But with the exception of cases immaterial for this analy- sis, means of production and articles of consumption are vastly different kinds of commodities, products of widely different natural forms and use-value, and, therefore, pro- ducts of radically different classes of concrete labor. The labor which employs machinery in the production of neces- sities of life is vastly different from the labor which makes machinery. The entire working day of the current year, which is 3000 in terms of value, figures as an expenditure in the production of articles of consumption valued at 3000, in which no portion of any constant value re-appears, since these 3000, equal to 1500 v + 1500 s, resolve themselves onlv into variable capital-value and surplus-value. On the other hand, the constant capital-value of 6000 re-appears in a class of producti quite different from articles of consump- 500 Capital.
tion, namely in means of production, while as a matter of fact no portion of the present annual working day figures as an expenditure in the production of these new products. It appears rather that this entire working day consists only of classes of labor which do not result in means of produc- tion, but in articles of consumption. We have already solved this mystery. The product in values of the labor of the present year is equal to the value of the products of department II, the total value of the newly produced ar- ticles of consumption. But the value of these products is greater by two thirds than that portion of the annual labor which has been expended in the production of articles of consumption (department II). Only one third of the annual labor has been expended in their production. Two thirds of this annual labor have been expended in the production of means of production, that is to say, in de- partment I. The value of the product created during this time in I, equal to the variable capital-value plus surplus- value produced in I, is equal to the constant capital-value of II re-appearing in articles of consumption of II. Hence they may be mutually exchanged and take one another's place in their natural form. The total value of the articles of consumption of II is, therefore, equal to the sum of the new product in values of I and II, or II (c + v +s) is equal to 1 (v + s)+II(v + s), in other words, equal to the sum of the new values produced by the labor of the current year in the form of v + s.
On the other hand, the total value of the means of pro- duction of I is equal to the sum of the constant capital- values re-appearing in the form of means of production of I and in that of articles of consumption of II, in other words, equal to the sum of the constant capital-values re- appearing in the total product of society. This total value is equal in terms of value to four thirds of a working day preceding the process of production of I and two thirds of a working day preceding the process of production of II, in all equal to two annual working days.
The difficulty in the analysis of the annual social pro- duct arises, therefore, from the fact that the constant por- Simple Reproduction. 501 tion of value is represented by a different class of products (means of production) than the new portion of value (v + s) added to this constant portion and represented by articles of consumption. Thus the appearance is created, so far as the question of values is concerned, as though two thirds of the consumed mass of products were reproduced in a new form, without any labor having been expended by society in their production. This is not so in the case of an individual capital. Every individual capitalist employs some particular concrete class of labor, which transforms the means of production peculiar to it into products. For instance, the capitalist may be a manufacturer of machines, the constant capital expended by him during the current year may be 6000 c, the variable capital 1500 v, the surplus- value 1500 s, the product 9000, represented, say, by 18 machines of 500 each. The entire product in this instance consists of the same form, of machines. If he produces various kinds, each one is calculated separately. The entire product in commodities is the result of the labor expended during the current year in machine manufacture by a combination of the same concrete labor with the same kind of means of production. The various portions of the value of the product therefore present themselves in the same- natural form: 12 machines represent 6000 c, 3 machines 1500 v, and 3 machines 1500 s. It is evident that the value of the 12 machines is equal to 6000 c, not merely because there is incorporated in these machines labor performed previously to the manufacture of these machines and not expended in their making. The value of the means of pro- duction for 18 machines did not transform itself into.ma- chines of its own doing, but the value of these 12 machines (consisting itself of 4000 c + 1000 v + 1000 s) is equal to the total value of the constant capital-value contained in the 18 machines. The machine manufacturer must, therefore, sell 12 of the 18 machines, in order to recover his expended constant capital, which he requires for the reproduction of 18 new machines. On the other hand, the thing would be inexplicable, if the result of the labor expended solely in the manufacture of machines, were to be: On the one hand, 6 502 Capital.
machines of 1500 v + 1500 s, on the other iron, copper, screws, belts, etc., to the amount of 6000 s, in other words, the natural means of production of the machines which the individual machine-building capitalist does not produce himself, but must secure by way of the process of circula- tion. And yet it seemed at the first glance as though the reproduction of the annual product of society took place in this absurd way.
The product of an individual capital, that is to say, of every aliquot part of the social capital endowed with a life oi its own and acting independently, has some natural form. The only condition is that this product must have a certain use-value, which endows it with the character of a member of the world of commodities fit for circulation. It is im- material and a matter of hazard, whether or not it can go back as a means of production into the same process of production from which it came as a product, in other words, whether that portion of its value as a product, in which the constant capital is incorporated, has a natural form, in which it can actually serve again as constant capital. If it has not, then this portion of the value of the product is reconverted into the form of its material elements by means of sale and purchase, and thus the constant capital is reproduced in the natural form adapted to its function.
It is different with the product of the total social capital. All the material elements of reproduction in their natural form must be a part of this product. The consumed con- stant portion of capital can be reproduced by the pro- duction as a whole only to the extent that the entire re- appearing constant capital is represented in the product by the natural form of new means of production, which can actually serve as constant capital. Simple reproduction being assumed, the value of that portion of the product which consists of means of production must be equal to the constant portion of the value of social capital.
Furthermore: Individually considered, the capitalist pro- duces in the value of his product by means of the newly added labor only his variable capital plus surplus-value, Simple Reproduction. 503 while the constant value is transferred by the concrete form of the newly added labor to the product.
Socially considered, that portion of the social working day which produces means of production, adding new value to them and transferring to them at the same time the value of the means of production consumed in their manufacture, creates nothing but new constant capital, which is intended to replace that consumed in the shape of the old means of production, that is to say of the constant capital consumed in department I and II. It creates only product intended for productive consumption. The entire \alue of this pro- duct, then, is a value which can serve only as a new con- stant capital, which can buy back only constant capital in its natural form, and which, for this reason, resolves itself neither into variable capital nor surplus-value, looking at it from the social point of view. On the other hand, if that portion of the social working day which produces articles of consumption does not create any portion of the social capital intended for reproduction, it creates only products intended, in their natural form, to realize the value of the variable capital and surplus-value of departments I and II.
Speaking of looking at things from the point of view of society as a whole, in this instance at the aggregate product of society, which comprises both the reproduction of social capital and individual consumption, we must not follow the manner copied by Proudhon from bourgeois economy, which looks upon this matter as though a society with a capitalist mode of production would lose its specific his- torical and economic characteristics by being taken as a unit. Not at all. We have, in that case, to deal with the aggregate capitalist. The aggregate capital appears as the capital stock of all individual capitalists combined. This stock company shares with many other stock companies the peculiarity that every one knows what he puts in, but not what he will get out of it.
504 Capital.
IX. A RETROSPECT ON ADAM SMITH, STORCH, AND RAMSAY.
The total value of the social product amounts to 9000 equal to 6000 c+1500 v+1500 c, in other words, 6000 represent the value of the means of production, and 3000 that of the articles of consumption. The value of the social revenue (v + s), then, amounts to only one third of the value of the total product, and the totality of the con- sumers, laborers as well as capitalists, can draw on the total social product for commodities only to the amount of this third, for the purpose of individual consumption. On the other hand, 6000, or two thirds, of the value of the product, are the value of the constant capital which must be repro- duced in its natural form. Means of production to this amount must again be incorporated in the productive fund. Storch recognizes this without being able to prove it: "It is clear that the value of the annual product is distributed partly to capital and partly to profits, and that each one of these portions of the value of the annual product is regularly employed in buying the products which the nation needs both for the maintenance of its capital and for stocking its fund for consumption. * * * * The products which con- stitute the capital of a nation are not consumable." (Storch, Considerations sur la nature du revenu national. Paris, Adam Smith, however, has promulgated this strange dogma, which is believed to this day, not only in the pre- viously mentioned form, according to which the entire value of the social product resolves itself into revenue, that is to say, into wages plus surplus-value, or, as he expresses it, into wages plus profit (interest) plus ground rent, but also in the still more popular form, according to which the consumers must ultimately pay to the producers the entire value of the product. This is to this day one of the best established commonplaces, or rather of the eternal truths of the so-called science of political economy. This is illus- trated in the following plausible manner: Take any article, for instance linen shirts. First, the spinner of linen yarn Simple Reproduction. 505 has to pay the flax grower the entire value of the flax, in other words the value of flax seed, fertilizers, cattle feed, etc., plus the value transferred to the product from the fixed capital of the flax grower, such as buildings, agricultural im- plements, etc.; furthermore the wages paid in the produc- tion of the flax; the surplus-value incorporated in the flax (profit, ground rent); finally the cost of transportation of the flax from its place of production to the spinnery. Next, the weaver has not only to reimburse the spinner for linen yarn, for the price of the flax, but also for that por- tion of the value of machinery, buildings, etc., in short of the fixed capital, which is transferred to the yarn, further- more all the auxiliary materials consumed in the spinning process, the wages of the spinners, the surplus-value, etc., and so forth in the case of the bleaching process, the trans- portation of the finished linen, and finally the shirtmaker, who has to pay the entire price of all preceding producers, who supplied him only with his raw material. There is now a further addition of value by his hands, either by means of constant capital which is consumed in the shape of materials of labor, auxiliary materials, etc., used in the making of shirts, or by means of labor expended in it, which adds the value of the wages of the shirtmakers plus the surplus-value of the shirt manufacturer. Now let this entire product in shirts cost ultimately 100 p. st., and let this be the aliquot part of the total annual value in products ex- pended by society in shirts. The consumers of the shirts pay these 100 p. st., that is to say the value of all the means of production, and of the wages plus surplus-value of the flax grower, spinner, weaver, bleacher, shirtmaker, and all carriers. This is quite true. Indeed, every child can see that. But now they continue: The same is true of the value of all other commodities. It should rather be said that this is true of the value of all articles of consumption, of the value of that portion of the social product which passes into consumption, in other words, that portion of the value of the social product which may be expended as revenue. It is true that the sum of the value of all these commodities is equal to the value 506 Capital of all the means of production (constant portions of capital) consumed in their creation, plus the value added by the last labor expended on them (wages plus surplus-value). Hence the totality of the consumers can pay for this entire sum of values, because, although the value of each individual commodity is made up by c + v + s, nevertheless the sum of the values of all commodities passing into consumption, taken at its maximum, can be equal only to that portion of the value of the social product, which resolves itself into v + s, in other words, equal to that value which the labor expended during the current year has added to the existing means of production representing the value of the constant capital. As for the value of the constant capital, we have seen that it is reproduced out of the mass of social products in a twofold way. First, by an exchange of the capitalists of II, who produce articles of consumption, with the cap- italists of I, who produce the means of production- And here is the source of the phrase that what is capital for one is revenue for the other. But this is not the actual state of affairs. The 2000 II c, existing in the shape of articles of consumption valued at 2000, constitute a constant capitalvalue for the capitalists of class II- They cannot consume it themselves, although the product must be consumed on account of its natural form. On the other hand, the 2000 I (v + s) are wages plus surplus-value produced by the capitalist and working classes of I. They exist in the natural form of means of production, of things in a shape in which their own value cannot be consumed. We have here, then, values to the amount of 4000, only one half of which, either before or after the change, reproduce constant capital, while the other half form revenue. In the second place, the constant capital of I is reproduced in its natural form, partly by exchange among the capitalists of I, partly by reproduction in a natural form in each individual busi- ness.
The phrase that the entire annual value in products must be ultimately paid by the consumer would be correct only in the case that we were to include in the term consumer two vastly different classes, namely individual consumers Simple Reproduction. 507 and productive consumers. But to say that one portion of the product must be consumed productively is precisely to say that it must serve as capital and cannot be consumed as revenue.
On the other hand, if we divide the total value of the entire product, equal to 9000, into 6000 c+1500 v+1500 s, and look upon the 3000 (v+s) in the light of a revenue, then the variable capital seems to disappear and capital, socially speaking, seems to consist only of constant capital. For that which appeared originally as 1500 v has resolved itself into a portion of the social revenue, into wages, the revenue of the working class, and has thus lost its character of capital. This conclusion is actually drawn by Ramsay. Ac- cording to him, capital, socially considered, consists only of fixed capital, but he means by fixed capftal the constant capital, that quantity of values which consists of means of production, whether these are instruments or materials of labor, such as raw materials, partly finished products, aux- iliary materials, etc. He calls the variable capital a cir- culating capital: "Circulating capital consists only of sub- sistence and other necessaries advanced to the workmen previously to the completion of the produce of their labor.
* * * * Fixed capital alone, not circulating, is properly speaking a source of national wealth. * * * * Circulating capital is not an immediate agent in production, nor es- sential to it at all, but merely a convenience rendered neces- sary by the deplorable poverty of the mass of the people- * * * * Fixed capital alone constitutes an element of cost of production in a national point of view." (Ramsay, 1, c, pages 23 to 26, selected.) Ramsay defines fixed capital, by which he means constant capital, more closely in the follow- ing words: "The length of time during which any portion of the product of that labor" (namely labor bestowed on any commodity) "has existed as fixed capital i. e., in a form in which, though assisting to raise the future commodity, it does not maintain laborers." (Page 59.)
Here we see once more the confusion created by Adam Smith by drowning the distinction between constant and variable capital in that of fixed capital and circulating 508 Capital.
capital. The constant capital of Ramsay consists of means of production, his circulating capital of articles of consump- tion. Both of them are commodities of a given value. The one can no more create any surplus-value than the other.
X. CAPITAL AND REVENUE: VARIABLE CAPITAL AND WAGES.44 The entire annual production, the entire product of a year, is the product of the useful labor of that year. But the value of this total product is greater than that portion of it in which the labor-power expended on production dur- ing the last year is incorporated. The product in values of this year, the new value created in its course in the form of commodities, is smaller than the value of the product, that is to say, THE TOTAL VALUE OF THE COM- MODITIES FINISHED DURING THE ENTIRE YEAR. The difference obtained by deducting from the total value of the annual product that portion of value which was added by the labor of the last year, is not an actually repro- duced value, but merely one re-appearing in a different form of existence. It is value transferred to the annual product from previously existing value, which may be of an earlier or later date, according to the wear of the constant portions of capital which have participated in that year's annual labor-process, a value which may be derived from some means of production which were first created during the year before last or in years even previous to that. It is under all circumstances a value transferred from means of pro- duction of former years to the product of the year under discussion.
Take our formula. We then have after the exchange of the elements, hitherto considered, between I and II, and within II: (I) 4000 c+1000 v+1000 s (these last realized in articles of consumption of II c) = 6000.
44 The following is from manuscript VIII.
Simple Reproduction. 509 (II) 2000 c (reproduced by exchange with I [v+s]) + Sum of values 9000.
Value newly produced during the year is incorporated only in v and s. The sum of the product in values of this year is therefore equal to the sum of v + s, that is to say, 2000 I (v + s) +1000 II (v + s) = 3000. All other portions of value in the products of this year are merely transferred values, derived from the value of means of production, previously produced and consumed in the annual production. Aside from the value of 3000, the current annual labor has not produced anything in the way of values. That 3000 represents its entire annual product in values.
Now, we have seen thcfc the 2000 I (v + s) of department II replace its 2000 II c in the natural form of means of production. Two thirds of the annual labor, then, expended in department I, have newly produced the constant capital of II, both as regards its value and its natural form. Socially speaking, two thirds of the labor expended during the entire year have created a new constant capital-value, which is realized in a natural form meeting the requirements of department II. The greater portion of the annual labor of society, then, has been spent in the production of new constant capital (means of production representing capital- value) in order to replace the value of the constant capital expended in the production of articles of consumption- That which distinguishes in this case capitalist society from a society of savages is not, as Senior thinks,45 that it is a privilege and peculiarity of a savage to expend his labor during a certain time which does not secure for him any revenue convertible into articles of consumption, but the distinction is the following: (a) Capitalist society employs more of its available annual labor in the production of means of production 45 "When a savage manufactures bows, he carries on an industry, but he does not practice any abstinence." (Senior, Principes foundamentaux de 1'Economie Politique, traduction Arrivabene, Paris, 1836, page 308.) "The more society advances, the more abstinence it requires." (Ibidem, page 342.) Compare "Capital," volume I, chapter XXIV, 3, page 608.
510 Capital.
(and thus of constant capital) which are not convertible into revenue in the form of wages or surplus-value, but can serve only as capital.
(b) When a savage makes bows, arrows, stone hammers> axes, baskets, etc., he knows very well that he did not spend the time so employed in the production of articles of consumption, but that he has simply stocked his supply of means of production, and nothing else. Furthermore, a savage commits a grave economic sin by his utter indif- ference so far as waste of time is concerned, for Tyler« tells us of him that he takes sometimes a whole month to make one arrow.
* The current conception, by which some political econom- ists seek to get rid of the theoretical difficulty, in other words, of the understanding of the real state of affairs, the con- ception that a thing may be capital for one and revenue for another, and vice versa, is only partially true, and it becomes wholly wrong, when it is made general, since it then implies a complete misunderstanding of the entire pro- cess of transactions taking place in annual reproduction and at the same time a misunderstanding of the actual basis of the partial truth.
We now review the actual conditions, on which the par- tial correctness of this conception rests, and we shall at the same time expose the wrong conception of these conditions.
(1) The variable capital serves as capital in the hands of the capitalist and as revenue in the hands of the wage worker.
The variable capital exists first in the hands of the capi- talist as money-capital; and it performs the function of money-capital, when he buys labor-power with it. So long as it persists in the form of money in his hands, it is nothing but a given value existing in the form of money, in other words, a constant and not a variable magnitude. It is only a potential variable capital, owing to its con- vertibility into labor power. It becomes actually a variable capital only after divesting itself of its money-form and as- "e E. B. Tyler, Forschungen ueber die Urgesehichte der Menschheit, translated by H. Mueller. Leipsic, no date, page 240.
Simple Reproduction. 511 suming the form of labor-power serving as an element of productive capital in the capitalist process.
The money which first served in the function of the money-form of the variable capital for the capitalist, now serves in the hands of the laborer as the money-form of his revenue, which he derives from the ever repeated sale of his labor-power.
We have here but the simple fact that the money in the hands of the buyer, in this case the capitalist, passes from these hands into those of the seller, in this case a seller of labor-power, the wage-worker. It is not the variable capital which serves twice, first as capital for the capitalist and then as revenue for the laborer. It is merely the same money, which exists first in the hands of the capitalist as the money-form of his variable capital representing a poten- tial variable capital, and which serves in the hands of the laborer as an equivalent for sold labor-power, as soon as the capitalist' has converted it into labor-power. But the fact that the same money serves another useful purpose in the hands of the buyer than in those of the seller is a peculiar- ity of the sale and purchase of all commodities- Apologists in political economy present the matter in a wrong light, as we can see best when we keep our eye ex- clusively, without taking any notice of the following trans- actions, on the transaction in circulation indicated by M — L (a variation of M — C), the conversion of money into labor-power on the part of the capitalist buyer, which is L — M (C — M), a conversion of the commodity labor- power into money, on the part of the seller, the laborer.
They say: "The same money realizes in this instance two capitals; the buyer — the capitalist — converts his money- capital into living labor-power, which he incorporates in his productive capital; on the other hand, the seller, the laborer, converts his commodity, his labor-power, into money, which he spends as his revenue, and this enables him to resell his labor-power in ever repeated turns and thereby to maintain it. His labor-power, then, represents his capital in the form of a commodity, which yields him a continuous revenue." Labor-power is indeed his wealth 512 Capital, (ever self-renewing and reproductive), not his capital. It is the only commodity which he must and can sell con- tinually, in order to live, and which does not serve as capi- tal until it reaches the hands of the capitalist. The fact that a man is continually compelled to sell his labor-power (himself) to another man proves to those apologetic econ- omists that he is a capitalist, for lo! he is continually sell- ing his "commodity," himself. In that case, a slave is also a capitalist, although he is sold by another for once and all as a commodity, for the nature of this commodity, a labor- ing slave, has the peculiarity that its buyer does not only make it work every new day, but also provides it with the food which enables it to do ever new work — (compare on this point the remarks of Sismondi and Say in their letters to Malthus.)
(2) In the exchange of 1000 I v + 1000 I s for 2000 II c, we see that what is constant capital for one (2000 II c) is variable capital and surplus-value, or in short, revenue for others; and what is variable capital and surplus-value (2000 I (v + s), or in short, revenue for one, becomes constant capital for another.
Let us first look at the exchange of I v for II c, beginning with the point of view of the laborer.