The Accumulation of Capital

ective demand, the use made of goods, not the source of the money which is paid for them. As to money as a means of circulation: when considering the reproductive proce

capitalist surplus value must invariably pass through the money stage before it can be accumulated, we must nevertheless try to track down t

on the other, because the possibility for it exists without the mone

uestion about the 'sources of money' to be a complete

ing the process of circulation. Still dealing with simple reproduction,

e surplus-value contained in it can be spent. Where does the money for this purpose come from? This ques

tever may be its period of turn-over, may now stand for the total capital of society, that is to say, of the capitalist class. Let the surplus-value be 100 p.

onsumer goods to the amount of ￡100 surplus value on top of putting ￡500 into circulation for constant and variable capital? It is immediately obvious that those ￡500 which, in form of capital, always serve to buy means of production and to pay the workers, cannot simultaneously

d to avoid this difficulty

available money-capital of the buyer B which assumes the form of his means of production which A is just producing. The same transaction, which restores that of B to its productive form, transforms it from money into materials of production and labour-power;

h have been analysed in the circulation of commodities (vol. i, chap, iii), ar

t this is on the one hand the sum simultaneously advanced, and that, on the other hand, it sets in motion more productive capital than 500 p.st., because it serves alte

A, and thus the same amount serves for the monetisation of the surplus-value of B and the circulating constant capital of A. But in that case, the solution of the question to be

lue. But we know, in the first place, that, the greater the time, the greater must be the supply of money which the capitalist A must keep continually in reserve. In the second place, the labourer spends the money, buys commodities for it, and thus monetises to that extent the surplus-value contained in them. Without penetrating any further into the question at this point, it is sufficient to say that the consumption of the entire ca

uffice to monetise the surplus-value? The answer to this is that the employment as fixed capital, if not by him who threw it into circulation, then by some one else, is probably implied in the sum of 500 p.st. (which includes the formation of a hoard for needed

f simple reproduction, by means of a hoard formed for the periodical renewal of fixed capital. Later on, with a view to realising the surplus value under the much more diff

value or not, and whether this mass of commodities has been produced capitalistically or not. In other words, the problem itself does not exist. All other conditions being given, such as velocity of circulation of money, etc., a definite sum of money is required in order to circulate the value of commodities worth x times 1,0

he angle of the circulation of money-in this connection, it is quite meaningless. But it is only from the angle of the circulation of money, or of a simple commodity circulation, that the problem has no existence. Under the aspect of social reproduction as a whole, it is very real indeed; but it should not, of course, be put in that misleading form that brings us back to simple commodity circ

s not all stay in the pocket of the industrial capitalist, but must be shared by him with other persons, has nothing to do with the present question. The question is: How does he maintain his surplus-value, not, how does he divide the money later after he has secured it? For the present case, the capitalist may as well be regarded as the sole owner of his surpl

they throw 500 p.st. into circulation. But the surplus-value incorporated in the product, with a rate of surplus-value of 100 per cent, is equal to the value of 100 p.st. How can they continually draw 600

of value to circulate by means of a smaller amount of money. The dodge will not work, of course, since the velocity of money in circulation is already taken

tion of the surplus-value incorporated in the commodities. But, mark well, it is not thrown into circulation as advanced money, not as capital. The capital

material form of the surplus product tends to preclude such use. The aggregate surplus value of the capitalists in general is, however, contained in the total social product-as long as there is simple reproduction-as expressed by a corresponding quantity of consumer goods for the capitalist class, just as the sum total of variable capital has its corresponding equivalent in the quantity of consumer goods for the working class, and as the constant capital of all individual capitalists taken together is represented by material means of production in an equivalent quantity. In order to exchange the unconsumable individual surplus values for a corresponding amount of consumer goods, a double transaction of commodity exchange is needed: first, the sale of one's own surplus product and then the purchase of consumer goods out of the surplus product of society. These two transactions can only take place among members of the capitalist class, among individual capitalists, which means that the

es; in fact, the solution is already anticipated by the very concept of simple reproduction which indeed is based on the entire surplus value being consu

which he is going to produce and monetise. This is obviously an arbitrary assumption, so far as, the individual capitalist is concerned. But it must be correct when applied to the entire capitalist class, when sim

as unavoidable as √?1 in mathematics. What is worse, it cannot offer any help at all with the problem of realising the surplus value in real li

f there is accumulation, i.e. not consumption but capitalisation

that portion of the realised surplus-value which is thrown into circulation by the capitalists as money-capital, not as the mo

onsumed their entire surplus value, and thus had in hand an appropriate amount of money for their circulation. To-day they decide to 'save' part of the surplus value and to invest it productively instead of squandering it. Provided that material means of production were manufactured inst

into circulation, so far as the value of this mass of commodities is equal to that of the productive capital consumed in their production. This additional quantity of money has precisely been advanced as an additional money-capital, and therefore it flows back

cisely. But instead of a solution, th

the previously circulating commodities, and because this increase has not been offset by a fall in prices. The additional money required for the circulation of this greater quantity of commodities of greater value must be secured, either by greater econom

modity values on the market. To put this commodity mass of a continually increasing value into circulation requires an ever larger amount of money. This increasing a

final question, where does all money originally come from, could then be answered on Marx's recipe: from the gold mines. This, of course, is one way of looking at things, that of simple commodity circulation. But in that case there is no need to drag in concepts such as constant and variable capital, or surplus value, which have no place in simple commodity circulation, belonging essentially to the circulation of capitals and to social reproduction; nor is there need to inquire for sources of money for the realisation of the social surplus value under conditions of first simp

since all surplus value is consumed by the capitalists, they themselves are the buyers and provide the full demand for the social surplus value, and by the same token they must also have the requisite cash in hand for circulation of the surplus value. But in this showing it is quite evident that under conditions of accumulation, i.e. of capitalisation of part of the surplus value, it cannot, ex hypothesi, be the capitalists themselves who buy the entire surplus value, that they cannot possibly realise

n of capitalist production-no other class but the working class. All that the working class buys is equal to the su

if the capitalists are still to be able to recover the capital they have accumulated and advanced; and yet-we cannot think of an

ears as indispensable as it looks impossible. The accumulation of capital has been ca

lem of the accumulation of capital, we must bear in mind above all that this secon

y for the reader's enlightenment. This fact is amply authenticated by the man best in the position to know: Friedrich Engels, who edited the second volume. In his introdu

which he practised in his endeavour to fully elaborate his great economic discoveries before he published them. This self-criticism rarely permit

1,472 quarto pages in 23 divisions, written in the time from August, 1861, to June, 1863. It is a continuation of the work of the same title, the

owing in the order of tim

e II, partly an elaboration of special points, particularly a critique of Adam Smith's statements as to fixed and circulating capital and the source of profits; furthermore, a discussion of the relations of the rate of surplus-value to the rate of profit, which belongs in Volume III. The references furnished little that was new, while the elaborations for Volumes II and III were rendered valueless through subsequent revisions and had to be ruled out for the greater part. Manuscript IV is an elaboration, ready for printing, of the first section and the first chapters o

ginning of 1877, Marx had recovered sufficiently to resume once more his chosen life's work. The beginning of 1877 is marked by references and notes from the above named four manuscripts intended for a new elaboration of Volume II, the beginning of which is represented by Manuscript V (56 pages in folio). It comprises the first four chapters and is not very fully worked out. Essential points are treated in footnotes. The

the first, and the entire second section, with the exception of Chapter 17, presented no great theoretical difficulties. But the third section, dealing with the reproduction and circulation of social capital, seemed to be very much in need of revision. Manuscript II, it must be pointed out, had first treated of this reproduction without regard to the circulation which is instrumental in effecting it, and then taken up the

ut which there was nothing new to say. An essential part of Chapter 17, Section II, which is more or less relevant to Section III, was at the same time drawn into this discussion and expanded. The logical sequence was

was supposed "to make something", as Marx said to

cripts Marx left: the section 'On the Circulation of Money and Commodity Capital' and on 'The Causes of Circulation and the Turnover of Capital'. The third section which treats of the reproduction of total capital is merely a collection of fragments which Marx himself considered to be 'very much in need of revi

d all his attention to proving that the total capital of society must serve, not only for consumption to the full amount of the various sources of revenue, but also for renewal of the constant capital. And inasmuch as the purest theoretical form for this line of reasoning is given, not by enlarged reproduction, but by simple reproduction, Marx tends to consider reproduction mainly from a point of view that is the very opposite of acc

den Mehrwert, we again find detailed polemics against Smith's dogma: pp. 164-253 in vol. i, and pp. 92, 95, 126, 233, and 262 in vol. ii, part 2. Marx repeatedly stressed and emphasised the fact that he considered replacement of the constant capital from the aggregate soc

gain. Attempts to grapple with this vital question for capitalist economy, with the question whether capital accumulation is possible in practice, co

TIO

XPOSITION OF

ST

US v. SAY-RICA