sion and affirmative recognition of the existing state of things, at the same time also, the recognition of the negation of that state, of its inevitable breaking up; because it regards every historically developed social form as in fluid movement, and therefore takes into account its transient nature not less than its momentary exist- ence; because it lets nothing impose upon it, and is in its essence critical and revolutionary.
The contradictions inherent in the movement of capitalist society impress themselves upon the practical bourgeois most strikingly in the changes of the periodic cycle, through which modern industry runs, and whose crowning point is the universal crisis. That crisis is once again approaching, although as yet but in its preliminary stage; and by the universality of its theatre and the intensity of its action it will drum dialectics even into the heads of the mushroom-upstarts of the new, holy Prusso- German empire.
KARL MARX.
London, January 24, 1873.
BOOK I.
CAPITALIST PRODUCTION.
PART I. COMMODITIES AND MONEY, CHAPTER I.
COMMODITIES.
SECTION 1. — THE TWO FACTORS OF A COMMODITY: USE- VALUE AND VALUE (the substance of value and THE MAGNITUDE OF VALUE).
THE wealth of those societies in which the capitalist mode of production prevails, presents itself as "an immense accumulation of commodities,"^ its unit being a single com- modity. Our investigation must therefore begin with the analysis of a commodity.
A commodity is, in the first place, an object outside us, a thing that by its properties satisfies human wants of some sort or another. The nature of such wants, whether, for instance, they spring from the stomach or from fancy, makes no dififer- 1 Karl Marx ** Zur Kritik der Politischen Oekonomie." Berlin, 1859, p. 4.
A 2 Capitalist Production, ence.^ Neither are we here concerned to know how the object satisfies these wants, whether directly as means of subsistence, or indirectly as means of production.
Every useful thing, as iron, paper, fee, may be looked at from the two points of view of quality and quantity. It is an assemblage of many properties, and may therefore be of use in various ways. To discover the various uses of things is the work of history,^ So also is the establishment of socially- recognised standards of measure for the quantities of these useful objects. The diversity of these measures has its origin partly in the diverse nature of the objects to be measured, partly in convention.
The utility of a thing makes it a use-value.^ But this utility is not a thing of air. Being limited by the physical properties of the commodity, it has no existence apart from] that commodity. A commodity, such as iron, corn, or a diamond, is therefore, so far as it is a material thing, a use- value, something useful. This property of a commodity is independent of the amount of labour required to appropriate its useful qualities. When treating of use-value, we always assume to be dealing with definite quantities, such as dozens of watches, yards of linen, or tons of iron. The use-values of commodities furnish the material for a special study, that of the commercial knowledge of commodities.^ Use-values become a reality only by use or consumption: they also con- 1 " Desire implies want; it is the appetite of the mind, and as natural as hunger to the body...The greatest number (of things) have their value from supplying the wants of the mind." Nicolas Barbon: "A Discourse on coining the new money lighter, in answer to Mr. Locke's Considerations," &c. London, 1696. p. 2, 3.
2 *' Things have an intrinsick vertue " (this is Barbon 's special term for value in use) ** which in all places have the same vertue; as the loadstone to attract iron " (I.e., p. 6). The property which the magnet possesses of attracting iron, became of use only after by means of that property the polarity of the magnet had been discovered.
3 " The natural worth of anything consists in its fitness to supply the necessities, or serve the conveniencies of human life." (John Locke, "Some considerations on the consequences of the lowering of interest, 1691," in Works Edit. Lond., 1777, Vol. II., p. 28.) In English writers of the 17th century we frequently find "worth" in the sense of value in use, and "value " in the sense of exchange value. This is quite in accordance with the spirit of a language that likes to use a Teutonic word for the actual thing, and a Romance word for its reflexion.
■* In bourgeois societies the economical fictio juris prevails that every one, as a buyer, possesses an encyclopaedic knowledge of commodities.
Commodities, 3 stitute the substance of all wealth, whatever may he the social form of that wealth. In the form of society we are about to consider, they are, in addition, the material depositories of exchange value.
Exchange value, at first sight, presents itself as a quantitative relation, as the proportion in which values in use of one sort are exchanged for those of another sort,^ a relation constantly changing with time and place. Hence exchange value appears to be something accidental and purely relative, and conse- quently an intrinsic value, ^.e., an exchange value that is inseparably connected with, inherent in commodities, seems a contradiction in terms.^ Let us consider the matter a little more closely.
A given commodity, e.g.^ a quarter of wheat is exchanged for X blacking, y silk, or z gold, &c. — in short, for other com- modities in the, most different proportions. Instead of one exchange value, the wheat has, therefore, a great many. But since x blacking, y silk, or z gold, &c., each represent the exchange value of one quarter of wheat, x blacking, y silk, z gold, &c., must, as exchange values, be replaceable by each other, or equal to each other. Therefore, first: the valid exchange values of a given commodity express something equal; secondly, exchange value, generally, is only the mode of expression, the phenomenal form, of something contained in ib, yet distinguishable from it.
Let us take two commodities, e.g., corn and iron. The pro- portions in which they are exchangeable, whatever those pro- portions may be, can always be represented by an equation in which a given quantity of corn is equated to some quantity of iron: e.g., 1 quarter corn=x cwt. iron. What does this equa- tion tell us? It tells us that in two difierent things — in 1 quarter of corn and x cwt. of iron, there exists in equal quan- tities something common to both. The two things must there- 1 " La valeur consiste dans le rapport d'echange qui se trouve entre telle chose et telle autre, entre telle mesure d'une production, et telle mesure d'une autre. " (Le Trosne: De 1' Int^r^t Social. Physiocrates, Ed. Daire. Paris, 1845. P. 889.)
2 "Nothing can have an intrinsick value." (N. Barbon, l.c., p. 6); or as Butler says — " The value of a thing Is just as much as it will bring."
4 Capitalist Production.
fore be equal to a third, which in itself is neither the one nor the other. Each of them, so far as it is exchange value, must therefore be reducible to this third.
A simple geometrical illustration will make this clear. In order to ca,lculate and compare the areas of rectilinear figures, we decompose them into triangles. But the area of the tri- angle itself is expressed by something totally different from its visible figure, namely, by half the product of the base into the altitude. In the same way the exchange values of com- modities must be capable of being expressed in terms of some- thing common to them all, of which thing they represent a greater or less quantity.
This common " something " cannot be either a geometrical, a chemical, or any other natural property of commodities. Such properties claim our attention only in so far as they affect the utility of those commodities, make them use-values. But the exchange of commodities is evidently an act character- ised by a total abstrstction from use- value. Then one use- value is just as good as another, provided only it be present in sufficient quantity. Or, as old Barbon says, "one sort of wares are as good as another, if the values be equal. There is no difference or distinction in things of equal value...An hundred pounds' worth of lead or iron, is of as great value as one hundred pounds' worth of silver or gold."^ As use-values, commodities are, above all, of different qualities, but as ex- change values they are merely different quantities, and conse- quently do not contain an atom of use-value.
If then we leave out of consideration the use-value of com- modities, they have only one common property left, that of being products of labour. But even the product of labour itself has undergone a change in our hands. If we make abstraction from its use-value, we make abstraction at the same time from the material elements and shapes that make the product a use- value; we see in it no longer a table, a house, yarn, or any other useful thing. Its existence as a material thing is put out of sight. Neither can it any longer be re- garded as the product of the labour of the joiner, the mason, Commodities, 5 the spinner, or of any other definite kind of productive labour. Along with the useful qualities of the products them- selves, we put out of sight both the useful character of the various kinds of labour embodied in them, and the concrete forms of that labour; there is nothing left but what is common to them all; all are reduced to one and the same sort of labour, human labour in the abstract.
Let us now consider the residue of each of these products; it consists of the same unsubstantijj[_reality in each, a mere congelation of^miogeneous human labour, of labour-power ex- pended without regard to the mode of its expenditure. AIL that these things now tell us is, that human labour-power has been expended in their production, that human labour is em- bodied in them. When looked at as crystals of this social substance, common to them all, they are — Values.
We have seen that when commodities are exchanged, their exchange value manifests itself as something totally independ- l ent of their use-value. But if we abstract from their use- value, \ <; there remains their Value as defined above. Therefore, the ^ common substance that manifests itself in the exchange value of commodities, whenever they are exchanged, is their value. The progress of our investigation will show that exchange value is the only form in which the value of commodities can manifest itself or be expressed. For the present, however, we have to consider the nature of value independently of this, its form. ^ A use-value, or useful article, therefore, has value only because S / human labour in the abstract has been embodied or material- Z ^ ised in it. How, then, is the magnitude of this value to be - measured? Plainly, by the quantity of the value-creating substance, the labour, contained in the article. The quantity of labour, however, is measured by its duration, and labour- time in its turn finds its standard in weeks, days, and hours.
Some people might think that if the value of a commodity is determined by the quantity of labour spent on it, the more idle and unskilful the labourer, the more valuable would his commodity be, because more time would be required in its production. (The labour, however, that forms the substance of r L 6 Capitalist Production.
value, is homogeneous human labour, expenditure of one uniform labour-power. /The total labour-power of society, which is embodied in the sum total of the values of all commodities pro- duced by that society, counts here as one homogeneous mass of human labour-power, composed though it be of innumerable individual units. Each of these units is the same as any other, so far as it has the character of the average labour-power of society, and takes effect as such; that is, so far as it requires for producing a commodity, no more time than is needed on an average, no more than is socially necessary. The labour-time socially necessary is that required to produce an article under the normal conditions of production, and with the average degree of skill and intensity prevalent at the time. The intro- duction of power looms into England probably reduced by one half the labour required to weave a given quantity of yarn into cloth. The hand-loom weavers, as a matter of fact, continued to require the same time as before; but for all that, the pro- duct of one hour of their labour represented after the change only half an hour's social labour, and consequently fell to one- half its former value.
We see then that that which determines the magnitude of the value of any article is the amount of labour socially neces- sary, or the labour-time socially necessary for its production.* Each individual commodity, in this connexion, is to be con- sidered as an average sample of its class.^ Commodities, there- / fore, in which equal quantities of labour are embodied, or which can be produced in the same time, have the same value. The value of one commodity is to the value of any other, as the labour-time necessary for the production of the one is to that n necessary for the production of ihe other. " As values, all com- modities are only definite masses of congealed labour-time."^ - / 1 "The value of them (the necessaries of life), when they are exchanged the one for another, is regulated by the quantity of labour necessarily required, and commonly taken in producing them." (Some Thoughts on the Interest of Money in general, and particularly in the Publick Funds, &c. Lond., p. 36.) This remarkable anonymous work, written in the last century, bears no date. It is clear, however, from internal evidence, that it appeared in the reign of George II. about 1739 or 1740.
^ '* Toutes les productions d'un meme genre ne forraent proprement qu'une masse, dont le prix se determine en general et sans egard aux circonstances particulieres." (Le Trosne, 1. c. p. 893. 3 K. Marx. 1. c. p. 6.
Commodities. 7 The value of a commodity would therefore remain constant, if the labour-time required for its production also remained constant. But the latter changes with every variation in the productiveness of labour. This productiveness is determined by various circumstances, amongst others, by the average amount of skill of the workmen, the state of science, and the degree of its practical application, the social organisation of production, the extent and capabilities of the means of pro- duction, and by physical conditions. For example, the same amount of labour in favourable seasons is embodied in 8 bushels of corn, and in unfavourable, only in four. The same labour extracts from rich mines more metal than from poor mines. Diamonds are of very rare occurrence on the earth's surface, and hence their discovery costs, on an aver- age, a great deal of labour-time. Consequently much labour is represented in a small compass. Jacob doubts whether gold has ever been paid for at its full value. This applies still more to diamonds. According to Eschwege, the total produce of the Brazilian diamond mines for the eighty years, ending in 1823, had not realised the price of one-and-a-half years* average produce of the sugar and coffee plantations of the same country, although the diamonds cost much more labour, and therefore represented more value. With richer mines, the same quantity of labour would embody itself in more diamonds, and their value would fall. If we could succeed at a small expenditure of labour, in converting carbon into diamonds, their value might fall below that of *bricks. In general, the greater the productiveness of labour, the less is the labour-time required for the production of an article, the less is the amount of labour crystallised in that article, and the less is its value; and vice versd, the less the productiveness of labour, the greater is the labour-time required for the production of an article, and the greater is its value. The value of a commodity, there- fore, varies directly as the quantity, and inversely as the productiveness, of the labour incorporated in it.
A thing can be a use-value, without having value. This is the case whenever its utility to man is not due to labour. Such are air, virgin soil, natural meadows, &;c. A thing can / i 8 Capitalist Production.
be useful, and the product of human labour, without being a commodity. Whoever directly satisfies his wants with the produce of his own labour, creates, indeed, use-values, but not commodities. In order to produce the latter, he must not only produce use-values, but use-values for others, social use-values. Lastly, nothing can have value, without being an object of utility. If the thing is useless, so is the labour contained in it; the labour does not count as labour, and therefore creates no value.
SECTION 2.— THE TWOFOLD CHARACTER OF THE LABOUR EMBODIED IN COMMODITIES.
At first sight a commodity presented itself to us as a complex of two things — use-value and exchange-value. Later on, we saw also that labour, too, possesses the same two-fold nature; for, so far as it finds expression in value, it does not possess the same characteristics that belong to it as a creator of use-values. I was the first to point out and to examine critically this two- fold nature of the labour contained in commodities. As this point is the pivot on which a clear comprehension of political economy turns, we must go more into detail.
Let us take two commodities such as a coat and 10 yards of linen, and let the former be double the value of the latter, so that, if 10 yards of linen=W, the coat=2W.
The coat is a use-value that satisfies a particular want. Its existence is the result of a special sort of productive activity, the nature of which is determined by its aim, mode of opera- tion, subject, means, and result. The labour, whose utility is thus represented by the value in use of its product, or which manifests itself by making its product a use-value, we call useful labour. In this connexion we consider only its useful efiect.
As the coat and the linen are two qualitatively difierent use- values, so also are the two forms of labour that produce them, tailoring and weaving. Were these two objects not quali- tatively difierent, not produced respectively by labour of different quality, they could not stand to each other in the Commodities, 9 relation of commodities. Coats are not exchanged for coats, one use- value is not exchanged for another of the same kind.
To all the different varieties of values in use there correspond as many different kinds of useful labour, classified according to the order, genus, species, and variety to which they belong in the social division of labour. This division of labour is a necessary condition for the production of commodities, but it does not follow, conversely, that the production of commodities is a necessary condition for the division of labour. In the primitive Indian community there is social division of labour, without production of commodities. Or, to take an example nearer home, in every factory the labour is divided according to a system, but this division is not brought about by the operatives mutually exchanging their individual products. Only such products can become commodities with regard to each other, as result from different kinds of labour, each kind being carried on independently and for the account of private individuals.
To resume, then: In the use-value of each commodity there is contained useful labour, i.e., productive activity of a definite kind and exercised with a definite aim. Use-values cannot confront each other as commodities, unless the useful labour/ embodied in them is qualitatively different in each of them. In a community, the produce of which in general takes the' form of commodities, i.e., in a community of commodity pro- ducers, this qualitative difference between the useful forms of labour that are carried on independently by individual pro- ducers, each on their own account, develops into a complex system, a social division of labour.
Anyhow, whether the coat be worn by the tailor or by his customer, in either case it operates as a use- value. Nor is the relation between the coat and the labour that produced it altered by the circumstance that tailoring may have become a special trade, an independent branch of the social division of labour. Wherever the want of clothing forced them to it, the human race made clothes for thousands of years, without a single man becoming a tailor. But coats and linen, like every other element of material wealth that is not the spontaneous produce of nature, must invariably owe their existence to a lo Capitalist Prodtiction.
special productive activity, exercised with a definite aim, an activity that appropriates particular nature-given materials to particular human wants. So far therefore as labour is a creator of use-value, is useful labour, it is a necessary con- dition, independent of all forms of society, for the existence of the human race; it is an eternal nature-imposed necessity, without which there can be no material exchanges between man and Nature, and therefore no life.
The use-values, coat, linen, &;c., i.e., the bodies of commodi- ties, are combinations of two elements — matter and labour. If we take away the useful labour expended upon them, a material substratum is always left, which is furnished by Nature without the help of man. The latter can work only as Nature does, that is by changing the form of matter.^ Nay more, in this work of changing the form he is constantly helped by natural forces. We see, then, that labour is not the only source of material wealth, of use- values produced by labour. As William Petty puts it, labour is its father and the earth its mother.
Let us now pass from the commodity considered as a use- value to the value of commodities.
By our assumption, the coat is worth twice as much as the linen. But this is a mere quantitative difference, which for the present does not concern us. We bear in mind, however, that if the value of the coat is double that of 10 yds. of linen, 20 yds. of linen must have the same value as one coat. So far as they are values, the coat and the linen are things of a like substance, objective expressions of essentially identical labour. But tailoring and weaving are, qualitatively, different kinds of ^ Tutti i fenomeni dell' universe, sieno essi prodotti della mano dell' uomo, ovvero delle universali leggi della fisica, non ci danno idea di attuale creazione, ma unica- mente di una modificazione della materia. Accostare e separare sono gli unici ele- menti che I'ingegno umano ritrova analizzando I'idea della riproduzione: e tanto d ri- produzione di valore (value in use, although Verri in this passage of his controversy with the Physiocrats is not himself quite certain of the kind of value he is speaking of) e di ricchezze se la terra I'aria e I'acqua ne' campi si trasmutino in grano, come se coUa mano dell' uomo il glutine di un insctto si trasmuti in velluto owero alcuni pez- zetti di metallo si organizzino a formare una ripetizione." — Pietro Verri. " Medita- zioni suUa Economia Politica " [first printed in 1773] in Custodi's edition of the Italian Economists, Parte Moderna, t. xv. p. 22.
Commodities. 1 1 labour. There are, however, states of society in which one and the same man does tailoring and weaving alternately, in which case these two forms of labour are mere modifications of the labour of the same individual, and not special and fixed func- tions of different persons; just as the coat which our tailor makes one day, and the trousers which he makes another day, imply only a variation in the labour of one and the same indi- vidual. Moreover, we see at a glance that, in our capitalist society, a given portion of human labour is, in accordance with the varying demand, at one time supplied in the form of tailor- ing, at another in the form of weaving. This change may possibly not take place without friction, but take place it must. Productive activity, if we leave out of sight its special form, viz., the useful character of the labour, is nothing but the ex- penditure of human labour-power. Tailoring and weaving, though qualitatively different productive activities, are each a productive expenditure of human brains, nerves, and muscles, and in this sense are human labour. They are but two different modes of expending human labour-power. Of course, this labour-power, which remains the same under all its modi- fications, must have attained a certain pitch of development before it can be expended in a multiplicity of modes. But the value of a commodity represents human labour in the abstract, the expenditure of human labour in general. And just as in society, a general or a banker plays a great part, but mere man, on the other hand, a very shabby part,^ so here with mere human labour. It is the expenditure of simple labour- power, i.e., of the labour-power which, on an average, apart from any special development, exists in the organism of every ordinary individual. Simple average labour, it is true, varies in character in diflferent countries and at different times, but in a particular society it is given. Skilled labour counts only as simple labour intensified, or rather, as multiplied simple labour, a given quantity of skilled being considered equal to a greater quantity of simple labour. Experience shows that this reduction is constantly being made. A commodity may be the product of the most skilled labour, but its value, by equating 1 Oomp. Hegel, Philosophie des Rechts. Berlin, 1840. P. 250 § 190.
12 Capitalist Production.
it to the product of simple unskilled labour, represents a definite quantity of the latter labour alone.^ The different proportions in which different sorts of labour are reduced to unskilled labour as their standard, are established by a social process that goes on behind the backs of the producers, and, consequently, appear to be fixed by custom. For simplicity's sake we shall henceforth account every kind of labour to be unskilled, simple labour; by this we do no more than save ourselves the trouble of making the reduction.
Just as, therefore, in viewing the coat and linen as values, we abstract from their difierent use-values, so it is with the labour represented hy those values: we disregard the difference between its useful forms, weaving and tailoring. As the use- values, coat and linen, are combinations of special productive activities with cloth and yarn, while the values, coat and linen, are, on the other hand, mere homogeneous congelations of undifferentiated labour, so the labour embodied in these latter values does not count by virtue of its productive relation to cloth and yarn, but only as being expenditure of human labour-power. Tailoring and weaving are necessary factors in the creation of the use-values, coat and linen, precisely because these two kinds of labour are of difierent qualities; but only in so far as abstraction is made from their special qualities, only in so far as both possess the same quality of being human labour, do tailoring and weaving form the substance of the values of the same articles.