第15章 汤普金斯先生品尝日料
- 书名：
- 物理世界奇遇记
- 作者：
- （美）乔治·伽莫夫
- 本章字数：
- 4233
- 更新时间：
- 2024-02-22 15:32:02
一个周末，茉德去约克郡探望阿姨了，汤普金斯先生约教授去一家著名的寿喜烧餐厅共进晚餐。他们坐在矮桌旁的软垫上，享受着日本精美菜肴，用小杯子抿着日本清酒。
汤普金斯先生说：“那天我听泰勒博士在讲座中说原子核内的质子和中子是由一些核作用力才贴合在一起的。那你告诉我，将电子困在原子内的是不是这类核作用力？”
“不是的！”教授回答他，“核作用力与其他力有一定的差别。原子中的电子是由普通的静电力才吸引在原子核的周围，18世纪末法国物理学家库仑首次提出静电力并深入研究。这种力相对来说比较弱，而且与原子中心的距离的平方成反比例递减。而核作用力却大有不同。当一个质子和一个中子相互靠近，但又不直接接触，实际上它们之间是没有作用力的。但一旦它们接触了，就出现了一个超强的力将它们紧紧地贴合在一起。就像两片胶带，它们近距离靠近的时候并不会相互吸引，但是一旦它们接触了就像兄弟一样难以分开。物理学家称这些力为‘强相互作用’。它们与两个粒子所携带的电荷无关，而且质子与中子间、两个质子间、两个中子间，这些力都是一样的。”
“有没有什么理论可以解释这些力呢？”汤普金斯先生问。
“有的。在30年代早期，日本理论物理学家汤川秀树提出，它们的产生是由于两个核子间有一种未知的粒子相互交换。核子是质子和中子的统称。当两个核子相互靠近的时候，它们之间有这些神秘粒子跳来跳去，形成了一股强结合力将它们贴合在一起。汤川从理论上推测出了神秘粒子的质量，大约是电子质量的200倍或者是核子质量的十分之一。因此，他称它们为‘介子’。接着维尔纳·海森堡的父亲，一位古典语言教授，反对这种叫法，认为是对希腊语的亵渎。你看，‘电子（electron）’这个名字，是由希腊语中‘琥珀’μερον一词变过来的，而‘质子’（proton）是由希腊语‘第一的’ЛρωΤον一词变过来的。但是汤川粒子的名字源自希腊语‘中间的’μερОV一词，这个词中间不应该有字母‘tr’。因此，在一场国际物理学会议中，海森堡提议将介子的名字‘mesatron’改成‘meson’。一些法国物理学家反对的原因是，与拼写无关，‘meson’读起来像是‘maison’，这个词在法语中是‘家或者房子’的意思。但是他们的反对被驳回了，现在‘meson’这个术语已在学界稳定扎根。快看舞台上！他们要表演一场介子秀了！”
确实，六位艺伎出场，开始表演剑玉。她们一手拿着一个杯子，然后将一颗球在两个杯子间抛来抛去。舞台背景上出现了一个男人的面孔，他唱道：
因为介子，我获得了诺贝尔奖
至于成就，我选择不在意
拉姆达零，横滨，
伊塔和K，富士山——
因为介子，我获得了诺贝尔奖。
在日本，他们提议叫它汤川子。
我反对了，因为我是一个非常谦逊的人。
拉姆达零，横滨，
伊塔和K，富士山——
在日本，他们提议叫它汤川子。
“不过为什么有三对艺伎？”汤普金斯先生问。
“她们代表着介子交换的三种可能，”教授说，“介子有三种：正电荷、负电荷和电中性。可能三种介子全部参与到核作用力的生成中。”
“所以现在有八个基本粒子了，”汤普金斯先生掰着手指头数，“中子、质子（正负电荷），负电子、正电子，还有三种介子。”
“啊！”教授说，“不是8个，接近80个。起初人们发现有两种介子：重介子和轻介子，分别由希腊字母π和μ表示。重介子是由非常高能的质子与大气边缘空气中气体的原子核相互作用产生的。但它们非常不稳定，在到达地表之前就分解了，分解成轻介子和中微子——它们中最神秘的粒子——没有质量也没有电荷，只是能量的携带体。轻介子的保存时间稍微长一点，大概几微秒，所以它们可以到达地表，但以后在我们的眼皮子底下衰退成普通的电子和两个中微子。然后还有一种称为K介子的粒子。”
三个艺伎在玩不同寻常的剑玉游戏
“这些艺伎们在扮演哪种粒子？”汤普金斯先生问道。
“噢，可能是重介子，中性的那种，它们是最重要的，不过我不确定。现在我们几乎每个月都要发现新的粒子，它们绝大多数都很短命，即使是以光速运动，它们从生成开始，在几厘米的距离内就要衰退，所以即使是用气球送到大气层里的小装置都无法观察到它们。”
“不过，我们现在有很强的粒子加速器，可以将质子加速到具有当时在宇宙射线中一样的高能量：几十亿电伏特。其中一个加速器，叫作劳伦斯加速器，就在附近的一座小山上，我很愿意带你去看。”
开了一小会儿车，他们就到了一座大楼里，里面有粒子加速机器。进入大楼，汤普金斯先生就被震撼了，这个巨型装置太复杂了。但是，教授向他保证，它在原理上并没有比大卫用来杀死歌利亚的弹弓还要复杂。带电的粒子进入这个巨型筒里，沿着越发分散的螺旋形轨迹运动，然后交流电脉冲给它们加速，最后在强磁场内排成一条直线。
“我觉得我之前看过类似的东西，”汤普金斯先生说，“当我参观粒子回旋加速器的时候，好多年前人们称它为原子加速器。”
“是的，是的，”教授说，“你之前看的那个机器就是劳伦斯博士最初发明的。你现在在这里看到的是基于相同的原理，不过不是将粒子加速到几百万伏特，而是加速到几十亿伏特。美国最近建了两台：一台在加州伯克利，叫作高功率质子回旋加速器，因为它制造出的质子具有十亿电子伏特级的能量。这是很严格意义上的美国名字，因为在美国，一个‘billion’是十亿。而在英国，一个‘billion’是万亿，所以英国没有人尝试过去获得这样的成绩。美国另一台粒子加速器在长岛的布鲁克海文，叫作宇宙线级回旋加速器，这有点夸张了，因为自然宇宙射线所能提供的能量要比这个加速器提供的高得多。在欧洲，靠近日内瓦的欧洲原子核研究中心，他们建了可以与美国的两台相媲美的加速器。在俄罗斯，离莫斯科不远的地方，也有一台那样的机器，就是我们所熟悉的赫鲁晓夫加速器，现在可能会被重命名为勃列日涅夫加速器。”
环顾四周，汤普金斯先生注意到门上挂了一个标志，上面写着：
阿尔瓦雷兹的液态氢洗浴装置
“那儿是什么？”他问教授。
教授说：“噢！劳伦斯加速器会制造出越来越多的不同基础粒子，它们的能量越来越高，人们要想对它们进行分析，就需要观察它们的运动轨迹，计算它们的质量、生命周期、相互作用，以及其他特质如奇异数、宇称等。”
在以前，人们用威尔逊发明的所谓的云室来进行观察。威尔逊还因为此发明在1927年获得了诺贝尔奖。当时，物理学家们所研究的最快的粒子不过是只有几百万电子伏特能量的电荷粒子，他们把这些粒子送入云室。云室有一个玻璃顶，里面的空气由水蒸气加湿到近乎临界值。当云室的底部猛然下沉，里面的空气就因为空间的扩张而冷却，而水蒸气变得过于饱和。因此，一部分的水蒸气不得不聚集成小小的水滴。威尔逊发现，在离子，即气体的带电荷粒子，其周围的水蒸气凝结速度快了很多。但电荷炮弹穿过云室的轨迹旁边的气体都已经电离化了。因此，水雾留下了朦朦胧胧的线条，这些线条被装在云室另一端的光源照射到了，在云室完全涂黑的底部显现了出来。你一定记得我在之前的讲座里展示过的这些照片。
“现在，宇宙射线粒子的能量比我们原来研究的那些翻了数千倍，由于它们的运动轨迹太长了，云室太小了，因此不能从头到尾都可以记录它们的运动轨迹，整个过程中只有一小部分能被观察到。最近，年轻的美国物理学家格雷色将技术向前推进了一大步，这确保了他于1960年获得诺贝尔奖。据他所说，他当时正郁闷地坐在酒吧里看着面前的啤酒瓶里的泡泡在往上冒，然后，他突然想到，既然威尔逊可以研究气体中的液滴，那么自己说不定可以研究液体中的气泡？我接下来并不会讲到技术细节，”教授继续，“也不会说小装置设计的困难点；这些你可能都不会懂。最后结果是，为了使整个过程顺利进行，在我们现在所称为的气泡室里的液体一定得是液态氢，液态氢的温度大约是-252摄氏度。在接下来的一个房间里，就是阿尔瓦雷兹造的一个大型容器，里面灌满了液态氢，所以他们通常称为‘阿尔瓦雷兹的浴缸’。”
“呃……这对于我来说太冷了！”汤普金斯先生叫道。
“噢，你不必进去，你只要通过透明的外壁看看里面粒子的轨迹。”
浴缸照常在运行，周围很多闪光相机一连串地拍着照片。
浴缸放在一个巨大的电磁中间，电磁的作用是约束着粒子的运动轨迹，以便于人们推测它们的运动速度。
“生成一张照片只需要几分钟，”阿尔瓦雷兹说，“只要装置没有出问题要去修的话，一天可以拍几百张照片。每张照片都要好好观察，每个轨迹都要研究，轨迹曲度也要仔细测量。看一张照片的时间可能是几分钟到一小时不等，这取决于这张照片有没有趣，以及也要看分析图片的姑娘的工作效率。”
“你为什么说‘姑娘’？”汤普金斯先生打断他的话，“这是一个纯女性职业吗？”
“噢，不，”阿尔瓦雷兹说，“这些姑娘当中很多都是男孩子。但在我们这一领域，我们用的术语‘姑娘’不设计性别因素，仅仅是作为工作效率与精准度的一个单位。当你说‘打字员’或者‘秘书’的时候你总是会想到是女性而不是男性。好吧，要分析我们实验室里所有这些照片上的点，我们需要几百个女孩子，这明显是一个大难题。所以我们将大量的照片发送到其他国家，那些国家没有足够的资金来建劳伦斯加速器和泡泡浴缸，但是可以置办分析我们这些照片的小装置。”
“那这里是唯一进行这项研究的机构吗？”汤普金斯先生询问他。
“不是的！在纽约长岛布鲁克海文国家实验室里，在日内瓦欧洲原子核研究中心，以及在苏联莫斯科附近的高能物理研究所，都有相似的装置。他们总是像在干草垛里寻根针，上帝保佑，他们一会儿就找到了！”
“但为什么这项工作一直在进行呢？”汤普金斯先生惊讶地问道。
比门捷列夫的周期表复杂得多！（G.F.周，M.盖尔曼，A.H.罗森菲尔德，《科学美国人》，1964.02）
“要想找到新的基本粒子，然后研究它们之间的相互作用，这比大海里捞针还要难。这里，墙上挂着一张粒子图表，里面所包含的粒子数量已经比门捷列夫系统里元素的数量还要多了。”
“但只是为了找新粒子，有必要耗费如此大的精力吗？”汤普金斯先生问。
“好吧，这就是科学，”教授回复他，“大到恒星系，小到微小的细菌甚至是这些基础粒子，人类想要了解身边的一切。研究它们很有趣、很兴奋，这就是为什么我们要这么做的原因。”
“但科学的发展是不是为了现实的目标，比如为了人类生活的改善，使人类更舒适幸福？”
“当然是的，不过这只是第二层目标。你觉得音乐的主要目的是让军号手清晨叫醒士兵？喊他们吃饭？或者命令他们上战场？人们总说‘好奇害死猫’，我要说‘好奇成就科学家’。”
说完这些话，教授跟汤普金斯先生说了声晚安。
-终-
已经读完最后一章啦！
90%的人强烈推荐
资本论
第一章
- 书名：
- 资本论
- 作者：
- (德)卡尔·马克思著
- 本章字数：
- 80307
图书在版编目（CIP）数据资本论=CAPITAL/（德）卡尔·马克思著；（美）塞缪尔·摩尔（SamuelMoore）译.—沈阳：辽宁人民出版社，2020.6（最经典英语文库.第十三辑）ISBN978-7-205-09890-2Ⅰ.①资…Ⅱ.①卡…②塞…Ⅲ.①英语—语言读物②马克思著作—马克思主义政治经济学Ⅳ.①H319.4：A中国版本图书馆CIP数据核字（2020）第083263号出版发行：辽宁人民出版社地址：沈阳市和平区十一纬路25号邮编：110003电话：024-23284321（邮购）024-23284324（发行部）传真：024-23284191（发行部）024-23284304（办公室）http://www.lnpph.com.cn印刷：辽宁新华印务有限公司幅面尺寸：105mm×175mm印张：23.75字数：798千字出版时间：2020年6月第1版印刷时间：2020年6月第1次印刷特约编辑：张放责任编辑：顾宸封面设计：琥珀视觉责任校对：吉拉书号：ISBN978-7-205-09890-2定价：80.00元（全两册）
今天很有必要重温《资本论》——“最经典英语文库”第十三辑之《资本论》导读玉麒卡尔·马克思（1818—1883），德国哲学家、经济学家、历史学家、社会学家、政治理论家、社会主义革命家。马克思是全世界无产阶级和劳动人民的革命导师，是马克思主义的主要创始人，是马克思主义政党的缔造者和国际共产主义的开创者，是近代以来最伟大的思想家。
马克思创立的哲学思想为历史唯物主义，其最大愿望是对于个人的全面而自由的发展。马克思创作了经济理论著作《资本论》，确立他的阐述原则是“政治经济学批判”。马克思认为，这是“政治经济学原理”的东西。马克思主义学说被认为是指引全世界劳动者为实现社会主义和共产主义理想而进行斗争的理论武器和行动指南。
马克思出生于德国特里尔城的一个律师家庭，曾在大学里专修法律和哲学。由于发表了一些政论出版物，被迫流亡英国伦敦。也正是在伦敦，他与德国思想家恩格斯合作，以继续发展自己的思想。他最著名的作品包括1848年出版的小册子《共产党宣言》，以及三卷本的《资本论》。您眼前的这本《资本论》是第一卷，也是马克思生前亲眼看到其出版面世的唯一卷本。总体而言，他的政治与哲学思想对后世的思想、经济和政治历史产生了极大影响力。他的名字作为形容词、名词以及一种社会理论的代名词，被广泛使用。
马克思对社会学、经济学和政治学的诸多批判理论（统称为“马克思主义”）主要强调的观点是：人类社会是经过阶级冲突而发展的。在资本主义社会，主要表现为，掌握生产工具的统治阶级（亦称：资产阶级）与通过使用那些工具，出卖劳动力从而换回工资的普罗大众（亦称：无产阶级）之间的冲突。马克思运用一种叫作“历史唯物主义”的批评手段，作出惊世预言：与以往的社会—经济体系别无二致，资本主义同样会在内部产生激化，这种激化最终导致自我毁灭，取代它的是一个崭新的体系，它叫：社会主义。
《资本论》是马克思用德语写作，由弗里德里希·恩格斯等编辑的一部政治经济学著作。这本第一卷最初出版于1867年，可以说，这部作品对资本主义进行了批判性的分析，对日后社会科学和人文科学的诸多领域产生了巨大的深远的影响。
马克思在这本《资本论》第一卷中，对古典经济学家的理论进行了仔细的分析和批判，并且提出自己的新观点。他的思想根源之一是黑格尔的辩证法，他也受到了法国社会主义者傅立叶、圣西门，以及无政府主义者普鲁东等人的影响。马克思认为他的目的是“用辩证的方法，经过批判，得出一个科学的结论”，通过分析资本主义的发展过程，找出现代社会的运动规律，为现代工人运动提供科学的依据。《资本论》也因此是社会科学研究领域被最常引用的书籍之一。马克思的另一个重要思想根源是以亚里士多德为代表的古希腊哲学。很多人认为马克思对资本三段论式的分析框架，深受亚里士多德政治学的影响。
《资本论》讨论了商品和价值的定义，承认商品的价值分为实用价值和交换价值，具有客观的有用性，并且认为劳动是衡量不同商品价值量的唯一标准。更为重要的是，马克思认为资本主义发展的动力，源于资本在生产过程中，对劳动者的剥削和异化，并从中发现了“剩余价值”。也就是说，资本只有不停地榨取劳动力才能获得发展，资本家为了追求利润的最大化以获取最多剩余价值，会刻意压低劳动者的工资，使工资保持在一个仅能维持劳动者生存，并使人口得以增长的较低水平。同时，资本家之间存在近乎你死我活的激烈竞争，竞争力较弱的中小企业逐渐失势，被强势的企业吞并或击垮，这使得小资产阶级逐渐沦为无产阶级，资产阶级在人口的比例中下降，无产阶级的比例在相应上升。由此导致社会最终被割裂为两个利益直接对立的阶级，社会矛盾不断产生，经济危机随时爆发。最关键的问题是，这些致命的问题，在那样一种制度下，根本无法得到彻底解决。也即是说，这是一种社会的经济发展规律。它犹如自然科学一样，不以人的意志而转移。更不能幻想通过改变所谓的“上层建筑”，使社会进行跨越式发展。经过潜心二十年时间对经济的研究和准备工作，尤其是经过对剩余价值理论的研究，马克思写就的这本《资本论》第一卷于1867年正式出版面世。不过，最开始出版的书名叫《资本的生产过程》。1883年，马克思逝世。1885年，恩格斯将马克思的草稿进行了编辑与整理，出版了第二卷，书名为《资本的流通过程》，接着又过了将近十年时间，恩格斯于1894年出版了第三卷：《资本生产的全过程》。此外，卡尔·考茨基利用1905年到1910年五年时间，编辑并出版了《剩余价值理论》，列为第四卷。《资本论》是马克思按照层层递进的辩证逻辑撰写的，因为出版周期长达一个世纪，在人们能获得全书之前，已经根据最早出版的第一卷形成了所谓“经典化、公式化”的理解，从而妨碍了人们对马克思真正意图的理解。
今天，很多经济史学家看重《资本论》在思想史和经济史上的文献价值。而历史和现实则证明了《资本论》的价值。近年来，由于不断发生经济危机，《资本论》销量开始大幅上升。
TheBedsideClassicsofWorldLiterature,PhilosophyandPsychologyDesignedtomakeallEnglishclassicworksavailabletoallreaders,TheBedsideClassicsbringyoutheworld’sgreatestliterature,philosophy,psychologybooksthathavestoodthetestoftime–atspeciallylowprices.Thesebeautifullydesignedbookswillbeproudaddictionstoyourbookshelf.You’llwantallthesetime-testedclassicsforyourownreadingpleasure.ThetitlesofthethirteenthsetofTheBedsideClassicsare:ALittlePrincessbyFrancesHodgsonBurnettCapitalVol.IbyKarlMarxLaCousineBettebyHonorédeBalzacDemocracyinAmericaVOL.IIbyAlexisdeTocquevilleEugèneOneginbyAlexanderPushkinIntheWorldbyMaksimGorkyLesMisérablesVolume4of5VolumesbyVictorHugoMainStreetbySinclairLewisManifestooftheCommunistPartybyKarlMarxandFrederickEngelsSiddharthabyHermannHesseTheAdventuresofPinocchiobyCarloCollodiTheFablesofLaFontainebyJeandelaFontaineTheLittlePrincebyAntoinedeSaint-ExupéryThePortraitofaLadyVolume2byHenryJamesTheSocialContractbyJean-JacquesRousseauFortheonlineorder,pleaseusethe2-dimentionalbarcodesonthebackcover.Orcall024-23284321,024-23284325.
CONTENTS1CONTENTSPART1:COMMODITIESANDMONEYCHAPTER1:COMMODITIES/3CHAPTER2:EXCHANGE/71CHAPTER3:MONEY,ORTHECIRCULATIONOFCOMMODITIES/85PART2:TRANSFORMATIONOFMONEYINTOCAPITALCHAPTER4:THEGENERALFORMULAFORCAPITAL/163CHAPTER5:CONTRADICTIONSINTHEGENERALFORMULAOFCAPITAL/177CHAPTER6:THEBUYINGANDSELLINGOFLABOUR-POWER/1942CAPITALPART3:THEPRODUCTIONOFABSOLUTESURPLUS-VALUECHAPTER7:THELABOUR-PROCESSANDTHEPROCESSOFPRODUCINGSURPLUS-VALUE/211CHAPTER8:CONSTANTCAPITALANDVARIABLECAPITAL/242CHAPTER9:THERATEOFSURPLUS-VALUE/259CHAPTER10:THEWORKINGDAY/285CHAPTER11:RATEANDMASSOFSURPLUS-VALUE/388PART4:PRODUCTIONOFRELATIVESURPLUS-VALUECHAPTER12:THECONCEPTOFRELATIVESURPLUS-VALUE/403CHAPTER13:CO-OPERATION/417CONTENTS3CHAPTER14:DIVISIONOFLABOURANDMANUFACTURE/438CHAPTER15:MACHINERYANDMODERNINDUSTRY/487PART5:PRODUCTIONOFABSOLUTEANDRELATIVESURPLUS-VALUECHAPTER16:ABSOLUTEANDRELATIVESURPLUS-VALUE/685CHAPTER17:CHANGESOFMAGNITUDEINTHEPRICEOFLABOUR-POWERANDINSURPLUS-VALUE/700CHAPTER18:VARIOUSFORMULAFORTHERATEOFSURPLUS-VALUE/717PART6:WAGESCHAPTER19:THETRANSFORMATIONOFTHEVALUE(ANDRESPECTIVEPRICE)OFLABOUR-POWERINTOWAGES/7254CAPITALCHAPTER20:TIME-WAGES/736CHAPTER21:PIECEWAGES/747CHAPTER22:NATIONALDIFFERENCESOFWAGES/759PART7:THEACCUMULATIONOFCAPITALCHAPTER23:SIMPLEREPRODUCTION/771CHAPTER24:CONVERSIONOFSURPLUS-VALUEINTOCAPITAL/790CHAPTER25:THEGENERALLAWOFCAPITALISTACCUMULATION/839PART8:PRIMITIVEACCUMULATIONCHAPTER26:THESECRETOFPRIMITIVEACCUMULATION/983CHAPTER27:EXPROPRIATIONOFTHEAGRICULTURALPOPULATIONFROMTHELAND/988CHAPTER28:BLOODYLEGISLATIONAGAINSTCONTENTS5THEEXPROPRIATED,FROMTHEENDOFTHE15THCENTURY.FORCINGDOWNOFWAGESBYACTSOFPARLIAMENT/1013CHAPTER29:GENESISOFTHECAPITALISTFARMER/1025CHAPTER30:REACTIONOFTHEAGRICULTURALREVOLUTIONONINDUSTRY.CREATIONOFTHEHOME-MARKETFORINDUSTRIALCAPITAL/1029CHAPTER31:THEGENESISOFTHEINDUSTRIALCAPITALIST/1036CHAPTER32:HISTORICALTENDENCYOFCAPITALISTACCUMULATION/1052CHAPTER33:THEMODERNTHEORYOFCOLONISATION/1057PREFACETOTHEFIRSTGERMANEDITION(MARX,1867)hework,thefirstvolumeofwhichInowTsubmittothepublic,formsthecontinuationofmyZurKritikderPolitischenOekonomie(AContributiontotheCriticismofPoliticalEconomy)publishedin1859.Thelongpausebetweenthefirstpartandthecontinuationisduetoanillnessofmanyyears'durationthatagainandagaininterruptedmywork.
Thesubstanceofthatearlierworkissummarisedinthefirstthreechaptersofthisvolume.Thisisdonenotmerelyforthesakeofconnexionandcompleteness.
Thepresentationofthesubjectmatterisimproved.Asfarascircumstancesinanywaypermit,manypointsonlyhintedatintheearlierbookarehereworkedoutmorefully,whilst,conversely,pointsworkedoutfullythereareonlytoucheduponinthisvolume.
Thesectionsonthehistoryofthetheoriesofvalueandofmoneyarenow,ofcourse,leftoutaltogether.
Thereaderoftheearlierworkwillfind,however,inthenotestothefirstchapteradditionalsourcesofreferencerelativetothehistoryofthosetheories.
Everybeginningisdifficult,holdsinallsciences.Tounderstandthefirstchapter,especiallythesectionthatcontainstheanalysisofcommodities,will,therefore,presentthegreatestdifficulty.Thatwhichconcernsmoreespeciallytheanalysisofthesubstanceofvalueandthemagnitudeofvalue,Ihave,asmuchasit2CAPITALwaspossible,popularised.1Thevalue-form,whosefullydevelopedshapeisthemoney-form,isveryelementaryandsimple.Nevertheless,thehumanmindhasformorethan2,000yearssoughtinvaintogettothebottomofitall,whilstontheotherhand,tothesuccessfulanalysisofmuchmorecompositeandcomplexforms,therehasbeenatleastanapproximation.Why?Becausethebody,asanorganicwhole,ismoreeasyofstudythanarethecellsofthatbody.Intheanalysisofeconomicforms,moreover,neithermicroscopesnorchemicalreagentsareofuse.
Theforceofabstractionmustreplaceboth.Butinbourgeoissociety,thecommodity-formoftheproductoflabour–orvalue-formofthecommodity–istheeconomiccell-form.Tothesuperficialobserver,theanalysisoftheseformsseemstoturnuponminutiae.
Itdoesinfactdealwithminutiae,buttheyareofthesameorderasthosedealtwithinmicroscopicanatomy.
Withtheexceptionofthesectiononvalue-form,therefore,thisvolumecannotstandaccusedonthescoreofdifficulty.Ipresuppose,ofcourse,areaderwhoiswillingtolearnsomethingnewandthereforetothinkforhimself.
Thephysicisteitherobservesphysicalphenomenawheretheyoccurintheirmosttypicalformandmostfreefromdisturbinginfluence,or,whereverpossible,hemakesexperimentsunderconditionsthatassuretheoccurrenceofthephenomenoninitsnormality.
InthisworkIhavetoexaminethecapitalistmodeofproduction,andtheconditionsofproductionandexchangecorrespondingtothatmode.Uptothepresenttime,theirclassicgroundisEngland.
ThatisthereasonwhyEnglandisusedasthechiefillustrationinthedevelopmentofmytheoreticalideas.
If,however,theGermanreadershrugshisshouldersattheconditionoftheEnglishindustrialandagriculturallabourers,orinoptimistfashioncomfortshimselfwithPrefacetotheFirstGermanEdition(Marx,1867)3thethoughtthatinGermanythingsarenotnearlysobad;Imustplainlytellhim,"Detefabulanarratur!"[Itisofyouthatthestoryistold.–Horace]Intrinsically,itisnotaquestionofthehigherorlowerdegreeofdevelopmentofthesocialantagonismsthatresultfromthenaturallawsofcapitalistproduction.Itisaquestionoftheselawsthemselves,ofthesetendenciesworkingwithironnecessitytowardsinevitableresults.Thecountrythatismoredevelopedindustriallyonlyshows,tothelessdeveloped,theimageofitsownfuture.
Butapartfromthis.WherecapitalistproductionisfullynaturalisedamongtheGermans(forinstance,inthefactoriesproper)theconditionofthingsismuchworsethaninEngland,becausethecounterpoiseoftheFactoryActsiswanting.Inallotherspheres,we,likealltherestofContinentalWesternEurope,suffernotonlyfromthedevelopmentofcapitalistproduction,butalsofromtheincompletenessofthatdevelopment.
Alongsidethemodernevils,awholeseriesofinheritedevilsoppressus,arisingfromthepassivesurvivalofantiquatedmodesofproduction,withtheirinevitabletrainofsocialandpoliticalanachronisms.Wesuffernotonlyfromtheliving,butfromthedead.Lemortsaisitlevif![Thedeadholdsthelivinginhisgrasp.–formulaofFrenchcommonlaw]ThesocialstatisticsofGermanyandtherestofContinentalWesternEuropeare,incomparisonwiththoseofEngland,wretchedlycompiled.ButtheyraisetheveiljustenoughtoletuscatchaglimpseoftheMedusaheadbehindit.Weshouldbeappalledatthestateofthingsathome,if,asinEngland,ourgovernmentsandparliamentsappointedperiodicallycommissionsofinquiryintoeconomicconditions;ifthesecommissionswerearmedwiththesameplenarypowerstogetatthetruth;ifitwaspossibletofindforthispurposemenascompetent,asfreefrompartisanshipandrespectofpersonsasarethe4CAPITALEnglishfactory-inspectors,hermedicalreportersonpublichealth,hercommissionersofinquiryintotheexploitationofwomenandchildren,intohousingandfood.Perseusworeamagiccapdownoverhiseyesandearsasamake-believethattherearenomonsters.
Letusnotdeceiveourselvesonthis.Asinthe18thcentury,theAmericanwarofindependencesoundedthetocsinfortheEuropeanmiddleclass,sothatinthe19thcentury,theAmericanCivilWarsoundeditfortheEuropeanworkingclass.InEnglandtheprocessofsocialdisintegrationispalpable.Whenithasreachedacertainpoint,itmustreactontheContinent.Thereitwilltakeaformmorebrutalormorehumane,accordingtothedegreeofdevelopmentoftheworkingclassitself.Apartfromhighermotives,therefore,theirownmostimportantinterestsdictatetotheclassesthatareforthenoncetherulingones,theremovalofalllegallyremovablehindrancestothefreedevelopmentoftheworkingclass.Forthisreason,aswellasothers,Ihavegivensolargeaspaceinthisvolumetothehistory,thedetails,andtheresultsofEnglishfactorylegislation.Onenationcanandshouldlearnfromothers.Andevenwhenasocietyhasgotupontherighttrackforthediscoveryofthenaturallawsofitsmovement–anditistheultimateaimofthiswork,tolaybaretheeconomiclawofmotionofmodernsociety–itcanneitherclearbyboldleaps,norremovebylegalenactments,theobstaclesofferedbythesuccessivephasesofitsnormaldevelopment.Butitcanshortenandlessenthebirth-pangs.
Topreventpossiblemisunderstanding,aword.
Ipaintthecapitalistandthelandlordinnosensecouleurderose[i.e.,seenthroughrose-tintedglasses].
Buthereindividualsaredealtwithonlyinsofarastheyarethepersonificationsofeconomiccategories,embodimentsofparticularclass-relationsandclass-interests.Mystandpoint,fromwhichtheevolutionoftheeconomicformationofsocietyisviewedasPrefacetotheFirstGermanEdition(Marx,1867)5aprocessofnaturalhistory,canlessthananyothermaketheindividualresponsibleforrelationswhosecreaturehesociallyremains,howevermuchhemaysubjectivelyraisehimselfabovethem.
InthedomainofPoliticalEconomy,freescientificinquirymeetsnotmerelythesameenemiesasinallotherdomains.Thepeculiarnatureofthematerialsitdealswith,summonsasfoesintothefieldofbattlethemostviolent,meanandmalignantpassionsofthehumanbreast,theFuriesofprivateinterest.TheEnglishEstablishedChurch,e.g.,willmorereadilypardonanattackon38ofits39articlesthanon1/39ofitsincome.Now-a-daysatheismisculpalevis[arelativelyslightsin,c.f.mortalsin],ascomparedwithcriticismofexistingpropertyrelations.Nevertheless,thereisanunmistakableadvance.Irefer,e.g.,totheBluebookpublishedwithinthelastfewweeks:"CorrespondencewithHerMajesty'sMissionsAbroad,regardingIndustrialQuestionsandTrades'Unions."TherepresentativesoftheEnglishCrowninforeigncountriestheredeclareinsomanywordsthatinGermany,inFrance,tobebrief,inallthecivilisedstatesoftheEuropeanContinent,radicalchangeintheexistingrelationsbetweencapitalandlabourisasevidentandinevitableasinEngland.Atthesametime,ontheothersideoftheAtlanticOcean,Mr.Wade,vice-presidentoftheUnitedStates,declaredinpublicmeetingsthat,aftertheabolitionofslavery,aradicalchangeoftherelationsofcapitalandofpropertyinlandisnextupontheorderoftheday.Thesearesignsofthetimes,nottobehiddenbypurplemantlesorblackcassocks.Theydonotsignifythattomorrowamiraclewillhappen.Theyshowthat,withintherulingclassesthemselves,aforebodingisdawning,thatthepresentsocietyisnosolidcrystal,butanorganismcapableofchange,andisconstantlychanging.
Thesecondvolumeofthisbookwilltreatoftheprocessofthecirculationofcapital(BookII.),andof6CAPITALthevariedformsassumedbycapitalinthecourseofitsdevelopment(BookIII.),thethirdandlastvolume(BookIV.),thehistoryofthetheory.
EveryopinionbasedonscientificcriticismIwelcome.Astoprejudicesofso-calledpublicopinion,towhichIhavenevermadeconcessions,nowasaforetimethemaximofthegreatFlorentineismine:"Seguiiltuocorso,elasciadirlegenti."[Followyourowncourse,andletpeopletalk–paraphrasedfromDante]KarlMarxLondonJuly25,1867NOTES:1Thisisthemorenecessary,aseventhesectionofFerdinandLassalle’sworkagainstSchulze-Delitzsch,inwhichheprofessestogive“theintellectualquintessence”ofmyexplanationsonthesesubjects,containsimportantmistakes.
IfFerdinandLassallehasborrowedalmostliterallyfrommywritings,andwithoutanyacknowledgement,allthegeneraltheoreticalpropositionsinhiseconomicworks,e.g.,thoseonthehistoricalcharacterofcapital,ontheconnexionbetweentheconditionsofproductionandthemodeofproduction,&c.,&c.,eventotheterminologycreatedbyme,thismayperhapsbeduetopurposesofpropaganda.Iamhere,ofcourse,notspeakingofhisdetailedworkingoutandapplicationofthesepropositions,withwhichIhavenothingtodo.
PREFACETOTHEFRENCHEDITION(MARX,1872)othecitizenMauriceLachatreTDearCitizen,Iapplaudyourideaofpublishingthetranslationof"DasKapital"asaserial.Inthisformthebookwillbemoreaccessibletotheworkingclass,aconsiderationwhichtomeoutweighseverythingelse.
Thatisthegoodsideofyoursuggestion,buthereisthereverseofthemedal:themethodofanalysiswhichIhaveemployed,andwhichhadnotpreviouslybeenappliedtoeconomicsubjects,makesthereadingofthefirstchaptersratherarduous,anditistobefearedthattheFrenchpublic,alwaysimpatienttocometoaconclusion,eagertoknowtheconnexionbetweengeneralprinciplesandtheimmediatequestionsthathavearousedtheirpassions,maybedisheartenedbecausetheywillbeunabletomoveonatonce.
ThatisadisadvantageIampowerlesstoovercome,unlessitbebyforewarningandforearmingthosereaderswhozealouslyseekthetruth.Thereisnoroyalroadtoscience,andonlythosewhodonotdreadthefatiguingclimbofitssteeppathshaveachanceofgainingitsluminoussummits.
Believeme,dearcitizen,8CAPITALYourdevoted,KarlMarxLondonMarch18,1872AFTERWORDTOTHESECONDGERMANEDITION(MARX,1873)muststartbyinformingthereadersoftheIfirsteditionaboutthealterationsmadeinthesecondedition.Oneisstruckatoncebytheclearerarrangementofthebook.Additionalnotesareeverywheremarkedasnotestothesecondedition.Thefollowingarethemostimportantpointswithregardtothetextitself:InChapterI,Section1,thederivationofvaluefromananalysisoftheequationsbywhicheveryexchange-valueisexpressedhasbeencarriedoutwithgreaterscientificstrictness;likewisetheconnexionbetweenthesubstanceofvalueandthedeterminationofthemagnitudeofvaluebysociallynecessarylabour-time,whichwasonlyalludedtointhefirstedition,isnowexpresslyemphasised.ChapterI,Section3(theFormofValue),hasbeencompletelyrevised,ataskwhichwasmadenecessarybythedoubleexpositioninthefirstedition,ifnothingelse.–Letmeremark,inpassing,thatthatdoubleexpositionhadbeenoccasionedbymyfriend,Dr.LKugelmanninHanover.Iwasvisitinghiminthespringof1867whenthefirstproof-sheetsarrivedfromHamburg,andheconvincedmethatmostreadersneededasupplementary,moredidacticexplanationoftheformofvalue.–Thelastsectionofthefirstchapter,"TheFetishismofCommodities,etc.,"haslargelybeenaltered.ChapterIII,SectionI(TheMeasureofValue),10CAPITALhasbeencarefullyrevised,becauseinthefirsteditionthissectionhadbeentreatednegligently,thereaderhavingbeenreferredtotheexplanationalreadygivenin"ZurKritikderPolitischenOekonomie,"Berlin1859.ChapterVII,particularlyPart2[Eng.ed.,ChapterIX,Section2],hasbeenre-writtentoagreatextent.
Itwouldbeawasteoftimetogointoallthepartialtextualchanges,whichwereoftenpurelystylistic.
Theyoccurthroughoutthebook.NeverthelessIfindnow,onrevisingtheFrenchtranslationappearinginParis,thatseveralpartsoftheGermanoriginalstandinneedofratherthoroughremoulding,otherpartsrequireratherheavystylisticediting,andstillotherspainstakingeliminationofoccasionalslips.Buttherewasnotimeforthat.ForIhadbeeninformedonlyintheautumnof1871,wheninthemidstofotherurgentwork,thatthebookwassoldoutandthattheprintingofthesecondeditionwastobegininJanuaryof1872.
Theappreciationwhich"DasKapital"rapidlygainedinwidecirclesoftheGermanworkingclassisthebestrewardofmylabours.HerrMayer,aViennamanufacturer,whoineconomicmattersrepresentsthebourgeoispointofview,inapamphletpublishedduringtheFranco-GermanWaraptlyexpoundedtheideathatthegreatcapacityfortheory,whichusedtobeconsideredahereditaryGermanpossession,hadalmostcompletelydisappearedamongsttheso-callededucatedclassesinGermany,butthatamongstitsworkingclass,onthecontrary,thatcapacitywascelebratingitsrevival.
TothepresentmomentPoliticalEconomy,inGermany,isaforeignscience.GustavvonGulichinhis"HistoricaldescriptionofCommerce,Industry,"&c.,1especiallyinthetwofirstvolumespublishedin1830,hasexaminedatlengththehistoricalcircumstancesthatprevented,inGermany,thedevelopmentofthecapitalistmodeofproduction,AfterwordtotheSecondGermanEdition(Marx,1873)11andconsequentlythedevelopment,inthatcountry,ofmodernbourgeoissociety.ThusthesoilwhencePoliticalEconomyspringswaswanting.This"science"hadtobeimportedfromEnglandandFranceasaready-madearticle;itsGermanprofessorsremainedschoolboys.Thetheoreticalexpressionofaforeignrealitywasturned,intheirhands,intoacollectionofdogmas,interpretedbythemintermsofthepettytradingworldaroundthem,andthereforemisinterpreted.Thefeelingofscientificimpotence,afeelingnotwhollytoberepressed,andtheuneasyconsciousnessofhavingtotouchasubjectinrealityforeigntothem,wasbutimperfectlyconcealed,eitherunderaparadeofliteraryandhistoricalerudition,orbyanadmixtureofextraneousmaterial,borrowedfromtheso-called"Kameral"sciences,amedleyofsmatterings,throughwhosepurgatorythehopefulcandidatefortheGermanbureaucracyhastopass.
Since1848capitalistproductionhasdevelopedrapidlyinGermany,andatthepresenttimeitisinthefullbloomofspeculationandswindling.
Butfateisstillunpropitioustoourprofessionaleconomists.AtthetimewhentheywereabletodealwithPoliticalEconomyinastraightforwardfashion,moderneconomicconditionsdidnotactuallyexistinGermany.Andassoonastheseconditionsdidcomeintoexistence,theydidsoundercircumstancesthatnolongerallowedoftheirbeingreallyandimpartiallyinvestigatedwithintheboundsofthebourgeoishorizon.InsofarasPoliticalEconomyremainswithinthathorizon,insofar,i.e.,asthecapitalistregimeislookeduponastheabsolutelyfinalformofsocialproduction,insteadofasapassinghistoricalphaseofitsevolution,PoliticalEconomycanremainascienceonlysolongastheclassstruggleislatentormanifestsitselfonlyinisolatedandsporadicphenomena.
LetustakeEngland.ItsPoliticalEconomybelongstotheperiodinwhichtheclassstrugglewasasyet12CAPITALundeveloped.Itslastgreatrepresentative,Ricardo,intheend,consciouslymakestheantagonismofclassinterests,ofwagesandprofits,ofprofitsandrent,thestartingpointofhisinvestigations,naivelytakingthisantagonismforasociallawofNature.Butbythisstartthescienceofbourgeoiseconomyhadreachedthelimitsbeyondwhichitcouldnotpass.AlreadyinthelifetimeofRicardo,andinoppositiontohim,itwasmetbycriticism,inthepersonofSismondi.2Thesucceedingperiod,from1820to1830,wasnotableinEnglandforscientificactivityinthedomainofPoliticalEconomy.ItwasthetimeaswellofthevulgarisingandextendingofRicardo'stheory,asofthecontestofthattheorywiththeoldschool.Splendidtournamentswereheld.Whatwasdonethen,islittleknowntotheContinentgenerally,becausethepolemicisforthemostpartscatteredthrougharticlesinreviews,occasionalliteratureandpamphlets.Theunprejudicedcharacterofthispolemic–althoughthetheoryofRicardoalreadyserves,inexceptionalcases,asaweaponofattackuponbourgeoiseconomy–isexplainedbythecircumstancesofthetime.Ontheonehand,modernindustryitselfwasonlyjustemergingfromtheageofchildhood,asisshownbythefactthatwiththecrisisof1825itforthefirsttimeopenstheperiodiccycleofitsmodernlife.Ontheotherhand,theclassstrugglebetweencapitalandlabourisforcedintothebackground,politicallybythediscordbetweenthegovernmentsandthefeudalaristocracygatheredaroundtheHolyAllianceontheonehand,andthepopularmasses,ledbythebourgeoisie,ontheother;economicallybythequarrelbetweenindustrialcapitalandaristocraticlandedproperty-aquarrelthatinFrancewasconcealedbytheoppositionbetweensmallandlargelandedproperty,andthatinEnglandbrokeoutopenlyaftertheCornLaws.TheliteratureofPoliticalEconomyinEnglandatthistimecallstomindthestormyforwardmovementinFranceafterDr.
AfterwordtotheSecondGermanEdition(Marx,1873)13Quesnay'sdeath,butonlyasaSaintMartin'ssummerremindsusofspring.Withtheyear1830camethedecisivecrisis.
InFranceandinEnglandthebourgeoisiehadconqueredpoliticalpower.Thenceforth,theclassstruggle,practicallyaswellastheoretically,tookonmoreandmoreoutspokenandthreateningforms.Itsoundedtheknellofscientificbourgeoiseconomy.
Itwasthenceforthnolongeraquestion,whetherthistheoremorthatwastrue,butwhetheritwasusefultocapitalorharmful,expedientorinexpedient,politicallydangerousornot.Inplaceofdisinterestedinquirers,therewerehiredprizefighters;inplaceofgenuinescientificresearch,thebadconscienceandtheevilintentofapologetic.Still,eventheobtrusivepamphletswithwhichtheAnti-CornLawLeague,ledbythemanufacturersCobdenandBright,delugedtheworld,haveahistoricinterest,ifnoscientificone,onaccountoftheirpolemicagainstthelandedaristocracy.
ButsincethentheFreeTradelegislation,inauguratedbySirRobertPeel,hasdeprivedvulgareconomyofthisitslaststing.
TheContinentalrevolutionof1848-9alsohaditsreactioninEngland.MenwhostillclaimedsomescientificstandingandaspiredtobesomethingmorethanmeresophistsandsycophantsoftherulingclassestriedtoharmonisethePoliticalEconomyofcapitalwiththeclaims,nolongertobeignored,oftheproletariat.HenceashallowsyncretismofwhichJohnStuartMillisthebestrepresentative.Itisadeclarationofbankruptcybybourgeoiseconomy,aneventonwhichthegreatRussianscholarandcritic,N.
Tschernyschewsky,hasthrownthelightofamastermindinhis"OutlinesofPoliticalEconomyaccordingtoMill."InGermany,therefore,thecapitalistmodeofproductioncametoahead,afteritsantagonisticcharacterhadalready,inFranceandEngland,shown14CAPITALitselfinafiercestrifeofclasses.Andmeanwhile,moreover,theGermanproletariathadattainedamuchmoreclearclass-consciousnessthantheGermanbourgeoisie.Thus,attheverymomentwhenabourgeoisscienceofPoliticalEconomyseemedatlastpossibleinGermany,ithadinrealityagainbecomeimpossible.
Underthesecircumstancesitsprofessorsfellintotwogroups.Theoneset,prudent,practicalbusinessfolk,flockedtothebannerofBastiat,themostsuperficialandthereforethemostadequaterepresentativeoftheapologeticofvulgareconomy;theother,proudoftheprofessorialdignityoftheirscience,followedJohnStuartMillinhisattempttoreconcileirreconcilables.Justasintheclassicaltimeofbourgeoiseconomy,soalsointhetimeofitsdecline,theGermansremainedmereschoolboys,imitatorsandfollowers,pettyretailersandhawkersintheserviceofthegreatforeignwholesaleconcern.
ThepeculiarhistoricaldevelopmentofGermansocietythereforeforbids,inthatcountry,alloriginalworkinbourgeoiseconomy;butnotthecriticismofthateconomy.Sofarassuchcriticismrepresentsaclass,itcanonlyrepresenttheclasswhosevocationinhistoryistheoverthrowofthecapitalistmodeofproductionandthefinalabolitionofallclasses–theproletariat.
ThelearnedandunlearnedspokesmenoftheGermanbourgeoisietriedatfirsttokill"DasKapital"bysilence,astheyhadmanagedtodowithmyearlierwritings.Assoonastheyfoundthatthesetacticsnolongerfittedinwiththeconditionsofthetime,theywrote,underpretenceofcriticisingmybook,prescriptions"forthetranquillisationofthebourgeoismind."Buttheyfoundintheworkers'press–see,e.g.,JosephDietzgen'sarticlesinthe–antagonistsstrongerthanthemselves,towhom(downtothisveryday)theyoweareply.3AfterwordtotheSecondGermanEdition(Marx,1873)15AnexcellentRussiantranslationof"DasKapital"appearedinthespringof1872.Theeditionof3,000copiesisalreadynearlyexhausted.Asearlyas1871,N.Sieber,ProfessorofPoliticalEconomyintheUniversityofKiev,inhiswork"DavidRicardo'sTheoryofValueandofCapital,"referredtomytheoryofvalue,ofmoneyandofcapital,asinitsfundamentalsanecessarysequeltotheteachingofSmithandRicardo.ThatwhichastonishestheWesternEuropeaninthereadingofthisexcellentwork,istheauthor'sconsistentandfirmgraspofthepurelytheoreticalposition.
Thatthemethodemployedin"DasKapital"hasbeenlittleunderstood,isshownbythevariousconceptions,contradictoryonetoanother,thathavebeenformedofit.
ThustheParisRevuePositivistereproachesmeinthat,ontheonehand,Itreateconomicsmetaphysically,andontheotherhand–imagine!–confinemyselftothemerecriticalanalysisofactualfacts,insteadofwritingreceipts4(Comtistones?)forthecook-shopsofthefuture.Inanswertothereproachinremetaphysics,ProfessorSieberhasit:"Insofarasitdealswithactualtheory,themethodofMarxisthedeductivemethodofthewholeEnglishschool,aschoolwhosefailingsandvirtuesarecommontothebesttheoreticeconomists."M.Block–"LesThéoriciensduSocialismeenAllemagne.ExtraitduJournaldesEconomistes,JuilletetAo?t1872"–makesthediscoverythatmymethodisanalyticandsays:"ParcetouvrageM.
Marxseclasseparmilesespritsanalytiqueslespluseminents."Germanreviews,ofcourse,shriekoutat"Hegeliansophistics."TheEuropeanMessengerofSt.
Petersburginanarticledealingexclusivelywiththemethodof"DasKapital"(Maynumber,1872,pp.427-436),findsmymethodofinquiryseverelyrealistic,but16CAPITALmymethodofpresentation,unfortunately,German-dialectical.Itsays:"Atfirstsight,ifthejudgmentisbasedontheexternalformofthepresentationofthesubject,Marxisthemostidealofidealphilosophers,alwaysintheGerman,i.e.,thebadsenseoftheword.Butinpointoffactheisinfinitelymorerealisticthanallhisforerunnersintheworkofeconomiccriticism.Hecaninnosensebecalledanidealist."Icannotanswerthewriterbetterthanbyaidofafewextractsfromhisowncriticism,whichmayinterestsomeofmyreaderstowhomtheRussianoriginalisinaccessible.
Afteraquotationfromtheprefacetomy"CriticismofPoliticalEconomy,"Berlin,1859,pp.IV-VII,whereIdiscussthematerialisticbasisofmymethod,thewritergoeson:"TheonethingwhichisofmomenttoMarx,istofindthelawofthephenomenawithwhoseinvestigationheisconcerned;andnotonlyisthatlawofmomenttohim,whichgovernsthesephenomena,insofarastheyhaveadefiniteformandmutualconnexionwithinagivenhistoricalperiod.Ofstillgreatermomenttohimisthelawoftheirvariation,oftheirdevelopment,i.e.,oftheirtransitionfromoneformintoanother,fromoneseriesofconnexionsintoadifferentone.Thislawoncediscovered,heinvestigatesindetailtheeffectsinwhichitmanifestsitselfinsociallife.
Consequently,Marxonlytroubleshimselfaboutonething:toshow,byrigidscientificinvestigation,thenecessityofsuccessivedeterminateordersofsocialconditions,andtoestablish,asimpartiallyaspossible,thefactsthatservehimforfundamentalstarting-points.Forthisitisquiteenough,ifheproves,atthesametime,boththenecessityofthepresentorderofthings,andtheAfterwordtotheSecondGermanEdition(Marx,1873)17necessityofanotherorderintowhichthefirstmustinevitablypassover;andthisallthesame,whethermenbelieveordonotbelieveit,whethertheyareconsciousorunconsciousofit.Marxtreatsthesocialmovementasaprocessofnaturalhistory,governedbylawsnotonlyindependentofhumanwill,consciousnessandintelligence,butrather,onthecontrary,determiningthatwill,consciousnessandintelligence....Ifinthehistoryofcivilisationtheconsciouselementplaysapartsosubordinate,thenitisself-evidentthatacriticalinquirywhosesubject-matteriscivilisation,can,lessthananythingelse,haveforitsbasisanyformof,oranyresultof,consciousness.Thatistosay,thatnottheidea,butthematerialphenomenonalonecanserveasitsstarting-point.Suchaninquirywillconfineitselftotheconfrontationandthecomparisonofafact,notwithideas,butwithanotherfact.Forthisinquiry,theonethingofmomentis,thatbothfactsbeinvestigatedasaccuratelyaspossible,andthattheyactuallyform,eachwithrespecttotheother,differentmomentaofanevolution;butmostimportantofallistherigidanalysisoftheseriesofsuccessions,ofthesequencesandconcatenationsinwhichthedifferentstagesofsuchanevolutionpresentthemselves.Butitwillbesaid,thegenerallawsofeconomiclifeareoneandthesame,nomatterwhethertheyareappliedtothepresentorthepast.ThisMarxdirectlydenies.Accordingtohim,suchabstractlawsdonotexist.Onthecontrary,inhisopinioneveryhistoricalperiodhaslawsofitsown....Assoonassocietyhasoutlivedagivenperiodofdevelopment,andispassingoverfromonegivenstagetoanother,itbeginstobesubjectalsotootherlaws.Inaword,economiclifeoffersusaphenomenonanalogoustothehistoryofevolutioninotherbranchesofbiology.Theoldeconomistsmisunderstoodthenatureofeconomic18CAPITALlawswhentheylikenedthemtothelawsofphysicsandchemistry.Amorethoroughanalysisofphenomenashowsthatsocialorganismsdifferamongthemselvesasfundamentallyasplantsoranimals.Nay,oneandthesamephenomenonfallsunderquitedifferentlawsinconsequenceofthedifferentstructureofthoseorganismsasawhole,ofthevariationsoftheirindividualorgans,ofthedifferentconditionsinwhichthoseorgansfunction,&c.Marx,e.g.,deniesthatthelawofpopulationisthesameatalltimesandinallplaces.Heasserts,onthecontrary,thateverystageofdevelopmenthasitsownlawofpopulation.
...Withthevaryingdegreeofdevelopmentofproductivepower,socialconditionsandthelawsgoverningthemvarytoo.WhilstMarxsetshimselfthetaskoffollowingandexplainingfromthispointofviewtheeconomicsystemestablishedbytheswayofcapital,heisonlyformulating,inastrictlyscientificmanner,theaimthateveryaccurateinvestigationintoeconomiclifemusthave.Thescientificvalueofsuchaninquiryliesinthedisclosingofthespeciallawsthatregulatetheorigin,existence,development,deathofagivensocialorganismanditsreplacementbyanotherandhigherone.Anditisthisvaluethat,inpointoffact,Marx'sbookhas."Whilstthewriterpictureswhathetakestobeactuallymymethod,inthisstrikingand[asfarasconcernsmyownapplicationofit]generousway,whatelseishepicturingbutthedialecticmethod?
Ofcoursethemethodofpresentationmustdifferinformfromthatofinquiry.Thelatterhastoappropriatethematerialindetail,toanalyseitsdifferentformsofdevelopment,totraceouttheirinnerconnexion.Onlyafterthisworkisdone,cantheactualmovementbeadequatelydescribed.Ifthisisdonesuccessfully,ifthelifeofthesubject-matterisideallyreflectedasinAfterwordtotheSecondGermanEdition(Marx,1873)19amirror,thenitmayappearasifwehadbeforeusamereaprioriconstruction.
MydialecticmethodisnotonlydifferentfromtheHegelian,butisitsdirectopposite.ToHegel,thelifeprocessofthehumanbrain,i.e.,theprocessofthinking,which,underthenameof"theIdea,"heeventransformsintoanindependentsubject,isthedemiurgosoftherealworld,andtherealworldisonlytheexternal,phenomenalformof"theIdea."Withme,onthecontrary,theidealisnothingelsethanthematerialworldreflectedbythehumanmind,andtranslatedintoformsofthought.
ThemystifyingsideofHegeliandialecticIcriticisednearlythirtyyearsago,atatimewhenitwasstillthefashion.ButjustasIwasworkingatthefirstvolumeof"DasKapital,"itwasthegoodpleasureofthepeevish,arrogant,mediocreEpigonoi[Epigones–Büchner,Dühringandothers]whonowtalklargeinculturedGermany,totreatHegelinsamewayasthebraveMosesMendelssohninLessing'stimetreatedSpinoza,i.e.,asa"deaddog."Ithereforeopenlyavowedmyselfthepupilofthatmightythinker,andevenhereandthere,inthechapteronthetheoryofvalue,coquettedwiththemodesofexpressionpeculiartohim.ThemystificationwhichdialecticsuffersinHegel'shands,bynomeanspreventshimfrombeingthefirsttopresentitsgeneralformofworkinginacomprehensiveandconsciousmanner.Withhimitisstandingonitshead.Itmustbeturnedrightsideupagain,ifyouwoulddiscovertherationalkernelwithinthemysticalshell.
Initsmystifiedform,dialecticbecamethefashioninGermany,becauseitseemedtotransfigureandtoglorifytheexistingstateofthings.Initsrationalformitisascandalandabominationtobourgeoisdomanditsdoctrinaireprofessors,becauseitincludesinitscomprehensionandaffirmativerecognitionoftheexistingstateofthings,atthesametime20CAPITALalso,therecognitionofthenegationofthatstate,ofitsinevitablebreakingup;becauseitregardseveryhistoricallydevelopedsocialformasinfluidmovement,andthereforetakesintoaccountitstransientnaturenotlessthanitsmomentaryexistence;becauseitletsnothingimposeuponit,andisinitsessencecriticalandrevolutionary.
Thecontradictionsinherentinthemovementofcapitalistsocietyimpressthemselvesuponthepracticalbourgeoismoststrikinglyinthechangesoftheperiodiccycle,throughwhichmodernindustryruns,andwhosecrowningpointistheuniversalcrisis.
Thatcrisisisonceagainapproaching,althoughasyetbutinitspreliminarystage;andbytheuniversalityofitstheatreandtheintensityofitsactionitwilldrumdialecticsevenintotheheadsofthemushroom-upstartsofthenew,holyPrusso-Germanempire.
KarlMarxLondonJanuary24,1873NOTES:1GeschichtlicheDarstellungdesHandels,derGewerbeunddesAckerbaus,&c..vonGustavvonGülich.5vols.,Jena.
1830-45.
2Seemywork"ZurKritik,&c.,"p.39.
3Themealy-mouthedbabblersofGermanvulgareconomyfellfoulofthestyleofmybook.Noonecanfeeltheliteraryshortcomingsin"DasKapital"morestronglythanImyself.
YetIwillforthebenefitandtheenjoymentofthesegentlemenandtheirpublicquoteinthisconnexiononeEnglishandoneRussiannotice.TheSaturdayReview,alwayshostiletomyviews,saidinitsnoticeofthefirstedition:"Thepresentationofthesubjectinveststhedriesteconomicquestionswithacertainpeculiarcharm."The"St.PetersburgJournal"(Sankt-PeterburgskieViedomosti),initsissueofApril8(20),1872,AfterwordtotheSecondGermanEdition(Marx,1873)21says:"Thepresentationofthesubject,withtheexceptionofoneortwoexceptionallyspecialparts,isdistinguishedbyitscomprehensibilitybythegeneralreader,itsclearness,and,inspiteofthescientificintricacyofthesubject,byanunusualliveliness.Inthisrespecttheauthorinnowayresembles...
themajorityofGermanscholarswho...writetheirbooksinalanguagesodryandobscurethattheheadsofordinarymortalsarecrackedbyit."4Rezepte–translatedas"Receipt,"whichinthe19thCentury,meant"recipe"andBenFowkes,forexampletranslatesthisas"recipe."[MIAfootnote].
AFTERWORDTOTHEFRENCHEDITION(MARX,1875)r.J.RoysethimselfthetaskofproducingMaversionthatwouldbeasexactandevenliteralaspossible,andhasscrupulouslyfulfilledit.
Buthisveryscrupulosityhascompelledmetomodifyhistext,withaviewtorenderingitmoreintelligibletothereader.Thesealterations,introducedfromdaytoday,asthebookwaspublishedinparts,werenotmadewithequalcareandwereboundtoresultinalackofharmonyinstyle.
Havingonceundertakenthisworkofrevision,Iwasledtoapplyitalsotothebasicoriginaltext(thesecondGermanedition),tosimplifysomearguments,tocompleteothers,togiveadditionalhistoricalorstatisticalmaterial,toaddcriticalsuggestions,etc.
Hence,whatevertheliterarydefectsofthisFrencheditionmaybe,itpossessesascientificvalueindependentoftheoriginalandshouldbeconsultedevenbyreadersfamiliarwithGerman.
BelowIgivethepassagesintheAfterwordtothesecondGermaneditionwhichtreatofthedevelopmentofPoliticalEconomyinGermanyandthemethodemployedinthepresentwork.
KarlMarxLondonApril28,1875PREFACETOTHETHIRDGERMANEDITION(ENGELS,1883)arxwasnotdestinedtogetthis,thethird,Meditionreadyforpresshimself.Thepowerfulthinker,towhosegreatnessevenhisopponentsnowmakeobeisance,diedonMarch14,1883.
UponmewhoinMarxlostthebest,thetruestfriendIhad–andhadforfortyyears–thefriendtowhomIammoreindebtedthancanbeexpressedinwords–uponmenowdevolvedthedutyofattendingtothepublicationofthisthirdedition,aswellasofthesecondvolume,whichMarxhadleftbehindinmanuscript.ImustnowaccountheretothereaderforthewayinwhichIdischargedthefirstpartofmyduty.
ItwasMarx'soriginalintentiontore-writeagreatpartofthetextofVolumeI,toformulatemanytheoreticalpointsmoreexactly,insertnewonesandbringhistoricalandstatisticalmaterialsuptodate.
ButhisailingconditionandtheurgentneedtodothefinaleditingofVolumeIIinducedhimtogiveupthisscheme.Onlythemostnecessaryalterationsweretobemade,onlytheinsertionswhichtheFrenchedition("LeCapital."ParKarlMarx.Paris,Lachatre1873)alreadycontained,weretobeputin.
AmongthebooksleftbyMarxtherewasaGermancopywhichhehimselfhadcorrectedhereandthereandprovidedwithreferencestotheFrenchedition;alsoaFrenchcopyinwhichhehadindicatedtheexactpassagestobeused.Thesealterationsandadditions24CAPITALareconfined,withfewexceptions,tothelast[Engl.
ed.:secondlast]partofthebook:"TheAccumulationofCapital."Heretheprevioustextfollowedtheoriginaldraftmorecloselythanelsewhere,whiletheprecedingsectionshadbeengoneovermorethoroughly.Thestylewasthereforemorevivacious,moreofasinglecast,butalsomorecareless,studdedwithAnglicismsandinpartsunclear;thereweregapshereandthereinthepresentationofarguments,someimportantparticularsbeingmerelyalludedto.
Withregardtothestyle,Marxhadhimselfthoroughlyrevisedseveralsub-sectionsandtherebyhadindicatedtomehere,aswellasinnumerousoralsuggestions,thelengthtowhichIcouldgoineliminatingEnglishtechnicaltermsandotherAnglicisms.MarxwouldinanyeventhavegoneovertheadditionsandsupplementaltextsandhavereplacedthesmoothFrenchwithhisownterseGerman;Ihadtobesatisfied,whentransferringthem,withbringingthemintomaximumharmonywiththeoriginaltext.
Thusnotasinglewordwaschangedinthisthirdeditionwithoutmyfirmconvictionthattheauthorwouldhavealteredithimself.Itwouldneveroccurtometointroduceinto"DasKapital"thecurrentjargoninwhichGermaneconomistsarewonttoexpressthemselves–thatgibberishinwhich,forinstance,onewhoforcashhasothersgivehimtheirlabouriscalledalabour-giver(Arbeitgeber)andonewhoselabouristakenawayfromhimforwagesiscalledalabour-taker(Arbeitnehmer).InFrench,too,theword"travail"isusedinevery-daylifeinthesenseof"occupation."ButtheFrenchwouldrightlyconsideranyeconomistcrazyshouldhecallthecapitalistadonneurdetravail(alabour-giver)ortheworkerareceveurdetravail(alabour-taker).
NorhaveItakenthelibertytoconverttheEnglishcoinsandmoneys,measuresandweightsusedthroughoutthetexttotheirnew-Germanequivalents.
PrefacetotheThirdGermanEdition(Engels,1883)25WhenthefirsteditionappearedtherewereasmanykindsofmeasuresandweightsinGermanyastherearedaysintheyear.Besidesthereweretwokindsofmarks(theReichsmarkexistedatthetimeonlyintheimaginationofSoetbeer,whohadinventeditinthelatethirties),twokindsofguldenandatleastthreekindsoftaler,includingonecalledneuesZweidrittel.
Inthenaturalsciencesthemetricsystemprevailed,intheworldmarket–Englishmeasuresandweights.
UndersuchcircumstancesEnglishunitsofmeasurewerequitenaturalforabookwhichhadtotakeitsfactualproofsalmostexclusivelyfromBritishindustrialrelations.Thelast-namedreasonisdecisiveevento-day,especiallybecausethecorrespondingrelationsintheworldmarkethavehardlychangedandEnglishweightsandmeasuresalmostcompletelycontrolpreciselythekeyindustries,ironandcotton.
InconclusionafewwordsonMarx'sartofquotation,whichissolittleunderstood.Whentheyarepurestatementsoffactordescriptions,thequotations,fromtheEnglishBluebooks,forexample,serveofcourseassimpledocumentaryproof.Butthisisnotsowhenthetheoreticalviewsofothereconomistsarecited.Herethequotationisintendedmerelytostatewhere,whenandbywhomaneconomicideaconceivedinthecourseofdevelopmentwasfirstclearlyenunciated.Heretheonlyconsiderationisthattheeconomicconceptioninquestionmustbeofsomesignificancetothehistoryofscience,thatitisthemoreorlessadequatetheoreticalexpressionoftheeconomicsituationofitstime.Butwhetherthisconceptionstillpossessesanyabsoluteorrelativevalidityfromthestandpointoftheauthororwhetheritalreadyhasbecomewhollypasthistoryisquiteimmaterial.Hencethesequotationsareonlyarunningcommentarytothetext,acommentaryborrowedfromthehistoryofeconomicscience,andestablishthedatesandoriginatorsofcertainofthemoreimportant26CAPITALadvancesineconomictheory.Andthatwasaverynecessarythinginasciencewhosehistorianshavesofardistinguishedthemselvesonlybytendentiousignorancecharacteristicofcareerists.ItwillnowbeunderstandablewhyMarx,inconsonancewiththeAfterwordtothesecondedition,onlyinveryexceptionalcaseshadoccasiontoquoteGermaneconomists.
Thereishopethatthesecondvolumewillappearinthecourseof1884.
FrederickEngelsLondonNovember7,1883PREFACETOTHEENGLISHEDITION(ENGELS,1886)hepublicationofanEnglishversionof"DasTKapital"needsnoapology.Onthecontrary,anexplanationmightbeexpectedwhythisEnglishversionhasbeendelayeduntilnow,seeingthatforsomeyearspastthetheoriesadvocatedinthisbookhavebeenconstantlyreferredto,attackedanddefended,interpretedandmisinterpreted,intheperiodicalpressandthecurrentliteratureofbothEnglandandAmerica.
When,soonaftertheauthor'sdeathin1883,itbecameevidentthatanEnglisheditionoftheworkwasreallyrequired,Mr.SamuelMoore,formanyyearsafriendofMarxandofthepresentwriter,andthanwhom,perhaps,nooneismoreconversantwiththebookitself,consentedtoundertakethetranslationwhichtheliteraryexecutorsofMarxwereanxioustolaybeforethepublic.ItwasunderstoodthatIshouldcomparetheMS.withtheoriginalwork,andsuggestsuchalterationsasImightdeemadvisable.
When,byandby,itwasfoundthatMr.Moore'sprofessionaloccupationspreventedhimfromfinishingthetranslationasquicklyaswealldesired,wegladlyacceptedDr.Aveling'soffertoundertakeaportionofthework;atthesametimeMrs.Aveling,Marx'syoungestdaughter,offeredtocheckthequotationsandtorestoretheoriginaltextofthenumerouspassagestakenfromEnglishauthorsandBluebooksand28CAPITALtranslatedbyMarxintoGerman.Thishasbeendonethroughout,withbutafewunavoidableexceptions.
ThefollowingportionsofthebookhavebeentranslatedbyDr.Aveling:(I)ChaptersX.(TheWorkingDay),andXI.(RateandMassofSurplus-Value);(2)PartVI.(Wages,comprisingChaptersXIX.toXXII.);(3)fromChapterXXIV.,Section4(Circumstancesthat&c.)totheendofthebook,comprisingthelatterpartofChapterXXIV.,.ChapterXXV.,andthewholeofPartVIII.(ChaptersXXVI.
toXXXIII);(4)thetwoAuthor'sprefaces.AlltherestofthebookhasbeendonebyMr.Moore.While,thus,eachofthetranslatorsisresponsibleforhisshareoftheworkonly,Ibearajointresponsibilityforthewhole.
ThethirdGermanedition,whichhasbeenmadethebasisofourworkthroughout,waspreparedbyme,in1883,withtheassistanceofnotesleftbytheauthor,indicatingthepassagesofthesecondeditiontobereplacedbydesignatedpassages,fromtheFrenchtextpublishedin1873.1ThealterationsthuseffectedinthetextofthesecondeditiongenerallycoincidedwithchangesprescribedbyMarxinasetofMS.instructionsforanEnglishtranslationthatwasplanned,abouttenyearsago,inAmerica,butabandonedchieflyforwantofafitandpropertranslator.ThisMS.wasplacedatourdisposalbyouroldfriendMr.F.A.SorgeofHobokenN.J.
ItdesignatessomefurtherinterpolationsfromtheFrenchedition;but,beingsomanyyearsolderthanthefinalinstructionsforthethirdedition,Ididnotconsidermyselfatlibertytomakeuseofitotherwisethansparingly,andchieflyincaseswhereithelpedusoverdifficulties.Inthesameway,theFrenchtexthasbeenreferredtoinmostofthedifficultpassages,asanindicatorofwhattheauthorhimselfwaspreparedtosacrificewhereversomethingofthefullimportoftheoriginalhadtobesacrificedintherendering.
PrefacetotheEnglishEdition(Engels,1886)29Thereis,however,onedifficultywecouldnotsparethereader:theuseofcertaintermsinasensedifferentfromwhattheyhave,notonlyincommonlife,butinordinaryPoliticalEconomy.Butthiswasunavoidable.
Everynewaspectofascienceinvolvesarevolutioninthetechnicaltermsofthatscience.Thisisbestshownbychemistry,wherethewholeoftheterminologyisradicallychangedaboutonceintwentyyears,andwhereyouwillhardlyfindasingleorganiccompoundthathasnotgonethroughawholeseriesofdifferentnames.PoliticalEconomyhasgenerallybeencontenttotake,justastheywere,thetermsofcommercialandindustriallife,andtooperatewiththem,entirelyfailingtoseethatbysodoing,itconfineditselfwithinthenarrowcircleofideasexpressedbythoseterms.
Thus,thoughperfectlyawarethatbothprofitsandrentarebutsub-divisions,fragmentsofthatunpaidpartoftheproductwhichthelabourerhastosupplytohisemployer(itsfirstappropriator,thoughnotitsultimateexclusiveowner),yetevenclassicalPoliticalEconomyneverwentbeyondthereceivednotionsofprofitsandrents,neverexaminedthisunpaidpartoftheproduct(calledbyMarxsurplus-product)initsintegrityasawhole,andthereforeneverarrivedataclearcomprehension,eitherofitsoriginandnature,orofthelawsthatregulatethesubsequentdistributionofitsvalue.Similarlyallindustry,notagriculturalorhandicraft,isindiscriminatelycomprisedinthetermofmanufacture,andtherebythedistinctionisobliteratedbetweentwogreatandessentiallydifferentperiodsofeconomichistory:theperiodofmanufactureproper,basedonthedivisionofmanuallabour,andtheperiodofmodernindustrybasedonmachinery.Itis,however,self-evidentthatatheorywhichviewsmoderncapitalistproductionasamerepassingstageintheeconomichistoryofmankind,mustmakeuseoftermsdifferentfromthosehabitualtowriterswholookuponthatformofproductionasimperishableand30CAPITALfinal.
Awordrespectingtheauthor'smethodofquotingmaynotbeoutofplace.Inthemajorityofcases,thequotationsserve,intheusualway,asdocumentaryevidenceinsupportofassertionsmadeinthetext.Butinmanyinstances,passagesfromeconomicwritersarequotedinordertoindicatewhen,where,andbywhomacertainpropositionwasforthefirsttimeclearlyenunciated.Thisisdoneincaseswherethepropositionquotedisofimportanceasbeingamoreorlessadequateexpressionoftheconditionsofsocialproductionandexchangeprevalentatthetime,andquiteirrespectiveofMarx'srecognition,orotherwise,ofitsgeneralvalidity.Thesequotations,therefore,supplementthetextbyarunningcommentarytakenfromthehistoryofthescience.
Ourtranslationcomprisesthefirstbookoftheworkonly.Butthisfirstbookisinagreatmeasureawholeinitself,andhasfortwentyyearsrankedasanindependentwork.Thesecondbook,editedinGermanbyme,in1885,isdecidedlyincompletewithoutthethird,whichcannotbepublishedbeforetheendof1887.WhenBookIII.hasbeenbroughtoutintheoriginalGerman,itwillthenbesoonenoughtothinkaboutpreparinganEnglisheditionofboth.
"DasKapital"isoftencalled,ontheContinent,"theBibleoftheworkingclass."Thattheconclusionsarrivedatinthisworkaredailymoreandmorebecomingthefundamentalprinciplesofthegreatworking-classmovement,notonlyinGermanyandSwitzerland,butinFrance,inHollandandBelgium,inAmerica,andeveninItalyandSpain,thateverywheretheworkingclassmoreandmorerecognises,intheseconclusions,themostadequateexpressionofitsconditionandofitsaspirations,nobodyacquaintedwiththatmovementwilldeny.AndinEngland,too,thetheoriesofMarx,evenatthismoment,exerciseapowerfulinfluenceuponthesocialistmovementPrefacetotheEnglishEdition(Engels,1886)31whichisspreadingintheranksof"cultured"peoplenolessthaninthoseoftheworkingclass.Butthatisnotall.ThetimeisrapidlyapproachingwhenathoroughexaminationofEngland'seconomicpositionwillimposeitselfasanirresistiblenationalnecessity.
Theworkingoftheindustrialsystemofthiscountry,impossiblewithoutaconstantandrapidextensionofproduction,andthereforeofmarkets,iscomingtoadeadstop.
FreeTradehasexhausteditsresources;evenManchesterdoubtsthisitsquondameconomicgospel.2Foreignindustry,rapidlydeveloping,staresEnglishproductioninthefaceeverywhere,notonlyinprotected,butalsoinneutralmarkets,andevenonthissideoftheChannel.Whiletheproductivepowerincreasesinageometric,theextensionofmarketsproceedsatbestinanarithmeticratio.Thedecennialcycleofstagnation,prosperity,over-productionandcrisis,everrecurrentfrom1825to1867,seemsindeedtohaverunitscourse;butonlytolandusinthesloughofdespondofapermanentandchronicdepression.
Thesighedforperiodofprosperitywillnotcome;asoftenasweseemtoperceiveitsheraldingsymptoms,sooftendotheyagainvanishintoair.Meanwhile,eachsucceedingwinterbringsupafreshthegreatquestion,"whattodowiththeunemployed";butwhilethenumberoftheunemployedkeepsswellingfromyeartoyear,thereisnobodytoanswerthatquestion;andwecanalmostcalculatethemomentwhentheunemployedlosingpatiencewilltaketheirownfateintotheirownhands.Surely,atsuchamoment,thevoiceoughttobeheardofamanwhosewholetheoryistheresultofalifelongstudyoftheeconomichistoryandconditionofEngland,andwhomthatstudyledtotheconclusionthat,atleastinEurope,Englandistheonlycountrywheretheinevitablesocialrevolutionmightbeeffectedentirelybypeacefulandlegalmeans.HecertainlyneverforgottoaddthathehardlyexpectedtheEnglishrulingclassestosubmit,withouta"pro-slaveryrebellion,"tothispeacefulandlegalrevolution.
NOTES:1"LeCapital,"parKarlMarx.TraductiondeM.J.Roy,entierementreviséeparl'auteur.Paris.Lachatre.Thistranslation,especiallyinthelatterpartofthebook,containsconsiderablealterationsinandadditionstothetextofthesecondGermanedition.
2AtthequarterlymeetingoftheManchesterChamberofCommerce,heldthisafternoon,awarmdiscussiontookplaceonthesubjectofFreeTrade.Aresolutionwasmovedtotheeffectthat"havingwaitedinvain40yearsforothernationstofollowtheFreeTradeexampleofEngland,thisChamberthinksthetimehasnowarrivedtoreconsiderthatposition."Theresolutionwasrejectedbyamajorityofoneonly,thefiguresbeing21for,and22against.–EveningStandard,Nov.
1,1886.
PREFACETOTHEFOURTHGERMANEDITION(ENGELS,1890)hefourtheditionrequiredthatIshouldestablishTinfinalform,asnearlyaspossible,bothtextandfootnotes.ThefollowingbriefexplanationwillshowhowIhavefulfilledthistask.
AfteragaincomparingtheFrencheditionandMarx'smanuscriptremarksIhavemadesomefurtheradditionstotheGermantextfromthattranslation.
Theywillbefoundonp.80(3rdedition,p.88)[presentedition,pp.117-18],pp.458-60(3rdedition,pp.509-10)[presentedition,pp.462-65],1pp.547-51(3rdedition,p.600)[presentedition,pp.548-51],pp.591-93(3rdedition,p.644)[presentedition,587-89]andp.596(3rdedition,p.648)[presentedition,p.591]inNote1.IhavealsofollowedtheexampleoftheFrenchandEnglisheditionsbyputtingthelongfootnoteontheminersintothetext(3rdedition,pp.509-15;4thedition,pp.461-67)[presentedition,pp.465-71].Othersmallalterationsareofapurelytechnicalnature.
Further,Ihaveaddedafewmoreexplanatorynotes,especiallywherechangedhistoricalconditionsseemedtodemandthis.Alltheseadditionalnotesareenclosedinsquarebracketsandmarkedeitherwithmyinitialsor"D.H."2MeanwhileacompleterevisionofthenumerousquotationshadbeenmadenecessarybythepublicationoftheEnglishedition.Forthisedition34CAPITALMarx'syoungestdaughter,Eleanor,undertooktocompareallthequotationswiththeiroriginals,sothatthosetakenfromEnglishsources,whichconstitutethevastmajority,aregiventherenotasre-translationsfromtheGermanbutintheoriginalEnglishform.Inpreparingthefourtheditionitwasthereforeincumbentuponmetoconsultthistext.Thecomparisonrevealedvarioussmallinaccuracies.Pagenumberswronglyindicated,duepartlytomistakesincopyingfromnotebooks,andpartlytotheaccumulatedmisprintsofthreeeditions;misplacedquotationoromissionmarks,whichcannotbeavoidedwhenamassofquotationsiscopiedfromnote-bookextracts;hereandtheresomeratherunhappytranslationofaword;particularpassagesquotedfromtheoldParisnotebooksof1843-45,whenMarxdidnotknowEnglishandwasreadingEnglisheconomistsinFrenchtranslations,sothatthedoubletranslationyieldedaslightlydifferentshadeofmeaning,e.g.,inthecaseofSteuart,Ure,etc.,wheretheEnglishtexthadnowtobeused–andothersimilarinstancesoftriflinginaccuracyornegligence.
Butanyonewhocomparesthefourtheditionwiththepreviousonescanconvincehimselfthatallthislaboriousprocessofemendationhasnotproducedthesmallestchangeinthebookworthspeakingof.Therewasonlyonequotationwhichcouldnotbetraced–theonefromRichardJones(4thedition,p.562,note47).Marxprobablyslippedupwhenwritingdownthetitleofthebook.3Alltheotherquotationsretaintheircogencyinfull,orhaveenhanceditduetotheirpresentexactform.
Here,however,Iamobligedtoreverttoanoldstory.
IknowofonlyonecaseinwhichtheaccuracyofaquotationgivenbyMarxhasbeencalledinquestion.
ButastheissuedraggedbeyondhislifetimeIcannotwellignoreithere.
OnMarch7,1872,thereappearedintheBerlinConcordia,organoftheGermanManufacturers'PREFACETOTHEFOURTHGERMANEDITION(ENGELS,1890)35Association,ananonymousarticleentitled:"HowKarlMarxQuotes."Itwashereasserted,withaneffervescenceofmoralindignationandunparliamentarylanguage,thatthequotationfromGladstone'sBudgetSpeechofApril16,1863(intheInauguralAddressoftheInternationalWorkingmen'sAssociation,1864,andrepeatedin"Capital,"Vol.I,p.
617,4thedition;p.671,3rdedition)[presentedition,p.610],hadbeenfalsified;thatnotasinglewordofthesentence:"thisintoxicatingaugmentationofwealthandpower...is...entirelyconfinedtoclassesofproperty"wastobefoundinthe(semi-official)stenographicreportinHansard."ButthissentenceisnowheretobefoundinGladstone'sspeech.Exactlytheoppositeisstatedthere."(Inboldtype):"Thissentence,bothinformandsubstance,isalieinsertedbyMarx."Marx,towhomthenumberofConcordiawassentthefollowingMay,answeredtheanonymousauthorintheVolksstaatofJune1st.Ashecouldnotrecallwhichnewspaperreporthehadusedforthequotation,helimitedhimselftociting,firsttheequivalentquotationfromtwoEnglishpublications,andthenthereportinTheTimes,accordingtowhichGladstonesays:"Thatisthestateofthecaseasregardsthewealthofthiscountry.Imustsayforone,Ishouldlookalmostwithapprehensionandwithpainuponthisintoxicatingaugmentationofwealthandpower,ifitweremybeliefthatitwasconfinedtoclasseswhoareineasycircumstances.Thistakesnocognisanceatalloftheconditionofthelabouringpopulation.TheaugmentationIhavedescribedandwhichisfounded,Ithink,uponaccuratereturns,isanaugmentationentirelyconfinedtoclassespossessedofproperty."ThusGladstonesaysherethathewouldbesorryifitwereso,butitisso:thisintoxicatingaugmentationofwealthandpowerisentirelyconfinedtoclassesofproperty.Andastothesemi-officialHansard,Marx36CAPITALgoesontosay:"Intheversionwhichheafterwardsmanipulated[zurechtgestümpert],Mr.Gladstonewasastuteenoughtoobliterate[wegzupfuschen]thispassage,which,comingfromanEnglishChancelloroftheExchequer,wascertainlycompromising.
This,bytheway,isatraditionalusageintheEnglishparliamentandnotaninventiongottenupbylittleLaskeragainstBebel."Theanonymouswritergetsangrierandangrier.InhisanswerinConcordia,July4th,hesweepsasidesecond-handsourcesanddemurelysuggeststhatitisthe"custom"toquoteparliamentaryspeechesfromthestenographicreport;adding,however,thatTheTimesreport(whichincludesthe"falsified"sentence)andtheHansardreport(whichomitsit)are"substantiallyincompleteagreement,"whileTheTimesreportlikewisecontains"theexactoppositetothatnotoriouspassageintheInauguralAddress."ThisfellowcarefullyconcealsthefactthatTheTimesreportexplicitlyincludesthatself-same"notoriouspassage,"alongsideofitsalleged"opposite."Despiteallthis,however,theanonymousonefeelsthatheisstuckfastandthatonlysomenewdodgecansavehim.Thus,whilsthisarticlebristles,aswehavejustshown,with"impudentmendacity"andisinterlardedwithsuchedifyingtermsofabuseas"badfaith,""dishonesty,""lyingallegation,""thatspuriousquotation,""impudentmendacity,""aquotationentirelyfalsified,""thisfalsification,""simplyinfamous,"etc.,hefindsitnecessarytodiverttheissuetoanotherdomainandthereforepromises"toexplaininasecondarticlethemeaningwhichwe(thenon-mendaciousanonymousone)attributetothecontentofGladstone'swords."Asifhisparticularopinion,ofnodecisivevalueasitis,hadanythingwhatevertodowiththematter.ThissecondarticlewasprintedinConcordiaonJuly11th.
MarxrepliedagainintheVolksstaatofAugust7thnowgivingalsothereportsofthepassageinquestionPREFACETOTHEFOURTHGERMANEDITION(ENGELS,1890)37fromtheMorningStarandtheMorningAdvertiserofApril17,1863.AccordingtobothreportsGladstonesaidthathewouldlookwithapprehension,etc.,uponthisintoxicatingaugmentationofwealthandpowerifhebelievedittobeconfinedto"classesineasycircumstances."Butthisaugmentationwasinfact"entirelyconfinedtoclassespossessedofproperty."Sothesereportstooreproducedwordforwordthesentenceallegedtohavebeen"lyinglyinserted."Marxfurtherestablishedoncemore,byacomparisonofTheTimesandtheHansardtexts,thatthissentence,whichthreenewspaperreportsofidenticalcontent,appearingindependentlyofoneanotherthenextmorning,provedtohavebeenreallyuttered,wasmissingfromtheHansardreport,revisedaccordingtothefamiliar"custom,"andthatGladstone,touseMarx'swords,"hadafterwardsconjureditaway."InconclusionMarxstatedthathehadnotimeforfurtherintercoursewiththeanonymousone.Thelatteralsoseemstohavehadenough,atanyrateMarxreceivednofurtherissuesofConcordia.
Withthisthematterappearedtobedeadandburied.
True,onceortwicelaterontherereachedus,frompersonsintouchwiththeUniversityofCambridge,mysteriousrumoursofanunspeakableliterarycrimewhichMarxwassupposedtohavecommittedin"Capital,"butdespiteallinvestigationnothingmoredefinitecouldbelearned.Then,onNovember29,1883,eightmonthsafterMarx'sdeath,thereappearedinTheTimesaletterheadedTrinityCollege,Cambridge,andsignedSedleyTaylor,inwhichthislittleman,whodabblesinthemildestsortofco-operativeaffairs,seizinguponsomechancepretextorother,atlastenlightenedus,notonlyconcerningthosevagueCambridgerumours,butalsotheanonymousoneinConcordia.
"Whatappearsextremelysingular,"saysthelittlemanfromTrinityCollege,"isthatitwasreserved38CAPITALforProfessorBrentano(thenoftheUniversityofBreslau,nowofthatofStrassburg)toexpose...thebadfaithwhichhadmanifestlydictatedthecitationmadefromMr.Gladstone'sspeechinthe[Inaugural]Address.HerrKarlMarx,who...attemptedtodefendthecitation,hadthehardihood,inthedeadlyshiftstowhichBrentano'smasterlyconductoftheattackspeedilyreducedhim,toassertthatMr.Gladstonehad'manipulated'thereportofhisspeechinTheTimesofApril17,1863,beforeitappearedinHansard,inorderto'obliterate'apassagewhich'wascertainlycompromising'foranEnglishChancelloroftheExchequer.OnBrentano'sshowing,byadetailedcomparisonoftexts,thatthereportsofTheTimesandofHansardagreedinutterlyexcludingthemeaningwhichcraftilyisolatedquotationhadputuponMr.
Gladstone'swords,Marxwithdrewfromfurthercontroversyunderthepleaof'wantoftime.'"Sothatwasatthebottomofthewholebusiness!
AndthuswastheanonymouscampaignofHerrBrentanoinConcordiagloriouslyreflectedintheproductivelyco-operatingimaginationofCambridge.
Thushestood,swordinhand,andthushebattled,inhis"masterlyconductoftheattack,"thisSt.GeorgeoftheGermanManufacturers'Association,whilsttheinfernaldragonMarx,"indeadlyshifts,""speedily"breathedhislastathisfeet.
AllthisAriostianbattlescene,however,onlyservestoconcealthedodgesofourSt.George.Herethereisnolongertalkof"lyinginsertion"or"falsification,"butof"craftilyisolatedquotation."Thewholeissuewasshifted,andSt.GeorgeandhisCambridgesquireverywellknewwhy.
EleanorMarxrepliedinthemonthlyjournalTo-day(February1884),asTheTimesrefusedtopublishherletter.Sheoncemorefocussedthedebateonthesolequestionatissue:hadMarx"lyinglyinserted"thatsentenceornot?TothisMr.SedleyTayloransweredPREFACETOTHEFOURTHGERMANEDITION(ENGELS,1890)39that"thequestionwhetheraparticularsentencedidordidnotoccurinMr.Gladstone'sspeech"hadbeen,inhisopinion,"ofverysubordinateimportance"intheBrentano-Marxcontroversy,"comparedtotheissuewhetherthequotationindisputewasmadewiththeintentionofconveying,orofpervertingMr.
Gladstone'smeaning."HethenadmitsthatTheTimesreportcontains"averbalcontrariety";but,ifthecontextisrightlyinterpreted,i.e.,intheGladstonianLiberalsense,itshowswhatMr.Gladstonemeanttosay.(To-day,March,1884.)ThemostcomicpointhereisthatourlittleCambridgemannowinsistsuponquotingthespeechnotfromHansard,as,accordingtotheanonymousBrentano,itis"customary"todo,butfromTheTimesreport,whichthesameBrentanohadcharacterisedas"necessarilybungling."Naturallyso,forinHansardthevexatioussentenceismissing.
EleanorMarxhadnodifficulty(inthesameissueofTo-day)indissolvingallthisargumentationintothinair.EitherMr.Taylorhadreadthecontroversyof1872,inwhichcasehewasnowmakingnotonly"lyinginsertions"butalso"lying"suppressions;orhehadnotreaditandoughttoremainsilent.IneithercaseitwascertainthathedidnotdaretomaintainforamomenttheaccusationofhisfriendBrentanothatMarxhadmadea"lying"addition.Onthecontrary,Marx,itnowseems,hadnotlyinglyaddedbutsuppressedanimportantsentence.Butthissamesentenceisquotedonpage5oftheInauguralAddress,afewlinesbeforethealleged"lyinginsertion."Andastothe"contrariety"inGladstone'sspeech,isitnotMarxhimself,whoin"Capital,"p.618(3rdedition,p.
672),note105[presentedition,p.611,Note1],refersto"thecontinualcryingcontradictionsinGladstone'sBudgetspeechesof1863and1864"?OnlyhedoesnotpresumeàlaMr.SedleyTaylortoresolvethemintocomplacentLiberalsentiments.EleanorMarx,inconcludingherreply,finallysumsupasfollows:40CAPITAL"Marxhasnotsuppressedanythingworthquoting,neitherhashe'lyingly'addedanything.Buthehasrestored,rescuedfromoblivion,aparticularsentenceofoneofMr.Gladstone'sspeeches,asentencewhichhadindubitablybeenpronounced,butwhichsomehoworotherhadfounditsway–outofHansard."WiththatMr.SedleyTaylortoohadhadenough,andtheresultofthiswholeprofessorialcobweb,spunoutovertwodecadesandtwogreatcountries,isthatnobodyhassincedaredtocastanyotheraspersionuponMarx'sliteraryhonesty;whilstMr.SedleyTaylor,nodoubt,willhereafterputaslittleconfidenceintheliterarywarbulletinsofHerrBrentanoasHerrBrentanowillinthepapalinfallibilityofHansard.
FrederickEngelsLondon.
June25.1890NOTES:1IntheEnglisheditionof1887thisadditionwasmadebyEngelshimself.–Ed.
2Inthepresenteditiontheyareputintosquarebracketsandmarkedwiththeinitials3Marxwasnotmistakeninthetitleofthebookbutinthepage.Heputdown36insteadof37.(Seepp.560-61ofthepresentedition.)–Ed.
1GeneralPrefaceMillionsofChinesearelearningEnglishtoacquireknowledgeandskillsforcommunicationinaworldwhereEnglishhasbecometheprimarylanguageforinternationaldiscourse.YetnotmanylearnershavecometorealizethatthecommandoftheEnglishlanguagealsoenablesthemtohaveaneasyaccesstotheworldliteraryclassicssuchasShakespeare'splays,Shelley'spoems,MarkTwain'snovelsandNietzsche'sworkswhichareanimportantpartofliberal-artseducation.Themostimportantgoalsofuniversitiesarenotvocational,thatis,notmerelythegivingofknowledgeandthetrainingofskills.
Inabroadsense,educationaimsatbroadeningyoungpeople'smentalhorizon,cultivatingvirtuesandshapingtheircharacter.Lincoln,MaoZedongandmanyothergreatleadersandpersonagesofdistinctiondeclaredhowtheydrewimmenseinspirationandstrengthfromliteraryworks.Asamatteroffact,manyofthemhadaspiredtobecomewritersintheiryoungage.AlexandertheGreat(356-323B.C.)issaidtotakealongwithhimtwothings,wakingorsleeping:abookandadagger,andthebookisIliad,aliteraryclassic,byHomer.Hewouldputthesetwomuchtreasuredthingsunderhispillowwhenhewenttobed.
2Today,wefaceanunprecedentedcomplexandchangingworld.Tocopewiththisrapidchangingworldrequiresnotonlycommunicationskills,butalsoadequateknowledgeofculturesotherthanourownhomeculture.
Amongthemostimportantdevelopmentsinpresent-dayglobalcultureistheeverincreasingculturalexchangesandunderstandingbetweendifferentnationsandpeoples.
Andoneofthebestwaystoknowforeignculturesistoreadtheirliteraryworks,particularlytheirliteraryclassics,thesoulofacountry'sculture.Theyalsogiveyouthebestlanguageandthefeelingofsublimity.
LiaoningPeople'sPublishingHouseistobecongratulatedforitsforesightandcourageinmakinganewseriesofworldliteraryclassics(BedsideClassics)availabletothereadingpublic.ItishopedthatpeoplewithanadequatecommandoftheEnglishlanguagewillreadthem,likethemandkeepthemastheirlifetimecompanions.
IamconvincedthattheserieswillmakeanimportantcontributiontotheliteraryeducationoftheyoungpeopleinChina.Atatimewhenthewholecountryisemphasizing"spiritualcivilization",itiscertainlyaverytimelyventuretoputouttheseriesofliteraryclassicsforliteraryandculturaleducation.
ZhangZhongzaiProfessorBeijingForeignStudiesUniversityJuly,2013Beijing3
总序经典名著的语言无疑是最凝练、最优美、最有审美价值的。雪莱的那句“如冬已来临，春天还会远吗？”让多少陷于绝望的人重新燃起希望之火，鼓起勇气，迎接严冬过后的春天。徐志摩一句“悄悄的我走了，正如我悄悄的来；我挥一挥衣袖，不带走一片云彩”又让多少人陶醉。尼采的那句“上帝死了”，又给多少人以振聋发聩的启迪作用。
读经典名著，尤其阅读原汁原味作品，可以怡情养性，增长知识，加添才干，丰富情感，开阔视野。所谓“经典”，其实就是作者所属的那个民族的文化积淀，是那个民族的灵魂缩影。英国戏剧泰斗莎士比亚的《哈姆雷特》和《麦克白》等、“意大利语言之父”的但丁的《神曲》之《地狱篇》《炼狱篇》及《天堂篇》、爱尔兰世界一流作家詹姆斯·乔伊斯的《尤利西斯》及《一个艺术家的肖像》等、美国风趣而笔法超一流的著名小说家马克·吐温的《哈克历险记》以及《汤姆索亚历险记》等，德国著名哲学家尼采的《查拉图斯特拉如是说》及《快乐的科学》等等，都为塑造自己民族的文化积淀，做出了永恒的贡献，也同时向世界展示了他们所属的民族的优美剪影。
4很多著名领袖如林肯、毛泽东等伟大人物，也都曾从经典名著中汲取力量，甚至获得治国理念。耶鲁大学教授查尔斯·希尔曾在题为《经典与治国理念》的文章，阐述了读书与治国之间的绝妙关系。他这样写道：“在几乎所有经典名著中，都可以找到让人叹为观止、深藏其中的治国艺术原则。”经典名著，不仅仅有治国理念，更具提升读者审美情趣的功能。世界上不同时代、不同地域的优秀经典作品，都存在一个共同属性：歌颂赞美人间的真善美，揭露抨击世间的假恶丑。
读欧美自但丁以来的经典名著，你会看到，西方无论是在漫长的黑暗时期，抑或进入现代进程时期，总有经典作品问世，对世间的负面，进行冷峻的批判。与此同时，也有更多的大家作品问世，热情讴歌人间的真诚与善良，使读者不由自主地沉浸于经典作品的审美情感之中。
英语经典名著，显然是除了汉语经典名著以外，人类整个进程中至关重要的文化遗产的一部分。从历史上看，英语是全世界经典阅读作品中，使用得最广泛的国际性语言。这一事实，没有产生根本性变化。
本世纪相当长一段时间，这一事实也似乎不会发生任何变化。而要更深入地了解并切身感受英语经典名著的风采，阅读原汁原味的英语经典作品的过程，显然是必不可少的。
辽宁人民出版社及时并隆重推出“最经典英语文库”系列丛书，是具有远见与卓识的出版行为。我相信，这套既可供阅读，同时也具收藏价值的英语原版经5
典作品系列丛书，在帮助人们了解什么才是经典作品的同时，也一定会成为广大英语爱好者、大中学生以及学生家长们挚爱的“最经典英语文库”。
北京外国语大学英语学院北外公共外交研究中心欧美文学研究中心主任全国英国文学学会名誉会长张中载教授2013年7月于北京PART1:COMMODITIESANDMONEYCHAPTER1:COMMODITIESSection1:TheTwoFactorsofaCommodity:Use-ValueandValue(TheSubstanceofValueandtheMagnitudeofValue)hewealthofthosesocietiesinwhichtheTcapitalistmodeofproductionprevails,presentsitselfas"animmenseaccumulationofcommodities,"1itsunitbeingasinglecommodity.Ourinvestigationmustthereforebeginwiththeanalysisofacommodity.
Acommodityis,inthefirstplace,anobjectoutsideus,athingthatbyitspropertiessatisfieshumanwantsofsomesortoranother.Thenatureofsuchwants,whether,forinstance,theyspringfromthestomachorfromfancy,makesnodifference.2Neitherarewehereconcernedtoknowhowtheobjectsatisfiesthesewants,whetherdirectlyasmeansofsubsistence,orindirectlyasmeansofproduction.
Everyusefulthing,asiron,paper,&c.,maybelookedatfromthetwopointsofviewofqualityandquantity.Itisanassemblageofmanyproperties,andmaythereforebeofuseinvariousways.Todiscoverthevarioususesofthingsistheworkofhistory.3Soalsoistheestablishmentofsocially-recognizedstandardsofmeasureforthequantitiesoftheseusefulobjects.Thediversityofthesemeasureshasitsoriginpartlyinthediversenatureoftheobjectstobe4CAPITALmeasured,partlyinconvention.
Theutilityofathingmakesitausevalue.4Butthisutilityisnotathingofair.Beinglimitedbythephysicalpropertiesofthecommodity,ithasnoexistenceapartfromthatcommodity.Acommodity,suchasiron,corn,oradiamond,istherefore,sofarasitisamaterialthing,ausevalue,somethinguseful.
Thispropertyofacommodityisindependentoftheamountoflabourrequiredtoappropriateitsusefulqualities.Whentreatingofusevalue,wealwaysassumetobedealingwithdefinitequantities,suchasdozensofwatches,yardsoflinen,ortonsofiron.Theusevaluesofcommoditiesfurnishthematerialforaspecialstudy,thatofthecommercialknowledgeofcommodities.5Usevaluesbecomearealityonlybyuseorconsumption:theyalsoconstitutethesubstanceofallwealth,whatevermaybethesocialformofthatwealth.Intheformofsocietyweareabouttoconsider,theyare,inaddition,thematerialdepositoriesofexchangevalue.
Exchangevalue,atfirstsight,presentsitselfasaquantitativerelation,astheproportioninwhichvaluesinuseofonesortareexchangedforthoseofanothersort,6arelationconstantlychangingwithtimeandplace.Henceexchangevalueappearstobesomethingaccidentalandpurelyrelative,andconsequentlyanintrinsicvalue,i.e.,anexchangevaluethatisinseparablyconnectedwith,inherentincommodities,seemsacontradictioninterms.7Letusconsiderthematteralittlemoreclosely.
Agivencommodity,e.g.,aquarterofwheatisexchangedforxblacking,ysilk,orzgold,&c.–inshort,forothercommoditiesinthemostdifferentproportions.Insteadofoneexchangevalue,thewheathas,therefore,agreatmany.Butsincexblacking,ysilk,orzgold&c.,eachrepresentstheexchangevalueofonequarterofwheat,xblacking,ysilk,zgold,&c.,must,asexchangevalues,bereplaceablebyPART1:COMMODITIESANDMONEY5eachother,orequaltoeachother.Therefore,first:thevalidexchangevaluesofagivencommodityexpresssomethingequal;secondly,exchangevalue,generally,isonlythemodeofexpression,thephenomenalform,ofsomethingcontainedinit,yetdistinguishablefromit.
Letustaketwocommodities,e.g.,cornandiron.
Theproportionsinwhichtheyareexchangeable,whateverthoseproportionsmaybe,canalwaysberepresentedbyanequationinwhichagivenquantityofcornisequatedtosomequantityofiron:e.g.,1quartercorn=xcwt.iron.Whatdoesthisequationtellus?Ittellsusthatintwodifferentthings–in1quarterofcornandxcwt.ofiron,thereexistsinequalquantitiessomethingcommontoboth.Thetwothingsmustthereforebeequaltoathird,whichinitselfisneithertheonenortheother.Eachofthem,sofarasitisexchangevalue,mustthereforebereducibletothisthird.
Asimplegeometricalillustrationwillmakethisclear.Inordertocalculateandcomparetheareasofrectilinearfigures,wedecomposethemintotriangles.
Buttheareaofthetriangleitselfisexpressedbysomethingtotallydifferentfromitsvisiblefigure,namely,byhalftheproductofthebasemultipliedbythealtitude.Inthesamewaytheexchangevaluesofcommoditiesmustbecapableofbeingexpressedintermsofsomethingcommontothemall,ofwhichthingtheyrepresentagreaterorlessquantity.
Thiscommon"something"cannotbeeitherageometrical,achemical,oranyothernaturalpropertyofcommodities.Suchpropertiesclaimourattentiononlyinsofarastheyaffecttheutilityofthosecommodities,makethemusevalues.Buttheexchangeofcommoditiesisevidentlyanactcharacterisedbyatotalabstractionfromusevalue.Thenoneusevalueisjustasgoodasanother,providedonlyitbepresentinsufficientquantity.Or,asoldBarbonsays,6CAPITAL"onesortofwaresareasgoodasanother,ifthevaluesbeequal.Thereisnodifferenceordistinctioninthingsofequalvalue...Anhundredpounds'worthofleadoriron,isofasgreatvalueasonehundredpounds'worthofsilverorgold."8Asusevalues,commoditiesare,aboveall,ofdifferentqualities,butasexchangevaluestheyaremerelydifferentquantities,andconsequentlydonotcontainanatomofusevalue.
Ifthenweleaveoutofconsiderationtheusevalueofcommodities,theyhaveonlyonecommonpropertyleft,thatofbeingproductsoflabour.Buteventheproductoflabouritselfhasundergoneachangeinourhands.Ifwemakeabstractionfromitsusevalue,wemakeabstractionatthesametimefromthematerialelementsandshapesthatmaketheproductausevalue;weseeinitnolongeratable,ahouse,yarn,oranyotherusefulthing.Itsexistenceasamaterialthingisputoutofsight.Neithercanitanylongerberegardedastheproductofthelabourofthejoiner,themason,thespinner,orofanyotherdefinitekindofproductivelabour.Alongwiththeusefulqualitiesoftheproductsthemselves,weputoutofsightboththeusefulcharacterofthevariouskindsoflabourembodiedinthem,andtheconcreteformsofthatlabour;thereisnothingleftbutwhatiscommontothemall;allarereducedtooneandthesamesortoflabour,humanlabourintheabstract.
Letusnowconsidertheresidueofeachoftheseproducts;itconsistsofthesameunsubstantialrealityineach,amerecongelationofhomogeneoushumanlabour,oflabourpowerexpendedwithoutregardtothemodeofitsexpenditure.Allthatthesethingsnowtellusis,thathumanlabourpowerhasbeenexpendedintheirproduction,thathumanlabourisembodiedinthem.Whenlookedatascrystalsofthissocialsubstance,commontothemall,theyare–Values.
WehaveseenthatwhencommoditiesarePART1:COMMODITIESANDMONEY7exchanged,theirexchangevaluemanifestsitselfassomethingtotallyindependentoftheirusevalue.Butifweabstractfromtheirusevalue,thereremainstheirValueasdefinedabove.Therefore,thecommonsubstancethatmanifestsitselfintheexchangevalueofcommodities,whenevertheyareexchanged,istheirvalue.Theprogressofourinvestigationwillshowthatexchangevalueistheonlyforminwhichthevalueofcommoditiescanmanifestitselforbeexpressed.Forthepresent,however,wehavetoconsiderthenatureofvalueindependentlyofthis,itsform.
Ausevalue,orusefularticle,therefore,hasvalueonlybecausehumanlabourintheabstracthasbeenembodiedormaterialisedinit.How,then,isthemagnitudeofthisvaluetobemeasured?Plainly,bythequantityofthevalue-creatingsubstance,thelabour,containedinthearticle.Thequantityoflabour,however,ismeasuredbyitsduration,andlabourtimeinitsturnfindsitsstandardinweeks,days,andhours.
Somepeoplemightthinkthatifthevalueofacommodityisdeterminedbythequantityoflabourspentonit,themoreidleandunskilfulthelabourer,themorevaluablewouldhiscommoditybe,becausemoretimewouldberequiredinitsproduction.Thelabour,however,thatformsthesubstanceofvalue,ishomogeneoushumanlabour,expenditureofoneuniformlabourpower.Thetotallabourpowerofsociety,whichisembodiedinthesumtotalofthevaluesofallcommoditiesproducedbythatsociety,countshereasonehomogeneousmassofhumanlabourpower,composedthoughitbeofinnumerableindividualunits.Eachoftheseunitsisthesameasanyother,sofarasithasthecharacteroftheaveragelabourpowerofsociety,andtakeseffectassuch;thatis,sofarasitrequiresforproducingacommodity,nomoretimethanisneededonanaverage,nomorethanissociallynecessary.Thelabourtimesociallynecessaryisthatrequiredtoproduceanarticleunder8CAPITALthenormalconditionsofproduction,andwiththeaveragedegreeofskillandintensityprevalentatthetime.Theintroductionofpower-loomsintoEnglandprobablyreducedbyone-halfthelabourrequiredtoweaveagivenquantityofyarnintocloth.Thehand-loomweavers,asamatteroffact,continuedtorequirethesametimeasbefore;butforallthat,theproductofonehouroftheirlabourrepresentedafterthechangeonlyhalfanhour'ssociallabour,andconsequentlyfelltoone-halfitsformervalue.
Weseethenthatthatwhichdeterminesthemagnitudeofthevalueofanyarticleistheamountoflaboursociallynecessary,orthelabourtimesociallynecessaryforitsproduction.9Eachindividualcommodity,inthisconnexion,istobeconsideredasanaveragesampleofitsclass.10Commodities,therefore,inwhichequalquantitiesoflabourareembodied,orwhichcanbeproducedinthesametime,havethesamevalue.Thevalueofonecommodityistothevalueofanyother,asthelabourtimenecessaryfortheproductionoftheoneistothatnecessaryfortheproductionoftheother."Asvalues,allcommoditiesareonlydefinitemassesofcongealedlabourtime."11Thevalueofacommoditywouldthereforeremainconstant,ifthelabourtimerequiredforitsproductionalsoremainedconstant.Butthelatterchangeswitheveryvariationintheproductivenessoflabour.Thisproductivenessisdeterminedbyvariouscircumstances,amongstothers,bytheaverageamountofskilloftheworkmen,thestateofscience,andthedegreeofitspracticalapplication,thesocialorganisationofproduction,theextentandcapabilitiesofthemeansofproduction,andbyphysicalconditions.Forexample,thesameamountoflabourinfavourableseasonsisembodiedin8bushelsofcorn,andinunfavourable,onlyinfour.Thesamelabourextractsfromrichminesmoremetalthanfrompoormines.DiamondsareofveryrareoccurrenceonPART1:COMMODITIESANDMONEY9theearth'ssurface,andhencetheirdiscoverycosts,onanaverage,agreatdealoflabourtime.Consequentlymuchlabourisrepresentedinasmallcompass.Jacobdoubtswhethergoldhaseverbeenpaidforatitsfullvalue.Thisappliesstillmoretodiamonds.AccordingtoEschwege,thetotalproduceoftheBraziliandiamondminesfortheeightyyears,endingin1823,hadnotrealisedthepriceofone-and-a-halfyears'averageproduceofthesugarandcoffeeplantationsofthesamecountry,althoughthediamondscostmuchmorelabour,andthereforerepresentedmorevalue.
Withrichermines,thesamequantityoflabourwouldembodyitselfinmorediamonds,andtheirvaluewouldfall.Ifwecouldsucceedatasmallexpenditureoflabour,inconvertingcarbonintodiamonds,theirvaluemightfallbelowthatofbricks.Ingeneral,thegreatertheproductivenessoflabour,thelessisthelabourtimerequiredfortheproductionofanarticle,thelessistheamountoflabourcrystallisedinthatarticle,andthelessisitsvalue;andviceversa,thelesstheproductivenessoflabour,thegreateristhelabourtimerequiredfortheproductionofanarticle,andthegreaterisitsvalue.Thevalueofacommodity,therefore,variesdirectlyasthequantity,andinverselyastheproductiveness,ofthelabourincorporatedinit.*Athingcanbeausevalue,withouthavingvalue.
Thisisthecasewheneveritsutilitytomanisnotduetolabour.Suchareair,virginsoil,naturalmeadows,&c.Athingcanbeuseful,andtheproductofhuman*Thefollowingpassageoccurredonlyinthefirstedition.
"Nowweknowthesubstanceofvalue.Itislabour.Weknowthemeasureofitsmagnitude.Itislabourtime.Theform,whichstampsvalueasexchange-value,remainstobeanalysed.
Butbeforethisweneedtodevelopthecharacteristicswehavealreadyfoundsomewhatmorefully."TakenfromthePenguineditionof"Capital,"translatedbyBenFowkes.
10CAPITALlabour,withoutbeingacommodity.Whoeverdirectlysatisfieshiswantswiththeproduceofhisownlabour,creates,indeed,usevalues,butnotcommodities.Inordertoproducethelatter,hemustnotonlyproduceusevalues,butusevaluesforothers,socialusevalues.
(Andnotonlyforothers,withoutmore.Themediaevalpeasantproducedquit-rent-cornforhisfeudallordandtithe-cornforhisparson.Butneitherthequit-rent-cornnorthetithe-cornbecamecommoditiesbyreasonofthefactthattheyhadbeenproducedforothers.Tobecomeacommodityaproductmustbetransferredtoanother,whomitwillserveasausevalue,bymeansofanexchange.)12Lastlynothingcanhavevalue,withoutbeinganobjectofutility.Ifthethingisuseless,soisthelabourcontainedinit;thelabourdoesnotcountaslabour,andthereforecreatesnovalue.
Section2:TheTwo-foldCharacteroftheLabourEmbodiedinCommoditiesAtfirstsightacommoditypresenteditselftousasacomplexoftwothings–usevalueandexchangevalue.
Lateron,wesawalsothatlabour,too,possessesthesametwo-foldnature;for,sofarasitfindsexpressioninvalue,itdoesnotpossessthesamecharacteristicsthatbelongtoitasacreatorofusevalues.Iwasthefirsttopointoutandtoexaminecriticallythistwo-foldnatureofthelabourcontainedincommodities.Asthispointisthepivotonwhichaclearcomprehensionofpoliticaleconomyturns,wemustgomoreintodetail.
Letustaketwocommoditiessuchasacoatand10yardsoflinen,andlettheformerbedoublethevalueofthelatter,sothat,if10yardsoflinen=W,thecoat=2W.
Thecoatisausevaluethatsatisfiesaparticularwant.Itsexistenceistheresultofaspecialsortofproductiveactivity,thenatureofwhichisdeterminedPART1:COMMODITIESANDMONEY11byitsaim,modeofoperation,subject,means,andresult.Thelabour,whoseutilityisthusrepresentedbythevalueinuseofitsproduct,orwhichmanifestsitselfbymakingitsproductausevalue,wecallusefullabour.Inthisconnectionweconsideronlyitsusefuleffect.
Asthecoatandthelinenaretwoqualitativelydifferentusevalues,soalsoarethetwoformsoflabourthatproducethem,tailoringandweaving.
Werethesetwoobjectsnotqualitativelydifferent,notproducedrespectivelybylabourofdifferentquality,theycouldnotstandtoeachotherintherelationofcommodities.Coatsarenotexchangedforcoats,oneusevalueisnotexchangedforanotherofthesamekind.
Toallthedifferentvarietiesofvaluesinusetherecorrespondasmanydifferentkindsofusefullabour,classifiedaccordingtotheorder,genus,species,andvarietytowhichtheybelonginthesocialdivisionoflabour.Thisdivisionoflabourisanecessaryconditionfortheproductionofcommodities,butitdoesnotfollow,conversely,thattheproductionofcommoditiesisanecessaryconditionforthedivisionoflabour.
IntheprimitiveIndiancommunitythereissocialdivisionoflabour,withoutproductionofcommodities.
Or,totakeanexamplenearerhome,ineveryfactorythelabourisdividedaccordingtoasystem,butthisdivisionisnotbroughtaboutbytheoperativesmutuallyexchangingtheirindividualproducts.Onlysuchproductscanbecomecommoditieswithregardtoeachother,asresultfromdifferentkindsoflabour,eachkindbeingcarriedonindependentlyandfortheaccountofprivateindividuals.
Toresume,then:Intheusevalueofeachcommoditythereiscontainedusefullabour,i.e.,productiveactivityofadefinitekindandexercisedwithadefiniteaim.Usevaluescannotconfronteachotherascommodities,unlesstheusefullabourembodied12CAPITALinthemisqualitativelydifferentineachofthem.
Inacommunity,theproduceofwhichingeneraltakestheformofcommodities,i.e.,inacommunityofcommodityproducers,thisqualitativedifferencebetweentheusefulformsoflabourthatarecarriedonindependentlybyindividualproducers,eachontheirownaccount,developsintoacomplexsystem,asocialdivisionoflabour.
Anyhow,whetherthecoatbewornbythetailororbyhiscustomer,ineithercaseitoperatesasausevalue.Noristherelationbetweenthecoatandthelabourthatproduceditalteredbythecircumstancethattailoringmayhavebecomeaspecialtrade,anindependentbranchofthesocialdivisionoflabour.
Whereverthewantofclothingforcedthemtoit,thehumanracemadeclothesforthousandsofyears,withoutasinglemanbecomingatailor.Butcoatsandlinen,likeeveryotherelementofmaterialwealththatisnotthespontaneousproduceofNature,mustinvariablyowetheirexistencetoaspecialproductiveactivity,exercisedwithadefiniteaim,anactivitythatappropriatesparticularnature-givenmaterialstoparticularhumanwants.Sofarthereforeaslabourisacreatorofusevalue,isusefullabour,itisanecessarycondition,independentofallformsofsociety,fortheexistenceofthehumanrace;itisaneternalnature-imposednecessity,withoutwhichtherecanbenomaterialexchangesbetweenmanandNature,andthereforenolife.
Theusevalues,coat,linen,&c.,i.e.,thebodiesofcommodities,arecombinationsoftwoelements–matterandlabour.Ifwetakeawaytheusefullabourexpendeduponthem,amaterialsubstratumisalwaysleft,whichisfurnishedbyNaturewithoutthehelpofman.ThelattercanworkonlyasNaturedoes,thatisbychangingtheformofmatter.13Naymore,inthisworkofchangingtheformheisconstantlyhelpedbynaturalforces.Wesee,then,thatlabourisnottheonlyPART1:COMMODITIESANDMONEY13sourceofmaterialwealth,ofusevaluesproducedbylabour.AsWilliamPettyputsit,labourisitsfatherandtheearthitsmother.
Letusnowpassfromthecommodityconsideredasausevaluetothevalueofcommodities.
Byourassumption,thecoatisworthtwiceasmuchasthelinen.Butthisisamerequantitativedifference,whichforthepresentdoesnotconcernus.Webearinmind,however,thatifthevalueofthecoatisdoublethatof10ydsoflinen,20ydsoflinenmusthavethesamevalueasonecoat.Sofarastheyarevalues,thecoatandthelinenarethingsofalikesubstance,objectiveexpressionsofessentiallyidenticallabour.