Marx, himself, of course, utilised Robinson Crusoe to illustrate not distribution or exchange, but The Law of Value, and its determination of value by labour-time. In Capital I, he writes,
“Since Robinson Crusoe’s experiences are a favourite theme with political economists, let us take a look at him on his island. Moderate though he be, yet some few wants he has to satisfy, and must therefore do a little useful work of various sorts, such as making tools and furniture, taming goats, fishing and hunting. Of his prayers and the like we take no account, since they are a source of pleasure to him, and he looks upon them as so much recreation. In spite of the variety of his work, he knows that his labour, whatever its form, is but the activity of one and the same Robinson, and consequently, that it consists of nothing but different modes of human labour. Necessity itself compels him to apportion his time accurately between his different kinds of work. Whether one kind occupies a greater space in his general activity than another, depends on the difficulties, greater or less as the case may be, to be overcome in attaining the useful effect aimed at. This our friend Robinson soon learns by experience, and having rescued a watch, ledger, and pen and ink from the wreck, commences, like a true-born Briton, to keep a set of books. His stock-book contains a list of the objects of utility that belong to him, of the operations necessary for their production; and lastly, of the labour time that definite quantities of those objects have, on an average, cost him. All the relations between Robinson and the objects that form this wealth of his own creation, are here so simple and clear as to be intelligible without exertion, even to Mr. Sedley Taylor. And yet those relations contain all that is essential to the determination of value.”
But, nothing more can be derived from this, in relation to exchange, precisely because there is no one else to exchange with. The distribution is determined by Robinson's production, but, also, his production is conditioned by his own consumption. In terms of exchange, he can only exchange with himself. In other words, again in accordance with the Law of Value, he can only exchange his consumption of a given quantity of A, by giving up a quantity of his consumption of B, the proportional relation of the two being determined by the amount of his labour-time required to produce both A and B.
Yet, Duhring says,
“In fact nothing more than this simple dualism is required to enable us to portray some of the most important relations of distribution in all their rigour and to study their laws embryonically in their logical necessity... Co-operative work on an equal footing is here just as conceivable as the combination of forces through the complete subjection of one party, who is then compelled to render economic service as a slave or as a mere tool and is also only maintained as a tool.” (p 197)
Clearly, that is not the case. Taking the primitive level of production represented by Robinson Crusoe, the existence of another Robinson, on the island, only makes possible the first option, i.e. of cooperative labour. Cooperative labour brings with it additional productivity, which means more for both producers as consumption. Without such cooperative labour, the second Robinson, or Man Friday, can only produce the same amount as Robinson, most, if not all of which would be required to sustain himself, leaving no surplus, for Robinson. Moreover, under such conditions, as always seen with slavery, Friday would be likely to produce less, to resist, to abscond and so on.
Duhring continues,
“Between the state of equality and that of nullity on the one hand and of omnipotence and sole active participation on the other, there is a range of stages which the events of world history have filled in rich variety. A universal survey of the various institutions of justice and injustice is here an essential presupposition”. (p 197)
No comments:
Post a Comment