Log in

View Full Version : Question on Capital Volume 1



Synthesis-
18th March 2013, 12:42
I have a question about a specific paragraph on Capital Volume 1. The paragraph has to do with Producton of Relative Surplus-Value, basically part 4 chapter 12.


Co-operation allows of the work being carried on over an extended space; it is consequently imperatively called for in certain undertakings, such as draining, constructing dykes, irrigation works, and the making of canals, roads and railways. On the other hand, while extending the scale of production, it renders possible a relative contraction of the arena. This contraction of arena simultaneous with, and arising from, extension of scale, whereby a number of useless expenses are cut down, is owing to the conglomeration of labourers, to the aggregation of various processes, and to the concentration of the means of production. The combined working day produces, relatively to an equal sum of isolated working-days, a greater quantity of use-values, and, consequently, diminishes the labour-time necessary for the production of a given useful effect. Whether the combined working-day, in a give case, acquires this increaded productive power, because it heightens the mechanical force of labour, or extends its sphere of action over a greater space, or contracts the field of production relatively to the scale of production, or at the critical moment sets large masses of labour to work, or excites emulation between individuals and raises their animal spirits,or impresses on the similar operations carried on by number of men the stamp of continuity and many-sidedness, or performs simultaneously different operations, or economises the means of production by use in common, or lends to individual labour the character of average social labour-which ever of these be the cause of the increase, the special productive power of the combined working day is, under all circumstances, the social productive power of labour, or the productive power of social labour. This power is due to co-operation itself. When the labourer co-operates systematically with others, he strips off the fetters of his individuality, and develops the capabilities of his species.


Ok, in general I have hard time understanding Capital as this is my first time reading it. I would like for someone to try to correct me in my understanding a bit or lay it out in lay-mans terms on what is being said here.

Is marx saying that the scale of advanced capitalist production render the artisan redundant and inefficient when tasked to construct railways, irrigation canals etc. The artisan exists as a labour power only within the arena so long as capitalist production remains in a small scale but once capitalism advances then it swallows the artisan because his single unit of redundant inefficient labour is made absolute by the co-operation of labour needed under capitalism? And in doing so the co-operation of labourers also induces in them the sense of the capablities of the human species and also lays the groundwork for the consciousness and future workers organization brought about by the capitalist mode of production?.

Like I said I dont know shit, When I read marx I feel as though there is a duality of meanings in his writings so sometimes i feel as though I must read more into them. But then again I could comepletely be wrong. Can someone please help me out here. THanks.

subcp
25th March 2013, 22:12
I'm no Marxologist, but this is my understanding of it (and hope it is at least a little helpful).

If I'm reading the paragraph right, Marx is saying that the socialization of labor (a function of capital development) [1] leads to greater productivity; you're correct that capital subsumes the artisan strata and has a tendency to turn them into waged laborers due to proletarianizing them: artisans often owned their own tools, were highly skilled craftsmen. So initially, capital co-ops the artisan into the capitalist economy (producing commodities for exchange) before proletarianizing him into a waged laborer (by creating mass production industry in the form of the factory where the expertise of the artisan is undercut economically).

There are two phases of capitalist domination (the hegemony of capitalism)- the formal domination of capital and real domination of capital (also known as/called the formal subsumption of labor and real subsumption of labor); under the formal domination of capital, there is generalized extraction of absolute surplus value (lengthening the working day), while under the real domination there is generalized extraction of relative surplus value (increasing the level/rate of exploitation of labor).

In the example of large works projects, the division of labor, spreading tasks across a large number of workers, the use of technical advancement and machinery, etc. becomes necessary to accomplish such tasks- which in turn set the stage for even bigger development of the productive forces- which is the means by which capital overtakes pre-capitalist forms/relations/classes, bends them to its needs, before re-making them as strictly capitalist relations, forms and classes. It's the means through which capital transitions between its formal and real domination.

For example;

A railway is being constructed near a small to moderate sized town 20 or 30 miles from Paris in the middle 19th century. Former peasants and artisans who have been proletarianized are hired en masse to build these projects by a railroad company to dig, lay track, clear obstacles, build the station, etc. The latest and greatest technological developments are owned by the railroad company and utilized on the project to build the rail lines. Once the project is completed, the railroad offers industry the means to expand in the small to moderately sized town- and more peasants and the few remaining artisans are proletarianized and forced to sell their labor in the newly constructed factories (which produce commodities to ship to the cities and coastal ports via the railroad).

So by utilizing technological improvements and developments to increase the efficiency of the project (thus extracting greater surplus value via increased exploitation) it is the extraction of relative surplus value instead of absolute surplus value- and is an example of how labor is subsumed by capital (the transformation of pre-capitalist forms, classes and relations to the needs of capital, such as the proletarianization of artisans and peasants).

That's my understanding anyway.

[1] definition of socialization of labor (it's pretty clear):

http://encyclopedia2.thefreedictionary.com/Socialization+of+Labor