As Marx describes in The Communist Manifesto, class struggle does not necessarily result in a progressive transformation of society, but may also result in “the ruination of the contending classes.” There is nothing progressive in “Anti-Capitalism”, as Marx also describes in The Communist Manifesto, in relation to the reactionary forms of Socialism, such as Sismondism, Feudal Socialism, and German True Socialism. Capitalism itself is progressive compared to these reactionary forms, because it acts to develop the forces of production required for Socialism. It develops capitalism on an international and global scale, creating a world market and world economy, smashing down national borders and creating a global working-class, whilst enabling the intellectual and cultural development of the working-class, required for it to become the ruling class.
“It is only in an epoch where the other conditions for capitalist production exist—free labour, a world market, dissolution of the old social connections, a certain level of the development of labour, development of science, etc.—that usury appears as one of the factors contributing to the establishment of the new mode of production; and at the same time causing the ruin of the feudal lords, the pillars of the anti-bourgeois elements, and the ruin of small-scale industry and agriculture, etc., in short, as a factor leading to the centralisation of the conditions of production in the form of capital.” (p 531-2)
The usurers and merchants as a result of the circuits M – M`, or M – C – M`, accumulate money and commodities in their hands. When capitalist production becomes possible, this means that some of the usurers and merchants may themselves become capitalist producers. In the “Putting Out System”, for example, it was merchants that turned former independent producers into wage workers, whilst maintaining the outward appearance of a continuation of cottage industry. But, as capitalist production begins to be established, the capitalist producer must themselves struggle against it. They must struggle against the high profit margins that the merchant guild monopolies impose as well as against usurious rates of interest, which raise the cost of capital to unsustainable levels.
“With the establishment of capitalist production the domination of the usurer over surplus labour, a domination which depends on the continued existence of the old mode of production, ceases. The industrial capitalist collects surplus-value directly in the form of profit; he has also already seized part of the means of production and he appropriates part of the annual accumulation directly. From this moment, and especially as soon as industrial and commercial wealth develops, the usurer—that is, the lender at interest—is a person who is differentiated from the industrial capitalist only as the result of the division of labour, but is subordinated to industrial capital.” (p 532)
No comments:
Post a Comment