icon 0
icon TOP UP
rightIcon
icon Reading History
rightIcon
icon Log out
rightIcon
icon Get the APP
rightIcon

The Accumulation of Capital

Chapter 8 MARX'S ATTEMPT TO RESOLVE THE DIFFICULTY

Word Count: 6154    |    Released on: 01/12/2017

isadvantages of its own, we see. There was much to be said for this method in the analysis of simple reproduction, where consumption is the be-all and end-all of produ

to reproduction, the surplus product is thus subjected to two metamorphoses: first it casts off its use-form and then it assumes a natural form which is fit for the purpose of accumulation. The point here is not that the different cycles of production are counted off in units of years. It would be just as well to take the month; for that matter, the successive transformation of individual portions of the surplus value in D

mulation did not cover this point adequately, and he himself kept

ue thus monetised into additional natural elements of his productive capital. In the next cycle of production the increased capital furnishes an increased product. But what happens in the case of the individual capital, must also show in the annual reproduction of society as a

very point of view, focusing on the fact that surplus valu

unt of its capacity and destination of being converted into the elements of productive capital. But practically he merely accumulates a simple hoard, which is not an element of actual production. His activity for the time being consists only in withdrawing circulating money out of circulation. Of course, it is not impossible that the circulating money thus laid away by him was itself, before it entered into circulation, a portion of some other ho

entire surplus-value of the year, and all the other capitalists would distribute among themselves their relative shares in his surplus-product, which consists naturally of money, gold being the natural form of his surplus-value. For that portion of the product of the gold producer, which has to make good his active capital, is already tied up and disposed of. The surplus-value of the gold producer, in the form of gold, would then be the only fund from which all other capitalists would ha

eeming difficulty, we m

wing to the separation of the different individual constant capitals in the process of circulation, will inevitably be formed in a capitalist system of production. Inasmuch as different capital investments have different spans of life, and there is always an interval before the parts of a pl

commodities for 600 in money, of which 100 are surplus-value which he withdraws from circulation and hoards in the form of

capitalised, for which reason he ignores altogether that part of the surplus value is used for the capitalists

amed A′, A′′, A′′′.... However, A accomplishes the formation of a hoard only to the extent that he acts as a seller, so far as his surplus-product is concerned, not as a buyer. His successive production of surplus-products, the bearers of his surplus-value convertible into money, is therefore a premise for the formation of his hoard. In the present case, where we are dealing only with th

thdrawing other commodities in return. The capitalists, B, B′, B′′, etc., are thereby enabled to throw only money into it and withdraw only commodities from it. In th

nalysis of enlarged reproduction is far from self-evident. The difficulty had been that for the purpose of accumulation, part of the surplus value is not consumed by the capitalists but added to capital in order to expand production, giving rise to the question of buyers for this additional product. The

, and the whole thing has nothing to do with our problem. The moment the producer goods purchased by B, B′, B′′, etc., serve to increase their constant capital, however, for purposes of accumulation, a number of new questions clamour for attention. First and foremost where do the B's get the cash to buy an additional product from the A's? The only way they could have made their money is by sale of their own surplus product. Before they c

a solution were found at last. After a short digression, Marx re

n that done on the basis of simple reproduction. The difference is here only one of the form of the surplus-labour performed, of the concrete nature of its particularly useful service. It is expended in means of production for Department Ic instead of IIc, in means of production of means of production instead of means of production of articles of consumption. In the case of simple reproduction it had been assumed that the entire surplus-value was spent as revenue in the commodities of II. Hence it consisted only of such means of production as restore the constant capital of IIc in its natural form. In order that the transition from simple to expanded reproduction may take place, the production in Department I must be enabled

money reserve in hand, the analysis of simple reproduction already having proved that the capitalist class must itself put into circulation the money needed for the realisation of their surplus value. Now, instead of consumer goods, the cap

hange of function on the part of money previously circulating. A while ago it served as a medium of cir

enlarged reproduction-in short, a moment that has no reference to reality and can only be conceived speculatively. Once accumulation has been established for some time, when increasing amounts of value are thrown upon the market in every period of production, buyers for these additional values cannot fail to become a problem. And on this point the proffered solution breaks down. For that matter, it was never more than a seeming solution, not a real one. On closer scrutiny, it fails us even at the precise instant it appears to have smoothed the way for us. For if we take accumul

ersists. Marx himself at once re-opens the question where B, B′ a

ditional constant capital. To the same extent they do not help to convert any surplus-product of A, A′, A′′ etc., (I) into money. Aside from this, where does the money come from? We know that they have formed their hoard in the same way as A, A′, etc., by the sale of their respective surplus-products. Now they have arrived

that case, the money which served only for the spending of revenue in articles of consumption returned to the capitalists in the same measure in which they advanced it for the purpose of disposing of their commodities. Here the same money reappears, but i

fixed capital that is (in terms of value) continually being transferred in instalments to the products which are then one by one realised in the process of sale. Owing to its very nature, the accumulated hoard can only cover the renewal of the old capital; there cannot possibly be enough to serve further for purchasing additional constant capital. That means that we are still within the limits of simple reproduction. Perhaps, though, that part o

additional goods produced by the capitalised surplus value; not a technical hitch in the circulation of money but an economic problem pertaining to the reproduction of the total social capital. Quite apart from the question which had claimed Marx's entire attention so far, namely where B, B′,

duct (portions of their surplus-product) or to sell it to one another. In that case, the money advanced by them for the circulation of their surplus-product fl

n out means of production for making producer goods and the B's means of production for making consumer goods, which is as much as to say that, though the product of A, A′, etc., need never leave Department I, the product of B, B′, etc., is by its natural form predestined from the first for Department II. Already the accumulation of B, B′, etc., it follows, must lead us to circ

Department II for additional means of production. Such a demand inevitably implies that the const

ortion of Is, is exchanged for a portion of IIc, which IIc exists in the form of articles of consumption. But now that A has converted his Is into gold by making this exchange impossible and withdrawing the money obtained from IIc out of circulation, instead of spending it for articles of consumption of IIc, there is indeed on the part of A(I) a formation of additional virtual money-capital, but on the other hand there is a corresponding portion

ment II have met with an unlooked-for result: a deficit for the capitalists of D

seeks to lay bare the root of the probl

duct of I, or 500s, is reincorporated in Department I as constant capital, then this portion, being detained in Department I, cannot take the place of any portion of IIc. Instead of being converted into articles of consumption, it is made to serve as an additional means of production in Department I itself.... It cannot perform this function simultaneously in I and II. The capitalist canno

o be said, at least, for this fiction, so long as it was just a question of accumulation within Department I. The capitalists of Department I, who denied themselves part of what they had been wont to consume, at once had a new hoard of money in hand with which they could start capitalisation. But when it comes to Department II, the same fiction only piles on the difficulties. The 'abstinence' of the capitalists in Department I here finds expression in a painful loss of consumers for whose expected demand production had largel

ketable surplus value in Department II that is the result of accumulation in Department I might be considered a reserve of commodit

any way. (2) Just as this year closes on the side of II with a supply of commodities for the next year, so it was opened by a supply of commodities on the same side, taken over from last year. In the analysis of annual reproduction, reduced to its abstract form, we must therefore strike it out at both ends. By leaving this year in possession of its entire production, including the supply held for next year, we take from it the supply of commodities transferred from last yea

ation by moments pertaining to simple reproduction, viz. the formation of a hoard consequent upon the gradual turnover of the

diagram, than the same difficulty crops up anew in a slightly different guise. Assuming that the capitalists of Departme

f its commodities to I. And this is a process which is continually repeated in every new annual prod

the capitalists in Department II is closely scrutinised. True, it exists in the form of money; but its proper function is the pur

the pocket of the capitalist, does not add in any way to the money moving in

eivable dodges, only to show

'Isn't there a chance to

l by depressing the wages of the workers below the normal average and thus to tap a new sourc

ble capital under normal conditions) do not depend on the benevolence of the capitalists, but must be

tem, frauds, etc., only to comment finally: 'This is the same operation as under (1), only disguised and car

the purpose of accumulation are thus unrewarded: 'In short, we cannot a

circulation of their own consumption and investigates whether none of this money can be d

ney required for these transactions serves only as a medium of circulation and must flow back to the interested parties in the normal co

e attempt to explain that money-capital can be formed in the hands of one capitalist group in Department II by defrauding the other capita

of IIs, represented by necessities of life, might be directl

l means of production from I, and Department II's problem how to place its own additional product in some way or other in the process of production is beside the point. Further, is the implication that the respective consumer goods should be used 'direct', i.e. without the mediation of money, in the production of Department II, so that the corresponding amount of money can be diverted from variable capital to the purpose

hing. It is not the capitalist of I who among other things buys from II a supply of necessities of life for his labourers,

ment II just as much as for those of Depart

volume ii, chapter 21, the 'Concluding Remarks sub iv', as

ent that he expands his production, does his v + s stay out of Department II. On the other hand, to the extent that the accumulation of gold on the part of the gold producer himself leads ultimately to an expansion of production, a portion of the surplus-value

II, we are made to fall back in the end on the very gold producer, recourse to whom Marx had at the outset of his analysis branded as 'absurd'. The analysis

Claim Your Bonus at the APP

Open