &.ocial labor. n But the e s s ence is that th~ oris: s if! inherent in the ccntr~d1ction b etwcen use-value and va~ue. ~oreover, money, as Marx sho~s in the section on money a.s means J: pa.yment. is related to the L10re fundamerrt eL quest ion of class re11=1.t lOnG~ liThe class struggles of "Che:mcient ~orld tCGk thE form o~1Hflv of a contest between debtor~ ?nd c r ed i tr-r s , which in Rome ended in the ru In of plebeia..'1 d~btors. They were displ~ced by slaves. In the middle a.ges the contest cnded with the ruin of the feud~l debtors, ~ho lost their political power t~gether with the economioal basia on

which it was established. Nevertheless, the money relation of debtor and creditor that existed at these two periods reflected only the deeper.lying antagonism between the general economical conditione of existence of the classes in question.n(152) should now test the pupils as to their understanding of the "1aw of value" as it manifests itself in the market. Let them tum back to page se and grapple with the following: ' "It requires a fully developed product'ion of commodities before, from the accumulated experience alone, the scientific conviction springs up, that all the different kinds of private labour, which are carried on independently of each other, and yet as spontaneously developed branches of the social div1si<?n of labour, are cont inually being reduced to the quantitative proportions in which society reqUires them. And why? Because in the midst of all the accidental $Dd ever fluctuating exchange-relations between the products, the labour-time socially necessary for their production fQrcibly asserts itself like an over-ridtng law of nature." (p.S6) Questions 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. S. 9, What i8 the relation between the act of. exohange and the real economic relationship. What is the dist inction between money as measure of value and as standard of price? . Does the movement of money express the ciroulation of commodities, or is the Circulation of oommodities the result of the movement of money? What is the formula for the circulation of commodities' Explain: "Oirculation sweats money from every pore. II liow does the total labor time of sooiety influence the magnitude of value of a single oommodity? Bow is the sooially neoesaary labor time requireQ for the production of commodities related to market requirements? Is a purchase always a sale, and a sale a purchase? When does their "oneness as.ert itself by producing-It crisis"? liow is the total quantity of money circulating during a given period determined?

- - I.- The teacher We have now canplete<i Part


Lecture 4 Part II The Formula of capital Instead of C-M-C, the formula for the ci~culation of commodities, the formUla for the transformation of money into capital is M-C-M1• "The simple ciroUlation of commodities--selling in order to buy, It writes Marx, "is a means of carry ing out a purpose unoonneoted with oirculation, namely, the appropriation of use-values, the satisfaction of wants. The circulation of money as capital is, on the oontrary, an end in itself, for the expansion of value takes place only with thl. constantly renewed movement. II (p.16S) The formula, M-C-M', is thus the true manifestation of capitalist production. And "the conscious representativen of the movement of money, its possessor, is the oapitalist~ "His person, or rather his pocket, is the point frOm which the money starts and to which it returns. The expansion of value which is the objective basis or main-spring of the circ~aiion M-C-M, beoomes his subjective aim, and it is only in so far as the appropriation of ever more and more wealth in the abstract becomes the sole motive of his operations, th~t he functions as a capitalist, that is, as capital personified and endowed with consoiousness and will. Usevalues must therefore neyer be looked upon as the real aim of the capitalist; neither must the profit on any single transaction. The restlessnever~ending process of profit~ makine alone is what he aims at." (p.170) Just as Marx emphasizes in the above passsge that profit-making is only the capitalist's subjective reaction to the expansion of value, which is the objective basis of the circulation M-C-W, so Marx also stresses that in the process of production itself it is value which is "the active factor in such a process." (p.172) That will be developed at great length by him when we come to the actual process of production. The general formula of cap ital, M-O-M I, has con tradict ions inherent in it. What we are faced with here is that, although commodities are sold at their value, 'yet more value has to be withdtawn from Circulation than was thrown into it by Mr. Moneybags. (Note that Marx dO. not call the possessor es of money a.capitalist until we reach the process of product ion where capital is created.) "These," state Marx "are the conditions of the problem. Hic Rhodus, hic saltat" (185)
In order to meet the conditions of the problem, Mr. Moneybags must be in a situation where he can find in the market a peculiar commodity "whose use value possesses the peculiar property of being a source of value." (p.18S)

The possessor of money finds in the market. just commodity. It is .called. labor power. . Labor Power

such a

"The exchange of commo41t1es 1tself," eay8J&ar~. "implies no other rel~lt10ns of dependence than those whtCh resul t from its own ·nature." (p.18.S) Marx does not stop here to expla.in what are the relatione of dependence which do result from its nature because be is still the market analyst and in the market freedom and equalitl reign supreme. We will have to leave this sphere where alone rule. Freedom, Equality, Property and Bentham", this "sphere of simple circulation or exchange of commodities which furnishes the 'Free trader Vulgaris' with his views and ideas"before'we see reve'3.led the real secret of how money begets mc·re moneY.(195-S)' (Compere this de script ion of equal cOlllDod.i owners with ty cross-reference on p.592, where the exchange between oapital and labor is referred to as a "guiee".)
In this ohapter on the buying and selling of' laboX' power 14·al"X eXl-~ ains that the worker. is free in the doubl~ sense, .

t~at as "a free man he oan dispose of his labor po.er~s his own commodity and that, on the other hand, be has n'o other commodity for sale, is s~ort of everything nec~e.,ry fqr·the realisation' of his labor power.~ (PP.187"S;,.·cross ref.,..,.p; .785) •

In the course of this discussion on labor power, Marx de.!lonstrates that, whereas commodities have been produced in other forms of societies, the appeerance of capital, or oapit~ist production"d~tes from the appearance of labor.power it self in the form of a cornmodiy:' "Th~ capitalist. t epoch is therefore characterized by this, that labor-power takes in the eyes of the laborer himself the form of a commodity which is his property;: his labor consequently. becomes wage labour •. On the other hand, it is only from this moment.that the produce cf labor un'1versally becomes a commodity •.. (1~9., ftn.) ": Further, "One consequence .of the peculiar nature of labor pow~r as'a commodity is that its use-value doee·not, on the concj.uatcn of th1's contract between buyer and 8eller, immed1ately pass int.o .the hands' cf the form~r. I:te value, . like that of every other commodity l is already fixed before it goes into Circulation, since a aefini te quantity of sooial 1abor has been spent upon 1 but its \lse-value 'consists t, in th e subsequent exe:c·ise of its force. The al1,enation of labor power and 1ts actual appropriation by the Duyer] its employment asa use-value are separated. by an iIL.tervaJ. of t il11e.t (p .193) I The students should be well aware of the quiniessential importanc,e of the use-value of labor power since only' 1ts utilization can answer the problem posed by Marx as to how money' begets more mcney. The sum of values in circulation c~not be augmented by any change in their distribution, and

yet we know that Mr. Moneybags must out of money make more money before he can become a full-fledged capitalist.. How does he do it? , The only distinction between the various commodities exch snged resided in their use-value. E1lidently, the use-value of one out of this multitude of commodities is the source of wealth. Which? How Can the capitalist get away with it? There is no law to compel one to use the commodity one_ ~ bought in full view of all men. The food you buy in the mark et you consume at home. The use-value of labor-power, too, is consumed not in the market, but there where it can first be put to use--in the fectory in this case. ' Hence, before we can force the secret of profit-making we must leave the m~rket, which lJoarx calls "the noisy sphere of exchange. ti No cheating, however, has occurred. Like every other commodity, the va,lue of the commodity, labor power, is determined by the socially-necessary labo,r time required to _ produce that commodity. In this case it is the means of subSistence, shelter and cloth1n~ needeu to make the laborer fit to work and to reproduoe his lind. The us~vaLue, on the other hand, belongs to him Who paid for the oommodity at value: "The consumption of labor power is completed~ as in the case of every other commodity, outside the limits of the market Or of the sphere of circulation. Accompanied by Mr... Moneybags and by the possessor of labor power, we. therefore take leeve for a time of this noisy sphere, Where everything takes place on the surface and in view of all men, and follow them both into the hidden abode of production, on whose threshold there stares us in the face 'No admittance except on business.r Here We shall see not only how capit8~ pro~ duces, but how capital is produced. We shall ~t last foree the secret of profit making." (p.195) "On leaving this sphere ()f simple circulation or exchange of commodities ••• ~.we think we oan perceive a ohange in the physiognomy of our dramatis personae. H.e, who before was the money owner, now strides, in front as capltali9t; the possessor of labor-power follows as his labourer. The one with an air of importanoe, smirking, intent on business; the other, timid and holding baok, like one wPo is bringing his own hide to market and has nothing to expect bu t-a hiding." (p.196) Before the teacher II, he should be sure to oall the attention of the class to the structure of this part, which is divided into three chapters, the first (ChapterIV) states the thesis: "The Geueral Formula for Capital". Tha second (Chapter V) depicts the antithesiS: "Contradict ions in the General Formul~ of Cani tal II • The th ird (Chapt er VI) deals with the open confl iot between Mr•• Moneybags and the laborer, and is entitled "The Buying and Selling of Labor Fower". Instead of e. "synthesisll, there is, in capit 9.l ist soc iety, the ever I3.ct ve class struggle. i -17

- '_ ..Part concludes


1. 2.
3. 4.

6. 7. 8.

9. 10. 11. 12.

WhAt is the general formula for capital? Is the production of use-values the real aim of the cap ital 1st? What ls' What is meant by the following statement: nValue is here the active factor."? Wby did Marx entitle Chapter V nContraeictions 1n the General fQrmula of Oapital"? Disprove the statement that "Oommerce adds value to products". Oan the sum of values in circulation be augmented by a change in their distribution? What is·wrong with the statement~ "Oommodities are sold above cost." . Whp,t is the peculiar n~ture of the commodity, labor power? WhAt are the oonditions for the existence of this oommodi ty? In what sense is the laborer freet (Cross references to page under discussion' (18S) are to be found on pp. 330, 5S8, 591-2 t 639 40, and 795~) ... There were commodities and money in periods prior to capitalism. Why weren't 'Commodities and money capital then? Labor power is bought, on the market; where is it con. sumed? liow is the value of labor power determined'

. __ Ai

The Capital ist Labor irooes~ Leoture 5 Part III. Chapters 7-9

In the "Labour prooess and the prooess of producing surplus value," karx deals with the labor process in general, or the production of use values, and the capitalisj; labor process, or the production of values and hence of surplus value. Here again, then, and in a much more profound sense because we are now conc~ed not merely with the appearance but with the essence, Marx brings us back to the two-f.old character of labor this time as exemplified in the two-fold character of the labor process, in general, and the capitalist labor process in particular: nThe labour prooess turned into the process by which the capitalist oonsumes labour power exhibits two oharacteristic phenomena. Fir~t, the laborer works under the control of the capitalist to whom his labour belongs •••Secondly. the product is the property of the capitalist and not that of the laborer, . its immediate producer •.•!he labour process is a prooess between things that the capitalist has purchased, things that have become his property.n (p.a06) Note that in the labor process not only the means of production but labor power are the pr0gerty of the oapitalist. Just as previously·Marx laid stress on the fact that v~lue Was the "aotive factor" so now he re-emphaeizes that "Value is independent of the partioular use-value by which it is bornet but it must be embodied in a u~e-value of some kind." (p.a091 We now learn why Mr. Moneybags bought labor really influenced him was the specific use-value commodity possesses of being ~urc not onl 0 .Q.LmQU value than it has itself." . p. 216 This forms money into capital: power. ttWbat which this value but is what trans-

"This metamorphosis, this conversion of money into capital takes place both within the sphere of Circulation and also outside it; within the Circulation, because conditioned by the purchase of the labour-power in the market; outside the circulation, because what is done within it is only a stepping stone to the proo.uction of surplus value,. a process which is entirely conf ined to the sphere of production." (p. 217) The antagonistic movemen t between use-value and value arises from the antagon'ismbetween useful labor and abstract labor. The labor of the spinner that Marx uses as an example is a speoific kind of labor which the laborer employe to affect an alteration in the material worked upon. The tailor out of cloth made

a dress. In the case of abstract labof, on the other hand, labor regardless of its specificity is under the direction o~ the capitalist and hence interested only in values. Thus, the .§.9Cially-necessary labor time becomes the all-dominant element. It serves, however, to highlight the fact that only living labor creates value, ano the laborer does th~t in each instant and not merely in "the last hour." (p.21S) Moreover, the raw material too "serves now merely as an absorbent of a definite quantity of labour.1f \IDeflflite quantities of produot, these quantities being determined by e)l:perienos, now represent nothing but definite quantities of labour, defin ite maseee of crystall ized labour t·1me." (p. 211) . Let us get clear in our minds how capital is created . "By turning his money into commooi ties that serve as the marterisl elements of a new product, and as factors in the labou~ process, by incorporating living labour with their dead substance, the capitalist at the same time converts value, i.e., past materialised and dead labour 1nto oapitalt into value big with value a live monster that is fruitful and mUltiplies." {p. 217} This is not a mere rhetoric phrase. l.ts significance is rooted deep in value produotion. CQnstant and Vari§bleqaRital To fully understand this "live monster that is fruitful and mul tipl ies," we must understand t he role that constant ca.pi tal and variable capital play. First, as to the meaning of the terms and their functions: "The means of product ion on the one hand, labour power on the other, are merely the different modes of existence whioh the value of the original 0 api tal assumed when from being ~oney it was transformed into the various faotors of the labor prooess ...Tbe same elements of oapital which, from the point of view of the labour process, present themselves r~ spectively as the oQjeotive and subjective factors, as means of produotion and labour power, present themselves from the po int (ifview of the prooess of creating surplus value, as co~stent and variable capital." (p. 232-3) To explain the all-pervading force in capitalist production? the self-expansion of vaiue, Marx abstracts 0 (constant capi1ial) and then showe that the newly-added value is both v (value) and s (surplus val~e). That'is to say, tpe living laborer has created both his own subsistence ,and the surplus. Constant capital is so called because it - means of production, raw and auxiliary material and the instruments of labor - undergoes no change in its magnitude in the process of production. It is reproduced 'in the newly-pro"duced oommodity, but it can never cede more value than it itself has. Variable capital is so called because it - the money spent for .13bor power - does undergo a ohange. in magnitude in the prooess of production, the living laborer having been made to

work beyond the time neoessary to reproduce himself. Thus the dress manufactured not only includes in it the cotton and wear and tear of machinery - components of value of another process of production - but the new labor of the wOfker, which means the value of his labor power plus a surplus. The worker by making a dress transferred the value of the maohinery and cotton to the dress, at the same time adding ~ labor to it. This riew labor includes the equivalent of his own subsistence and a surRlus. Each qommod1ty is composed of three elements: (1) constant capital, (2) variable capital and (3) surplus value. So insistent is Marx in emphasizing that the new value includes both variable and surplus, so careful is he in ~phasizing the self-expansion of value that he cites an example (p. 236) where constant capital is equal to zero, although, in reality, that would not be capi~alism at B.l;1.. (Farenthetically, it might be stated that the question of "new va;1.ue"enters in the historic debate with LasalleL and the student should bere consult Critique of tAe Gotha ~rQgramm~.) In considering the rate of surplus value Marx warns us that ~the rate of profit is no mystery, so soon as we know the lar,s of surplus value- If we reverse tn'ep;ocesswe cannot comprehend either the one or the other." (p. 239 Footnote) The rate of surplus value is "an exact expression for the degree of exploitation." (p.24J) "It is every bit as important," he continues, "for a correct understanding of surplus value, to conceive it as a mere congelation of surplus labour-t ime,. as nothing but materialised aurpkus labour, as it is for a proper comprehension of value, to conceive it as a mere congelation ot so many hours of l~bour, as nothing but materialised labour." (p. 241) 'J;'he section entitled "The Representa.tlon of the Componen ts of the Value of the Product by Corresponding Proport tonal Parts of the Product Itself" should be studied very painetakingly. It is not wrong to divide any product. say twenty dresses, into various groups of say, five, five and ten dresses (or to divide them into the time it took to produce them) wh ron represent the produce Requal in value" to the constant capital, variable capital and sur~lus,va~ue. This can be done for the purpose of simplification. But in reality, each dress con tafna c, v and s; otherwise such a div Ls i on either of the commodity or the time it took to produoe it, says Marx "can also be accompanied by very barbarian notions, more especially in the heads of those who are as much ~nterested, practically, in the process of making value beget value, as they are in misunderstanding that process theoret 10al1y _If (:p. 247-8) Witness Senior's concept of the 1I1e_st hour" (the 11th) in which supposedly all surplus value ie ~ducedt Therefore, any shortening of the work rng day wniehwould e1 imin8te the 11th hour , says he, would rob the capit~ist of all profit.


questions 1.


4. 5.







What are,the two characteristic phenomena by which the. general l$.bol'process .is turned into a process where the capital ist consumes labor power? How are vlUue and uSe.""value inter-related? How an·t.a~ gon ist ia1 . , . :,. .;. What doas the expres8ion, "diffetent ~bc1ea of exist_fice of signify? Define c~etant capital. fatiable capital. What is the specifio us~value of la~orpower? . What distInguishes the prooess of creating surplus value from \l$helabor process in general? . Draw the distinction between necessary labor and necessary labor. time. What is the rate of surplus value? In what degree, if any, does this differ from the degree of e~ploitation? ~.7hatis the distinction between various eoonomic forms of society? How is the extraction of surplus value different u~der capitalism than under feudalism' Is surplus labdr characteristic only of capitalist society? I~ surplus value? What is wrong with the sentence: "The whole net profit is derived from the l$lst hour"? Does the worker produOe surplus value only in the last hour? Which hour? Every instant? . how is the thirst for surplus labor in capitalist society distinguiened from other class societies? Tell the yalue and the danger in representing the components of the value ot a product by the corresponding proport ional parts of the product itself? What does Marx mean when he says that such a representat ion can be accompanied "by very barbarian notions"?

(Note to teacher: Some of these questions anticipate the following lecture; hence, if there are any difficulties in getting the answers, delay asking the questions until aftar Lecture 6.) .

Lecture Part III. ghapters

8 lO and


The Working Day "••• so long, as the 1eterminetion of value by working time is itself left lund~terminedl, as it is by'"R1cardo," Marx wrote Engels, "it doe~ not make people shaky. But as soon as it is brought into exact connection with the working day and its variations, a very unpleaaant new light dawns upon them. II (,Marx-Engels CQrrespondence, pp.231-2) The "people" referred to are bourgeoi8 professors, and the "un~leasant new light that .l... wns upon them" comes from the fact tllat the relationship of s'.lrplus value to exploitation can no longer be kept a seoret sinee one i. the exact expression for the degree of exploitation. The very lengthy section on "The Working Day· will now prove his thesis historically. Here we see What is the real me~ning of the expression, "self-expansion of value", for the voice of the laOo.rer, "stifled in the eto·rm and stress of the process o~ production', rises" to tell the capitalist: "That which on y6ur side appears a apont anecua expansion of capit~l is on mine extra expenditure of labour-power." (2SS) nCapital has not invented surplus labour," liarx writes. IIWherever a part of society possesses a monopoly of the means of production, the labourer, free or not free, must add to the working time necessary for bis own maintenance an extra working time in order to produce the means of subsistence for the owners of the means of production, whether this proprietorbe the ••• Etruscan theoorat, civte Romanue, Norman baron, Americ~ slave owner ,Wallach ian BOyard modern lE..ndlord or c$pttalist." (pp.259.80) Then Marx proceeds to determine precisely what 18 the specific nature Of capit~lism, as distinguished from all other forms of society: IIIt 1s, howeve~, clear that m any given economic formation of society, where not the exchangevalue but the us~value of the product predominates, suxpluelabour will be limited Oy a given set of wants which may be gre~ter or lese, and ~hat here no boundless thirst for surplus labour ar1ses from the nature of the product ion itself. n (P.280) This IIboWldless thirst for surplus labourll expresses itself in the attempt, first,. to extend the working day. The surplus value produced through the extension of the working day is called absolute s.l£rlus value: "The ere=;": +cn of a norm91. working aay"TI -:t.erefore, the prod"~~/: :;< a ,rotr~cted civil war, mo or ~€,tJ rl.j,8sembled, betw~e;,. "',he capitalist reclass and the working ,:l.FtI3S .. 11 (p,3a7) It is here that Marx links the battle for a ~Jrma~ working day yo tte tattle

against outr1ght 81avery~. II'Jon the Un1ted States of North America, every independent movement of the workers was pa:p,lysed so long as slavery disfigured a part of the Republic. Labour cannot emanci~ate itself in the "hite skin when in the black it is branded." (p.329) In these seventy-five pages devoted to the working day,· Marx not only shows how in ~~l"-·related are theory and history, but since onereflects the o t ncr , his abstract theory of value has ~ most concrete policy flowing from it. This he counterposes to the empty C~ilt1;bl' oJf the bourgeois theorists:' "In place of the pompous oatalogue of the t inaliEmable r1ghts ofman' comes the modest Magna ChartE'. of a legally limited working day, which shall make clear :when the ·time which the work~ er salls is ended, end when his own begins.·: n (p~330)

_the Labor Process Having established the relationship between the struggle for the normal working day and the theory of value, Marx now gi ves us the law govern ing the r. te and mass of surplus value. Study cC'refully the formula on page 332 in order clearly to un der s tsnd how the I! Diminution of the variable capital. may therefore be compensated by a proportionate rise in the degree of explc i tat ion of labour power,. or. the deorease in the number of laborers employed by a propor.tionate ex·tension oj· the working day." (p. 333); The extent of explo i tation can best be grasped through a comprehension of the capitalist labor' process. In the labor process in general, Marx tells us,. the laborer uses the means of production in order to fashion an article of ut1lity. In the labor process of capital it is not the worker Who uses the means of production but the meaaa of production' the worker.· The labor process has become a mere means for the creat10n o~ values. However, even .ae living labor can function only aocording to its specific skill, so accumulated labor can realize itself as value big with val ue by means of its 1nherent llse-value.· Thp-t is to say,- just as yarn cannot become cotton, wood a chair, -:steel a tractor without uniting with living labor s- and just as dead labor can preserve i tsel·f and become a gre~.ter value only by absorbing l.iving labor,. so accumulated labor can function only according to its use-val·ue.· That is wh!:lt the "live monster th:;.t is fruitful and muJ..tiplles" does.· The use-value of constant capital. is the manner of its absorption of living labor' as "the ferment necessary to their own life process" (p. 339) . Thu's, "The means of production are at once changed into means of absorption of the labour of others. l·t is now no longor the labourer that employs the meane of pxoduction, but the means of production tpet employ the labourer. Instead of being consumed by him as mat sr ial elements of his productive activity,. they consume him as the ferment necessary to their own life-process, and the life prQcess of capital consists only in its mcvement a.s value constantly expanding, constantly multiplying itself." (p. 339) ..4 2

That, of oourse, does not ohange the fact that living labor is the only souroe of value, f:om which Karx deduoes the law that "the greateJ; the 'Variable oapital, the gl'eater would be the mass of the value produced and of the sUl"plus value." (p. 334) Marx tells ~ that nThis law clearly contradicts all experienoe based on appearanoe. EVeryone knows that a ootton spinner, who, reckoning the percentage of the whole of his applied oa.pital, employs muoh constant and litt;l.evariable oapital, does not, on aocount of this, pocket lese profit or surplus value than. a baker, who relatively sets in motion much variible and little constant capital. For the solution of this apparent contradict ion, many intermediate terms are as yet wanted ••• " (p, 335) .

.1though it held

Olassical political eoonomy oould not formulate this law If instinctively to it, beoause it is a necesbary consequence of the general law of value. It tries to reecue the law from collision with the contradictory phenomena by a violent abstraction." (p. 335)

Marx cont inues: .. t wj,ll be seen later how the sohool of I Ricardo came to grief over this stumbling block." The ";Later" referred to is not the chapter following: . It appears first in his Theories o-! Surplus Yalue. No doubt we cannot fully understand how classic~l political economy tried to "rescue the law from collision With the contradictory phenome~a by a violent abstraction" until We have covere(i the whole of CAPITAL, but still it will help us some to understand it further now, and hence the passage referred to by Marx f~om Theories of durplus Value: (po 184, Russian Edi120nr )i ). "•••he fF,iardo}has in mind only the Ql.lan c titat ive determi.nation of exohange value, that is, that it is equal to a de.finite quantity of labour time; but he forgets the ~uaJ.itative determinetion, that indiviaual labour must by means of its alienation be presented in the form of abstracty.niversal social labour." ." ) Hence the capitalist labor prooess is a process of alienation which, precisely through the ino,ssantly ohanging quant1_ta tive determine.tion of exohange value - that is the sooiallynecessary labor time inoorporated in a oommodity ~ reduces the gualitet 1.vedi!f erences (that is, the various oonorete, specifio kinds of labor, such as mining or tailoring) to nothing but a mass of abstraot labor. . Thus without understanding the dual oharacter of labor it is impossible to und.erstand the contradictions of capitalist production and hence Marx's insistence tnat the analysis of the dual charaoter of labor was pivotal to an understanding of po11ticel economy. Hence, also, his insistence on a full comprehension of the inherent laws_Qf capitalist Eroduction even in such seemingly ind.ividualist actions aa that undertaken by oapi talists

in free competition are not due to "• .'il1" but to the inherent laws of capitalist production; ltJ're~!competition brings out the inherent laws of oapi talist p;roc:1\\o1;ion the shape of ex'in ternal coercive laws hav1ns power ov~.r every individual- capital ist. n (p. 297) questions 1. 2~ Howis a normal working day determined, has 'tbat to the olass struggle? Wba~relation

If capitalism has not invented.surplus labor, what dietinguishes surplus labor under oapt talism trom. that under other societies? Howdid the Boyard express this thirst for surplus labor? ' What is the relat ion ship of the Magna Oharta to the theory of value? What, then, is the theory of value to the struggle between the capitalist and the laborer? Howwas the independent movementof labor for the eight hour day hampered in the United States by the existenoe of slavery? Write out the formula for' the mass of s\l.rplua value. Whydid classical eoonomyholdinetinctively. to the law of surplus value, al though it had formulated no such law? What does the following statement mean: "rree oompeti~ t10n bring out the inherent laws of oapital1stproduction 1n the shape of external ooerc1ve laws having power over every individual capitalist. If Compareyour answer with the one you would get from the cross references on pp.347 and 649. .

:5 ~

4. 5• 6. 7.


;C,oture ., Part
IV, Chap,tere 12-1+


Surplu. 1'alue

"The Production of Absolute Surplus Value" dealt with the prolongation of the working day. "The Production of Relative Surplus Value" describes the extrac~ion of surplus value within tbe same working uay. In the first case, capi tal subordinates labor "on the basis of the technical oondi t ions in which it historioally finds itself. II (p. 339) In the seoond case, it revolutionizes these teohnical oonditions. Marx will anal.yze this fully in the last ohafter of Part IV, where he will consider "Machinery and Modern Industry". In approaching II The Concept of Relative Surplus Value", we should keep firmly in mind.the faot that "The essential difference between the various economio forms of sooiety, between, for instance, a society based on slave labor, and one based on wag~ lebor, lies only in the mode in which this surplus~labor is in each case extracted from the actual producer, the laborer." (p.241) And it~s preoisely the JDannerof extraction of this surplus labor which is so characteristioally capitalistio that Marx describes in the l~bor process. Thus'we see that the "live monster that is fruitful and multiplies" does so by virtue of the special CapitalistiC manner in whioh various, kinds of conorete labor (mining, tailorin-g, etc.) are reduced. to one mass of abstract labor. It is the way in which constant 'capital, _or aocumulated. labor, dominates over variable capital, or living labor. ' It is of cruoial importance to understand clearly that the socially necessary labor time is the solvent which r~ duces the aggregatesof concrete labor into the general mass of abstract labor. Since there is no such thing as an abstract laborer, the manner in which the capitalist ll~rrorms his mission of getting abstract labor is the key factor to his amassing surplus v'l ue.' He utilizes one of the factors of production, accumulated or dead labor, against the other faccor, living labor. Only in capitalist ~ociety does accumulated labor dominate living labor. ~!Ws a,ad th~»!pife§tations . Howdoes the fall of the value of commodities because of an increase in the proquctiv i ty of labor, affect t he value of labor-power itself? Marx answers: "In order to effect a fall in the value of labour-power, the increase in the productivener;;s of labour must seize upon tncae liranches of industry whose products determine t,he value of labour-power, and oonsequently e,ither belong to the class of custo~ary means'of subsistence or are capable ot supplying the place of those means." (p ..348)

It is at this point that it 1s most tempting ,to move to the field of competition, and ask how that would effect the value of labor power., But Marx warns us that 'nThe general and necessary tendencies of capital must be distinguished from their form of manifestations." (p.)47) Preoisely because it is easy to move away from tne abstract to the concrete, that Marx is most insistent on remaining within tbe inner'" abode of production: "It is not our intention to consider, here, the way 1n which the laws, immanent in oapi tal i'stproduction, ma~1fest themselves in the movements of individual masses of capital, where they assert themselves as coercive laws of competition, and are brought home to the mind and consciousness of the . individual capital ist as the direoting motives of his operations. But this muoh is clear; a scientific analysis of competition is not possible; Qefor~ we have a conception of the innar nature of capital." tp.)47J , And again: "'rhelaw of the determ1nation of value by la-' bor-t ime, a law wh ich brings under its sway the individual capi tCll ist who applies the new method of product ion, by compelling him to sell his goods under the SOCial value, this same law, acting as a coercive law of competit;.on, forces his competitors to adopt the new method." (p.350) "Hence," concludes ~arx, "there is immanent in capital an incl1na,tion of and constant tendency to heighten the productiveness of labour, in order to cheapen commodities, and by such cheapening to ch eapen the l'abourer himself." \p.351) Qooperation and Manufacture Marx divided into three parts the particular modes of producing relative surplus value, the object of whicb under capitalism is "to shorten that p?rt of the working day, during which the workman must labour for his own benefit, ~nd by th~t very shortening, to lengthen the other part of the day, during which he is at liberty to work gratis for the capit~list." (p.352) These were: (1) cooperation, whioh is "both historioally and logioally the starting point of capitalist production" {p.353); (2) divis10n of labor in manufacture; and (3) maohinery and modern industry. The last of these divisions we will deal with in the next lecture. Cooperation is the form of producing a single commodity by a number of laborers working together under the mastership of one capitalist. At first, then, "the subjection of labour to capit~l was only a form9l result of the fact that the labourer, instead of workin~ for himself, works for and CQnsequently under a capitalist. (p. )62) But cnoe cccpezat Ion becomes a function of capital, it acquires distinctive characteristics: "The directing motive, the end and aim of oapitalist production is to extract the greatest possible amount of surplus value, and conseqUently to exploit labo~r pcwer to the gr eateat possible extent •••The ccnt ro), exerc i aed by the capit~list is not only a epecial funotion; due tc the nature of

the social labour-process, and peouliar to that process, but it is, at the same time, a function of the exploitation of a soci~l labour-process, and is consequently rooted in the unavoidable antagonism between the exploiter and the living and labouring raw material he exploits." (p.363) And further: "As cooperators, as members of a working organiSlll, they (}he laborertO are out special modes of existence of capit~l.1I (p.3S5) ~arx next considers the two-fold origin of manufacture: (1) "•••assemblage, in one workshop under the control of a single capitelist, of labourers oelonging to various independent handicrafts but through whose hands a given article must P~BS on its WAy to completion"; and (2) " •••one capitalist employing simult~neously in one workshop, a number of artificers, who all do the same, or the Sf:lme ind of work ••• II (p.)70) k "But, I' concludes ~arx, "whatever may have been its particular starting po rn't its final form is invariably thc s:;'Ime--a , productive mechanism whose parts are human b etngs ;" (p.371) ThE description of the detail laborer and his implements, the heterogeneous and serial forms of manufacture, all lead up to the division of labor in manufacture being compared with the diVision of labor in society; "The foundation of every div islon· of labour that is well developed, end brought about by the exchange of commodities, is the separation between town ~Hid country. It may be s~ Ld, tpat the whole economical history of society is summed up 1n the movement of this antithesis.II(387) ~arx's theory of value is derived from the historical development of labor. "If at first, II s:::IYs Marx, "the workman sells his Labour-power to oapital, because the m~terial me~ s of producing a commodity fail him, now his very labour-power refUSES its scrvices unless it has been sold to capital. Its functicns CAn be exercised only in ~ environment that exists in the workshop ?f the capit~list after the sale. By n~turs unfitted to make anything independently, the manuf~cturing labourer develops product ive activity ae a mere appendage of the cepitalist's workshop. As the chosen people bore in their feature the sign mpnual of Jehovah, so division of labour brands the manufacturing workman as the property cf capital." Questions 1. Define the distinction between absolute and relative surplus value~ 2. Rhat is the re~~tionship between socially-necesEary labor time and the necessity to extract ae much surplus value 9.S possible within the same VTorking day? 3. Does the f~ll in the value cf 3ny commodity effect the value of labor power? Would a f311 in the value of steel? 4. Does compet ition decide the law of v3lue? Draw a. par~llel between the d1visicn cf l~bor in society ~d thet in manufacture. S. Define the differences between cooperation and m~nufqcturc. 7. In wh..,t respect is the m8nufClct~ring workql~n II the property of c~pit~lll?


Lecture 8 ;P,rt IV Chapter 15

Technology and Valu; First, we must see how the capitalist character of manufacture paved the way both for machinofacture and for the abolition of the dominion of capital. "This workshop, the product of the division of labor in manufacture, produced in its turn--machines. It is they that sweep away toe handicraftsman's work as the regulat1ng principle of social production. Thus, on the one hand, the technical reason for the lif3-10ng annexation of the workman to a detail function is removed. On the other hand, the fetters that th~s sam~ principle laid on the dominion of capital, fall away." (p.404) Next, Marx shows how basic is the state of technology to the whole mode of produotion and to the production relations: "Technology discloses man's mode of dealing with Nature, the process of pl"oductlon by which he sustains his lifa and thereby also lays bare the mode of formation of his social relations." (p.406, ftn.) Technological revolutions, then, by"deciding"the mode of production, decide the law of value by making the sooially-necessary labor time required for the production of any commodity, a constantly changing quantity. It is this ",nich keeps oapitalist production in constant turmoil. Before machinofacture becomes a system of production, the production of machines must have'become general since anyone invention, sporadically disoovered,- would have been insufficient to transform manufacture into .ma,chinofacture. "In Manufacture the organisation of the social labour-process 'is purely subjective; it is a combination of detail labourers; in its machinery system, kodern Industry has a productive organism that is purely objective in which the labourer becomes a mere append~ge to an already existing material condition of product ion. "_ (p. 421) Previously Marx had demonstrated thet in the division of labor even in manufacture "the labourer is brought face to face with the intellectual potenc ies of the material process of production as the property of another, and as a ruling power." But it is only in modern industry that science in fact becomes "€I productive force distinct from labour.If(397) Marx next considers the relationship of value to the machine: "Machinery, like every other component of constant cap itEll, creates no new value, but yields up 1ts own value to the product that it serves to beget. In so far as the machine has value, and, in consequence, parts with value to the product, it forms an element in the value of the product. Instead of being cheapened, the product is made dearer in proportien to the v~lue of the machine. And it 1s clear as noon-day that machines and systems of machinery, are incom-


pat3bly more loaded With value than the handicrafts and manu:fa¢ture.1I (p.423)


used in

TeChnology and the Workman Value production is in no way separated, of course, from the greatest productive force, the laborer himself. Marx therefore consider. painstakingly the effects of machinery on the workman~ It i. of utmost importance that the teacher stress the indissoluble connection between the value theory and the conditions of the wor~ers. this hi.torical section on the effects of machinery on the employment of women and children, on tbe prolongation of the working day and intensifioa.tion of labor, l.eat;iing up to the factory system is indeed· the very heart of the conclusion that "In the handicrafts and manufacture the workm.an m.kes use of a tool, in the factory the.mac~L~e makes use of h1=." (p,46l) Under capitalist domination modern technology has converted the workman into a mere automaton: "Every kind of capoi tal ist production in so far as it is not only a labor-process, but also a process of creating surplus value, has this in common, that it is not the workman tha"c emploYF the ij,1struments of la.bor, but the instrUlflents of labor tha"t employ the workman. But it is only. in the factory system that this invers.1,,)fI acquires techn1.cal and palpable reality. By means of iti=l conversion into an automaton, the instruments of labor confront the laborer, during the labor proceas, in the shape of ol'lpitl3l, of dead labor tha.t dOminates, and PUMpSdry, living labour powJr. The sep~ration of the intellectuFll powers of production from the manu~l labor, a. nd the conversion cf these powers into the might of capital over labor is, as we h~ve already shown, fin 'llly ccmpl et cd by modern industry erected on the foundat ion of machinery. The special skill of each individual insignificant factory operative vanishes as an infinitesimal quantity before t_1J science, the gigantic physicIU forces, and th(~ mass of ;'iPor that are embodied in th€ factory mechen i.am, and togather with 1;h.~t mechanism, ccns t rtut e the power of t~le 'mq,dter' ." (ll.462) JAarx conc:.udes th 1s sect ton by showing the effects of modem industry upc.n agriculture.: "Capitalist production, therefore, develops technology, and the ccmb1ning together of various processes into a social wholet only by sapping the originel sources of all weaJ.th.-th~ ec 1J. ana the labourer." (p.556) . " Questions 1. When cap1tfll first su'bcrdinates labor, do~s it immediately change the mode of produc~ion? 2, Whet is the rel.r;tion£hip GBtween technology and production relCJt ions? 3. How does machinery transf~l' it$ v!:,lus to the prcduc';~? 4. What determines the value of the muchine,the pr oc eae from which it issued, or the process in which it is usedr 5. Explain; II It is now no longer the laborer. that employs the means of production, but the meens of produoticn the laborE.r."· How does this c-omplete inversicn of dead to living labor oome about, Whpt constitutes "the power of the 'master'" in a ca.pitelist society. 6. Eo~ does mcdern industry affect agricul ture?

Leoture 9 Part V It 1s import an t to note that this Part, ent itled "The Froduction of Absolute and of Relative durplus Value", is not a mere summation of "The Production of '-AbsoluteSurplus Value" and "The Production of Relative Surplus Velue", but is a further determination of the preqominant factor of these two modes of extracting surplus value. That ie, on the combined basis of the production of absolute and of' relative surplus . value, it is first possible ful~y to grasp what the aelf-expansion of capital =eans. Here too we a:e' able further to delineate the difference between what Marx 0811s the formal and the real subjection of labor to capital: bThe production of absolute surplus value turns exclusively upon the length of the working day; the production of relative surplus value, revolutionises out and out the technical procceees of labor and the composition of society. It therefore presupposes a specific mode, the capitalist modeo! produotion, a mode which along with its methods, means, and conditions, arises and develops itself spontaneously on the foundation afforded by the formal subjection of labOUr to oapital. In the course of this development, the formal subjection is replaced by the rea! subjection of labour to capital." (p.559) After considering the changes in magnitude in the price of labor-power and in surplus value, depending upon '(1) the length of the working day, (2) no:mal intensity of labor, and (3) the productiveness of labor, Marx writes of the "Various formulae for the Rate of ~urplus ValueUThese formulae, Which appea r on pages 582-584 should be gone over carefully, for it is only then th~t we oan understand Marx's conclusion: "Capital. therefore7 is not only, as Adam ~mith says, the command over'labour. It is essentially the command over unpaid labour. All SUrPlus valUe, w~atever pRrticular form (profit, tnterest or rent), it may subsequefitly clystelise into, is in sUbstanoe the materialisa.tion of unpa td labour. The seoret of- the self-expansion of of capital resolves itself into haVing the disposal of,oa definite quantity of other people's unpaid labour." (p.585) Questions

Now th~t you have covered the analysiS of the entire process of production, what, in your opinion, is the central thesis of 'Marx IS analysit;)of the capitalist labor process? Check this against a review of Parts III, IV and V. Wh~t is the relationship between the laws of production and the historical sections on (a) the working day, (b) the factcry actsf and (a)the development of capitalism from its cooperat ive to its mechinofacture sta·8es1 How does the length of the work1ng day 1nfluenc~ tht rate of surplus value' liow does the intensity of labor influence it? ~tate the different formulae for the rate of surplus value. , covering all three parts 4. Wri te out a ser,ies of questionS l on the prcduo tf on of su:plus va ue, that you would have 32 asked if you were teacher, -


B - Result

of the Labor Proces, lQ ~ l!8.rt VI Wages


~8rx considered his analysis of wages to be one of three fundamentally new elements he introduoed into political economy. (see Marx-Engels CorresP9ngence, p.232.) A valuable lesson cen be gotten from contrasting the manner in which he deals with this _phenomenal form of the value of labor power in' Part VI, that 1s, ,fter we have analysed the process of prOduction, and his treatment of the same subjeot i~ Part II, that is, before we entered the inner abode of produ ct rcn , In Part II, in the chafter on the "Contradiotion in the General 'omulafor Capital he merely pose! the conditions wh1ch enable the oapitalist to withdraw m··...re money fJ"om ciroulation than he threw into it. We know, vaguely, that it is the. speoific use-value of laQor-power, but we do not know exactly how that 1s aocomplished. We oannot know that sinoe we are then in·~he market where equality reigns. The worker was not "cheated"; his labor power was paid for at value.

We then follcw the worker into the faotory p~d see that he works more houre than is necessary to r eprc duce his commodity, labor power.• Why does he do trat? W1:y: dc.esn't he assert his rights &8 the equal with th~ other seller of the comillodity, money, cr wages? In Pprt VI ¥.A.rxtell e u s why: "That ~hich comes fa~e to face with the poseessor of money on the market is in fact not labor, but the Labour-e r , What the latter sells iEl nis labO"l .. ~.r-power. As SOO,las his labour actually' ~eg1ns, 1t has al.ready ceased t o b el cng to hin:; it can ther::fore ,1':> longer OS sold by ~ im. Labo::r is the aubstance and tte 1mrr.an,~nt easur-e of value, but haf! itf!'i:ifJlQ_ m vallle." (p.588)
Since labor power 'in aotion 1s labor itself, but since it becomes labor only 1n tbe factory Where it no longer belongs to the laborer, Marx concludes that the appearance of the value of labor power (wages) in actllality "makes the aotual relation invisible and indeed shoWS the direct opposite of the relation and forms the basis of all juridical notions of both labourer and cap i tal; at, of all the mystifications of the capi talist mode of production: of all its illu8ions as to l.iberty, of al~ the apologetic sU.f·t of the vulgar economists." In fac~, continues .~~arx, the r e81lt of the labor processtle that i~ reproduces the ~age Labar er arid sends him ag aIn to market to find a buyer--befudd::'es the basic ola.ss relat ionsh1p~ "Tne wage-form thus extinguishes ·every trace of the division at' 'Ute working day into ueceasary labour and surplus labour. All labour appears as pa rd labour •.• All the slave's labour appe.~rs as unpaidlClvour. In wage-Labour , on the con-


ttary, even surplus labour, or unpaid labour, appears as paid. There the property relation conceals the labour of ,the sla,ve for himself; here the money.relation oonceal. the unrequited labour of the wag~labourer. It (,.591) It is only after he has made this distinction olear that Marx goes into a description of time wages, piece wages, and nat ional differences in wages. It is at this POint, too, that we see that the law of value is a law of the world market: !tBut the law of value 'in its international application i8 yet more modified by this, that on the world market, the more productive national l~our reokon. also as the more intense; so long as the more productive nation. is not compelled by competition to lower the selling price of its commodities ,to the 1 evel of their value." (p.6l2) The full relationship of value to price, in all its phenomenal complexities, w11.1 not, however, be analyzed by Marx until Volume lII.


Immediately after the questions· should review parts I and II. QUestions

to this' les8oD4 the students

1. Do~s labor
2. 3. 5.


possess value or is'it.only a source' of'value? How is the commodity, labor power, distinguished from ~~l other commc~ities? Compare the treatment cf buying and sell ing of labor power in ,Part I I, with ttle:t in Part VI. , Row does tie mcnoy relation .hide ,th~ unpaid labor of the Laber er? . vVhat do wages re'~r.eEe~.ltt How does the mcn ey l's.Latioi.l aff ectthe -jt..ridir.;al no s rcn of tne lab:>rer? of t.ha IJClpitaJ.ist'l on the que s+Lon of fre~d()m find eQu'iJ.:':'ty~ WhEt is rr z r e ElJeGiiic to capitalism, tinie O~ p i ece wages? rela'~ion of the v·alue of Labc r power to its pr rcet hOW does oompet it ion on t'n'e world market influence the price of cmnmodities'l Whf'tdeter.nines the n s t ional differrnces in wages? . Ho~ does labor productivity' influence the price of labor power? What rel~t ionship has the standa.rd of living, the' strength of trade union organization" on the'value of labor pm'er?


Whet t a th6


i I

¥ ;
I· .


11 ?3=24

~art VII" Qha;ters

Part VII is the cl1mu to Volume I. In the rourth German Ed1t1o:n of OAPITAL,whlch Engels published in 1890 from the last notes mad. by Kafx to the frenc~ ~dition Part VIII 1I~b:e~o-Oalled primitive .o~t4.ation of Oapital,. appears only in the form of eAcltl:onal ohapters to Part VII ,1I~he A.ccu- . mulation at Oapital.· ' . In approach~g this part we shwld bear in min.d the changes 14arx int:ro<iuceQ. into the french idit,"on whioh, he wrote, npossesses a soientific vaLue independent of the original and should be consul. ted even by readers of the German.1I (Dona Torr Edition, p.842) The two moat impo:rtant of these changes, since incorporated in all editions, inoluding the Americ~, are to be found on (1) pp.640-4 where 14a1"% expands ~he thesis of the trBns:fol'Ulatlon of the laws of property into the laws of capitaJ..ist appropriation; and (a) pp.687-8 which explain how the l'aw of oentralisation of oapital develope until it reaches its ext:reme by being un! tef,i "in the hanci. of one sing~e capitalist, or in tho~e of one single corporation.1I We will discuss the first addition in the oourse of this leotu:re end the aecend in the fol-lowing lecture.



9Y! NQn at Oapitalist


Before analyzing simple repo:rduct ion, !4arx explains why he proceeds fl'om production to reproduction, without stopping to consider t he act of selling the oommodities produoeci. He merely assumes that the capitalist has sold what he p;o4uQo4. "80 far: as aocumulation takes plaoe," writes Marx, "the oapitalist must have suoceeded 10 sel~ing his commodlties and in reoonverting the eale-~oney into oapital. Moreover, the breaking up of~surplus value into f;agments neither altere its nature nor the conditions under which it beoomes an element_of aooumulation ••• W~ tllerefore assume more than-what actually takes place. On the other hand, the simple fu~ciamental form \ of the process of accumulation is obscured by the inoident of the circulation whioh brings it about, 'and by tpe splitting up of surplus value. An exact analysis of the process, therefore, demands that we should, for a time, disregard all phenomena d that hide the play of its inner mechanism. (p.619}


'!he conditione of production are the conditions of repro-, duction. The mere con~inuity of the process of produotion, even apart from accumulation, sooner or later "oonverts every capital into accumulated capital, or capita11sed surplus value," (p.624) since, no matter with what oapital the oapitalist started that amount would soon have been consumed 'r)yhim, if it


were not that capital had begotten a surplus value. That surplus it got from variable capital. nEVen if the capital was originally acquired by t~e personal labour C)f its employer" it sooner or later becomes yalue appropriated without an equivalent, the unpaid labour of others materialieed either in money or in some other object •••The separation of labour from its p;,oduct, of subjective labour ... power from the objective cond1t10ns of labour was therefore the real foundation 1n fact, and the starting point of capitalist production.~ (p.624)
II ••• Since the process of production is also the process by which the cap~ talist consumes labour-power, the product of the labourer is incessantly converted not only into commodities but into capital, into value that sucks up the value-creating power, into means of subsistence that buy the person of the labourer, into means of production that command the producers. The labourer therefore constantly produces material, objective w~altb, but in the f~rm of capital, of an alien power that do. m tnat ee and exploits himi and the capitalist as constantly pro.duces labour-power, but in the fol"D'l a subj ect ive source of of wealth, separated from the objocts in and by which it can alone be real ised; in short, he produces the labourer bU,t as a wagelabourer. This incessant reproduction, t~1e perpetuation of the labourer is the sine gua~ of capitalist production~n (p.625)

Marx proceeds to make the distinction between produgtive consumpt ion and. in~iVidua.l consumption. nte lat.t.r,tieShOW8 ~to be r under capitalism, a mere incident of production'." (p.sas) ~o emphatic is }4arx on this point that the wage laborer is a factor of production that he says it is not the laborer that buys .the means of consumption, but the means of consumption the laborer. liThe fact," he yoncludes, "that the labourer consumes his means of subsistence for his own purposes, and not to please the capitalist, hae no bearing on the matter, The consumption of food by a beast of burden is none the less a necessary faotor in the process of production, because the beast enjoys what it eats- The maintenance andreproduotlon of the workin~class ie, and must ever be, a necessary condition to the reproduotion of cnpital.D (p.S21) . The Oapitali§t Relationship • Oapitalist production produoes not merely oapital but it produces and reproduces the oapitalist relationship: nOapi~ talist production, therefore, of itself reproduces the separation between labour-power and the means of labour. It thereby reproduces and perpetuates the cond1tion w.~xplo1ting the labourer. It 1ncessantly foroes him to/hie labour-power in 'Jrder to live, and en~blee the capital1st to purohase la... bour-power in order that he may enrich himself." (p. 632~3) The crucial point here is th~t the ex~stence of the wagelaboring claae is now not merely tllehistorio be'ginning of ca~ pi t,9.list product ion, but 1s the tesylt of that production. If it is asked, but isn't the worker free, the anewer i8 that in


fact "the labourer belongs to capital before be has sold himself to capital. His economical bondage is both brougpt about and concealed 'by the period1csale of himself, by his change of masters, and by' the oscillations 1n the marketprice of labour-power." (p.633) The gine qua non of capitalist production, the oontinual reproduction of the labourer, likewise gives tbe lie tc the apparent equality of exchange in the capitalist market where capitalist and laborer exchange oommod1ties: "The exchange of equivalents, the original operation with which we started, has now beoome turned round in such a ,way that there 1s only an apparent exchange. This i8 owing to the fact, first, that the capital whioh is exohanged for labourpower is itself but a port ion of the product of ot'hers1 labour appropriated without an equivalent; and, sec! ondly , that this capital must not only be replaoed'by its producer., but replaoed together witb an added surplus. The relation of exchange subsisting between capitalist and labourer becomes a mere semblance appertaining to the proc~ss of oircU1a.tlon, a. mere formt foreign to the real nature of the transaotion, and only mystlfles it. The ever-repeated purchase and sale of l~ boux-power is~ow the mere form; What really takes place is this--the capit,alist again and again appropriates, without equivE'lent, a portion of the previously meter1911sed labor of othars, ~nd exohanges itior a greaterquantlty of living labor." (p.63S') In other words, the relation of oapitalist to laborer is the exact oPHosite of What it appeared to be when We witnessed that relation in the market. This is olear enough from the above passage~ Nevertheless, it is precisely here that Marx made one of his two major additions to the first publiShed text of OAPITAL. In order to make c~~ar beyond the shadow of a doubt, how it is that the transformation of ~oney into capital, whioh proceeded with striot compliance of the economiC laws of the produotion of oommodities, shoUld only result 1n inequali ty. Marx explains;
II u) That the product belongs to the capit~!st, the laborer.

not to

II (2)That the value of this product comprises a surplus value over and above the value of the advanced capital.

,,()That the laborer has reproduced his l~bour-power and 3 can sell it once more, if he finds a buyer for it. II (p.64l) Th~ Material Form of Capit§J;
'By establishing the fact that the perpetuation of the laboring class is the 1ndispens~ble condition of capitalist production, Merx demonstratect the quintessential 1mport~nce of the faot that the material form of variable capital is actu~l living lebor. For it is only living labor tha.t produoes surplus -37

value; the means of consumption are only the medium to reproduce the laborer. Yet, so far as the products of prc1uction are concerned, the material form Of .variable capi~al 18; ot course, means of consump'tion, j~r: t ItS the material forn. of constant capital is means of production~ Marx demonstrates that "surplus value is convertible into capital' solely because the surplus product whose v~ue it is already comprises the material element of new capital.1I '(p.636) 1urthermore, Marx'· emphasizes:
wh ich a nation can change art icles of luxury 'either into means

"We her e take no account of export trade, by means of

of production or means of subSistence, and vice versa. In order to examine the object of our investigation in its integrity, free from all disturbing subsidiary Circumstances, we must treat the whole wor~d as one nation, and assume that capitalist production is every~ere est9blished ••• n( 636,ftn.)

These two factors of product ion--l 1ving labor and means of production--are also the factors of zeproduct ron , !Aoreover, it does not alter matters any, continues Marx, if sunple reproduction is replaced by reproduction on an enlarged scale. No greater error can be committed than to think that the condi t ions of expanded r epr oduc t Lon are changed Simply because "the popular mind is impressed by the sight, on the one hand, of the mass of goods that are stored up for the gradual consumption by the rich, and on the other hand" by the formation of reserve stocks." (p.645) The Error 9f ro~itical Economy Classica.l political economy realized that accumulation resulted not in the expansion of cons~ption, but expansion of production •. Nevertheless, so unaware were these economists' of the role of constant capital in production that they, "by a. fundamentally perverted analysis, arrived at the absurd conclusion that, even though each individul!ilcapital is divided into constant and variable, the c~pital of society resolves itself into only variable capital, i. e., is laid out exolusively in payment of wages." (p.e4?) . ot Reproduction In the section. o~.the,Erroneous Conception/by Political Economy on a Progressively Increasing Scale Marx expanda on the above pOint, and anticipates the prob Leme he will deDl with in full in Volume II: liTheannual process of reproduction is easily underetcod so long as we keep in view merely the sum total of the ye~rls production. But every Single component of this product must be b rcugh t into the r.1arketas a commodity and there the difficulty begins. The movements of the individual capital, and of the personal revenues, oross and intermingle and are lost in the general ohange of places, in the circulaof the wealth of society; this dazes the sight, and propounds very complicated p~obl~s for sOlut10p, In the third part of Bock II, I shall giv~ the analysis of the real bearings of the facts." (p.6~7)

The Abstinence TheorY In discounting the theory that it 1s the abstinence on the part of the capitalist, which makes accumulation possible, Marx does not let us forget that the capitalist is only personified capital. It is not so much the "evil" of the capitalist as the contradictory nature of the capitalist mode of production which is the root evil: . "Except as personi! ied capital, the capitalist has no historical value, and no right to that historical existence, which, to use an expression of the witty ~ichnowsky, 'hasn't got no datel •••But, so far as he is personified capital, it is.not values in use and the enjoyment of them, but exchange value and its augmentation that spur him into action. Fanatically bent on making value expand itself, he ruthlessly forces the human rac e to produc e for product ion t s Sakei ·he thus forces the development of the productive powers of 'society, and creates those material conditions, which alone can form the real basis of a higher form of society, a society in which the full and free dev~lopment of every individual forms the ruling principle. (pp.648-9, Marx then relates the passion for money on the part of ·the mt ser, and on the pa.rt of the capt talist: "Only as personified capitsl is the capitalist respectable. As such, he shares with the miser the passion for wealth as wealth. Bu~ that which in the miser is a mere idiosyncrasy is, in the capitalist, the effect of the social mechanism, of Which he is but one of the Wheels. Moreover! the development of capitalist production makes it constant y necessary to keep increasing the amount of the capital laid out in a given industrial undertaking, and competition makes the immanent laws of oapitalist production felt by each individual capitalist as external coercive laws. It compels him to keep constantly extending hie capital, in order to preserve it, but extend it he cannot, except by means of 'prcgressive accumulation." (P.~) It is this compulsion whi9h has given rise to the claSSical formula, "Accumulate, accumlate! II Because olassical economy 'Wasnot deceived by the spurious supposition that the capitalist's abstinenoe made accumulation possible, its formula correctly reflected the inherent law of capital ist product ion: "Accumulation for accumulation's sake, production for prcduotions'a sake: by this form~a classical economy expressed the historioal mission of the bourgeoisiet and did not for a single ir.stantdeceive itself over the blrth-throes of wealth. But ~hat avails lamentation in the face of historical necessity?" (p.652) Questions
1. Whet 1S '~he real foundation of capitalist production? What is its sine gua non? 2. Whet is meant by the expression "In reality, the labourer belongs to ·capital.before he b~s sold himself to capital"? -39


4 •.

5. 6.

8. 9. 10. 11.


Do market transactions augment total annual production? Do they al ter the nature of the obj eots produced, What is signifioant about the material form of oapital?' Analyze the follow ing: It surplus v«llue is convertible irito oapital solely because the eurplue.-produot whose value it ls. already comprises the mater~al el~ents of ,new oapital." Eow do the laws of property beoo~e 'transformed into laws of capitalist appropriation' . . What is significant about the sent~nce "1he exchange of equivalents, the original operation w~th whioh we started has now become tumed around in such a way tbat there 1s only an apparent e~change.n? What are the three re~lts of capitalist production? How are these altered if simple reproduction is replaoed by reproduct ion on an enlarged soale?' . . What is the erroneous conoeption of classical polit1cal ,economyabout reproduQt1on on an enlarged scale? Does abstinenoe help in converling surplus value 1nto c~ pital? . What is the soaoocalledlabor fund? What determines the extent of aocumulat1on? What determines 1ts rate? Explain: n400~ulat10n of oapital, is, therefore, inorease .of the proletariat."


The Lot of

tlle ,ork3M 010..1

. The conoluding chapter of this pa.ri, -The Gene:r~ Law of Oa.pi tal~st i\c.cumul..at~.o'n" 1s .bY far the~ost ba$ic to ·the theory of oapitalist d.evelopnent. ·In :reviewing· it we must go rather

s~ow~y because 1n the t~eatment of t~e·o:rgan1c oompositionof oapital u.arx antic:ipates the tJ."eatJrlen'the acoords ,.t 1n the seotion on the D§cJ.ill~ni Rate Qf irQi,U. 1l:1 Volume III, and thus a full uncierstanding of this ohapte~ will help us when we get to that vol~e. -.

ot deoisive 81gnUicanee in underst!.Uldmg wl'iat .is the gen~ eral law of aocumUlation is tne recognition. that the lot; of the working' class is as integral a part of ,thiela'" AS the organic oomposition of oapital. ':Chis is not "mere" f,\gitation, but oan be expressed in the most prect se 'techni.oal t erme. The organio oomoosit~cll of capita.l is the interrelationship between its value~~ i t iQ.B., or th e propc rt ion between constant and variable oapital, and. its teQQpioaJ,. ~omT29§.itiQJh or the dj.vieion b etueen means of ptoduct"!on and llving labor power. ,
Tbe W8.y this affects-"the -lot 6f 'ne .workers is as follows: "iroduct ion of surplus value is the absolute law 0: -this mode of productiori~··"Labour-pov:er is only saleable so :taias it .. ;eP serves tl+8 means of product 10n 1n thet; capaoity of ca-pitJl, rep~oduces 1te ;own value as oapi taJ. and y1elds in unpaid la". bour a souroe of additional capital." (p.67~) Henoea wage rise could never reach the po int wheTe ~t would threaten the cyetem it self: "Either the price 01 ~abo~ keeps on ~is1ng b.eo1'!.us$ is r1se does not inte;rfere with the i progress of ~ccumulat10n ••• Or, on tQe other hand, aocumulation s~aoken$ in ccnaequenoe oi theriae 1n the p:rice of labour, 'because the st:l.muluB of ga1n is bl'imte4. The rate o:t accUJnlr lation lessens; but With the l~ssen1ng the primarY cause ()f that ~essening vanishes, i-e., the d1~propottion between oap4~ tal and exploital:lle labour-povrer. The meohanism of the p~o.... cee a at ca.pitalist produQtion removes the ve"!:yobstaole,s tha.t it tempor~;rUy cr eet ea, The price of labo\l;t' falls aga.in to·. level corresponding with the needs ot the selt-expaneion of C~ p1tal, weether the ~evel be low, the same as, or above~ the one whioh was no~al before the :rise of wages too~ plaQe~· (pp.67&.a) 14a~x summarizes this in tile following formulat1cin: I~O put it mathematically the ;ate of accumulation is independent~ not the dependent variablei· the rate of wages, the dependept-, not. the independent var~t:'p e. n (p.679) Or, in othel;' words;, the rise of ':Vegestherefo;r:e is confined within limits that not \only leave intact the f.Qundations of the capi tBl1st system, but .. aJ,:s9 secure its reproduotion on a progressive soale. ~he law of ca.pitalist accumulation, metamorphosed by econom,iste into a pretended law of na~'ure. in re~liti rne~ely states that tbe

very nature of acc~ation excludes every diminution in the degree of eXploitation of labour, and every rise in the pr Lo'e oj labour, which could seriously imperll the cont inual reproduct ion on an ever enlarging scale, of the capital iatia relat ion. It cannot be otherwise in a mode of production in which th e labourer exists to sat isfy the needs ot self-expansion of existing values, instead of on ~e oontrary, material wealth existing to satisfy the needs of development on the part of the labourer. As, in religlon, man i8 governed by the products of his own bra.in, so in aapit. &listie production he is governed by the produc'&s of his own hand." lpp.680-1) - Growth of Constant Capital At the Ex'Qense of Variable Oapital Marx now turns his attent ion to the condit ions arising from a change in the or7anio oomp,lsition of oapital. The law governing this change ia the ive incr ase constant capital in proportion to vartabl,C_c4Pttal. Labor-power or the wC'ge-fund to buy' it.) Accumulation of capital, it is true, means expansion of production and hence the growth of the working population. However, the demand for labor comes not from total capital, but only from its variable component, which is relatively the smaller part. Moreover, the value of constan~ capital does not fully reflect the change in the composition of its m~terialconst 1tuen ts. In order to hire m oze workers, not only is a greeter wage fund needed but greater investmen'& 10 factories, in means of production and raw materials. IWhere~s formerly an increase in capital by 20 percent would have sUfficed to rat se the demand for l·abour by 20 per cent, now th is latter rise requires a tripling 0:: the o~1nal capital." (p.683) Marx continues; 'This diminution in the variable part of capital as compared with the constant, or the altered value composition of the capital, however, only shows apprOXimately the change in the composition of its material oonstituents. If, e.g., the capital-value employed today in spinning is 7/8 constant and 1/8 variable, whilst at the beginning of the 18th Century it was 1/2 constant and 1/2 variable, on the other hand, the rLass of raw ~ter1al, instruments of labour, etc. that a certain quantity ot spinning labour Qonsumea productively today, is many hundred times greater than at the beginning of the 18th Century. The reascn is simply that, with the increasing productivity of labour, not only does the mass ot the means of productj,on consumed by it increase] but their.v~ 1ue aompared to this mase dim1n1sbee. Their v~ue therefore rises absolutely, but not in proportion to their mass." (p.683) Oentralization of oapital Marx now proceeds to analyze the effect of the concentration and centralization of capital upon the relationship ot constant to variabl.e.oapital. But, first, he warns that "The laws of this centralisation of oapitals or of the attract10n

of capital by capital, cannot be developed ~ere.n He does not deal with this until he reaches Volume III. Here he says, "! brief hint at a few facts must suffioe." (p.SSS) However, what Marx calls a "brief hint If propounds astounding problems for the Marxist student. Here is how he develops his brief hint: "The battle of competition is fought by cheapening of commodities. The cheapness of 'oommod1t ie8 depends, gget@ri8. QaribuB, on the productiveness of labour, and this again on the scile -of production. 'rherefore the larser oapitals beat the smaller ••• Competiti~n and oredit, the two most powerful levers of centra~isation, develop in proportion as oapitalist production and accumulation do••• Centralisation may take plac,e by a mere change in the distribution at all'ead.y existing capitals, a simple change in the quantitative arrangement of the components of social capital. capital may in that case accumulate in one hand in large masses by withdraw1ng it from eany indiv1dual hands. Oentralisation in a certain line of industry w~ld bave reached its extreme limit, if a 1 the individual capitals 1nvested in it would have been amalgamated into one single oapital. n(pp.686-8) This 1s trustification.. This is the beginning of the second and the most important change 14ar~ 1ntroduoed into the French Edition of CAPIT~ •. Moreover. Marx does not stop here since the development of the trust i8 only the 11mit of oentralisation of capital in a specific line of industry. What is the limit of centralization of capital in a given oount:y' uThis l1mlit," lla~'writes, "would not be· reached in any particular society unt1l the entire social oapital would be united, either in the hands of one s~ngle oapitalist, or in those of one eing1e corporation. II (p.sse) . We have here the prediction of state capitalism: Itthe entire sooial capital ••• united either in the hands of one single capital~st 01' in those of one single corporation.1 The Geperpl Absolute La! of Oapit§list prQduction The result s of this aot, cont inues Marx in this crucial addition to the French Edition of CAPITAL, has the 'same results whether accomp1ish,d by "the violent means of annexation' or nthe smoother road of forming ~toct companies.' The result is of a qualitative charaoter; that is, it so revolutionises the technical composition of oapital that it inoreases its constant at the expense of its Variable constituent: DThe specifically capitalist mode of prod~ction, the development of the productive power ot labour corresponding to .it, and the change then resulting in the organio composition of capital, do not merely keep paoe with the advance ot accumulation, or with the growth of sooial wealth. 'rhey de\felop to a much quicker rate~ .• If it was originally sayl:l, it now becomes successively 2:1, 3~l, 4;1, 5;1, 7:1, etc.~.The labouring population ~herefore producee, along with the accumulation -43


of capital produoecl by it, the means by whioh it it·self 1s made relatively superfluous, is turned into a relative surplus population." (pp.690-a) nThe greater the so01al wealth, the funotioning of capital, the extent and energy of its growth, and therefore also the absolute mass of the proletariat and the productiveness of labour, the greater 1s the industrial reserve army. The same causes whioh develop the expansive power of capital, develop also the labou;-power at its disposal ••• But the greater this reserve army in pro~ortion to the aotive labour-army the greater ~s the mass of a consolidated surplus population, ••• and the greater is the offiCial pauper i_ • Th ill is the abs:>l11te general law '\It' capit).iist a'bcuanll-a"t'1on." lp.707)








This absolute general law dominates over production even when it has reached 1ts ultimate development throu" statifioat 10n. This law of capitalist accumulation means no1; only the polarization of wealth, the alienation of the products of labor from the laborer, bu~ it means the alienation of his very capao1ty to labor. Karx's desoription of the oapitalist labor process is that it 1s a process whereln 'all means for the development of produotion transform themselves into means of domination over, and eXpl01tation of, the produoers; they mutilate the labo;rer into a fragment of a man, degrade him to the level of an appendage to a machine, de,st,roy every remnant of charm in hls work and turn it into a hated to~l; they estrange him from the intellectual potent lalities of the labourprocess in the same prop04tion as science is· incorporated in it as an independent power; they distort the oonditione under which he works, subject him during the labour-process to a despotiSm the more hateful for its meanness; they tX'aneto:= his life-time into Working-time, andc1rag his wite. anc1 c.hU4 beneath the wheels of the Juggernaut of capital. l3\lt $11 mot hods for the produot10n of surplus value are at ttle 8=0 time methods of aocumulation; and every extension ot acQ1.1mUl.~ tion becomes again a means for the development of theqo meth.. ods. It follows therefore that in proportion as capital aao~~ muated, the lot of the labourer! be his payment high or lQw, must grow worse. Th'e law 1 ·fina ly, thR.t always equilibrates therelat1ve surplus-popu.Lation, or industrial reserve army, to the extent and energy of accumulation, this law rivets tne labourer to capital more "f1rmly than the wedges of Vulcan did Prometheus to the rook. It establishes an aocumulation of misery, correspond.ing with an accumulation of oapital. Accumulation of wealth at one pole iSt therefore, at the same time, a~· cumulation of misery agony or to U, slavery, ignorance, brutalitYt mental degcadationt at the oppqs1te POle 1.e., on the side or the class that prOQuces its own product ln the form of oapital." (pp.70S-8) Questions 1. 2. Define the.Value-compositlon, technioal oomposit10n and the organic cOmpos1tion of capital. Explain the relation betwe~n the la" of capitalistic ao-



cumulation and the laborer's existenoe "to satisfy the. needs of self-expansion of existing value." 3. What is the s1gnifioance of the proportionate 100rease of oonstant to variable oapital' 4. What 1s the law of the oonoentration of wealth, of its . oentfalization' What is the limit of oentralization 1n a single industry? What 18 the limit in a given .oo1et." . ue these affeoted by the "absolute general law of oapitalist produot.ion"? What is the "a.bsolu~e general law"? 5. What is the relation between aooumulat1onabd the reserve amy of labor' What are the different fbrme. of the relative surplus populat10n, Is the degradation of the worker to an appendage of a maohine dependent upon whether his payment 1s high or 1",,"1




Lecture Part Historical


VIII beginnings

Ma.rx now turns to the historic beginnings of capitalism, and shows how "The economic structure of oapitalist· sooiety has gr om out of the economic structure 'Of feu~8l society. The dissolution 'Of the latter set free the elements 'Of the former. II (p.786) The oapitalistic era dates fre~ the 16th century. "The starting peint 'Of the develepment that gave rise te the wagelabeurer, a. well ·as te the capitalist, w~s the servitude 'Of the labeurer," Marx writes, emphasizing that tiThe exprOpriatien of the agricultural preducer, the peasant, frem the seil, 1s the 'oasis of the whele precess. If (p.787) Marx then proceeds to a description of·the exprepriatien 'Of the agricultural population frem the land, and the legisl~ t ien against the exprepriated: liThe bourgeeisie, a t its rise, wants and uses the power of the state te 're~atet wages, 1.e., to force tnem within the limits suitable fer 'surplus-value making, to lengthen the working-day and to 'keep the labourer himself in the normal degree 'Of dependence. This 1s an essential element of the se-called primitive accumulatien.1I (p,,80S)


Hewever, centinues Marx, laber's suberdinatien te capital at the beginning "was only formal, i.e., the mede 'Of prcduotion itself had as yet no speoific capitalistio char~-ter. Variable capital p;r:ependerated greatly ever constant." (p.SOS) Marx next traoes the genesis of the oapitalist farmer and the manner in which the agrioul tural revelutien oreated a home market fer industrial oapital: "With the setting free,ef a part 'Of the agricultural pepulation, therefere, their former means 'Of nourishment w.ere also set free. They were now transformed inte material elements 'Of variable capital. 'l'he peasant. exprepriated and cast adrift~ must buy their value in the ferm 'Of wages, frem his new master J the industrial capitalist. That which helds, geed of the means of Bubsistenoe holds. with the raw .materials 'Of industry ~ependent upen heme agriculture. They were transformed into an element of constant capital.a (pp.8l7-18) , The historic beginnings of capitalism reaoh their climax in the genesis 'Of the industrial oapitalist: "The discovery 'Of gold and silver in Amerioa, the extirpation, enslavement and entombment in mines of the aboriginal population, the beginning of the conqueat and looting 'Of the East Indies, the turning of Africa into a warren for the commercial hunting 'Of blaCk-skins, ·signalised the rosy dawn 'Of the era. of oapitalist,production. These 14yllio proceedings' are the ch.ief momenta of primi t1ve accl,lmUl'!t1on. On their heels treads the commeroial war of the P).lropean nations, with th'e globe for a theatre." (p.S23)

These momentaof primitive &Caumulation,'f~thermore, "all employ the power of the State, the ooncentrated and o~gan ised force of 80C iety, to halten, hothouse fashion, the process of transformation of the feudal mode of produotion into the capitalist =oae, and to shorten the transition. Force is the midWife of every old sooiety pregnant with a new one. It is itself an eoonom"io .power.1I (pp.8a~4) Karx concludes: liThe only part of the so-called national wealth that actually enters into the collective possessions of modern peoples is~their national debt ••• The public debt beoomes one of the most powerful levers of primitive accumulat ion. II (p.827) Historical ~endenQI of Qapitalist AcoYmY,l,atign "What," asks Marx, '!ldoes the primitive accumulation of capital, i.e., itB historical genesis, resolve itself into.'" And he anSWers: "In so far as it is not the immediate transf ormation of slaves and serfs into wage-labourers, and therefore a mere change of form, it only means the expropriation of the immediate producers, i.e, the dissolution of private property based on the labour of its owner." (p.8J4) Thus we s~e .the distinction between self-earned private property and capitalistic priv1.te property, based on the expropriation of the producers: II The capitalist mode -f appropriation, the result of the capitalist mode of pre .ct tcn , produces capitalist private property. ':this' is the first negation of individual private pro~erty, as fOWldedon the labour of the proprietor. But oapitalist production begets, with the inexorability of a law of .Natur-e, lts ownnegation. It is the negat ion of negat ion, " This is pl"oletarien revolution. For, along with the degradation and exploitation of the worlcing class "grows the revolt of the working class". (pP.- 837,8)6) "That which is now to be e~propriated is no longer the labourer working for himself, but the capitalist exploiting many laborers. This expropriation is accomplished by the action of the immanentlaws of capitalist produotion itself, by the centralisation of oRoitsl. One capitalist always kills many... . -Oentralisation of the-meane of p~duct10n~ and' soo~alizat10n of labor at last reaoh a point where they beoome inoompatible with their oapital1st integument. This 1nte~ment is burst asunder. 'l'he knell of oapitalist private prop~rty sounds. The el:propriatora are expropriated." (pp.936-7) Thus we s~e that the historical tendenoy of oapital1st acoumt~~tion leading to ita collapse is deoid3d on the ~ive historic stage by the c~ass struggle. Marx c0noludes that the modern theory of colonisation demonstrates that even the capitalist ideologiste know that "oapital 1s not a thing, but a' sooial relation between persons, es1;ablished by the instrumentali,ty of t·h1ngs.fI (p.839) .


Questions Whet' is "the pr1mitive accumulation of oapital"' Does primary accumulation occur through "honest toil"? 2. Desoribe the double lense in whioh the laborer is free. 3. Marx writes that liThe starting point that gave rise to the wage-laborer as well as the capitalist was the servitude of the laborer." How,does this servitude differ from outright slavery? " ' 4. Whet is the meaning of the expression" 1115,000 Gaels were replaced by 131,000 sheep"? . 5. What is the inter-relationship yetween state legislation and the working day' In whose behalf did the state interfere! Is th~t a new role tor the state to play! 6. Define the relationship ~etween the expropriation of the agricultural population. and the creation of the home market. 7. Explain the expresJ3ion: "the negat ion of the negation". Is that an automatic aotion? Has it any relationship to the actual class struggle? 8. Whet is the historic tendency of capitalist accumulation? 9. What are the fetters of production? How are they broken? 10. What is the relationship between the central isat ion of the means of production and the socialisation of labor? Is there a conflict in this result of ca.pital 1st aocumulation? 11. Bow are the expropriators expropriated?· Is the abolition 'of small capitals by large capital part of this ex~ropriBttion? Can large capital abolish itself? J.2. What is the modern theory of colonisat ion? tiow did this reveal the true condition of capitalist production? 13. Wb,at is capital? Is it a thing? Is it a relationship of produotion? What is t he connection between the two1

-48 ,



..L eelu.§ -Ai

Marxism and Pplitioll


.All soience, wrote Marx, "would be super{luous if the appearance, the form, and the na.ture of things were wholly identical." ,Vol. II, p.951) , Marxian science separates the. essential production relationship from its fetishistic appearance as a relation between things. At the same time it shows the dialectical relat.ion between essence and phenomena. lor essence must manifest itself, and its manifestation does reflect the t~ue tel~tionsh4p, ,noe you are aware that the underly1ng eSBenOehaa an irrat ional form of manifesta.tlon. Just as Marx's abstract method of analysis is derived from t~e concrete history of developing capitalism, so his analysis of the use-value and value of a co.mmodity 184erived from an analysis of the dual character of labor. This, 8ays Marx, is lithe pivot onJihich a clear comprehension ofpolltloal economy turns.1I (p.4S) .. "I was the first to point out and to examine critically this two-fold nature of the· labour eontained in commodiies. ". t .. ~ ., .• It is evident that what makes all eorts of commodities-from apples to steel--commensurable are not their use-values,but the something that is common ~ll of them--the homogeto neous human labor embodied in them. ' A!! understanding of the facts, and ~arx underlines the word, all, depends upon a comprehension of this dual character of labor- ... oncrete c labor creates use-values; abstract labor values. (See Marxingels Correspondence. p.a26) This, then, is Marx's ori~inal contribution to political economy. What is the :s;Lgnll'icance of t~is If contribut ion II to pol it ical eoonomy? A great advanoe in the evolution of political economy as a science was made when the source of weal th was recognized to be not in obj ecte- outside of man-e-pr tcus metals or the earth ..-but in the f.unot::.on of ec man. The rC9u'l t of manI s labor was the source of pri-"I::t.~e p rcper ty , Iio'~ is it, then, that the living embodimen1;·f r labor, the latcrer, continues to remain poverty-stricken, and the produo t s of his labor are not his "private prcperty"? Here classical pol:i.tic~ econcmy'could""""'O£Ier ansWer. no It is true, as the young Marx wrote in 1844, th"lt nWhen one' speaks of priv~te property, one thinks of something outs ide of man. Whenone speaks of labor, one has to do 1mme·diately with man himself. 'l,'henew formulation of the queeti.on already involves its solution. II However, th~t new for ...

mul~ticn of the question involved its solution, not ~hen bourgeois economists tackled the problem, but when the revolutionist, Marx, did. The diff erence between the scienoe of economics" as such", as a science of obj ective elements-wages, value, etc .--and t he Marxian sc ience of economrca is that for ~arx all economic categories are social categories. Thus Marxism incorporates into tr.ie science of economics the subjeotive element, the receiver of wages, the source of value, in other words, the l~ borer. It is i;;ipossibleto disaSSOCiate property forms from pr oduct ion relations. 'rhelaborer, whose funotion, labor, creates bourgeois weal th and his ovm h:i>over~ &nJ!cnt is opposed to his dcm inatIon by a product of his own Labcr . He rebels agamat the mode of laber, and thus becomes the grave digger of bourgeOis pri~ate property. Capitalist priVate property thus cont a tns l'ithin itself the seed of its'own disintegration. It is for this reason that the classical economist, 1 imited by the concepts of his class which blurred his vision as to the h istaric nature of the capitalist mode of production, could not prooe the problem to the end. He failed to see that the living embodimen t of the source of w cal th, the laborer, would bring to 8 head and to an·end all the contradictions inherent in capitalist priv~te property.

Value AJld SUrplus Value eo . ~

In obserVing the structure and content of CAPITAL, We have noted that Marx, first, describes capitalist wealth as it ~ppears--a vast accumul':Jtionof cornmodi ties. Part s I and II deal w it-the buying and sell ing of commod i ties, including the ccmmo d-. ity, labor power. Marx then leaves the sphere of exchange, or the market, and for the next 389 pages--which comprise Parts III, IV and V--he analyzes the pure essence of capitalist SOCiety: the production of surplus value. When we next return to a phenomenon--that of wages, covered in part VI~-w~ no longer deal with a phenomenon abstracted fram production relations. We now consider it as a manifestation of that very production relationship between o8pital and labor. Marx's theory of value is his theory of surplus value. Moreover, his abstract definition of value is rooted deep in t r.e concret~_pi13tQ.rLof develo~!lS_.Qapit3.lism. Ma.rx traces in detail the concept of the working day and the history of its limitation; in the beginning~m'oap1talist could extract surplus value from the worker only through lengthening of the workin~ day, with the state intervening in behalf of the budding cepitalist. This is period of the production of absolute surplus vFllue. The estaLlishment of a normal working day, says Marx, 1s the result of centuries of struggle vetween oapitalist and laborer. It connects with the highest stage of development of cE'pitalist production, machinofacture, which makes possible, within the same working da~ the extraction of ever greater masses of surplus value. ~ough the worker now labored 8

hours instead of 11, only two of ~hese 8 hours are necessary to produce the means of subsistence of the laborer, so that the capitalist gets fully S'hours of unpaid labor. The extracticn of relative surplus value Marx calls the specifioally oapitalist method of ext;r.aot1ne;surplus value beoause it is here that the inveJ;sion of dead to living labor -acquires teohnical end palpable reality." Cr~y in capitalist society does aocumulated labor dominate living labor. There was dead. labor, or machines, or at least tools in pre-oapita.list sooieties, but they did not dominat~ 1 iving labor. The savage was complete master of his bow an arroW. The serf was without a tractor and had to use a wooden hoe, but that crude instrument did not have a value that as. serted its independence in the process of production as a I'live monster that 1s fruitful and multiplieslf so that the energy of the living laborer was a mere means for its expansion • .The machine age has brought about the complete inversion of dead to living labor. iIloreover . more and more mach s ines need lessand less labor and more and more perfect machines need less and less skill in the general mass of humanlabor. The.t is why the capital 1st, the agent of value, care. naught about the specificity of the labor of the individual laborer. Whether he is a.'Bhoe-maker, shipyard worker or assembly laborer, the cap1talis·t sees th~ he uses up only as much time as is eooial1): necessary in the pro.duotion of commodities -. The incessantly ohanging quantitative determinaion of exch ang e values';'-8 hours were soc ially nee essary for the produotion of a oommodity; onlyS hours are neoessary today, and only 4 will be necessary tomorrow--is the law which compels the capitalist to use one factor of proQuotion, aocumulated labor, against another faotor of production, living labor. By mea.nsof his faotory clock, he bludgeons the worker to produce as many units as is sooially neoes8ary~no matter whether the worker be a miner, a tailor. " Tihere is no such thing as an abstraot laborerl tet all produoe abstract values. The social~y-necessary labor time 1s the solvent whioh reduces the aggregates of concrete labor into a general mass of abstract labor. Marx calls this the real subordination of labor to capital. . .Capital ~A.snot invented surplus labor; in all class soc i:eties surplus labor was extracted ·from the worker for the master class. What distinguishes one economyfrom another is, however, the manner in which this extraction is accomplished. In capitalist society this is aocomplished by accumulated labor, machines, for which livin~ labor 1s the mere ferment ne.oessary to ita self-expansion~ The.capitalist1s domination over the liv~ 1ng laborer is only lithe mastery of dead over living labor. II. Constant and variaole oapital are not merely the outer covering of an old relationship; ~hey are the innermost essence of the capitalist mode of production revealing that society in whrt Marx called 1ts "part icular distinctiveness". The ba.sic antagonism between uae-vakue end value reside in the commodity, labor power, whOle utilization produces all surplus

value. That commodity, in- the process of production and not in the market, creates a greater value -~8D 1t 1taelf 1s. nIt is every b1t as important," wr1te. Marx, 'for a oorrect understand1ng of .~lus value, ~o oonceive it a8 a mere congelat10n of surplus labo~time, .s nothing but material13ed surplus.labour, as it 1s, for a proper comprehens1on of value, to conce1ve 1t as a mere oongelation of so many hours of _ labour, as nothing but materiallsed. labour.' (p.241) Tae Law of SurPlrus Y8.}ue


The law of surplus value ae.I to oontr&(\ict all pheno.mena based. on experience for everyone knows that the. baker who uses mOl'eliVing laborers relat1ve to means of production' does not get more prof1t than the steel manufacturer who uses relat1vely less variable as compared to h1s constant capltal. Nevertheless, the law not only is true, but oompetlt lon, which seems to be a matter of w111, is, in reality. only a reaot1on to the inherent law of capita~ist pToduotion. But, warns Karx, let us not worry about oompet1tlon and prof1t, and Itiok to essentials: "The rate of proflt is no mystery, 10 soon as we knoWthe laws of s~lus value. If Wereve~8e the ~roo.s8, we cannot com.prehendeither the one or the other.' \p.239,ftn.) Surplu8 value 18 a~iv~ magnitu~e, the sum total of ~ paid. hours of labor. Ite rea~lng-up of surplus value into fragments, II wri tea Marx,"nei ther alters its l1ature Jlor the oond1tions under Which it becomes an element of accumulation.1f Neither does the rate of aocumulat10n depend upon either his con auaptn on, or a m1dQJ.e I scommission, .)1" his w111. man . Accumulat1on, depending, as it does on the magnitude of surplus value, tbe degree of exploitation and the produot1vity of labor is, fundamentally ~ simple process of _e"'ploitat ion. But this s~ple prooess of prOduotion and reproduotion 1s obscured by the prooess of oirculation. This 1s why, from the· very begL-ming, in his prefaces, Marx states that be is not interested in subjeotive motivations, but only in objeative condLtions.: "Individuals are dealt with only in 80 far as they' are the pe~sonificat10ns of economic oategories, embodiments of particular class relations and classes. 14y standpolnt from which the evolution of the eoonomic formation of sooiety is viewed as a prooess of natural history, oan ~ess than any other make the· individual responsiblo for relatlons whese oreature he socially remains." (p.15) . Marx has therefore analyzed the capitalist'mode of produGtion from the point of view of the laws of produotion "working with iron neoessity towards inevitable results,' (p.13) The 1nevitable results are dealt witb in the tbeoretioaL climax to ~arx's work, The AccumUlation of CaRital. Thls fartVII and the historical, illustrat ions of its genesis in Part VII I we can deal with under tne heading of lithe La of Motion of Capi tal1st Society ". It is the disoe:rnment of this la~, we must remember, which Marx set as the task of his work.

TRe Law of MQt~oQ Qf Qap1;,*1st Sooiety 1rOQl the very beginning of O.APITjL we' learned of the in terdependence of use-value and value. Value, -wrote Marx, may oe indifferent to th~ use-value by which it is borne, Nt it must be born~ oy some u.e.value. Th1s bodily form assumes added signif1oanoe in tbe Question of acoumulation or expanded reproduotlona "Surplus value is convertible into capital solely beo~se the surplus product whose value it is, already comprises the material elements of new-oapital~" (636) Oapital, whioh 1s "value big'w1th value", deepens the oontradiction between use-value and value~ This is so because not only are the material and value forms of capital' in oonstant co_nflict, but so are the cl!sS t"elalipn, whi..ch ~'interfere with" the production process. Capital, Marx' held" ,is not a t hil1~ but a relation of produotion establishe4 oy the instrumen, tality of things. Expanded produotion further aggravates this class relationship whioh is pro¢Uced and)reproduced by capitalist production. Capitalist private property 'turns out to be the right on the part of the capitalist to appropriate unpaid labour of ethers or its product, and to be' the impossibU1ty, on tl:epart of the labourer, of appropriating his own product."

Cut of the, innermost needs of capitalist pro'duotion, whose motive force is the produotion of surplus value, oomes the drive to pay the laborer the minimum and to extraot from him the maximum. The class struggle produced thereby leads, under certain Circumstances, to a rise in wages. But that rise is never so high as to threaten the foundation, of capitalist production. The law of value, dominating over this mode of producticn, leads, on the one hand, to the oentralisation of , tha means of production and, on the other hand, to the social1 za.t ion of labor. ' The centralisation of the means of production ends first, in trustification, and, ultimately, in statification, But big capital which kills little capital cannot kill the workers who produce it. The socialisation of labor brings masses of workers into large !aotorl'es where prod,uct1on disciplines them and p r epares them for revel t at the very time that they are degraded to "an appendage to a maohine". Th is dialectical development 1s accompanied by '.centralisation reaching a point where the ent1re social capital is lIu~'lited,ith'er in the hands of one single oapitalist, or in e those of one single corporation.- (p.sse) This ultimate development in no way saves capital1st production from lts II aosolute gener§l law"--the rese:cve army of labor. "But in fact it is the capitalistic aoaumulation itself that constantly'produces and reproduces in the direct ratio of its own energy and extent a relatively redundant population of laborers, i.e., a population of greater extent than suffices for the average needs of the 8elf-e~pansion of capital, and therefore a surplus population." (p.691)

This failure to give "full employment" to labor shakes the whole structure of capitalist society. ~arx emphasizes that "every special historic mode of production has its own special laws of pOpulation, historically valid within its limits alone." (p.693) lor capitalist produotion, ae we law, that, law was·the law of the .urplus~army, surplus, that, to the capitalist mode a f product ion. The incapacity of capitalism to reproduce its own valueoreating substanoe-labor power in the Ihape of the living, employed laborer-signals the doom of oap~talism. Marx defines this doom in the final part-Part VIII-where he, first deals with the historical genesis and then with the hlstoric~ tendency of capitalisti9 accumulation. , The-historic beginnings of capitalism, described under The bo-called Primitive AccumUlation of Capital", has highlycharged agitation material. The fact that 14arx relegates this material to the end, instead of the beginning of OAPITAL, cannot be overestimated. It means that Marx wished, above all, to-analyze the law of development of capitalism. lor, no matter what its b egmmrigs weI'e, the contradiotions arise not from its origin but from its inherent natur¥, wbich "begets with the inexorability of a law of Nature,ts own negationll• (p.837) ,

The law of m2tion of capitol1st soCi~ty is therpfore the law of its collS';pse. Marx discerned this law through the ~ pl icat ion of dialectical materialism to tlle developmental laws eff capitalist production.
that the basie ~f Me:s's most' abstract. theories is the class. struggle itself; that an integral part of his theory of accumulation is the mobilisation of the proletariat to revolt against the production relations which hamper the full development of the productive foroes into ua higher form of BocietYd a society Where every individual forms the ruling principle. (p .649) It is because 14arx based himself on the inevitabUity of socialism that he oould discern the law of motion of capitalist society, the tnevitablity of its collapse. It was this that gave the force. the direction, and the profundity to his analysiS of CAfITAL.

We see, furthermore,



Pap in Vintace/Pengp1n ed1tlon

Page in Outline Lecture 1 p.4 P.S p.6 p.7 Lecture 2 p.8

p.14 p.17 p.19 p.186 p.S91 pp.836-7

p.92 p.96 p.97 p.271 p.680 p.929

p.41 p.46 p.48 p.S) p.54 p.71 p.69 p.70 p.8) p.8S p.87 p.89 p.92 p.66. ftn. p.69 p.71 p.8) p.86 p.87 p.89 p.91 p.92 ».92-),ftu.

p.12S p.1JO p.l32 pp.1)6-7 p.1)7 p.154 pp.1Sl-2 p.1.52 p.16S p.167 p.169 p.170 p.17) p.l49. ftn. 22 pp.1Sl-2 pp.1S)-4 pp.164-6 pp.167-8 p.l69 p.170 pp.172-) pp.17)-S pp.17)-6, ftns.



p.ll. ex.1 ex.2 ex.) ex.4 ex.S 8x.6 ex.7 8x.8 ex.9 ex.10 Lecture) p.12


p.96 p.109 p.120 p.120

p.178 p.192 p.202 p.202


Page in OutUn. p.l)


in Kerr ed1ti.n p.lJO

Page in Vintye/PellljUin



pp.21l-2 p.209 p.2)) p.168




Lecture 4


p.l69 p.l70 p.l72 p.l85 p.l86 p.l86 pp.l95-6 p.592 pp.187-8 cress ref., p.785 p.l89,ftn. p.l9) p.l95 p.196 cross cross cross cross cross p.186 ref., P.))O ref., p.588 ref.,PP.59l-2 ref.,pp.639-40 ref., p.795 cross cross cross cross cross

p.25) p.2,54 p.255 p.269 p.270 pp.270-l p.280 p.68l pp.272-) cross ref., p. 874 p.274,ftn. 4 p.277 pp.279-80 p.280 pp.270-1 ref.,pp.415-6 ref., p.677 ref.,pp.68o-1 ref.,pp.729-)1 ref.,pp.884-5


p.l7 p.l8

Lecture 5 p.l9

p.206 p.209 p.216 p.2l7 p.2l8 p.211 p.217 pp.2)2-) p.2)6 p.2)9,ftn. p.24l p.24l pp.247-8

pp.291-2 p.295 pp.)OO-l p.J02 pp.)02-) p.297 p.)02 p.)l7 pp.)2l-2 p.)24,ftn. ) p.326 p.)25 p.)32



Lecture 6 p.2)

p.258 pp.259-60 p.260 p.)27

p.)42 pp.J44-5 p.J45 pp.4l2-)


Page in Outline p.24

Page in Kerr ed1ti.n p.J29 P.JJO p.JJ2 p.JJJ P.JJ9 p.JJ9 p.J34 p.335 p.335
cress ref., creaa ref.,



Vintye/Penp1n p.414 p.416 p.418 p.419 p.425 p.425 p.420 p.421 p.421


p.25 p.26

p.297 p.347 p.649 p.JJ9 p.241 P.)46 p.347 p.347 p.JSO p.351 p.JS2 p.3SJ p.)62 p.)63 P.)6S

p.)8l cr... ref., p.4JJ croaa re:f.,pp.7J9-40 p.425 p.J25 p.4J2 p.43J p.4J3 p.4)6 pp.4)6-7 p.4)8 p.4J9 p.448 p.449 P'~l p.4 p.457 p.472 pp.490-1 p.493,ftn. 4 p.S08 p.482 p.509 p.S48 pp.S48-9 p.6)8 p.64S pp.668-72 p.6n

Lecture 7 p.27 . p.28


p.J71 P.J87 Lecture 8 P.)O p.404 p.406,ftn. p.421 p.m p.423 p.461 p.462



Lectur. 9 p~J2

pp.S82-4 p.ses



Page in Outline Lecture 10 p.:n p.)4

Page in Kerr edition


in Vintage/Penguin edition

p.588 pp.S9l-2 p.S9l p.612

p.677 p.680 p.680 p.702

Lecture 11 p.3S

Dona Torr eel., p.842 pp.640-4 pp.687-8 p.6l9 p.624 p.624 p.625 p.626 p.627 pp.632-3 p.633 p.639 p.64l p.636 p.6)6,ftn. p.645 p.647 p.647 pp.648-9 p.649 p.652

p.10S pp.730-4 pp.777-9 p.7l0 p.7l5 p.71S-6 p.7l6 p.7l7 p.7l8 p.723 pp.723-4 pp.729-)o p.73l p.727 p.727,ftn. 2 pp.735-6 p.737 p.737 p.739 p.739 p.742





Lecture 12 p~4l

p.678 pp.678-9 p.679 pp.68o-l p.683 p.683 p.686 pp.686-8 p.688 pp.690-2 p.707 pp.708-9

p.769 p.770 p.770 pp.771-2 pp.774-5 p.774 p.777 pp.777-9 p.779 pp.681-3 p.798 p.799





fage in Outline

Page in Kerr editien

Pace in Vintage,Penguin edition

Lecture 13 p.46

p.786 p.787 p.809 p.809 pp.8l7-8 p.823


p.875 PP.875,6 pp.899-900 p.900 pp.908-9 p.9l5 pp.91S-6 p.9l9 p.927 p.929 p.929 pp.928-9 p.932


pp.823-4 p.8'Zl p.834 p.837 p.8)6 pp.8)6-7 p.839

Lecture 14 p.49

p.48 p.24l p.239,ftn. p.1S p.13 p.6)6 p.640 p.688 p.69l p.693 p.837 p.649

p.132 p.325 p.324,ftn. 3 p.92 p.91 p.727 p.730 p.779 p.782 ,.784 p.929 ,.739





News and Letters Committees, an organization of Marxist-Humanists, stand for the abolition of capitalism, whether in its private property form as in the U.S., or its state property form as in Russia. or China. News & Letters was created so that the voices of revolt from below could be heard not separated from the articulation of a philosophy of liberation. A Black production worker, Charles Denby, author of Indignant Heart: A Black Workers Journal, is the editor of the paper. Raya Dunayevskaya, National Chairwoman of the Committees, is the author of Marxism and Freedom and Philosophy and Revolution, which spell out the philosophic ground of Marx's HumanismInternanationally as American Civilization on Trial concretizes it on the American scene and shows the two-way road between the U.S. and Africa. News & Letters was founded in 1955, the year of the Detroit wildcats against Automation and the Montgomery Bus Boycott against segregation activities which signalled a new movement from practice which was itself a form of theory. Vol. I, No. I, came .off the press on the second anniversary of the June 17, 1953 East Ger- . man revolt against Russian state-capitalism masquerading as Commun.ism, in order to express our solidarity with freedom fighters abroad as well as at home. Because 1953 was also the year when we worked out the revolutionary dialectics of Marxism in its original form of "a new Humanism," as well as individuality "purified of all that interferes with its universalism, i.a., with freedom itself," we organized ourselves in Committees rather than any elitist party "to lead," In opposing the capitalistic, racist, sexist, exploitative society, we participate in all class and freedom struggles, nationally and internationally. As our Constitution states: "It is' our aim ... to promote the firmest unity among workers, Blacks and other minorities, women, youth and those intellectuals who have broken with the ruling bureaucraey of both capital and labor." We do not separate the mass activities from the activitg, of thinking. Anyone who is a participant in these freedom struggles for totally new relations and a fundamentally new way of life. and who believes in these principles, is invited to join us. Send for a copy of the Constitution of News and Letters Committees.

Who We Are and What We Stand For

Available from News & LaHers, Detroit

PHILOSOPHY AND REVOLUTION: From Hegel to Sortre, and from Marx to Moo. A Dell publication Spanish edition (Siglo Veintiuno) Italian edition (Feltrinelli) MARXISM AND FREEDOM-from 1776 until today (Preface by Herbert Marcuse) British edition (Pluto Press) French edition (Champ Libre) Spani.h edition (Juan Pablos)

5.00 5.00

6.00 6.00 3.00

NEW ESSAYS: Post-Moo Chino; Trotsky as Man and as Theoretician; Dialectics of Liberation in Thought and in Activity'Absolute Negativity as New Beginning POLITICAL-PHILOSOPHIC LETTERS-Eleven RUSSIA AS STATE-CAPITALIST SOCIETY Oritinal historic 1942-46 article. WAR, PEACE OR REVOLUTION-Shifting Alliances in The Middle-East Marxist-Humanist analyses at current events 2.00

2.00 1.00

1.00 .25 1.00


.50 Accumulotion of Capitol" 2.00

DIALECTICS OF LIBERATION. Includes Summaries of Hegel's wo,ks: PhenomenolotY of Mind, Science of Logic, Smaller Logic; excerpts of Letters on the Aboslute Ideo; Lecture Notes-Lenin on Science of Logic AMERICAN CIVILIZATION ON TRIAL: BLACK MASSES AS VANGUARD A statement of the Notional Editorial Boord of News & Letters, Raya Dunayevskaya, Chairwoman SEXISM, POLITICS AND REVOLUTION IN MAO'S CHINA Includes "Chiang Ch'ing, Hua Kuo-Feng in Post-Moo China" MARX'S CAPITAL AND TODAY'S GLOBAL CRISES Include. a critique of Ernest Mandel's Introduction and of Tony Cliff's work, Lenin



2.00 to the new tronslotion of Capitol,


.50 .50

News and' LeHers, 28~~d Blvd., Detroit, MI 48211
(PLEASE ADD 50¢ ..F(JI(POSTAGE AND HANDLING FOR EACH ORDER) Note: Roya Dunayevskaya's writings are on file in the Walter Reuther library of Wayne State University, Lobor History Archives, Detroit, MI. 48202, and available from them on microfilm as "The Raya Dunayevskaya Collection: Marxist-Humanism, 1941 to Today".

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful