DOCSLIB.ORG

Marx's Critique of Fetishism As Method

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Marx's Critique of Fetishism As Method Value without Fetish Historical Materialism Book Series Editorial Board Loren Balhorn (Berlin) David Broder (Rome) Sebastian Budgen (Paris) Steve Edwards (London) Juan Grigera (London) Marcel van der Linden (Amsterdam) Peter Thomas (London) volume 227 The titles published in this series are listed at brill.com/hm Value without Fetish Uno Kōzō’s Theory of ‘Pure Capitalism’ in Light of Marx’s Critique of Political Economy By Elena Louisa Lange leiden | boston This is an open access title distributed under the terms of the cc by-nc-nd 4.0 license, which permits any non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided no alterations are made and the original author(s) and source are credited. Further information and the complete license text can be found at https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ The terms of the cc license apply only to the original material. The use of material from other sources (indicated by a reference) such as diagrams, illustrations, photos and text samples may require further permission from the respective copyright holder. The open access publication of this book has been published with the support of the Swiss National Science Foundation. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Names: Lange, Elena Louisa, author. Title: Value without fetish : Uno Kōzō’s theory of ‘pure capitalism’ in light of Marx’s critique of political economy / by Elena Louisa Lange. Description: Leiden ; Boston : Brill, [2021] | Series: Historical materialism book series, 1570-1522 ; volume 227 | Includes bibliographical references and index. Identifiers: lccn 2021006689 (print) | lccn 2021006690 (ebook) | isbn 9789004297388 (hardback ; alk. paper) | isbn 9789004449909 (ebook) Subjects: lcsh: Uno, Kōzō, 1897-1977. | Marxian economics. | Capitalism. | Value. | Economics. Classification: lcc hb126.j4 u645 2021 (print) | lcc hb126.j4 (ebook) | ddc 335.4/12–dc23 lc record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2021006689 lc ebook record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2021006690 Typeface for the Latin, Greek, and Cyrillic scripts: “Brill”. See and download: brill.com/brill‑typeface. issn 1570-1522 isbn 978-90-04-29738-8 (hardback) isbn 978-90-04-44990-9 (e-book) Copyright 2021 by Elena Louisa Lange. Published by Koninklijke Brill nv, Leiden, The Netherlands. Koninklijke Brill nv incorporates the imprints Brill, Brill Nijhoff, Brill Hotei, Brill Schöningh, Brill Fink, Brill mentis, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, Böhlau Verlag and V&R Unipress. Koninklijke Brill nv reserves the right to protect this publication against unauthorized use. This book is printed on acid-free paper and produced in a sustainable manner. To Juno Theodora Lange ‘Sapere Aude’ ∵ All systems exist because of supply and demand. annette peacock (1979) … Denn an allem, was sich ändert, haben Kauffrauen investiert. cpt. kirk &. (1992) ∵ Contents Acknowledgements ix Note on Translations and Transcriptions x part 1 The Method of The Critique of Political Economy 1 Introduction – Marx’s Critique of Fetishism as Method 3 1.1 The Critique of Fetishism and Uno’s Theory of ‘Pure Capitalism’ 14 1.2 The Aporias of Classical Political Economy 34 1.3 The Critical Function of Marx’s Labour Theory of Value. Against Some Readings of ‘Form’ in Contemporary Value Form Theory 48 2 What’s ‘Pure’ about Capitalism? Uno’s Three-Level Method and the Theory of Principles 61 2.1 The Limits to the Three Level-Method (sandankairon) 69 2.2 Pure Theory’s X-Axis: The Law of Population 115 2.3 Pure Theory’s Y-Axis: The Commodification of Labour Power 135 part 2 The Object of The Critique of Political Economy 3 Uno’s Theory of Value – Value without Fetish (1947–69) 155 3.1 The Problem of Abstract Labour in Uno’s Theory of Value 159 3.2 Uno’s Theory of Value: Methodological Individualism and the Fetishism of Use Value 184 3.3 Uno’s Theory of Money: Baileyan Assumptions 211 3.4 Uno’s Theory of Capital: M-C-M’ as Pure Form 247 4 The Principles of Political Economy (Keizai Genron, 1952/1964) in Light of Marx’s Critique of Political Economy 259 4.1 The Reconstruction of Capital 261 4.2 The Law of Value as the Law of General Social Equilibrium (Uno) 297 4.3 Surplus Value and Profit: The ‘Transformation Problem’ in Uno’s Perspective 332 4.4 The Law of Value as the Law of Crisis (Marx) 376 viii contents 5 Uno’s Legacy in Japan and Beyond 423 5.1 Money vs. Value? The ‘Monetary Approach’ in the Post-Uno School of Value Theory 427 5.2 The ‘Dialectic of Capital’ as the Apologetic of Capital in the Anglophone Uno School 462 5.3 The Meaning of Real Subsumption or the Real Subsumption of Meaning: Aspects of Anglophone Uno School Historiographies 498 References 539 Index of Names 561 Index of Subjects 564 Acknowledgements Many personal thanks to Raji C. Steineck, Riccardo Bellofiore, Patrick Murray, Jeanne Schuler, Fred Moseley, Saitō Kōhei, Agon Hamza, Ingo Stützle, Michael Heinrich, Ingo Elbe, Namiko Holzapfel, Nobutake Kamiya, Mishima Kenichi, Nick Nesbitt, Joshua Pickett-Depaolis, Eric-John Russell, Maren Thom, Jacob Blumenfeld, Christian Uhl, Frank Engster, Werner Bonefeld, Jan Hoff, Andrés Sáenz de Sicilia, and Chris O’Kane. Moishe Postone’s and Ōtani Teinosuke’s support, advice and good spirits are painfully missed. Thanks to the discussants of the Value-Form Group for being ‘ruthless critics of all that exists’. Many thanks to Jan Steiner for his invaluable, and spontaneous, help. Special thanks to my patient parents, Horst and Donka. Extra special thanks to the love of my life, F. A part of the research conducted for this book has been financially supported by the Swiss National Science Foundation (snsf). Note on Translations and Transcriptions All translations from materials written in languages other than English are ours, unless otherwise indicated. All non-English terms are indicated by italics. For transliterations of Japanese, we use the Modified Hepburn System with the macron indication a long vowel, e.g. ryūtsū-ron. Terms in Japanese, in par- ticular proper nouns that have an established usage in English (e.g. Tokyo) remain unmodified. Japanese names are given in the Japanese order: family name first and given name last (e.g. Uno Kōzō), unless the person’s pen name has been established according to the English custom (e.g. Makoto Itoh instead of Itō Makoto). part 1 The Method of The Critique of Political Economy ∵ chapter 1 Introduction – Marx’s Critique of Fetishism as Method Cryptocategories of Marxism: Exchange value is the most well- known. To cryptologically uncover the hidden categorical determin- ations of existence is not to reveal a metaphysical essence, but rather the ‘surface’ of things, their appearance itself. hans-jürgen krahl (1971)1 … … in the capitalist process, every element, even the simplest, the commodity for example, is already an inversion … karl marx (1861–3 Economic Manuscripts)2 ∵ This book wants to put the critique of the ‘fetishism of the bourgeois rela- tions of production’ back into the Critique of Political Economy.3 Its aim is to demonstrate that the disavowal of the critique of fetishism strips the Marxian project of its critical core, its raison d’être. Disavowing, disregarding, or even rejecting Marx’s critique of fetishism, as we will show, resorts to the framework of classical and neoclassical bourgeois ‘economics’ which no longer offers an incentive to change or question the capitalist mode of production as a histor- ically specific society. This book, however, precisely sees itself as a theoretical contribution to the overcoming of the capitalist predicament, and therefore as an intervention against the obliviousness to the problem of fetishism. To pursue this task, we will highlight the pivotal role of Marx’s critique of the fetish-characteristic forms of value, or the value forms, as the key method for 1 Krahl 1971, p. 84. Footnote. Many thanks to Jacob Blumenfeld for the translation. 2 Marx 1989b, p. 507. 3 We use capital letters to characterise Marx’s project, beginning with the Grundrisse in 1857. © Elena Louisa Lange, 2021 | doi:10.1163/9789004449909_002 This is an open access chapter distributed under the terms of the cc by-nc-nd 4.0 license. 4 chapter 1 his analysis and critique of the capitalist mode of production and its bour- geois interpreters as a scientific object.4 This impetus stands in opposition to the desideratum of the ‘methodological purity’ of the economic categor- ies, in which the critique of fetishism as the central incentive becomes sub- altern, if not disregarded. This latter interpretation is presented in Japanese Marxian economist Uno Kōzō’s (1897–77) theory of ‘pure capitalism’ ( junsui shihonshugi), which the present work will examine critically. The neglect of the fetish complex, we argue, leads to a truncated and functionalist under- standing of capitalist economy, and, even more fatally, helps to prolong and sustain a system of blind domination of social structures over humans, in which old fetishes persist as new ones, making an emancipatory develop- ment impossible. Most of all, however, the categorial reconstruction of the capitalist modus operandi that was not only Marx’s, but also Uno’s intention, becomes inadequate when the fetishistic forms that value assumes, both obfus- cating its content and structuring ‘the self-presentation of value’,5 are left unad- dressed: for leaving them unaddressed leaves these fetishised forms of value intact as objects of cognition. It therefore reproduces the inverted forms in which value, i.e. abstract human labour, appears at the surface of capitalist self-representation – paradigmatically in the exchange-fetish and the view of capital as ‘fruit-bearing’ in the categories of money, profit, price, interest, rent, etc. – instead of deconstructing these self-representations, and with them, the modes of their self-legitimisation.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Value's Law, Value's Metric
    Values Law Values Metric by P Co ckshott A Cottrell Research Rep ort RR Novemb er Values Law Values Metric W Paul Co ckshott and Allin F Cottrell septemb er Abstract It is argued that the metric space of exchanging commo dities is noneuclidean and characteristic of a system governed by a conservation law The p ossible can didates for what is conserved in commo dity exchange are reviewed with reference to inverted inputoutput matrices of the British economy Strong evidence is pre sented that the conserved substance is lab our The arguments of Mirowski and others regarding the appropriateness of such physicalist arguments are discussed What is meant by the law of value The phrase law of value is little used by Marx but p opular among his followers It has no precise denition of the typ e that one would exp ect for a scientic law Laws such as Ho okes law or Boyles law have a concise denition that any chemist or physicist could rep eat but it is doubtful if anywhere in the Marxist literature there exists a comparable denition of the law of value On the basis of what Ricardo and Marx wrote on the theory we would advance the following as a reasonable denition The law of value states that value understood as the labour time social ly necessary to produce a commodity is conserved in the exchange of commodities The advantages of this denition are that it is cast in the normal form of a sci entic law it is empirically testable it has a precise meaning and it emphasizes the fundamental Marxian prop osition that value cannot arise in circulation
    [Show full text]
  • Conversations with Stalin on Questions of Political Economy”
    WOODROW WILSON INTERNATIONAL CENTER FOR SCHOLARS Lee H. Hamilton, Conversations with Stalin on Christian Ostermann, Director Director Questions of Political Economy BOARD OF TRUSTEES: ADVISORY COMMITTEE: Joseph A. Cari, Jr., by Chairman William Taubman Steven Alan Bennett, Ethan Pollock (Amherst College) Vice Chairman Chairman Working Paper No. 33 PUBLIC MEMBERS Michael Beschloss The Secretary of State (Historian, Author) Colin Powell; The Librarian of Congress James H. Billington James H. Billington; (Librarian of Congress) The Archivist of the United States John W. Carlin; Warren I. Cohen The Chairman of the (University of Maryland- National Endowment Baltimore) for the Humanities Bruce Cole; The Secretary of the John Lewis Gaddis Smithsonian Institution (Yale University) Lawrence M. Small; The Secretary of Education James Hershberg Roderick R. Paige; (The George Washington The Secretary of Health University) & Human Services Tommy G. Thompson; Washington, D.C. Samuel F. Wells, Jr. PRIVATE MEMBERS (Woodrow Wilson Center) Carol Cartwright, July 2001 John H. Foster, Jean L. Hennessey, Sharon Wolchik Daniel L. Lamaute, (The George Washington Doris O. Mausui, University) Thomas R. Reedy, Nancy M. Zirkin COLD WAR INTERNATIONAL HISTORY PROJECT THE COLD WAR INTERNATIONAL HISTORY PROJECT WORKING PAPER SERIES CHRISTIAN F. OSTERMANN, Series Editor This paper is one of a series of Working Papers published by the Cold War International History Project of the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars in Washington, D.C. Established in 1991 by a grant from the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation, the Cold War International History Project (CWIHP) disseminates new information and perspectives on the history of the Cold War as it emerges from previously inaccessible sources on “the other side” of the post-World War II superpower rivalry.
    [Show full text]
  • The Emergence of the Law of Value in a Dynamic Simple Commodity Economy
    Review of Political Economy, Volume 20, Number 3, 367–391, July 2008 The Emergence of the Law of Value in a Dynamic Simple Commodity Economy IAN WRIGHT Faculty of Social Sciences, The Open University, Milton Keynes, UK ABSTRACT A dynamic computational model of a simple commodity economy is examined and a theory of the relationship between commodity values, market prices and the efficient division of social labour is developed. The main conclusions are: (i) the labour value of a commodity is an attractor for its market price; (ii) market prices are error signals that function to allocate the available social labour between sectors of production; and (iii) the tendency of prices to approach labour values is the monetary expression of the tendency of a simple commodity economy to allocate social labour efficiently. The model demonstrates that, in the special case of simple commodity production, Marx’s law of value can naturally emerge from multiple local exchanges and operate ‘behind the backs’ of actors solely via money flows that place budget constraints on their local evaluations of commodity prices, which are otherwise subjective and unconstrained. 1. Introduction Marx, following Ricardo, held a labour theory of the economic value of reprodu- cible commodities. The value of a commodity is determined by the prevailing technical conditions of production and measured by the socially necessary labour-time required to produce it (Marx, 1867). The value of a commodity is to be distinguished from its price, which is the amount of money it fetches in the market. According to Marx, although individual economic actors may differ in their subjective evaluations of the worth or ‘value’ of commodities, market prices are nevertheless determined by labour values due to the operation of the ‘law of value’, an objective economic law that emerges as an unintended consequence of local and distributed market exchanges.
    [Show full text]
  • Slavery, Capitalism, and the “Proletariat”
    1 1 The Slave-Machine: Slavery, Capital- ism, and the “Proletariat” in The Black Jacobins and Capital Nick Nesbitt This essay argues that C. L. R. James’s Marxist humanism is inherently inade- quate for describing the distinction and transition between slavery and capitalism. To do so, the essay interrogates James’s famous claim in The Black Jacobins (1938) that the slaves of St. Domingue were “closer to a modern proletariat than any group of workers in existence at the time,” by comparing James’s understand- ing of the concept of proletariat—there and in World Revolution (1937)—with Marx’s various developments of the concept across the three volumes of Capital. This analysis distinguishes James’s political and historicist deployment of the term from Marx’s analytical usage of the notion in his categorial critique of capitalism.In contrast with James’s linear, Marxist-humanist understanding of the passage from slavery to capitalism, Marx himself demarcates a well-defined delineation between these two basic categories, understood in Capital as analytically (as opposed to historically) distinct modes of production.The essay thus concludes by analyzing Marx’s conceptual differentiation of slavery and industrial capitalism in Capital, drawing on Etienne Balibar’s analysis of the concepts of mode of production and transition in Reading Capital (1965). The slaves worked on the land, and, like revolutionary peasants everywhere, they aimed at the extermination of their oppressors. But working and living together in gangs of hundreds on the huge sugar-factories which covered the North Plain, they were closer to a modern proletariat than any group of workers in existence at the time, and the rising was, therefore, a thoroughly prepared and organized mass movement.
    [Show full text]
  • Modern Monetary Theory: a Marxist Critique
    Class, Race and Corporate Power Volume 7 Issue 1 Article 1 2019 Modern Monetary Theory: A Marxist Critique Michael Roberts [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.fiu.edu/classracecorporatepower Part of the Economics Commons Recommended Citation Roberts, Michael (2019) "Modern Monetary Theory: A Marxist Critique," Class, Race and Corporate Power: Vol. 7 : Iss. 1 , Article 1. DOI: 10.25148/CRCP.7.1.008316 Available at: https://digitalcommons.fiu.edu/classracecorporatepower/vol7/iss1/1 This work is brought to you for free and open access by the College of Arts, Sciences & Education at FIU Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Class, Race and Corporate Power by an authorized administrator of FIU Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Modern Monetary Theory: A Marxist Critique Abstract Compiled from a series of blog posts which can be found at "The Next Recession." Modern monetary theory (MMT) has become flavor of the time among many leftist economic views in recent years. MMT has some traction in the left as it appears to offer theoretical support for policies of fiscal spending funded yb central bank money and running up budget deficits and public debt without earf of crises – and thus backing policies of government spending on infrastructure projects, job creation and industry in direct contrast to neoliberal mainstream policies of austerity and minimal government intervention. Here I will offer my view on the worth of MMT and its policy implications for the labor movement. First, I’ll try and give broad outline to bring out the similarities and difference with Marx’s monetary theory.
    [Show full text]
  • The Critique of Real Abstraction: from the Critical Theory of Society to the Critique of Political Economy and Back Again
    The Critique of Real Abstraction: from the Critical Theory of Society to the Critique of Political Economy and Back Again Chris O’Kane John Jay, CUNY [email protected] There has been a renewed engagement with the idea of real abstraction in recent years. Scholars associated with the New Reading of Marx, such as Moishe Postone, Chris Arthur, Michael Heinrich, Patrick Murray, Riccardo Bellofiore and others,1 have employed the idea in their important reconstructions of Marx’s critique of political economy. Alberto Toscano, Endnotes, Jason W. Moore and others have utilized and extended these theorizations to concieve of race, gender, and nature as real abstractions. Both the New Reading and these new theories of real abstraction have provided invaluable work; the former in systematizing Marx’s inconsistent and unfinished theory of value as a theory of the abstract social domination of capital accumulation and reproduction; the latter in supplementing such a theory. Yet their exclusive focus on real abstraction in relation to the critique of political economy means that the critical marxian theories of real abstraction -- developed by Alfred Sohn- Rethel, Theodor W. Adorno and Henri Lefebvre -- have been mostly bypassed by the latter and have largely served as the object of trenchant criticism for their insufficient grasp of Marx’s theory of value by the former. Consequently these new readings and new theories of real abstraction elide important aspects of Sohn-Rethel, Adorno and Lefebvre’s critiques of real abstraction; which sought to develop Marx’s critique of political economy into objective-subjective critical theories of the reproduction of capitalist society.2 However, two recent works by 1 Moishe Postone’s interpretation of real abstraction will be discussed below.
    [Show full text]
  • Preface This Compendium of Marxist Ideas and Practices Is Aimed at The
    AN A-Z OF MARXISM Preface This compendium of Marxist ideas and practices is aimed at the newcomer to the socialist movement who may be unfamiliar with socialist terminology. We have included cross-referencing, suggested books for further reading and links to relevant websites at the end of most entries. Included are many biographical entries of individuals and organisations of interest to the socialist movement. The inclusion of any of these should not necessarily be understood as an endorsement of their ideas and practices. Likewise, the suggested books and websites may contain views which are not necessarily the same as those of the Socialist Party. The website links are checked at the time of publication but we cannot accept responsibility for their continuing availability. It will be obvious that there are some errors, omissions and unworthy inclusions. We make no claim to comprehensive, final and definitive truth. This compendium can and should be better. We therefore invite suggestions and constructive criticisms for use in future editions of this compendium. Education Department June 2010 The Socialist Party of Great Britain 52 Clapham High Street, London, SW4 7UN www.worldsocialism.org/spgb Abundance. A situation where resources are sufficient, or more than sufficient, to satisfy human needs; whereas scarcity is a situation where resources are insufficient to meet human needs. It is because abundance is possible that socialism can be established. In capitalist economics human wants are said to be unlimited, so that abundance is impossible. Economists infer that because wants exceed the poverty imposed by the wages system then scarcity and capitalism must always exist.
    [Show full text]
  • 'Law of Motion' in Economics
    Munich Personal RePEc Archive Crisis and ‘law of motion’ in economics: a critique of positivist Marxism Freeman, Alan London Metropolitan University 2 June 2010 Online at https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/48619/ MPRA Paper No. 48619, posted 27 Jul 2013 04:57 UTC Crisis and ‘law of motion’ in economics a critique of positivist Marxism Alan Freeman1 London Metropolitan University [email protected] Abstract This is a prepublication version of the paper published in Review of Political Economy Volume 26, 2010 (http://www.emeraldinsight.com/books.htm?issn=0161‐7230&volume=26). It should be cited as Freeman, A. (2010). ‘Crisis and “law of motion” in economics: a critique of positivist Marxism’, Review of Political Economy Volume 26, 2010, pp 211‐250. This paper restores the concepts of freedom, consciousness, and choice to our understanding of ‘economic laws’, so we may discuss how to respond to economic crisis. These are absent from orthodox economics which presents ‘globalisation’ or ‘the markets’ as the outcome of unstoppable forces outside human control. They were integral to the emancipatory political economy of Karl Marx but have been lost to Marxism, which appears as the inspiration for mechanical, fatalistic determinism. This confusion arises from Marxism’s absorption of the idea, originating in French positivism, that social laws are automatic and inevitable. The article contests the organizing principle of this view: that economic laws are predictive, telling us what must happen. Marx’s laws are relational, not predictive, laying bare the connection between two apparently distinct forms of appearance of the same thing, such as labour and price.
    [Show full text]
  • Economic Development and Surplus Labour: a Critical Review of the Lewis Model
    Economic Development and Surplus Labour: A Critical Review of the Lewis Model 1 2 Xiaobing Wang, Jenifer Piesse 1University of Manchester 2King’s College London and University of Stellenbosch, South Africa April 2009 [email protected] [email protected] BWPI Working Paper 89 Brooks World Poverty Institute ISBN : 978-1-906518-88-2 Creating and sharing knowledge to help end poverty www.manchester.ac.uk/bwpi Abstract The Lewis dual economy model is widely recognised in development economics for its profound explanatory power and applications in economic development. However, there remain some confusions and ambiguities, especially with respect to the definition of surplus labour and the wage determination mechanisms in both the traditional and modern sectors. This has prohibited its use, especially in empirical studies. This paper clarifies and extends this theory. Several questions are addressed. Firstly, it defines two types of surplus labour. Second, it considers the pattern of production and of population growth in the traditional agricultural sector to define the subsistence level of consumption. Third, it considers two wage determination mechanisms in the modern sector, which are then applied to the relationships between these mechanisms and labour market restrictions. Fourth, the role of agriculture and food supply is discussed. Fifth, it considers the dynamics of surplus labour and labour transfer, and defines two types of turning points, which have important implications for empirical studies. Sixth, a scenario for urban surplus labour is presented. In summary, the paper seeks to enhance the general level of understanding of the Lewis model and its application to the process of economic development.
    [Show full text]
  • ITHER LABOUR HISTORY Regionalism, Class, and the Writing of BC History
    FORUM W[H]ITHER LABOUR HISTORY Regionalism, Class, and the Writing of BC History MARKLEIER s BC LABOUR HISTORY IN DECLINE? Certainly it is fashionable everywhere today to claim that labour history has had its day. Yet I in Canada every regional journal and most wider journals, such as the Canadian Historical Review and Histoire Sociale, regularly publish articles in the field of labour history. And there is, of course, a first- class journal, Labour/Le Travail, that is devoted to labour and work­ ing-class history. As other fields complain about the lack of synthesiz­ ing works, Canadian labour history has produced three: Desmond Morton's Working People, now in its third edition; Craig Heron's The Canadian Labour Movement', and Bryan Palmer's Working Class Expe­ rience, now in its second edition.1 In BC, we have a long tradition of producing book-length histories of the labour movement, starting with the work of Communist Party of Canada (CPC) writers William Bennett and Harold Griffin, through Paul Phillips's No Power Greater, to the work by former CPC member Jack Scott in the 1970s.2 Articles, theses, and books on BC labour history make up a * This is a revised version of a paper presented to the New Directions in BC History Conference, May 1995, University of Northern British Columbia. I would like to thank Robin Fisher and Ruth Sandwell for first suggesting I take up this topic. I would also like to thank Annette DeFaveri, Sean Cadigan, Todd McCallum, Andy Pamaby, Tina Loo, Lawrin Armstrong, R. Cole Harris, and the anonymous readers for BC Studies for their comments and suggestions.
    [Show full text]
  • The Role of Production Relations in Marx's Theory of Capitalist Exploitation
    The Role of Production Relations in Marx’s Theory of Capitalist Exploitation* Gilbert L. Skillman Department of Economics Wesleyan University Middletown, CT 06459 E-mail: [email protected] ABSTRACT It is well known that Karl Marx explained profit in capitalist economies as arising primarily from the exploitation of productive labor. Less generally understood is Marx’s theory as to the economic logic of capitalist exploitation, in particular the sense in and degree to which the latter depends on direct capitalist control of production, which Marx termed the subsumption of labor under capital. In Volume I of Capital, Marx focuses exclusively on the purchase and consumption of labor power under capitalist production as the basis of capitalist exploitation, on the grounds that the appropriation of surplus value must be explained on the condition that commodities exchange at their respective values. However, this stipulation manifestly does not follow from the arguments Marx presents, and its apparent implications clash with Marx’s own historical account of exploitation via circuits of capital which did not in fact depend on the subsumption of labor under capital. This paper argues that the logic of capitalist exploitation is instead best understood in terms of Marx’s historical-materialist theory of profit, which depicts capitalist production relations as a historically contingent strategic response to evolving conditions of class conflict over the creation and distribution of surplus product. This account, constructed from Marx’s published and unpublished economic writing, establishes a consistent thread of argumentation linking the Grundrisse with the analysis featured in Volume I of Capital a decade later.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Modes of Production in a Materialist Conception of History 2.1. The
    Modes of Production in a Materialist Conception of History …the extremely dubious speculative juggling, with the concepts and terms of the materialist method, which has under the pens of some of our Marxists transplanted the methods of formalism into the domain of the materialist dialectic; which has led to reducing the task to rendering defi nitions and classifi cations more precise and to splitting empty abstractions into four equally empty parts; in short, has adulterated Marxism by means of the indecently elegant mannerisms of Kantian epigones. It is a silly thing indeed endlessly to sharpen or resharpen an instrument, to chip away Marxist steel when the task is to apply the instrument in working over the raw material! (Leon Trotsky) 2.1. The retreat into historical formalism In his polemic with Dühring, Engels described the theory of surplus-value and the materialistic conception of history as the ‘two great discoveries’ of Marx, through which were established the scientific foundations of socialism. Modern materialism, wrote Engels, characterised history as a ‘process of evolution’ and set itself the task of discovering its ‘laws of motion’.1 In one of the best reviews of Capital to appear at that time, a bourgeois economist Kaufmann repeated the point to Marx’s approval: Marx treats the social movement ‘as a process of natural history governed by laws’.2 In a famous resumé of his conception of history, written closer to our time, Braudel describes Marx as the originator of ‘historical models’.3 In their own way, these writers implied, in a language borrowed from the sciences of their time, that social phenomena like the phenomena of nature are scientifi cally penetrable, and that we owe the recognition of this fact to the work of Marx.
    [Show full text]