資本論 CHAPTER 32: HISTORICAL TENDENCY OF CAPITALIST ACCUMULATION

What

does

the

primitive

accumulation

of

capital,i.e.,

its

historical

genesis,

resolve

itself

into

In

so

far

as

it

is

not

immediate

transformation

of

slaves

and

serfs

into

wage

labourers,

and

therefore

a

mere

change

of

form,

it

only

means

the

expropriation

of

the

immediate

producers,

i.e.,

the

dissolution

of

private

property

based

on

the

labour

of

its

owner.Private

property,

as

the

antithesis

to

social,

collective

property,

exists

only

where

the

means

of

labour

and

the

external

conditions

of

labour

belong

to

private

individuals.

But

according

as

these

private

individuals

are

labourers

or

not

labourers,

private

property

has

a

different

character.

The

numberless

shades,

that

it

at

first

sight

presents,

correspond

to

the

intermediate

stages

lying

between

these

two

extremes.

The

private

property

of

the

labourer

in

his

means

of

production

is

the

foundation

of

petty

industry,

whether

agricultural,manufacturing,

or

both;

petty

industry,

again,

is

an

essential

condition

for

the

development

of

social

production

and

of

the

free

individuality

of

the

labourer

himself.

Of

course,

this

petty

mode

of

production

exists

also

under

slavery,

serfdom,

and

other

states

of

dependence.

But

it

flourishes,

it

lets

loose

its

whole

energy,

it

attains

its

adequate

classical

form,only

where

the

labourer

is

the

private

owner

of

his

own

means

of

labour

set

in

action

by

himself:

the

peasant

of

the

land

which

he

cultivates,

the

artisan

of

the

tool

which

he

handles

as

a

virtuoso.

This

mode

of

production

presupposes

parcelling

of

the

soil

and

scattering

of

the

other

means

of

production.As

it

excludes

the

concentration

of

these

means

of

production,

so

also

it

excludes

co-operation,

division

of

labour

within

each

separate

process

of

production,the

control

over,

and

the

productive

application

of

the

forces

of

Nature

by

society,

and

the

free

development

of

the

social

productive

powers.

It

is

compatible

only

with

a

system

of

production,

and

a

society,

moving

within

narrow

and

more

or

less

primitive

bounds.

To

perpetuate

it

would

be,

as

Pecqueur

rightly

says,

\"to

decree

universal

mediocrity\".

At

a

certain

stage

of

development,

it

brings

forth

the

material

agencies

for

its

own

dissolution.

From

that

moment

new

forces

and

new

passions

spring

up

in

the

bosom

of

society;but

the

old

social

organisation

fetters

them

and

keeps

them

down.

It

must

be

annihilated;

it

is

annihilated.

Its

annihilation,

the

transformation

of

the

individualised

and

scattered

means

of

production

into

socially

concentrated

ones,

of

the

pigmy

property

of

the

many

into

the

huge

property

of

the

few,

the

expropriation

of

the

great

mass

of

the

people

from

the

soil,

from

the

means

of

subsistence,

and

from

the

means

of

labour,

this

fearful

and

painful

expropriation

of

the

mass

of

the

people

forms

the

prelude

to

the

history

of

capital.

It

comprises

a

series

of

forcible

methods,of

which

we

have

passed

in

review

only

those

that

have

been

epoch-making

as

methods

of

the

primitive

accumulation

of

capital.

The

expropriation

of

the

immediate

producers

was

accomplished

with

merciless

Vandalism,

and

under

the

stimulus

of

passions

the

most

infamous,

the

most

sordid,

the

pettiest,

the

most

meanly

odious.

Self-earned

private

property,

that

is

based,

so

to

say,

on

the

fusing

together

of

the

isolated,independent

labouring

individual

with

the

conditions

of

his

labour,

is

supplanted

by

capitalistic

private

property,

which

rests

on

exploitation

of

the

nominally

free

labour

of

others,

i.e.,

on

wage

labour.1

As

soon

as

this

process

of

transformation

has

sufficiently

decomposed

the

old

society

from

top

to

bottom,

as

soon

as

the

labourers

are

turned

into

proletarians,

their

means

of

labour

into

capital,

as

soon

as

the

capitalist

mode

of

production

stands

on

its

own

feet,

then

the

further

socialisation

of

labour

and

further

transformation

of

the

land

and

other

means

of

production

into

socially

exploited

and,

therefore,common

means

of

production,

as

well

as

the

further

expropriation

of

private

proprietors,

takes

a

new

form.That

which

is

now

to

be

expropriated

is

no

longer

the

labourer

working

for

himself,

but

the

capitalist

exploiting

many

labourers.

This

expropriation

is

accomplished

by

the

action

of

the

immanent

laws

of

capitalistic

production

itself,

by

the

centralisation

of

capital.

One

capitalist

always

kills

many.

Hand

in

hand

with

this

centralisation,

or

this

expropriation

of

many

capitalists

by

few,

develop,

on

an

ever-extending

scale,

the

co-operative

form

of

the

labour

process,the

conscious

technical

application

of

science,

the

methodical

cultivation

of

the

soil,

the

transformation

of

the

instruments

of

labour

into

instruments

of

labour

only

usable

in

common,

the

economising

of

all

means

of

production

by

their

use

as

means

of

production

of

combined,

socialised

labour,

the

entanglement

of

all

peoples

in

the

net

of

the

world

market,

and

with

this,the

international

character

of

the

capitalistic

regime.Along

with

the

constantly

diminishing

number

of

the

magnates

of

capital,

who

usurp

and

monopolise

all

advantages

of

this

process

of

transformation,

grows

the

mass

of

misery,

oppression,

slavery,

degradation,exploitation;

but

with

this

too

grows

the

revolt

of

the

working

class,

a

class

always

increasing

in

numbers,and

disciplined,

united,

organised

by

the

very

mechanism

of

the

process

of

capitalist

production

itself.

The

monopoly

of

capital

becomes

a

fetter

upon

the

mode

of

production,

which

has

sprung

up

and

flourished

along

with,

and

under

it.

Centralisation

of

the

means

of

production

and

socialisation

of

labour

at

last

reach

a

point

where

they

become

incompatible

with

their

capitalist

integument.

This

integument

is

burst

asunder.

The

knell

of

capitalist

private

property

sounds.

The

expropriators

are

expropriated.

The

capitalist

mode

of

appropriation,

the

result

of

the

capitalist

mode

of

production,

produces

capitalist

private

property.

This

is

the

first

negation

of

individual

private

property,

as

founded

on

the

labour

of

the

proprietor.

But

capitalist

production

begets,

with

the

inexorability

of

a

law

of

Nature,

its

own

negation.

It

is

the

negation

of

negation.

This

does

not

re-establish

private

property

for

the

producer,

but

gives

him

individual

property

based

on

the

acquisition

of

the

capitalist

era:

i.e.,

on

co-operation

and

the

possession

in

common

of

the

land

and

of

the

means

of

production.

The

transformation

of

scattered

private

property,arising

from

individual

labour,

into

capitalist

private

property

is,

naturally,

a

process,

incomparably

more

protracted,

violent,

and

difficult,

than

the

transformation

of

capitalistic

private

property,

already

practically

resting

on

socialised

production,

into

socialised

property.

In

the

former

case,

we

had

the

expropriation

of

the

mass

of

the

people

by

a

few

usurpers;

in

the

latter,

we

have

the

expropriation

of

a

few

usurpers

by

the

mass

of

the

people.2

NOTES:

1\"Nous

sommes

dans

une

condition

tout-à-fait

nouvelle

de

la

societé...

nous

tendons

a

séparer

toute

espèce

de

propriété

d'avec

toute

espèce

de

travail.\"

[We

are

in

a

situation

which

is

entirely

new

for

society

...

we

are

striving

to

separate

every

kind

of

property

from

every

kind

of

labour]

(Sismondi:\"Nouveaux

Principes

d'Econ.

Polit.\"

t.II,

p.434.)

2The

advance

of

industry,

whose

involuntary

promoter

is

the

bourgeoisie,

replaces

the

isolation

of

the

labourers,

due

to

competition,

by

their

revolutionary

combination,

due

to

association.

The

development

of

Modern

Industry,

therefore,cuts

from

under

its

feet

the

very

foundation

on

which

the

bourgeoisie

produces

and

appropriates

products.

What

the

bourgeoisie,

therefore,

produces,

above

all,

are

its

own

grave

diggers.

Its

fall

and

the

victory

of

the

proletariat

are

equally

inevitable....

Of

all

the

classes

that

stand

face-to-face

with

the

bourgeoisie

today,

the

proletariat

alone

is

a

really

revolutionary

class.

The

other

classes

perish

and

disappear

in

the

face

of

Modern

Industry,

the

proletariat

is

its

special

and

essential

product....

The

lower

middle

classes,

the

small

manufacturers,the

shopkeepers,

the

artisan,

the

peasant,

all

these

fight

against

the

bourgeoisie,

to

save

from

extinction

their

existence

as

fractions

of

the

middle

class...

they

are

reactionary,

for

they

try

to

roll

back

the

wheel

of

history.

Karl

Marx

and

Friedrich

Engels,

\"Manifest

der

Kommunistischen

Partei,\"

London,1848,

pp.

9,

11.