Das Kapital — Kap. 9 · semantic zoom

K.9

NEUNTES KAPITEL. Rate und Masse des Mehrwerts

Chapter 8 fixed the working day's limits; this chapter turns to the arithmetic behind them — how the rate of exploitation, the number of workers, and the length of the day together set the mass of surplus-value, with the day's twenty-four-hour ceiling as the hard bound. It ends by noting that this whole result holds only for surplus-value won by lengthening the day — handing the next chapter the turn to relative surplus-value.

Wie bisher wird in diesem Kapitel der Wert der Arbeitskraft, also der zur Reproduktion oder Erhaltung der Arbeitskraft notwendige Teil des Arbeitstags, als gegebne, konstante Größe unterstellt.

the standing assumption

As before, we take the value of labour-power — and therefore the part of the working day needed just to keep that labour-power alive — as a given, constant magnitude.

Dies also vorausgesetzt, ist mit der Rate zugleich die Masse des Mehrwerts gegeben, die der einzelne Arbeiter dem Kapitalisten in bestimmter Zeitperiode liefert. Beträgt z.B. die notwendige Arbeit täglich 6 Stunden, ausgedrückt in einem Goldquantum von 3 sh. = 1 Taler, so ist der Taler der Tageswert einer Arbeitskraft oder der im Ankauf einer Arbeitskraft vorgeschoßne Kapitalwert. Ist ferner die Rate des Mehrwerts 100%, so produziert dies variable Kapital von 1 Taler eine Masse Mehrwert von 1 Taler, oder der Arbeiter liefert täglich eine Masse Mehrarbeit von 6 Stunden.

rate fixes one worker's surplus mass

With that assumption in place, the rate of surplus-value fixes the mass of surplus-value a single worker delivers to the capitalist in a given time.

Suppose the necessary labour is 6 hours a day, expressed in a quantum of gold worth 3 shillings (1 taler). That taler is the daily value of one labour-power — the capital value advanced to buy it. If the rate of surplus-value is 100%, this variable capital of 1 taler produces a mass of surplus-value of 1 taler. The worker delivers 6 hours of surplus labour every day.

Das variable Kapital ist aber der Geldausdruck für den Gesamtwert aller Arbeitskräfte, die der Kapitalist gleichzeitig verwendet. Sein Wert ist also gleich dem Durchschnittswert einer Arbeitskraft, multipliziert mit der Anzahl der verwandten Arbeitskräfte. Bei gegebnem Wert der Arbeitskraft steht also die Größe des variablen Kapitals in direktem Verhältnis zur Anzahl der gleichzeitig beschäftigten Arbeiter. Ist der Tageswert einer Arbeitskraft = 1 Taler, so ist also ein Kapital vorzuschießen von 100 Talern, um 100, von n Talern, um n Arbeitskräfte täglich zu exploitieren.

total wage bill

But the variable capital is the money-expression of the total value of all the labour-powers a capitalist uses at once. Its value equals the average value of one labour-power multiplied by the number of labour-powers employed. With the value of labour-power given, the size of the variable capital varies directly with the number of workers employed at the same time.

If the daily value of one labour-power is 1 taler, you must advance a capital of 100 talers to exploit 100 workers daily — or n talers to exploit n workers.

Ebenso: Produziert ein variables Kapital von 1 Taler, der Tageswert einer Arbeitskraft, einen täglichen Mehrwert von 1 Taler, so ein variables Kapital von 100 Talern einen täglichen Mehrwert von 100, und eins von n Talern einen täglichen Mehrwert von 1 Taler x n. Die Masse des produzierten Mehrwerts ist also gleich dem Mehrwert, den der Arbeitstag des einzelnen Arbeiters liefert, multipliziert mit der Anzahl der angewandten Arbeiter. Da aber ferner die Masse Mehrwert, die der einzelne Arbeiter produziert, bei gegebnem Wert der Arbeitskraft, durch die Rate des Mehrwerts bestimmt ist, so folgt dies erste Gesetz: Die Masse des produzierten Mehrwerts ist gleich der Größe des vorgeschoßnen variablen Kapitals multipliziert mit der Rate des Mehrwerts oder ist bestimmt durch das zusammengesetzte Verhältnis zwischen der Anzahl der von demselben Kapitalisten gleichzeitig exploitierten Arbeitskräfte und dem Exploitationsgrad der einzelnen Arbeitskraft. <In der autorisierten französischen Ausgabe wurde der zweite Teil dieses Satzes wie folgt wiedergegeben: "oder aber sie ist gleich dem Wert einer Arbeitskraft multipliziert mit dem Grad ihrer Exploitation und multipliziert mit der Anzahl der gleichzeitig exploitierten Arbeitskräfte.">

the first law of the mass

By the same logic: if a variable capital of 1 taler — the daily value of one labour-power — produces a daily surplus-value of 1 taler, then a variable capital of 100 talers produces a daily surplus-value of 100, and one of n talers a daily surplus-value of 1 taler × n.

The mass of surplus-value produced equals the surplus-value that one worker's day supplies, multiplied by the number of workers employed.

Since the mass of surplus-value a single worker produces — given the value of labour-power — is determined by the rate of surplus-value, this first law follows: the mass of the surplus-value produced equals the size of the variable capital advanced multiplied by the rate of surplus-value. Or it is determined by the compound ratio between the number of labour-powers simultaneously exploited by the same capitalist and the degree of exploitation of each individual labour-power.

Nennen wir also die Masse des Mehrwerts M, den vom einzelnen Arbeiter im Tagesdurchschnitt gelieferten Mehrwert m, das im Ankauf der einzelnen Arbeitskraft täglich vorgeschoßne variable Kapital v, die Gesamtsumme des variablen Kapitals V, den Wert einer Durchschnitts-Arbeitskraft k, ihren Exploitationsgrad
a'
/
a
(Mehrarbeit)
/
(Notwendige Arbeit)
und die Anzahl der angewandten Arbeiter n, so erhalten wir:
M=
{
m
/
v
* V
k *
a'
/
a
* n.

Let the mass of the surplus-value be S, the surplus-value supplied
by the individual labourer in the average day s the variable capital daily
advanced in the purchase of one individual labour-power v, the sum total
of the variable capital V, the value of an average labour-power P, its
degree of exploitation (a'/a) (surplus-labour/necessary-labour) and the number of labourers employed n; we have:
S =
{
(s/v) × V
P × (a'/a) × n

Es wird fortwährend unterstellt, nicht nur daß der Wert einer Durchschnitts-Arbeitskraft konstant ist, sondern daß die von einem Kapitalisten angewandten Arbeiter auf Durchschnitts-Arbeiter reduziert sind. Es gibt Ausnahmefälle, wo der produzierte Mehrwert nicht verhältnismäßig zur Anzahl der exploitierten Arbeiter wächst, aber dann bleibt auch der Wert der Arbeitskraft nicht konstant.

exception cases excluded

We constantly assume not only that the value of an average labour-power is constant, but also that the workers a capitalist employs are reduced to average workers. There are exception cases where the surplus-value produced does not grow in proportion to the number of workers exploited, but in those cases the value of labour-power does not remain constant either.

In der Produktion einer bestimmten Masse Mehrwert kann daher die Abnahme des einen Faktors durch Zunahme des andren ersetzt werden. Wird das variable Kapital vermindert und gleichzeitig in demselben Verhältnis die Rate des Mehrwerts erhöht, so bleibt die Masse des produzierten Mehrwerts unverändert. Muß unter den frühern Annahmen der Kapitalist 100 Taler vorschießen, um 100 Arbeiter täglich zu exploitieren, und beträgt die Rate des Mehrwerts 50%, so wirft dies variable Kapital von 100 einen Mehrwert von 50 Talern ab oder von 100 x 3 Arbeitsstunden. Wird die Rate des Mehrwerts verdoppelt, oder der Arbeitstag, statt von 6 zu 9, von 6 zu 12 Stunden verlängert, so wirft das um die Hälfte verminderte variable Kapital von 50 Talern ebenfalls einen Mehrwert von 50 Talern ab oder von 50 x 6 Arbeitsstunden. Verminderung des variablen Kapitals ist also ausgleichbar durch proportionelle Erhöhung im Exploitationsgrad der Arbeitskraft oder die Abnahme in der Anzahl der beschäftigten Arbeiter durch proportionelle Verlängerung des Arbeitstags. Innerhalb gewisser Grenzen wird die vom Kapital erpreßbare Zufuhr der Arbeit also unabhängig von der Arbeiterzufuhr.²⁰² Umgekehrt läßt Abnahme in der Rate des Mehrwerts die Masse des produzierten Mehrwerts unverändert, wenn proportionell die Größe des variablen Kapitals oder die Anzahl der beschäftigten Arbeiter wächst.

fewer workers, higher rate

In producing a definite mass of surplus-value, a fall in one factor can be offset by a rise in the other. If the variable capital shrinks while the rate of surplus-value rises in the same proportion, the mass of surplus-value produced stays the same.

Under our earlier assumptions, the capitalist had to advance 100 talers to exploit 100 workers daily, and at a rate of surplus-value of 50% this variable capital of 100 yielded a surplus-value of 50 talers, or 100 × 3 working hours. If the rate of surplus-value doubles — the working day extended from 6 to 12 hours instead of 6 to 9 — then the halved variable capital of 50 talers also yields a surplus-value of 50 talers, or 50 × 6 working hours.

A fall in the variable capital can therefore be offset by a proportional rise in the degree of exploitation, or a fall in the number of workers by a proportional lengthening of the working day. Within certain limits, the supply of labour that capital can wring out becomes independent of the supply of workers.

Conversely, a fall in the rate of surplus-value leaves the mass of surplus-value unchanged if the size of the variable capital or the number of workers grows proportionally.

Indes hat der Ersatz von Arbeiteranzahl oder Größe des variablen Kapitals durch gesteigerte Rate des Mehrwerts oder Verlängerung des Arbeitstags unüberspringbare Schranken. Welches immer der Wert der Arbeitskraft sei, ob daher die zur Erhaltung des Arbeiters notwendige Arbeitszeit 2 oder 10 Stunden betrage, der Gesamtwert, den ein Arbeiter tagaus, tagein produzieren kann, ist immer kleiner als der Wert, worin sich 24 Arbeitsstunden vergegenständlichen, kleiner als 12 sh. oder 4 Taler, wenn dies der Geldausdruck von 24 vergegenständlichten Arbeitsstunden. Unter unsrer frühern Annahme, wonach täglich 6 Arbeitsstunden erheischt, um die Arbeitskraft selbst zu reproduzieren oder den in ihrem Ankauf vorgeschoßnen Kapitalwert zu ersetzen, produziert ein variables Kapital von 500 Talern, das 500 Arbeiter zu Mehrwertsrate von 100% oder mit zwölfstündigem Arbeitstag verwendet, täglich einen Mehrwert von 500 Talern oder 6 x 500 Arbeitsstunden. Ein Kapital von 100 Talern, das 100 Arbeiter täglich verwendet zur Mehrwertsrate von 200% oder mit 18stündigem Arbeitstag, produziert nur eine Mehrwertsmasse von 200 Talern oder 12 x 100 Arbeitsstunden. Und sein gesamtes Wertprodukt, Äquivalent des vorgeschoßnen variablen Kapitals plus Mehrwert, kann tagaus, tagein niemals die Summe von 400 Talern oder 24 x 100 Arbeitsstunden erreichen. Die absolute Schranke des durchschnittlichen Arbeitstags, der von Natur immer kleiner ist als 24 Stunden, bildet eine absolute Schranke für den Ersatz von vermindertem variablen Kapital durch gesteigerte Rate des Mehrwerts oder von verringerter exploitierten Arbeiteranzahl durch erhöhten Exploitationsgrad der Arbeitskraft. Dies handgreifliche zweite Gesetz ist wichtig zur Erklärung vieler Erscheinungen, entspringend aus der später zu entwickelnden Tendenz des Kapitals, die von ihm beschäftigte Arbeiteranzahl oder seinen variablen in Arbeitskraft umgesetzten Bestandteil soviel als immer möglich zu reduzieren, im Widerspruch zu seiner andren Tendenz, die möglichst große Masse von Mehrwert zu produzieren. Umgekehrt. Wächst die Masse der verwandten Arbeitskräfte oder die Größe des variablen Kapitals, aber nicht verhältnismäßig zur Abnahme in der Rate des Mehrwerts, so sinkt die Masse des produzierten Mehrwerts.

the hard ceiling: the 24-hour day

But substituting a higher rate of surplus-value or a longer working day for a greater number of workers or a larger variable capital has an impassable limit. Whatever the value of labour-power is — whether the labour-time needed to maintain the worker is 2 hours or 10 — the total value a worker can produce day in, day out is always less than the value embodied in 24 working hours (less than 12 shillings, or 4 talers, if that is the money-expression of 24 embodied hours).

Under our earlier assumption, where 6 working hours are daily required to reproduce the labour-power itself, a variable capital of 500 talers employing 500 workers at a rate of surplus-value of 100% (a 12-hour working day) produces a daily surplus-value of 500 talers, or 6 × 500 working hours. A capital of 100 talers employing 100 workers at a rate of surplus-value of 200% (an 18-hour working day) produces only a mass of surplus-value of 200 talers, or 12 × 100 working hours. And its total value-product — the equivalent of the variable capital advanced plus the surplus-value — can never reach 400 talers, or 24 × 100 working hours.

The absolute limit of the average working day — which by nature is always less than 24 hours — forms an absolute bound on replacing reduced variable capital with a higher rate of surplus-value, or fewer exploited workers with a higher degree of exploitation.

This tangible second law matters for explaining many phenomena arising from capital's tendency (to be developed later) to reduce the number of workers it employs as much as possible, contradicting its other tendency to produce the greatest possible mass of surplus-value. Conversely, if the mass of labour-power employed or the amount of variable capital increases, but not in proportion to the fall in the rate of surplus-value, the mass of surplus-value produced falls.

Ein drittes Gesetz ergibt sich aus der Bestimmung der Masse des produzierten Mehrwerts durch die zwei Faktoren, Rate des Mehrwerts und Größe des vorgeschoßnen variablen Kapitals. Die Rate des Mehrwerts oder den Exploitationsgrad der Arbeitskraft, und den Wert der Arbeitskraft oder die Größe der notwendigen Arbeitszeit gegeben, ist es selbstverständlich, daß, je größer das variable Kapital, desto größer die Masse des produzierten Werts und Mehrwerts. Ist die Grenze des Arbeitstags gegeben, ebenso die Grenze seines notwendigen Bestandteils, so hängt die Masse von Wert und Mehrwert, die ein einzelner Kapitalist produziert, offenbar ausschließlich ab von der Masse Arbeit, die er in Bewegung setzt. Diese aber hängt, unter den gegebnen Annahmen, ab von der Masse Arbeitskraft oder der Arbeiteranzahl, die er exploitiert, und diese Anzahl ihrerseits ist bestimmt durch die Größe des von ihm vorgeschoßnen variablen Kapitals. Bei gegebner Rate des Mehrwerts und gegebnem Wert der Arbeitskraft verhalten sich also die Massen des produzierten Mehrwerts direkt wie die Größen der vorgeschoßnen variablen Kapitale. Nun weiß man aber, daß der Kapitalist sein Kapital in zwei Teile teilt. Einen Teil legt er aus in Produktionsmitteln. Dies ist der konstante Teil seines Kapitals. Den andren Teil setzt er um in lebendige Arbeitskraft. Dieser Teil bildet sein variables Kapital. Auf Basis derselben Produktionsweise findet in verschiednen Produktionszweigen verschiedne Teilung des Kapitals in konstanten und variablen Bestandteil statt. Innerhalb desselben Produktionszweigs wechselt dies Verhältnis mit wechselnder technischer Grundlage und gesellschaftlicher Kombination des Produktionsprozesses. Wie aber ein gegebnes Kapital immer zerfalle in konstanten und variablen Bestandteil, ob der letztre sich zum erstren verhalte wie 1 : 2, 1 : 10 oder 1 : x, das eben aufgestellte Gesetz wird nicht davon berührt, da früherer Analyse gemäß der Wert des konstanten Kapitals im Produktenwert zwar wiedererscheint, aber nicht in das neugebildete Wertprodukt eingeht. Um 1.000 Spinner zu verwenden, sind natürlich mehr Rohmaterialen, Spindeln usw. erheischt, als um 100 zu verwenden. Der Wert dieser zuzusetzenden Produktionsmittel aber mag steigen, fallen, unverändert bleiben, groß oder klein sein, er bleibt ohne irgendeinen Einfluß auf den Verwertungsprozeß der sie bewegenden Arbeitskräfte. Das oben konstatierte Gesetz nimmt also die Form an: Die von verschiednen Kapitalen produzierten Massen von Wert und Mehrwert verhalten sich bei gegebnem Wert und gleich großem Exploitationsgrad der Arbeitskraft direkt wie die Größen der variablen Bestandteile dieser Kapitale, d.h. ihrer in lebendige Arbeitskraft umgesetzten Bestandteile.

third law: variable capital

A third law follows from determining the mass of surplus-value by its two factors: the rate of surplus-value and the size of the variable capital advanced.

Given the rate of surplus-value (the degree of exploitation) and the value of labour-power (the amount of necessary labour-time), the greater the variable capital, the greater the mass of value and surplus-value produced. With the limit of the working day given, and the limit of its necessary part given, the mass of value and surplus-value an individual capitalist produces clearly depends exclusively on the mass of labour he sets in motion. Under our assumptions, that depends on the mass of labour-power — the number of workers he exploits — and that number is set by the size of the variable capital he advances. At a given rate of surplus-value and a given value of labour-power, the masses of surplus-value produced vary directly with the sizes of the variable capitals advanced.

We know the capitalist splits his capital into two parts. One part goes into means of production: the constant part of his capital. The other goes into living labour-power: his variable capital. On the same basis of production, the split between constant and variable differs across different branches of production, and within the same branch it changes as the technical conditions and social combinations of the production process change.

But however a given capital breaks into constant and variable — whether the latter stands to the former as 1 : 2, 1 : 10, or 1 : x — the law just laid down is unaffected. According to our earlier analysis, the value of constant capital reappears in the product's value but does not enter into the newly created value-product. To employ 1,000 spinners requires more raw material, spindles, and so on than to employ 100. But the value of those added means of production may rise, fall, stay unchanged, be large or small — it remains without any influence on the valorization process of the labour-powers that set them in motion.

The law takes this form: the masses of value and surplus-value produced by different capitals — given the value of labour-power and an equal degree of exploitation — vary directly with the sizes of the variable constituents of these capitals, that is, their constituents transformed into living labour-power.

Dies Gesetz widerspricht offenbar aller auf den Augenschein gegründeten Erfahrung. Jedermann weiß, daß ein Baumwollspinner, der, die Prozentteile des angewandten Gesamtkapitals berechnet, relativ viel konstantes und wenig variables Kapital anwendet, deswegen keinen kleinren Gewinn oder Mehrwert erbeutet als ein Bäcker, der relativ viel variables und wenig konstantes Kapital in Bewegung setzt. Zur Lösung dieses scheinbaren Widerspruchs bedarf es noch vieler Mittelglieder, wie es vom Standpunkt der elementaren Algebra vieler Mittelglieder bedarf, um zu verstehn, daß 0 / 0 eine wirkliche Größe darstellen kann. Obgleich sie das Gesetz nie formuliert hat, hängt die klassische Ökonomie instinktiv daran fest, weil es eine notwendige Konsequenz des Wertgesetzes überhaupt ist. Sie sucht es durch gewaltsame Abstraktion vor den Widersprüchen der Erscheinung zu retten. Man wird später²⁰³ sehn, wie die Ricardosche Schule an diesem Stein des Anstoßes gestolpert ist. Die Vulgärökonomie, die "wirklich auch nichts gelernt hat", pocht hier, wie überall, auf den Schein gegen das Gesetz der Erscheinung. Sie glaubt im Gegensatz zu Spinoza, daß "die Unwissenheit ein hinreichender Grund ist".

the law contradicts appearance

This law clearly contradicts all experience grounded in appearance. Everyone knows that a cotton spinner, who — reckoning by the percentage of his total applied capital — employs relatively much constant and little variable capital, does not pocket less profit or surplus-value than a baker, who sets in motion relatively much variable and little constant capital.

Resolving this apparent contradiction requires many intermediate links — just as, from the standpoint of elementary algebra, many intermediate links are needed to understand that 0 / 0 can represent an actual magnitude. Classical economy, though it never formulated the law, clings to it instinctively because it is a necessary consequence of the law of value in general. It tries to rescue it from collision with the phenomena of appearance through violent abstraction. The Ricardian school came to grief over this stumbling block. Vulgar economy, which "has really learnt nothing," clings here, as everywhere, to appearance against the law of appearance. In opposition to Spinoza, it believes that "ignorance is a sufficient reason."

Die Arbeit, die vom Gesamtkapital einer Gesellschaft tagaus, tagein in Bewegung gesetzt wird, kann als ein einziger Arbeitstag betrachtet werden. Ist z.B. die Zahl der Arbeiter eine Million und beträgt der Durchschnittsarbeitstag eines Arbeiters 10 Stunden, so besteht der gesellschaftliche Arbeitstag aus 10 Millionen Stunden. Bei gegebner Länge dieses Arbeitstags, seien seine Grenzen physisch oder sozial gezogen, kann die Masse des Mehrwerts nur vermehrt werden durch Vermehrung der Arbeiteranzahl, d.h. der Arbeiterbevölkerung. Das Wachstum der Bevölkrung bildet hier die mathematische Grenze für Produktion des Mehrwerts durch das gesellschaftliche Gesamtkapital. Umgekehrt. Bei gegebner Größe der Bevölkrung wird diese Grenze gebildet durch die mögliche Verlängerung des Arbeitstags.²⁰⁴ Man wird im folgenden Kapitel sehn, daß dies Gesetz nur für die bisher behandelte Form des Mehrwerts gilt.

social working-day limits

The labour set in motion day in, day out by a society's total capital can be viewed as a single working day. If the number of workers is a million, and the average worker's day is 10 hours, the social working day consists of 10 million hours.

With a given length for this working day — whether its limits are drawn physically or socially — the mass of surplus-value can only be increased by increasing the number of workers, that is, the working population. The growth of population forms the mathematical limit for the production of surplus-value by the total social capital. Conversely, with a given population size, that limit is formed by the possible lengthening of the working day.

We will see in the following chapter that this law holds only for the form of surplus-value dealt with up to now.

Aus der bisherigen Betrachtung der Produktion des Mehrwerts ergibt sich, daß nicht jede beliebige Geld- oder Wertsumme in Kapital verwandelbar, zu dieser Verwandlung vielmehr ein bestimmtes Minimum von Geld oder Tauschwert in der Hand des einzelnen Geld- oder Warenbesitzers vorausgesetzt ist. Das Minimum von variablem Kapital ist der Kostenpreis einer einzelnen Arbeitskraft, die das ganze Jahr durch, tagaus, tagein, zur Gewinnung von Mehrwert vernutzt wird. Wäre dieser Arbeiter im Besitz seiner eignen Produktionsmittel und begnügte er sich, als Arbeiter zu leben, so genügte ihm die zur Reproduktion seiner Lebensmittel notwendige Arbeitszeit, sage von 8 Stunden täglich. Er brauchte also auch nur Produktionsmittel für 8 Arbeitsstunden. Der Kapitalist dagegen, der ihn außer diesen 8 Stunden sage 4 Stunden Mehrarbeit verrichten läßt, bedarf einer zusätzlichen Geldsumme zur Beschaffung der zusätzlichen Produktionsmittel. Unter unsrer Annahme jedoch müßte er schon zwei Arbeiter anwenden, um von dem täglich angeeigneten Mehrwert wie ein Arbeiter leben, d.h. seine notwendigen Bedürfnisse befriedigen zu können. In diesem Fall wäre bloßer Lebensunterhalt der Zweck seiner Produktion, nicht Vermehrung des Reichtums, und das letztre ist unterstellt bei der kapitalistischen Produktion. Damit er nur doppelt so gut lebe wie ein gewöhnlicher Arbeiter und die Hälfte des produzierten Mehrwerts in Kapital zurückverwandle, müßte er zugleich mit der Arbeiterzahl das Minimum des vorgeschoßnen Kapitals um das Achtfache steigern. Allerdings kann er selbst, gleich seinem Arbeiter, unmittelbar Hand im Produktionsprozesse anlegen, aber ist dann auch nur ein Mittelding zwischen Kapitalist und Arbeiter, ein "kleiner Meister". Ein gewisser Höhegrad der kapitalistischen Produktion bedingt, daß der Kapitalist die ganze Zeit, während deren er als Kapitalist, d.h. als personifiziertes Kapital funktioniert, zur Aneignung und daher Kontrolle fremder Arbeit und zum Verkauf der Produkte dieser Arbeit verwenden könne.²⁰⁵ Die Verwandlung des Handwerksmeisters in den Kapitalisten suchte das Zunftwesen des Mittelalters dadurch gewaltsam zu verhindern, daß es die Arbeiteranzahl, die ein einzelner Meister beschäftigen durfte, auf ein sehr geringes Maximum beschränkte. Der Geld- oder Warenbesitzer verwandelt sich erst wirklich in einen Kapitalisten, wo die für die Produktion vorgeschoßne Minimalsumme weit über dem mittelaltrigen Maximum steht. Hier, wie in der Naturwissenschaft, bewährt sich die Richtigkeit des von Hegel in seiner "Logik" entdeckten Gesetzes, daß bloß quantitative Verändrungen auf einem gewissen Punkt in qualitative Unterschiede umschlagen.^205a

the minimum capital threshold

What has been said so far shows that not just any sum of money or value can be transformed into capital. To make that transformation, a definite minimum of money or exchange-value must be in the hands of the individual possessor of money or commodities.

The minimum of variable capital is the cost-price of a single labour-power, used the whole year through, day in, day out, to produce surplus-value. Suppose this worker owned his own means of production and was content to live as a worker. He would need to work only the time necessary to reproduce his means of subsistence — say 8 hours a day. He would need means of production for only 8 working hours. The capitalist, by contrast, who makes him perform 4 hours of surplus-labour on top of those 8, needs an extra sum of money to provide the extra means of production.

On our assumption, the capitalist would already need to employ two workers just to live off the daily surplus-value appropriated — to satisfy his own necessary needs — as well as an ordinary worker. In that case, mere subsistence would be the purpose of his production, not an increase in wealth. But an increase in wealth is presupposed in capitalist production. So that he might live twice as well as an ordinary worker and turn half the surplus-value produced back into capital, he would have to raise the minimum of the capital advanced eightfold, along with the number of workers.

Of course he can set his own hand to work in the production process, like his worker, but then he is only a hybrid between capitalist and worker — a "small master." A certain level of capitalist production requires that the capitalist be able to devote the whole time during which he functions as a capitalist — that is, as personified capital — to appropriating and therefore controlling the labour of others, and to selling the products of that labour.

The guild system of the Middle Ages tried violently to prevent the transformation of the master of a trade into a capitalist by limiting the number of workers a single master could employ to a very small maximum. The possessor of money or commodities actually turns into a capitalist only where the minimum sum advanced for production far exceeds the medieval maximum.

Here, as in natural science, the correctness of the law discovered by Hegel in his Logic is confirmed: merely quantitative changes at a certain point pass into qualitative differences.

Das Minimum der Wertsumme, worüber der einzelne Geld- oder Warenbesitzer verfügen muß, um sich in einen Kapitalisten zu entpuppen, wechselt auf verschiednen Entwicklungsstufen der kapitalistischen Produktion und ist, bei gegebner Entwicklungsstufe, verschieden in verschiednen Produktionssphären, je nach ihren besondren technischen Bedingungen. Gewisse Produktionssphären erheischen schon in den Anfängen der kapitalistischen Produktion ein Minimum von Kapital, das sich noch nicht in der Hand einzelner Individuen vorfindet. Dies veranlaßt teils Staatssubsidien an solche Private, wie in Frankreich zur Zeit Colberts und wie in manchen deutschen Staaten bis in unsre Epoche hinein, teils die Bildung von Gesellschaften mit gesetzlichem Monopol für den Betrieb gewisser Industrie- und Handelszweige²⁰⁶ - die Vorläufer der modernen Aktiengesellschaften.

historical variance of the threshold

The minimum sum of value an individual possessor of money or commodities must command to transform himself into a capitalist changes at different stages of development of capitalist production. At a given stage, it differs across different spheres of production according to their special technical conditions.

Certain spheres of production demand, even at the very beginnings of capitalist production, a minimum of capital not yet found in the hands of single individuals. This gives rise partly to state subsidies to private persons — as in France under Colbert, and in some German states right up to our own epoch — and partly to the formation of societies with legal monopolies for the operation of certain branches of industry and commerce. Martin Luther called these institutions "Company Monopolia." They are the forerunners of modern joint-stock companies.

__________

Wir halten uns nicht beim Detail der Verändrungen auf, die das Verhältnis von Kapitalist und Lohnarbeiter im Verlaufe des Produktionsprozesses erfuhr, also auch nicht bei den weitren Fortbestimmungen des Kapitals selbst. Nur wenige Hauptpunkte seien hier betont.

section recap: main points

We will not dwell on the details of the changes that the relationship between capitalist and wage-worker underwent in the course of the production process, nor on the further specifications of capital itself. Only a few main points will be stressed here.

Innerhalb des Produktionsprozesses entwickelte sich das Kapital zum Kommando über die Arbeit, d.h. über die sich betätigende Arbeitskraft oder den Arbeiter selbst. Das personifizierte Kapital, der Kapitalist, paßt auf, daß der Arbeiter sein Werk ordentlich und mit dem gehörigen Grad von Intensität verrichte.

capital as command over labour

Within the production process, capital developed into command over labour — that is, over functioning labour-power, or the worker himself. Personified capital, the capitalist, takes care that the worker does his work properly and with the right degree of intensity.

Das Kapital entwickelte sich ferner zu einem Zwangsverhältnis, welches die Arbeiterklasse nötigt, mehr Arbeit zu verrichten, als der enge Umkreis ihrer eignen Lebensbedürfnisse vorschrieb. Und als Produzent fremder Arbeitsamkeit, als Auspumper von Mehrarbeit und Exploiteur von Arbeitskraft übergipfelt es an Energie, Maßlosigkeit und Wirksamkeit alle frühern auf direkter Zwangsarbeit beruhenden Produktionssysteme.

capital as a coercive relation

Capital further developed into a coercive relation that compels the working class to perform more labour than the narrow round of its own life-needs prescribes. As a producer of others' toil, as a pumper-out of surplus labour and an exploiter of labour-power, it surpasses in energy, recklessness, and efficiency all earlier systems of production based on directly compulsory labour.

Das Kapital ordnet sich zunächst die Arbeit unter mit den technischen Bedingungen, worin es sie historisch vorfindet. Es verändert daher nicht unmittelbar die Produktionsweise. Die Produktion von Mehrwert in der bisher betrachteten Form, durch einfache Verlängrung des Arbeitstags, erschien daher von jedem Wechsel der Produktionsweise selbst unabhängig. Sie war in der altmodischen Bäckerei nicht minder wirksam als in der modernen Baumwollspinnerei.

old methods, longer day

At first, capital subordinates labour under the technical conditions in which it historically finds it. It does not, therefore, immediately change the mode of production. The production of surplus-value in the form considered so far — by simple lengthening of the working day — proved to be independent of any change in the mode of production itself. It was no less effective in the old-fashioned bakery than in the modern cotton mill.

Betrachten wir den Produktionsprozeß unter dem Gesichtspunkt des Arbeitsprozesses, so verhielt sich der Arbeiter zu den Produktionsmitteln nicht als Kapital, sondern als bloßem Mittel und Material seiner zweckmäßigen produktiven Tätigkeit. In einer Gerberei z.B. behandelt er die Felle als seinen bloßen Arbeitsgegenstand. Es ist nicht der Kapitalist, dem er das Fell gerbt. Anders, sobald wir den Produktionsprozeß unter dem Gesichtspunkt des Verwertungsprozesses betrachteten. Die Produktionsmittel verwandelten sich sofort in Mittel zur Einsaugung fremder Arbeit. Es ist nicht mehr der Arbeiter, der die Produktionsmittel anwendet, sondern es sind die Produktionsmittel, die den Arbeiter anwenden. Statt von ihm als stoffliche Elemente seiner produktiven Tätigkeit verzehrt zu werden, verzehren sie ihn als Ferment ihres eignen Lebensprozesses, und der Lebensprozeß des Kapitals besteht nur in seiner Bewegung als sich selbst verwertender Wert. Schmelzöfen und Arbeitsgebäude, die des Nachts ruhn und keine lebendige Arbeit einsaugen, sind "reiner Verlust" ("mere loss") für den Kapitalisten. Darum konstituieren Schmelzöfen und Arbeitsgebäude einen "Anspruch auf die Nachtarbeit" der Arbeitskräfte. Die bloße Verwandlung des Geldes in gegenständliche Faktoren des Produktionsprozesses, in Produktionsmittel, verwandelt letztre in Rechtstitel und Zwangstitel auf fremde Arbeit und Mehrarbeit. Wie diese der kapitalistischen Produktion eigentümliche und sie charakterisierende Verkehrung, ja Verrückung des Verhältnisses von toter und lebendiger Arbeit, von Wert und wertschöpferischer Kraft, sich im Bewußtsein der Kapitalistenköpfe abspiegelt, zeige schließlich noch ein Beispiel. Während der englischen Fabrikantenrevolte von 1848-1850 schrieb "der Chef der Leinen- und Baumwollspinnerei zu Paisley, einer der ältesten und respektabelsten Firmen von Westschottland, der Kompagnie Carlile, Söhne und Co., die seit 1752 besteht und Generation nach Generation von derselben Familie geführt wird" dieser äußerst intelligente Gentleman also schrieb in die "Glasgow Daily Mail" vom 25. April 1849 einen Brief²⁰⁷ unter dem Titel: "Das Relaissystem", worin u.a. folgende grotesk naive Stelle unterläuft:

tools apply the worker

If we look at the production process from the point of view of the labour process, the worker relates to the means of production not as capital, but as mere means and material of his purposeful productive activity. In a tannery, for example, he treats the skins as his mere object of labour. It is not the capitalist whose skin he tans.

That changes as soon as we consider the production process from the point of view of valorization. The means of production immediately turn into means for sucking up the labour of others. It is no longer the worker who applies the means of production, but the means of production that apply the worker. Instead of being consumed by him as material elements of his productive activity, they consume him as the ferment of their own life-process — and the life-process of capital consists only in its movement as self-expanding value.

Furnaces and workshops that stand idle by night and suck up no living labour are a "mere loss" to the capitalist. Hence furnaces and workshops constitute a lawful claim on the night-labour of the work-people. The mere transformation of money into the material factors of the production process — into means of production — transforms those factors into a legal title and a warrant of compulsion over the labour and surplus-labour of others.

An example will show, finally, how this inversion — this complete topsy-turvy of the relation between dead and living labour, between value and value-creating power, peculiar to and characteristic of capitalist production — mirrors itself in the consciousness of capitalist heads.

During the English factory revolt of 1848–1850, "the head of one of the oldest and most respectable firms in the West of Scotland, Messrs. Carlile, Sons & Co., of the linen and cotton thread factory at Paisley, a company which has existed since 1752 and has been carried on by generation after generation of the same family" — this highly intelligent gentleman wrote a letter to the Glasgow Daily Mail of 25 April 1849 under the title "The Relay System," in which, among other things, the following grotesquely naïve passage occurs:

"Laßt uns nun die Übel betrachten, die aus einer Reduktion der Arbeitszeit von 12 auf 10 Stunden fließen ... Sie 'belaufen' sich auf die allerernsthafteste Beschädigung der Aussichten und des Eigentums des Fabrikanten. Arbeitete er" (d.h. seine "Hände") "12 Stunden und wird er auf 10 beschränkt, dann schrumpfen je 12 Maschinen oder Spindeln seines Etablissements auf 10 zusammen (then every 12 machines or spindles, in his establishment, shrink to 10), und wollte er seine Fabrik verkaufen, so würden sie nur als 10 gewertschätzt werden, so daß so ein sechster Teil vom Wert einer jeden Fabrik im ganzen Lande abgezogen würde."²⁰⁸

staged voice: the Carlile letter

"Let us now see what evils attend the reduction of the working time from 12 to 10 hours... They amount to the most serious damage to the manufacturer's prospects and property. If he" (that is, his "hands") "worked 12 hours and is limited to 10, then every 12 machines or spindles in his establishment shrink to 10, and should the factory be put up for sale, they will be valued only as 10 — so that a sixth part of the value of every factory in the country would be deducted."

Diesem erbangestammten Kapitalhirn von Westschottland verschwimmt der Wert der Produktionsmittel, Spindeln usw., so sehr mit ihrer Kapitaleigenschaft, sich selbst zu verwerten oder täglich ein bestimmtes Quantum fremder Gratisarbeit einzuschlucken, daß der Chef des Hauses Carlile und Co. in der Tat wähnt, beim Verkauf seiner Fabrik werde ihm nicht nur der Wert der Spindeln gezahlt, sondern obendrein ihre Verwertung, nicht nur die Arbeit, die in ihnen steckt und zur Produktion von Spindeln derselben Art nötig ist, sondern auch die Mehrarbeit, die sie täglich aus den braven Westschotten von Paisley auspumpen helfen, und ebendeshalb, meint er, schrumpfe mit der Verkürzung des Arbeitstags um zwei Stunden der Verkaufspreis von je 12 Spinnmaschinen auf den von je 10 zusammen!

unpacking the spindle fetish

To this bourgeois capitalist brain of west Scotland — inheriting the accumulated capitalistic qualities of four generations — the value of the means of production, spindles and so on, blurs so completely with their character as capital, their capacity to expand their own value or to swallow a definite quantum of other people's unpaid labour daily, that the head of the house of Carlile & Co. actually imagines that if he sells his factory, he will be paid not only the value of the spindles but, on top of that, their power of self-expansion — not only the labour embodied in them and necessary to produce spindles of the same kind, but also the surplus-labour they help daily to pump out of the worthy Scots of Paisley. And for that very reason, he believes, with a shortening of the working day by two hours, the selling-price of every 12 spinning machines shrinks to that of 10!

K.9

Chapter Eleven - Rate and Mass of Surplus Value

In this chapter, as hitherto, the value of labour-power, and therefore the part of the working day necessary for the reproduction or maintenance of that labour-power, are supposed to be given, constant magnitudes.

the standing assumption

As before, we take the value of labour-power — and therefore the part of the working day needed just to keep that labour-power alive — as a given, constant magnitude.

This premised, with the rate, the mass is at the same time given of the surplus-value that the individual labourer furnishes to the capitalist in a definite period of time. If, e.g., the necessary labour amounts to 6 hours daily, expressed in a quantum of gold = 3 shillings, then 3s. is the daily value of one labour-power or the value of the capital advanced in the buying of one labour-power. If, further, the rate of surplus-value be = 100%, this variable capital of 3s. produces a mass of surplus-value of 3s., or the labourer supplies daily a mass of surplus labour equal to 6 hours.

rate fixes one worker's surplus mass

With that assumption in place, the rate of surplus-value fixes the mass of surplus-value a single worker delivers to the capitalist in a given time.

But the variable capital of a capitalist is the expression in money of the total value of all the labour-powers that he employs simultaneously. Its value is, therefore, equal to the average value of one labour-power, multiplied by the number of labour-powers employed. With a given value of labour-power, therefore, the magnitude of the variable capital varies directly as the number of labourers employed simultaneously. If the daily value of one labour-power = 3s., then a capital of 300s. must be advanced in order to exploit daily 100 labour-powers, of n times 3s., in order to exploit daily n labour-powers.

total wage bill

If the daily value of one labour-power is 1 taler, you must advance a capital of 100 talers to exploit 100 workers daily — or n talers to exploit n workers.

In the same way, if a variable capital of 3s., being the daily value of one labour-power, produce a daily surplus-value of 3s., a variable capital of 300s. will produce a daily surplus-value of 300s., and one of n times 3s. a daily surplus-value of n × 3s. The mass of the surplus-value produced is therefore equal to the surplus-value which the working day of one labourer supplies multiplied by the number of labourers employed. But as further the mass of surplus-value which a single labourer produces, the value of labour-power being given, is determined by the rate of the surplus-value, this law follows: the mass of the surplus-value produced is equal to the amount of the variable capital advanced, multiplied by the rate of surplus-value, in other words: it is determined by the compound ratio between the number of labour-powers exploited simultaneously by the same capitalist and the degree of exploitation of each individual labour-power.

the first law of the mass

The mass of surplus-value produced equals the surplus-value that one worker's day supplies, multiplied by the number of workers employed.

It is always supposed, not only that the value of an average labour-power is constant, but that the labourers employed by a capitalist are reduced to average labourers. There are exceptional cases in which the surplus-value produced does not increase in proportion to the number of labourers exploited, but then the value of the labour-power does not remain constant.

exception cases excluded

In the production of a definite mass of surplus-value, therefore the decrease of one factor may be compensated by the increase of the other. If the variable capital diminishes, and at the same time the rate of surplus-value increases in the same ratio, the mass of surplus-value produced remains unaltered. If on our earlier assumption the capitalist must advance 300s., in order to exploit 100 labourers a day, and if the rate of surplus-value amounts to 50%, this variable capital of 300s. yields a surplus-value of 150s. or of 100 × 3 workinghours. If the rate of surplus-value doubles, or the working day, instead of being extended from 6 to 9, is extended from 6 to 12 hours and at the same time variable capital is lessened by half, and reduced to 150s., it yields also a surplus-value of 150s. or 50 × 6 workinghours. Diminution of the variable capital may therefore be compensated by a proportionate rise in the degree of exploitation of labour-power, or the decrease in the number of the labourers employed by a proportionate extension of the working day. Within certain limits therefore the supply of labour exploitable by capital is independent of the supply of labourers. ¹ On the contrary, a fall in the rate of surplus-value leaves unaltered the mass of the surplus-value produced, if the amount of the variable capital, or number of the labourers employed, increases in the same proportion.

fewer workers, higher rate

Conversely, a fall in the rate of surplus-value leaves the mass of surplus-value unchanged if the size of the variable capital or the number of workers grows proportionally.

Nevertheless, the compensation of a decrease in the number of labourers employed, or of the amount of variable capital advanced by a rise in the rate of surplus-value, or by the lengthening of the working-day, has impassable limits. Whatever the value of labour-power may be, whether the workingtime necessary for the maintenance of the labourer is 2 or 10 hours, the total value that a labourer can produce, day in, day out, is always less than the value in which 24 hours of labour are embodied, less than 12s., if 12s. is the money expression for 24 hours of realised labour. In our former assumption, according to which 6 workinghours are daily necessary in order to reproduce the labour-power itself or to replace the value of the capital advanced in its purchase, a variable capital of 1,500s., that employs 500 labourers at a rate of surplus-value of 100% with a 12 hours’ working day, produces daily a surplus-value of 1,500s. or of 6 × 500 workinghours. A capital of 300s. that employs 100 labourers a day with a rate of surplus-value of 200% or with a working day of 18 hours, produces only a mass of surplus-value of 600s. or 12 × 100 workinghours; and its total value-product, the equivalent of the variable capital advanced plus the surplus-value, can, day in, day out, never reach the sum of 1,200s. or 24 × 100 workinghours. The absolute limit of the average working day — this being by nature always less than 24 hours — sets an absolute limit to the compensation of a reduction of variable capital by a higher rate of surplus-value, or of the decrease of the number of labourers exploited by a higher degree of exploitation of labour-power. This palpable law is of importance for the clearing up of many phenomena, arising from a tendency (to be worked out later on) of capital to reduce as much as possible the number of labourers employed by it, or its variable constituent transformed into labour-power, in contradiction to its other tendency to produce the greatest possible mass of surplus-value. On the other hand, if the mass of labour-power employed, or the amount of variable capital, increases, but not in proportion to the fall in the rate of surplus-value, the mass of the surplus-value produced, falls.

the hard ceiling: the 24-hour day

A third law results from the determination, of the mass of the surplus-value produced, by the two factors: rate of surplus-value and amount of variable capital advanced. The rate of surplus-value, or the degree of exploitation of labour-power, and the value of labour-power, or the amount of necessary workingtime being given, it is selfevident that the greater the variable capital, the greater would be the mass of the value produced and of the surplus-value. If the limit of the working-day is given, and also the limit of its necessary constituent, the mass of value and surplus-value that an individual capitalist produces, is clearly exclusively dependent on the mass of labour that he sets in motion. But this, under the conditions supposed above, depends on the mass of labour-power, or the number of labourers whom he exploits, and this number in its turn is determined by the amount of the variable capital advanced. With a given rate of surplus-value, and a given value of labour-power, therefore, the masses of surplus-value produced vary directly as the amounts of the variable capitals advanced. Now we know that the capitalist divides his capital into two parts. One part he lays out in means of production. This is the constant part of his capital. The other part he lays out in living labour-power. This part forms his variable capital. On the basis of the same mode of social production, the division of capital into constant and variable differs in different branches of production, and within the same branch of production, too, this relation changes with changes in the technical conditions and in the social combinations of the processes of production. But in whatever proportion a given capital breaks up into a constant and a variable part, whether the latter is to the former as 1:2 or 1:10 or 1:x, the law just laid down is not affected by this. For, according to our previous analysis, the value of the constant capital reappears in the value of the product, but does not enter into the newly produced value, the newly created value product. To employ 1,000 spinners, more raw material, spindles, &c., are, of course, required, than to employ 100. The value of these additional means of production however may rise, fall, remain unaltered, be large or small; it has no influence on the process of creation of surplus-value by means of the labour-powers that put them in motion. The law demonstrated above now, therefore, takes this form: the masses of value and of surplus-value produced by different capitals — the value of labour-power being given and its degree of exploitation being equal — vary directly as the amounts of the variable constituents of these capitals, i.e., as their constituents transformed into living labour-power.

third law: variable capital

A third law follows from determining the mass of surplus-value by its two factors: the rate of surplus-value and the size of the variable capital advanced.

This law clearly contradicts all experience based on appearance. Everyone knows that a cotton spinner, who, reckoning the percentage on the whole of his applied capital, employs much constant and little variable capital, does not, on account of this, pocket less profit or surplus-value than a baker, who relatively sets in motion much variable and little constant capital. For the solution of this apparent contradiction, many intermediate terms are as yet wanted, as from the standpoint of elementary algebra many intermediate terms are wanted to understand that 0/0 may represent an actual magnitude. Classical economy, although not formulating the law, holds instinctively to it, because it is a necessary consequence of the general law of value. It tries to rescue the law from collision with contradictory phenomena by a violent abstraction. It will be seen later² how the school of Ricardo has come to grief over this stumbling block. Vulgar economy which, indeed, “has really learnt nothing,” here as everywhere sticks to appearances in opposition to the law which regulates and explains them. In opposition to Spinoza, it believes that “ignorance is a sufficient reason.”

the law contradicts appearance

The labour which is set in motion by the total capital of a society, day in, day out, may be regarded as a single collective working day. If, e.g., the number of labourers is a million, and the average working-day of a labourer is 10 hours, the social working day consists of ten million hours. With a given length of this working day, whether its limits are fixed physically or socially, the mass of surplus-value can only be increased by increasing the number of labourers, i.e., of the labouring population. The growth of population here forms the mathematical limit to the production of surplus-value by the total social capital. On the contrary, with a given amount of population, this limit is formed by the possible lengthening of the working day.³ It will, however, be seen in the following chapter that this law only holds for the form of surplus-value dealt with up to the present.

social working-day limits

We will see in the following chapter that this law holds only for the form of surplus-value dealt with up to now.

From the treatment of the production of surplus-value, so far, it follows that not every sum of money, or of value, is at pleasure transformable into capital. To effect this transformation, in fact, a certain minimum of money or of exchange-value must be presupposed in the hands of the individual possessor of money or commodities. The minimum of variable capital is the cost price of a single labour-power, employed the whole year through, day in, day out, for the production of surplus-value. If this labourer were in possession of his own means of production, and were satisfied to live as a labourer, he need not work beyond the time necessary for the reproduction of his means of subsistence, say 8 hours a day. He would, besides, only require the means of production sufficient for 8 working-hours. The capitalist, on the other hand, who makes him do, besides these 8 hours, say 4 hours’ surplus-labour, requires an additional sum of money for furnishing the additional means of production. On our supposition, however, he would have to employ two labourers in order to live, on the surplus-value appropriated daily, as well as, and no better than a labourer, i.e., to be able to satisfy his necessary wants. In this case the mere maintenance of life would be the end of his production, not the increase of wealth; but this latter is implied in capitalist production. That he may live only twice as well as an ordinary labourer, and besides turn half of the surplus-value produced into capital, he would have to raise, with the number of labourers, the minimum of the capital advanced 8 times. Of course he can, like his labourer, take to work himself, participate directly in the process of production, but he is then only a hybrid between capitalist and labourer, a “small master.” A certain stage of capitalist production necessitates that the capitalist be able to devote the whole of the time during which he functions as a capitalist, i.e., as personified capital, to the appropriation and therefore control of the labour of others, and to the selling of the products of this labour.⁴ The guilds of the middle ages therefore tried to prevent by force the transformation of the master of a trade into a capitalist, by limiting the number of labourers that could be employed by one master within a very small maximum. The possessor of money or commodities actually turns into a capitalist in such cases only where the minimum sum advanced for production greatly exceeds the maximum of the middle ages. Here, as in natural science, is shown the correctness of the law discovered by Hegel (in his “Logic”), that merely quantitative differences beyond a certain point pass into qualitative changes.⁵

the minimum capital threshold

Here, as in natural science, the correctness of the law discovered by Hegel in his Logic is confirmed: merely quantitative changes at a certain point pass into qualitative differences.

The minimum of the sum of value that the individual possessor of money or commodities must command, in order to metamorphose himself into a capitalist, changes with the different stages of development of capitalist production, and is at given stages different in different spheres of production, according to their special and technical conditions. Certain spheres of production demand, even at the very outset of capitalist production, a minimum of capital that is not as yet found in the hands of single individuals. This gives rise partly to state subsidies to private persons, as in France in the time of Clobber, and as in many German states up to our own epoch, partly to the formation of societies with legal monopoly for the exploitation of certain branches of industry and commerce, the forerunners of our modern joint stock companies.⁶

historical variance of the threshold

No corresponding sentence in Moore–Aveling (1887): the German transition "Wir halten uns nicht beim Detail der Verändrungen auf... Nur wenige Hauptpunkte seien hier betont" is omitted in the English; its only trace is the "as we have seen" folded into the next paragraph.

section recap: main points

Within the process of production, as we have seen, capital acquired the command over labour, i.e., over functioning labour-power or the labourer himself. Personified capital, the capitalist takes care that the labourer does his work regularly and with the proper degree of intensity.

capital as command over labour

Capital further developed into a coercive relation, which compels the working class to do more work than the narrow round of its own life-wants prescribes. As a producer of the activity of others, as a pumper-out of surplus labour and exploiter of labour-power, it surpasses in energy, disregard of bounds, recklessness and efficiency, all earlier systems of production based on directly compulsory labour.

capital as a coercive relation

At first, capital subordinates labour on the basis of the technical conditions in which it historically finds it. It does not, therefore, change immediately the mode of production. The production of surplus-value — in the form hitherto considered by us — by means of simple extension of the working day, proved, therefore, to be independent of any change in the mode of production itself. It was not less active in the old-fashioned bakeries than in the modern cotton factories.

old methods, longer day

If we consider the process of production from the point of view of the simple labour process, the labourer stands in relation to the means of production, not in their quality as capital, but as the mere means and material of his own intelligent productive activity. In tanning, e.g., he deals with the skins as his simple object of labour. It is not the capitalist whose skin he tans. But it is different as soon as we deal with the process of production from the point of view of the process of creation of surplus-value. The means of production are at once changed into means for the absorption of the labour of others. It is now no longer the labourer that employs the means of production, but the means of production that employ the labourer. Instead of being consumed by him as material elements of his productive activity, they consume him as the ferment necessary to their own life-process, and the life-process of capital consists only in its movement as value constantly expanding, constantly multiplying itself. Furnaces and workshops that stand idle by night, and absorb no living labour, are “a mere loss” to the capitalist. Hence, furnaces and workshops constitute lawful claims upon the night-labour of the work-people. The simple transformation of money into the material factors of the process of production, into means of production, transforms the latter into a title and a right to the labour and surpluslabour of others. An example will show, in conclusion, how this sophistication, peculiar to and characteristic of capitalist production, this complete inversion of the relation between dead and living labour, between value and the force that creates value, mirrors itself in the consciousness of capitalists. During the revolt of the English factory lords between 1848 and 1850, “the head of one of the oldest and most respectable houses in the West of Scotland, Messrs. Carlile Sons & Co., of the linen and cotton thread factory at Paisley, a company which has now existed for about a century, which was in operation in 1752, and four generations of the same family have conducted it” ... this “very intelligent gentleman” then wrote a letter⁷ in the Glasgow Daily Mail of April 25th, 1849, with the title, “The relay system,” in which among other things the following grotesquely naïve passage occurs: “Let us now ... see what evils will attend the limiting to 10 hours the working of the factory.... They amount to the most serious damage to the millowner’s prospects and property. If he (i.e., his “hands”) worked 12 hours before, and is limited to 10, then every 12 machines or spindles in his establishment shrink to 10, and should the works be disposed of, they will be valued only as 10, so that a sixth part would thus be deducted from the value of every factory in the country.”⁸

tools apply the worker

M–A merges

staged voice: the Carlile letter

To this West of Scotland bourgeois brain, inheriting the accumulated capitalistic qualities of “four generations,” the value of the means of production, spindles, &c., is so inseparably mixed up with their property, as capital, to expand their own value, and to swallow up daily a definite quantity of the unpaid labour of others, that the head of the firm of Carlile & Co. actually imagines that if he sells his factory, not only will the value of the spindles be paid to him, but, in addition, their power of annexing surplus-value, not only the labour which is embodied in them, and is necessary to the production of spindles of this kind, but also the surpluslabour which they help to pump out daily from the brave Scots of Paisley, and for that very reason he thinks that with the shortening of the working day by 2 hours, the selling-price of 12 spinning machines dwindles to that of 10!

unpacking the spindle fetish