A Dictionary of Marxist Thought Edited by Tom Bottomore Editorial Board Laurence Harris V. G. Kiernan Ralph Miliband Blackwell Reference 178 FORCE activity over the cycle, and can precipitate forces. The sum total of these relations of financial crises even before the onset of a production constitutes the economic generalized economic crisis (although the structure, the real basis on which rises a former remains 'only a symptom, an omen, of legal and political superstructure. the latter crisis'). (Contribution to the Critique of Political In Marx's theory, interest-bearing capital, Economy, Preface.) although ultimately dependent on industrial capital, stands outside and is a more universal, The power of the contradiction between unfettered category. In that it parallels the relations and forces to act as the motor of character of externality, universality, and history is also stated in the same place: 'at a freedom which Marx attributes to money vis ii cenain stage of their development, the vis commodities (in Capital I). Similarly, the material productive forces of society come in rate of interest appears as a purer category conflict with the existing relations of than the rate of profit; it is calculated production ... within which they have been transparently and yields a single figure at work hitheno'; and 'from forms of (although here Marx was exaggerating) development of the productive forces these compared with the multitude of different relations turn into their fetters', thereby profit rates on different capitals. (See also initiating social revolution. FORMS OF CAPITAL AND REVENUES; CREDIT The productive forces were conceived by AND FICTITIOUS CAPITAL.) LH Marx as including means of production and labour power. Their development, therefore, Reading encompasses such historical phenomena as Harris, Laurence 1976: 'On Imerest, Credit and the development of machinery, changes in the Capital'. LABOUR PROCESS, the opening up of new Harvey, David 1982: The Limits to Capital. sources of energy, and the education of the Hilferding, Rudolf] 910 (1981): Finance Capital. proletariat. There remain, however, several elements whose definition is disputed. Some writers have included science itself as a force. See violence. productive force (not just the changes in means of production that result), and Cohen (1978, ch. II) includes geographical space as a forces and relations of production Throughout force. the mature Marx's economic works the idea Relations of production are constituted by that a contradiction between forces and rela­ the economic ownership of productive forces; tions of production underlies the dynamic of under capitalism the most fundamental of the capitalist mode of production is present. these relations is the bourgeoisie'S ownership More generally, such a contradiction accounts of means of production while the proletariat for history existing as a succession of modes of owns only its labour power. Economic production, since it leads to the necessary ownership is different from legal ownership collapse of one mode and its supersession by for it relates to the control of the productive another. And the couple, forces/relations of forces. In a legal sense the workers with rights production, in any mode ofproduction under­ in a pension fund may be said to own the lies the whole of society's processes, not just shares of the companies in which the pension the economic ones. The connection between fund invests and thus to be, indirectly, legal them and the social structure was stated in owners of their means of production some of Marx's most succinct sentences: (although even this interpretation of the legal In the social production of their life men position is open to criticism on the grounds enter into definite relations that are that share ownership is a legal title to revenue indispensable and independent of their rather than to means of production); but if so, will, relations of production which they are cenainly not in control of those correspond to a definite stage of means of production and hence have no development of their material productive economic ownership (see PROPERTY). FORCES AND RELATIONS OF PRODUCTION 179 The manner in which the development of In Capital I, for example, especially in the the forces and relations of production occurs, discussion of the development of the real and the effects of this development, have been subsumption of labour to capital (in a the subject of one of the main controversies in manuscript chapter 'Results of the Immediate Marxist thought. The most straightforward Process of Production' which was first interpretation of the celebrated passage from published in 1933), Marx writes as though the Preface is this: within a mode of the capitalist relations of production production there is a correspondence both revolutionize the instruments of production between forces and relations, and as a result of and the labour process. Such formulations this, between the relations of production and need not be a problem for the idea that the legal, ideological and other social relations forces of production are primary if Marxism (the second correspondence being one were to offer a conception of the articulation between BASE AND SUPERSTRUCTURE). The between forces and relations such that they correspondence appears to be one where the interact, but with the forces being forces of production are primary, the relations determinant, in some sense, both of the of production are determined by the forces, relations and of the way the two elements and they themselves determine the super­ interact. But Marx's own texts are silent on structure. These respective positions of the this, and some writers have argued that they , three elements in the chain of causation preclude the possibiliry of such interaction acquire significance from their implications between two distinct elements because they j for historical development. Thus, the collapse or 'fuse' forces and relations together, :, development of the forces of production leads with the forces becoming a form of the s to a contradiction between them and the relations (Cutler et al. 1977, ch. 5; Balibar e relations of production (which 'turn into their 1970, p. 235). N fetters'), and the intensification of this The idea that the productive forces are ,e contradiction leads to the breakdown of the primary, despite the problems it presents, has al existing mode of production and its been vigorously reasserted by Cohen (1978; Ie superstructure. One problem with this see also Shaw 1978). Cohen demonstrates the a interpretation of the central historical role of coherence of the thesis in its own terms and forces and relations of production turns on argues that it does have a valid, logical the central question. Is it valid to conceive of centrality in Marx's own writing. The basic the forces of production as the prime movers? difficulry in understanding the connection In the revival of Marxist theory in the third between forces and relations of production is quarter of this century this particular that whereas the two are seen as necessarily interpretation of Marx's thesis has been compatible with each other within a mode of subjected to considerable criticism. An production, one of them has to develop important consideration for some was that the in such a way that a contradiction or thesis appeared to carry a political implication incompatibility matures; their progress, which was rejected: it was argued that Stalin's therefore, has an element ofasymmetry, and it policy of rapid industrialization with its has to be a systematIc rather than accidental forced collectivization and political repression asymmetry. Thus 'compatibility' cannot mean stemmed from his conception of the primacy mutual and even determination. It could mean of the forces of production (and that Trotsky that the relations develop, causing de­ shared this conception), so that if the velopment of the forces, which then react productive forces in the Soviet Union could back on the relations but in such a way that become those of modern industry, socialist the effect of relations on forces is multiplied relations of production would have their while that of forces on relations is muted; if proper basis. Moreover, Marx's own writings that occurred the relations of production appeared to be ambiguous on the primacy of would be primary but the maturation of the the productive forces, and in places he~rrtes forces would run up against the 'fetters' which as though the relations of production characterize the contradiction. Cohen, how­ dominate and generate changes in the forces. ever, does not adopt this interpretation. .