"PhilipI，KingofFrance，"saysM。Proudhon，"mixeswithCharlemagne’sgoldpoundathirdofalloy，imaginingthat，havingthemonopolyofthemanufactureofmoney，hecoulddowhatisdonebyeverymanufactureofmoney，hecoulddowhatisdonebyeverytradesmanwhohasthethemonopolyofaproduct。WhatwasactuallythisdebasementofthecurrencyfromwhichPhilipandhissuccessorshavebeensomuchblamed？Itwasperfectlysoundreasoningfromthepointofviewofcommercialpractice，butveryunsoundeconomicscience，viz。，tosupposethat，assupplyanddemandregulatevalue，itispossible，eitherbyproducinganartificialscarcityorbymonopolizingmanufacture，toincreasetheestimationandconsequentlythevalueofthings;andthatthisistrueofgoldandsilverasofcorn，wine，oilortobacco。ButPhilip’sfraudwasnosoonersuspectedthanhismoneywasreducedtoitstruevalue，andhehimselflostwhathehadthoughttogainfromhissubjects。Thesamethinghashappenedasaresultofeverysimilarattempt。"
　　[I70—71]
　　Ithasbeenprobedtimeswithoutnumberthat，ifaprincetakesintohisheadtodebasethecurrency，itishewholoses。Whathegainsonceatthefirstissueheloseseverytimethefalsifiedcoinagereturnstohimintheformoftaxes，etc。ButPhilipandhissuccessorswereabletoprotectthemselvesmoreorlessagainstthisloss，for，oncethedebasedcoinagewasputintocirculation，theyhastenedtoorderageneralre—mintingofmoneyontheoldfooting。
　　Andbesides，ifPhilipIhadreallyreasonedlikeM。Proudhon，hewouldnothavereasonedwell"fromthecommercialpointofview"。NeitherPhilipInorM。Proudhondisplaysanymercantilegeniusinimaginingthatitispossibletoalterthevalueofgoldaswellasthatofeveryothercommoditymerelybecausetheirvalueisdeterminedbytherelationbetweensupplyanddemand。
　　IfKingPhiliphaddecreedthatonequarterofwheatwasinfuturetobecalledtwoquartersofwheat，hewouldhavebeenaswindler。Hewouldhavedeceivedalltherentiers，allthepeoplewhowereentitledtoreceive100quartersofwheat。Hewouldhavebeenthecauseofallthesepeoplereceivingonly50quartersofwheat;hewouldhavehadtopayonly50。
　　Butincommerce100suchquarterswouldneverhavebeenworthmorethan50。Bychangingthenamewedonotchangethething。Thequantityofwheat，whithersuppliedordemanded，willbeneitherdecreasednorincreasedbythismerechangeofname。Thus，therelationbetweensupplyanddemandbeingjustthesameinspiteofthischangeofname，thepriceofwheatwillundergonorealchange。Whenwespeakofthesupplyanddemandofthings，wedonotspeakofthesupplyanddemandofthenameofthings。
　　PhilipIwasnotamakerofgoldandsilver，asM。Proudhonsays;hewasamakerofnamesforcoins。PassoffyourFrenchcashmeresasAsiaticcashmeres，andyoumaydeceiveabuyerortwo;butoncethefraudbecomesknown，yourso—calledAsiaticcashmereswilldroptothepriceofFrenchcashmeres。
　　Whenheputafalselabelongoldandsilver，KingPhilipcoulddeceiveonlysolongasthefraudwasnotknown。Likeanyothershopkeeper，hedeceivedhiscustomersbyafalsedescriptionofhiswares，whichcouldnotlastforlong。Hewasboundsoonerorlatertosuffertherigourofcommerciallaws。IsthiswhatM。Proudhonwantedtoprove？No。Accordingtohim，itisfromthesovereignandnotfromcommercethatmoneygetsitsvalue。Andwhathashereallyproved？Thatcommerceismoresovereignthanthesovereign。Letthesovereigndecreethatonemarkshallinfuturebetwomarks，commercewillkeeponsayingthatthesetwomarksareworthnomorethanonemarkwasformerly。
　　But，forallthat，thequestionofvaluedeterminedbythequantityoflaborhasnotbeenadvancedastep。Itstillremainstobedecidedwhetherthevalueofthesetwomarks（whichhavebecomewhatonemarkwasonce）
　　isdeterminedbythecostofproductionorbythelawofsupplyanddemand。
　　M。Proudhoncontinues："Itshouldevenbeborneinmindthatif，insteadofdebasingthecurrency，ithadbeenintheking’spowertodoubleitsbulk，theexchangevalueofgoldandsilverwouldimmediatelyhavedroppedbyhalf，alwaysfromreasonsofproportionandequilibrium。"
　　[I71]
　　Ifthisopinion，whichM。Proudhonshareswiththeothereconomists，isvalid，itarguesinfavorofthelatter’sdoctrineofsupplyanddemand，andinnowayinfavorofM。Proudhon’sproportionality。For，whateverthequantityoflaborembodiedinthedoubledbulkofgoldandsilver，itsvaluewouldhavedroppedbyhalf，thedemandhavingremainedthesameandthesupplyhavingdoubled。Orcanitbe，byanychance，thatthe"lawofproportionality"wouldhavebecomeconfusedthistimewiththesomuchdisdainedlawofsupplyanddemand？ThistrueproportionofM。Proudhon’sisindeedsoelastic，iscapableofsomanyvariations，combinationandpermutations，thatitmightwellcoincideforoncewiththerelationbetweensupplyanddemand。
　　Tomake"everycommodityacceptableinexchange，ifnotinpracticethenatleastbyright"，onthebasisoftheroleofgoldandsilveris，then，tomisunderstandthisrole。Goldandsilverareacceptablebyrightonlybecausetheyareacceptableinpractice;andtheyareacceptableinpracticebecausethepresentorganizationofproductionneedsauniversalmediumofexchange。Rightisonlytheofficialrecognitionoffact。
　　WehaveseenthattheexampleofmoneyasanapplicationofvaluewhichhasattainedconstitutionwaschosenbyM。Proudhononlytosmugglethroughhiswholedoctrineofexchangeability，thatistosay，toprovethateverycommodityassessedbyitscostofproductionmustattainthestatusofmoney。Allthiswouldbeveryfine，wereitnotfortheawkwardfactthatpreciselygoldandsilver，asmoney，areofallcommoditiestheonlyonesnotdeterminedbytheircostofproduction;andthisissotruethatincirculationtheycanbereplacedbypaper。Solongasthereisacertainproportionobservedbetweentherequirementsofcirculationandtheamountofmoneyissued，beitpaper，gold，platinum，orcoppermoney，therecanbenoquestionofaproportiontobeobservedbetweentheintrinsicvalue（costofproduction）andthenominalvalueofmoney。Doubtless，ininternationaltrade，moneyisdetermined，likeanyothercommodity，bylabortime。Butitisalsotruethatgoldandsilverininternationaltradearemeansofexchangeasproductsandnotasmoney。Inotherwords，theylosethischaracteristicof"stabilityandauthenticity"，of"sovereignconsecration"，which，forM。Proudhon，formstheirspecificcharacteristic。
　　Ricardounderstoodthetruthsowellthat，afterbasinghiswholesystemonvaluedeterminedbylabortime，andaftersaying：
　　"Goldandsilver，likeallothercommodities，arevaluableonlyinproportiontothequantityoflabornecessarytoproducethem，andbringthemtomarket"，headds，nevertheless，thatthevalueofmoneyisnotdeterminedbythelabortimeitssubstanceembodies，butbythelawofsupplyanddemandonly。
　　"Thoughit[papermoney]hasnointrinsicvalue，yet，bylimitingitsquantity，itsvalueinexchangeisasgreatasanequaldenominationofcoin，orofbullioninthatcoin。Onthesameprinciple，too，namely，bylimitationofitsquantity，adebasedcoinwouldcirculateatthevalueitshouldbear，ifitwereofthelegalweightandfineness，andnotatthevalueofthequantityofmetalwhichitactuallycontained。InthehistoryoftheBritishcoinage，wefind，accordingly，thatthecurrencywasneverdepreciatedinthesameproportionthatitwasdebased;thereasonofwhichwas，thatitneverwasincreasedinquantity，inproportiontoitsdiminishedintrinsicvalue。"
　　（Ricardo，loc。cit。[pp。206—07]）
　　ThisiswhatJ。B。SayobservesonthispassageofRicardo’s：
　　"Thisexampleshouldsuffice，Ithink，toconvincetheauthorthatthebasisofallvalueisnottheamountoflaborneededtomakeacommodity，buttheneedfeltforthatcommodity，balancedbyitsscarcity。"
　　[ThereferenceistoSay’snoteontheFrencheditionofRicardo’sbook，Vol。II，pp。206—07。]
　　Thusmoney，whichforRicardoisnolongeravaluedeterminedbylabortime，andwhichJ。B。SaythereforetakesasanexampletoconvinceRicardothattheothervaluescouldnotbedeterminedbylabortimeeither，thismoney，Isay，takenbyJ。B。Sayasanexampleofavaluedeterminedexclusivelybysupplyanddemand，becomesforM。Proudhontheexampleparexcellenceoftheapplicationofvalueconstituted……bylabortime。
　　Toconclude，ifmoneyisnotavalue"constituted"bylabortime，itisallthelesslikelythatitcouldhaveanythingincommonwithM。
　　Proudhon’strue"proportion"。Goldandsilverarealwaysexchangeable，becausetheyhavethespecialfunctionofservingastheuniversalagentofexchange，andinnowisebecausetheyexistinaquantityproportionaltothesumtotalofwealth;or，toputitstillbetter，theyarealwaysproportionalbecause，aloneofallcommodities，theyserveasmoney，theuniversalagentofexchange，whatevertheirquantityinrelationtothesumtotalofwealth。
　　"Acirculationcanneverbesoabundantastooverflow;forbydiminishingitsvalue，inthesameproportionyouwillincreaseitsquantity，andbyincreasingitsvalue，diminishitsquantity。"
　　（Ricardo[II205]）
　　"Whatanimbrogliothispoliticaleconomyis！"criesM。Proudhon。[I72]
　　"Cursedgold！"criesaCommunistflippantly（throughthemouthofM。Proudhon）。Youmightaswellsay：Cursedwheat，cursedvines，cursedsheep！——for"justlikegoldandsilver，everycommercialvaluemustattainitsstrictlyexactdetermination。"[I73]
　　Theideaofmakingsheepandvinesattainthestatusofmoneyisnotnew。InFrance，itbelongstotheageofLouisXIV。Atthatperiod，moneyhavingbeguntoestablishitsomnipotence，thedepreciationofallothercommoditieswasbeingcomplainedof，andthetimewhen"everycommercialvalue"mightattainitsstrictlyexactdetermination，thestatusofmoney，wasbeingeagerlyinvoked。EveninthewritingsofBoisguillebert，oneoftheoldestofFrencheconomists，wefind：
　　"Money，then，bythearrivalofinnumerablecompetitorsintheformofcommoditiesthemselves，re—establishedintheirtruevalues，willbethrustbackagainwithinitsnaturallimits。"
　　（Economistesfinanciersdudix—huitiemesiecle，Daireedition，p。422）
　　Oneseesthatthefirstillusionsofthebourgeoisiearealsotheirlast。
　　B）SurplusLabor"Inworksonpoliticaleconomywereadthisabsurdhypo—thesis：Ifthepriceofeverythingweredoubled……Asifthepriceofeverythingwerenottheproportionofthings——andonecoulddoubleaproportion，arelation，alaw！"
　　（Proudhon，Vol。I，p。81）
　　Economistshavefallenintothiserrorthroughnotknowinghowtoapplythe"lawofproportionality"andof"constitutedvalue"。
　　UnfortunatelyintheverysameworkbyM。Proudhon，VolumeI，p。110，wereadtheabsurdhypothesisthat，"ifwagesrosegenerally，thepriceofeverythingelsewouldrise"。Furthermore，ifwefindthephraseinquestioninworksonpoliticaleconomy，wealsofindasexplanationofit。
　　"Whenonespeaksofthepriceofallcommoditiesgoingupordown，onealwaysexcludessomeonecommoditygoingupordown。Theexcludedcommodityis，ingeneral，moneyorlabor。"
　　（EncyclopediaMetropolitanaorUniversalDictionaryofKnowledge，Vol。IV，Article"PoliticalEconomy"，by[N。W。]
　　Senior，London1836。Regardingthephraseunderdiscussion，seealsoJ。St。Mill：EssaysonSomeUnsettledQuestionsofPoliticalEconomy，London1844，andTooke：AHistoryofPrices，etc。，London1838。[FullreferenceisTh。Tooke，AHistoryofPrices，andoftheStateoftheCirculation，from1793to1837，Vols。I—II，London，1838]）
　　Letuspassnowtothesecondapplicationof"constitutedvalue"，andofotherproportions——whoseonlydefectistheirlackofproportion。AndletusseewhetherM。Proudhonishappierherethaninthemonetarizationofsheep。
　　"Anaxiomgenerallyadmittedbyeconomistsisthatalllabormustleaveasurplus。Inmyopinionthispropositionisuniversallyandabsolutelytrue：itisthecorollaryofthelawofproportion，whichmayberegardedasthesummaryofthewholeofeconomicscience。But，iftheeconomistswillpermitmetosayso，theprinciplethatalllabormustleaveasurplusismeaninglessaccordingtotheirtheory，andisnotsusceptibleofanydemonstration。"
　　（Proudhon[I73]）
　　Toprovethatalllabormustleaveasurplus，M。Proudhonpersonifiessociety;
　　heturnsitintoaperson，Society——asocietywhichisnotbyanymeansasocietyofpersons，sinceithasitslawapart，whichhavenothingincommonwiththepersonsofwhichsocietyiscomposed，andits"ownintelligence"，whichisnottheintelligenceofcommonmen，butanintelligencedevoidofcommonsense。M。Proudhonreproachestheeconomistswithnothavingunderstoodthepersonalityofthiscollectivebeing。WehavepleasureinconfrontinghimwiththefollowingpassagefromanAmericaneconomist，whoaccusestheeconomistsofjusttheopposite：
　　"Themoralentity——thegrammaticalbeingcalledanation，hasbeenclothedinattributesthathavenorealexistenceexceptintheimaginationofthosewhometamorphoseawordintoathing……Thishasgivenrisetomanydifficultiesandtosomedeplorablemisunderstandinginpoliticaleconomy。"
　　（Th。Cooper，LecturesontheElementsofPoliticalEconomy，Columbia1826）
　　[ThefirsteditionofthebookwaspublishedinColombiain1826。Asecond，enlargededitionappearedinLondonin1831。]
　　"Thisprincipleofsurpluslabor，"continuesM。Proudhon，"istrueofindividualsonlybecauseitemanatesfromsociety，whichthusconfersonthemthebenefitofitsownlaws。"
　　[I75]
　　DoesM。Proudhonmeantherebymerelythattheproductionofthesocialindividualexceedsthatoftheisolatedindividual？IsM。Proudhonreferringtothisexcessoftheproductionofassociatedindividualsoverthatofnon—associatedindividuals？Ifso，wecouldquoteforhimahundredeconomistswhohaveexpressedthissimpletruthwithoutanyofthemysticismwithwhichM。Proudhonsurroundshimself。This，forexample，iswhatMr。Sadlersays：
　　"Combinedlaborproducesresultswhichindividualexertioncouldneveraccomplish。Asmankind，therefore，multiplyinnumber，theproductsoftheirunitedindustrywouldgreatlyexceedtheamountofanymerearithmeticaladditioncalculatedonsuchanincrease……Inthemechanicalarts，aswellasinpursuitsofscience，amanmayachievemoreinaday……thanasolitary……individualcouldperforminhiswholelife……Geometrysays……
　　thatthewholeisonlyequaltothesumofallitsparts;asappliedtothesubjectbeforeus，thisaxiomwouldbefalse。Regardinglabor，thegreatpillarofhumanexistence，itmaybesaidthattheentireproductofcombinedexertionalmostinfinitelyexceedsallwhichindividualanddisconnectedeffortscouldpossiblyaccomplish。"
　　（T。Sadler，TheLawofPopulation，London1830）
　　[Vol。I，pp。83and84]
　　ToreturntoM。Proudhon。Surpluslabor，hesays，isexplainedbytheperson，Society。Thelifeofthispersonisguidedbylaws，theoppositeofthosewhichgoverntheactivitiesofmanasanindividual。Hedesirestoprovethisby"facts"。
　　"Thediscoveryofaneconomicprocesscanneverprovidetheinventorwithaprofitequaltothatwhichheprocuresforsociety……Ithasbeenremarkedthatrailwayenterprisesaremuchlessasourceofwealthforthecontractorsthanforthestate……Theaveragecostoftransportingcommoditiesbyroadis18centimespertonperkilometre，fromthecollectionofthegoodstotheirdelivery。Ithasbeencalculatedthatatthisrateanordinaryrailwayenterprisewouldnotobtain10percentnetprofit，aresultapproximatelyequaltothatofaroad—transportenterprise。Butletussupposethatthespeedofrailtransportcomparedwiththatofroadtransportisas4isto1。Sinceinsocietytimeisvalueitself，therailwaywould，pricesbeingequal，presentanadvantageof400percentoverroad—transport。
　　Yetthisenormousadvantage，veryrealforsociety，isfarfrombeingrealizedinthesameproportionforthecarrier，who，whilebestowinguponsocietyanextravalueof400percent，doesnotforhisownpartdraw10percent。
　　Tobringthematterhomestillmorepointedly，letussuppose，infact，thattherailwayputsupitsrateto25centimes，thecostofroadtransportremainingat18：itwouldinstantlyloseallitsconsignments。Senders，receivers，everybodywouldreturntothevan，totheprimitivewaggonifnecessary。Thelocomotivewouldbeabandoned。Asocialadvantageof400
　　percentwouldbesacrificedtoaprivatelossof35percent。Thereasonforthisiseasilygrasped：theadvantageresultingfromthespeedoftherailwayisentirelysocial，andeachindividualparticipatesinitonlyinaminuteproportion（itmustberememberedthatatthemomentwearedealingonlywiththetransportofgoods），whilethelossstrikestheconsumerdirectlyandpersonally。Asocialprofitequalto400representsfortheindividual，ifsocietyiscomposedonlyofamillionmen，fourten—thousandths;
　　whilealossof33percentfortheconsumerwouldsupposeasocialdeficitof33million。
　　（Proudhon[I75，76]）
　　Now，wemayevenoverlookthefactthatM。Proudhonexpressesaquadrupledspeedas400percentoftheoriginalspeed;butthatheshouldbringintorelationthepercentageofspeedandthepercentageofprofitandestablishaproportionbetweentworelationswhich，althoughmeasuredseparatelybypercentages，areneverthelessincommensuratewitheachother，istoestablishaproportionbetweenthepercentageswithoutreferencetodenominations。
　　Percentagesarealwayspercentages，10percentand400percentarecommensurable;theyaretoeachotheras10isto400。Therefore，concludesM。Proudhon，aprofitof10percentisworth40timeslessthanaquadrupledspeed。Tosaveappearances，hesaysthat，forsociety，timeismoney。Thiserrorarisesfromhisrecollectingvaguelythatthereisaconnectionbetweenlaborvalueandlabortime，andhehastenstoidentifylabortimewithtransporttime;thatis，heidentifiesthefewfiremen，driversandothers，whoselabortimeisactuallytransporttime，withthewholeofsociety。
　　Thusatoneblow，speedhasbecomecapital，andinthiscaseheisfullyrightinsaying："Aprofitof400percentwillbesacrificedtoalossof35percent。"Afterestablishingthisstrangepropositionasamathematician，hegivesustheexplanationofitasaneconomist。
　　"Asocialprofitequalto400representsfortheindividual，inasocietyofonlyamillionmen，4/10，000ths。"
　　Agreed;butwearedealingnotwith400，butwith400percent，andaprofitof400percentrepresentsfortheindividual400percent，neithermorenorless。Whateverbethecapital，thedividendswillalwaysbeintheratioof400percent。WhatdoesM。Proudhondo？Hetakespercentagesforcapital，and，asifhewereafraidofhisconfusionnotbeingmanifestenough，"pointed"enough，hecontinues：
　　"Alossof33percentfortheconsumerwouldsupposeasocialdeficitof33million。"
　　Alossof33percentfortheconsumerremainsalossof33percentforamillionconsumers。HowthencanM。Proudhonsaypertinentlythatthesocialdeficitinthecaseofa33percentlossamountsto33million，whenheknowsneitherthesocialcapitalnoreventhecapitalofasingleoneofthepersonsconcerned？ThusitwasnotenoughforM。Proudhontohaveconfusedcapitalwithpercentage;hesurpasseshimselfbyidentifyingthecapitalsunkinanenterprisewiththenumberofinterestedparties。
　　"Tobringthematterhomestillmorepointedlyletussupposeinfact"agivencapital。Asocialprofitof400percentdividedamongamillionparticipants，eachoftheminterestedtotheextentof1franc，wouldgive4francsprofitperhead——andnot0。0004，asM。Proudhonalleges。
　　Likewisealossof33percentforeachoftheparticipantsrepresentsasocialdeficitof330，000francsandnotof33million（100：33=1，000，000：330，000）。
　　M。Proudhon，preoccupiedwithhistheoryoftheperson，Society，forgetstodivideby100，whichentailsalossof330，000francs;but4
　　francsprofitperheadmake4millionfrancsprofitforsociety。Thereremainsforsocietyanetprofitof3，670，000francs。ThisaccuratecalculationprovespreciselythecontraryofwhatM。Proudhonwantedtoprove：namely，thattheprofitsandlossesofsocietyarenotininverseratiototheprofitsandlossesofindividuals。
　　Havingrectifiedthesesimpleerrorsofpurecalculation，letustakealookattheconsequenceswhichwewouldarriveat，ifweadmittedthisrelationbetweenspeedandcapitalinthecaseofrailways，asM。
　　Proudhongivesit——minusthemistakesincalculation。Letussupposethatatransportfourtimesasrapidcostsfourtimesasmuch;thistransportwouldnotyieldlessprofitthancartage，whichisfourtimesslowerandcostsaquartertheamount。Thus，ifcartagetakes18centimes，railtransportcouldtake72centimes。Thiswouldbe，accordingto"therigorofmathematics"，theconsequenceofM。Proudhon’ssuppositions——alwaysminushismistakesincalculation。Buthereheisallofasuddentellingustheif，insteadof72centimes，railtransporttakesonly25，itwouldinstantlyloseallitsconsignments。Decidedlyweshouldhavetogobacktothevan，totheprimitivewaggoneven。Only，ifwehaveanyadvicetogiveM。Proudhon，itisnottoforget，inhisProgrammeoftheProgressiveAssociation，todivideby100。But，alas！itisscarcelytobehopedthatouradvicewillbelistenedto，forM。Proudhonissodelightedwithhis"progressiveassociation"，thathecriesmostemphatically：
　　"IhavealreadyshowninChapterII，bythesolutionoftheantinomyofvalue，thattheadvantageofeveryusefuldiscoveryisincomparablylessfortheinventor，whateverhemaydo，thanforsociety。Ihavecarriedthedemonstrationinregardtothispointintherigorofmathematics！"
　　Letusreturntothefictionoftheperson，Society，afictionwhichhasnootheraimthanthatofprovingthissimpletruth——thatanewinventionwhichenablesagivenamountoflabortoproduceagreaternumberofcommodities，lowersthemarketablevalueoftheproduct。Society，then，makesaprofit，notbyobtainingmoreexchangevalues，butbyobtainingmorecommoditiesforthesamevalue。Asfortheinventor，competitionmakeshisprofitfallsuccessivelytothegenerallevelofprofits。HasM。Proudhonprovedthispropositionashewantedto？No。Thisdoesnotpreventhimfromreproachingtheeconomistswithfailuretoproveit。Toprovetohimonthecontrarythattheyhaveprovedit，weshallciteonlyRicardoandLauderdale——Ricardo，theheadoftheschoolwhichdeterminesvaluebylabortime，andLauderdale，oneofthemostuncompromisingdefendersofthedeterminationofvaluebysupplyanddemand。Bothhaveexpoundedthesameproposition：
　　"Byconstantlyincreasingthefacilityofproduction，weconstantlydiminishthevalueofsomeofthecommoditiesbeforeproduced，thoughbythesamemeanswenotonlyaddtothenationalriches，butalsotothepoweroffutureproduction……Assoonasbytheaidofmachinery，orbytheknowledgeofnaturalphilosophy，youobligenaturalagentstodotheworkwhichwasbeforedonebyman，theexchangeablevalueofsuchworkfallsaccordingly。If10menturnedacornmill，anditbediscoveredthatbytheassistanceofwind，orofwater，thelaborofthese10menmaybespared，theflourwhichistheproducepartlyoftheworkperformedbythemill，wouldimmediatelyfallinvalue，inproportiontothequantityoflaborsaved;andthesocietywouldbericherbythecommoditieswhichthelaborofthe10mencouldproduce，thefundsdestinedfortheirmaintenancebeinginnodegreeimpaired。"
　　（Ricardo[II59]）
　　Lauderdale，inhisturn，says：
　　Ineveryinstancewherecapitalissoemployedastoproduceaprofit，ituniformlyarises，either——fromitssupplantingaportionoflabor，whichwouldotherwisebeperformedbythehandofman;or——fromitsperformingaportionoflabor，whichisbeyondthereachofthepersonalexertionofmantoaccomplish。Thesmallprofitwhichtheproprietorsofmachinerygenerallyacquire，whencomparedwiththewagesoflabor，whichthemachinesupplants，mayperhapscreateasuspicionoftherectitudeofthisopinion。
　　Somefire—engines，forinstance，drawmorewaterfromacoalpitinonedaythancouldbeconveyedontheshoulderof300men，evenassistedbythemachineryofbuckets;andafire—engineundoubtedlyperformsitslaboratamuchsmallerexpensethantheamountofthewagesofthosewhoselaboritthussupplants。Thisis，intruth，thecasewithallmachinery。Allmachinesmustexecutethelaborthatwasantecedentlyperformedatacheaperratethanitcouldbedonebythehandofman……
　　Ifsuchaprivilegeisgivenfortheinventionofamachine，whichperforms，bythelaborofoneman，aquantityofworkthatusedtotakethelaboroffour;asthepossessionoftheexclusiveprivilegepreventsanycompetitionindoingthework，butwhatproceedsfromthelaboroftheworkmen，theirwages，aslongasthepatentcontinues，mustobviouslyformthemeasureofthepatentee’scharge;thatistosecureemployment，hehasonlytochargealittlelessthanthewagesofthelaborwhichthemachinesupplants。Butwhenthepatentexpires，othermachinesofthesamenaturearebroughtintocompetition;andthenhischargemustberegulatedonthesameprincipleaseveryother，accordingtotheabundanceofmachines……
　　Theprofitofcapitalemployed……，thoughitarisesfromsupplantinglabor，comestoberegulated，notbythevalueofthelaboritsupplantsbut，asinallothercases，bythecompetitionamongtheproprietorsofcapitalthatpresentsitselfforperformingtheduty，andthedemandforit。
　　[Pp。119，123，124，125，134]
　　Finally，then，solongastheprofitisgreaterthaninotherindustries，capitalwillbethrownintothenewindustryuntiltherateofprofitfallstothegenerallevel。
　　Wehavejustseenthattheexampleoftherailwaywasscarcelysuitedtothrowanylightonhisfictionoftheperson，Society。Nevertheless，M。Proudhonboldlyresumeshisdiscourse：
　　"Withthesepointsclearedup，nothingiseasierthantoexplainhowlabormustleaveasurplusforeachproducer。"
　　[I77]
　　Whatnowfollowsbelongstoclassicalantiquity。Itisapoeticalnarrativeintendedtorefreshthereaderafterthefatiguewhichtherigoroftheprecedingmathematicaldemonstrationsmusthavecausedhim。M。Proudhongivestheperson，Society，thenameofPrometheus，whosehighdeedsheglorifiesintheseterms：
　　Firstofall，Prometheusemergingfromthebosomofnatureawakenstolife，inadelightfulinertia，etc。，etc。Prometheussetstowork，andonthisfirstday，thefirstdayofthesecondcreation，Prometheus’product，thatis，hiswealth，hiswell—being，isequalto10。Onthesecondday，Prometheusdivideshislabor，andhisproductbecomesequalto100。Onthethirddayandoneachofthefollow—ingdays，Prometheusinventsmachines，discoversnewutil—itiesinbodies，newforcesinnature……Witheverystepofhisindustrialactivity，thereisanincreaseinthenumberofhisproducts，whichmarksanenhancementofhap—pinessforhiM。Andsince，afterall，toconsumeisforhimtoproduce，itisclearthateveryday’sconsumption，usinguponlytheproductofthedaybefore，leavesasurplusproductforthenextday。"
　　[I77—78]
　　ThisPrometheusofM。Proudhon’sisaqueercharacter，asweakinlogicasinpoliticaleconomy。SolongasPrometheusmerelyteachesusthedivisionoflabor，theapplicationofmachinery，theexploitationofnaturalforcesandscientificpower，multiplyingtheproductiveforcesofmenandgivingasurpluscomparedwiththeproduceoflaborinisolation，thisnewPrometheushasthemisfortuneonlyofcomingtoolate。ButthemomentPrometheusstartstalkingaboutproductionandconsumptionhebecomesreallyludicrous。Toconsume，forhim，istoproduce;heconsumesthenextdaywhatheproducedthedaybefore，sothatheisalwaysonedayinadvance;thisdayinadvanceishis"surpluslabor"。But，ifheconsumesthenextdaywhathehasproducedthedaybefore，hemust，onthefirstday，whichhadnodaybefore，havedonetwodays’workinordertobeonedayinadvancelateron。HowdidPrometheusearnthissurplusonthefirstday，whentherewasneitherdivisionoflabor，normachinery，norevenanyknowledgeofphysicalforcesotherthanfire？Thusthequestion，forallitsbeingcarriedback"tothefirstdayofthesecondcreation"，hasnotadvancedasinglestepforward。ThiswayofexplainingthingssavorsbothofGreekandofHebrew，itisatoncemysticalandallegorical。ItgivesM。Proudhonaprefectrighttosay：
　　"Ihaveprovedbytheoryandbyfactstheprinciplethatalllabormusthaveasurplus。"
　　The"facts"arethefamousprogressivecalculation;thetheoryisthemythofPrometheus。
　　"But，"continuesM。Proudhon，"thisprinciple，whilebeingascertainasanarithmeticalproposition，isasyetfarfrombeingrealizedbyeveryone。
　　Whereas，withtheprogressofcollectiveindustry，everyday’sindividuallaborproducesagreaterandgreaterproduct，andwhereastherefore，byanecessaryconsequence，theworkerwiththesamewageoughttobecomerichereveryday，thereactuallyexistestatesinsocietywhichprofitandotherswhichdecay。"
　　[I79—80]
　　In1770thepopulationoftheUnitedKingdomofGreatBritainwas15million，andtheproductivepopulationwas3million。Thescientificpowerofproductionequalledapopulationofabout12millionindividualsmore。Thereforetherewere，altogether，15millionofproductiveforces。Thustheproductivepowerwastothepopulationas1isto1;andthescientificpowerwastothemanualpoweras4isto1。
　　In1840thepopulationdidnotexceed30million：theproductivepopulationwas6million。Butthescientificpoweramountedto650million;
　　thatis，itwastothewholepopulationas21isto1，andtomanualpoweras108isto1。
　　InEnglishsocietytheworkingdaythusacquiredin70asurplusof2，700percentproductivity;thatis，in1840itproduced27timesasmuchasin1770。AccordingtoM。Proudhon，thefollowingquestionshouldberaised：whywasnottheEnglishworkerof184027timesasrichastheoneof1770？InraisingsuchaquestiononewouldnaturallybesupposingthattheEnglishcouldhaveproducedthiswealthwithoutthehistoricalconditionsinwhichitwasproduced，suchas：privateaccumulationofcapital，moderndivisionoflabor，automaticworkshops，anarchicalcompetition，thewagesystem——inshort，everythingthatisbaseduponclassantagonisM。
　　Now，thesewerepreciselythenecessaryconditionsofexistenceforthedevelopmentofproductiveforcesandofsurpluslabor。Therefore，toobtainthisdevelopmentofproductiveforcesandthissurpluslabor，therehadtobeclasseswhichprofitedandclasseswhichdecayed。
　　Whatthen，ultimately，isthisPrometheusresuscitatedbyM。Proudhon？
　　Itissociety，socialrelationsbasedonclassantagonisM。Theserelationsarenotrelationsbetweenindividualandindividual，butbetweenworkerandcapitalist，betweenfarmerandlandlord，etc。Wipeouttheserelationsandyouannihilateallsociety，andyourPrometheusisnothingbutaghostwithoutarmsorlegs;thatis，withoutautomaticworkshops，withoutdivisionoflabor——inaword，withouteverythingthatyougavehimtostartwithinordertomakehimobtainthissurpluslabor。
　　Inthen，intheory，itsufficedtointerpret，asM。Proudhondoes，theformulaofsurpluslaborintheequalitariansense，withouttakingintoaccounttheactualconditionsofproduction，itshouldsuffice，inpractice，toshareoutequallyamongtheworkersallthewealthatpresentacquired，withoutchanginginanywaythepresentconditionsofproduction。
　　Suchadistributionwouldcertainlynotassureahighdegreeofcomforttotheindividualparticipants。
　　ButM。Proudhonisnotsopessimisticasonemightthink。Asproportioniseverythingforhim，hehastoseeinhisfullyequippedPrometheus，thatis，inpresent—daysociety，thebeginningsofarealizationofhisfavoriteidea。
　　"Buteverywhere，too，theprogressofwealth，thatis，theproportionofvalues，isthedominantlaw;andwheneconomistsholdupagainstthecomplaintsofthesocialpartytheprogressivegrowthofthepublicwealth，andtheimprovedconditionsofeventhemostunfortunateclasses，theyunwittinglyproclaimatruthwhichisthecondemnationoftheirtheories。"
　　[I80]
　　Whatis，exactly，collectivewealth，publicfortune？Itisthewealthofthebourgeoisie——notthatofeachbourgeoisinparticular。Well，theeconomistshavedonenothingbutshowhow，intheexistingrelationsofproduction，thewealthofthebourgeoisiehasgrownandmustgrowstillfurther。Asfortheworkingclasses，itstillremainsaverydebatablequestionwhethertheirconditionhasimprovedasaresultoftheincreaseinso—calledpublicwealth。Ifeconomists，insupportoftheiroptimism，citetheexampleoftheEnglishworkersemployedinthecottonindustry，theyseetheconditionofthelatteronlyintheraremomentsoftradeprosperity。Thesemomentsofprosperityaretotheperiodsofcrisisandstagnationinthe"trueproportion"of3to10。Butperhapsalso，inspeakingofimprovement，theeconomistswerethinkingofthemillionsofworkerswhohadtoperishintheEastIndiessoastoprocureforthemillionandahalfworkersemployedinEnglandinthesameindustrythreeyears’prosperityoutoften。
　　Asforthetemporaryparticipationintheincreaseofpublicwealth，thatisadifferentmatter。Thefactoftemporaryparticipationisexplainedbythetheoryoftheeconomists。Itistheconfirmationofthistheoryandnotits"condemnation"，asM。Proudhon。Iftherewereanythingtobecondemned，itwouldsurelybethesystemofM。Proudhon，whowouldreducetheworker，aswehaveshown，totheminimumwage，inspiteoftheincreaseofwealth。Itisonlybyreducingtheworkertotheminimumwagethathewouldbeabletoapplythetrueproportionofvalues，of"valueconstituted"
　　bylabortime。Itisbecausewages，asaresultofcompetition，oscillatenowabove，nowbelow，thepriceoffoodnecessaryforthesustenanceoftheworker，thathecanparticipatetoacertainextentinthedevelopmentofcollectivewealth，andcanalsoperishfromwant。Thisisthewholetheoryoftheeconomistswhohavenoillusionsonthesubject。
　　Afterhislengthydigressionsofrailways，onPrometheus，andonthenewsocietytobereconstitutedon"constitutedvalue"，M。Proudhoncollectshimself;emotionoverpowershimandhecriedinfatherlytones：
　　"Ibeseechtheeconomiststoaskthemselvesforonemoment，inthesilenceoftheirhearts——farfromtheprejudicesthattroublethemandregardlessoftheemploymenttheyareengagedinorhopetoobtain，oftheintereststheysubserve，ortheapprobationtowhichtheyaspire，ofthehonorswhichnursetheirvanity——letthemsaywhetherbeforethisdaytheprinciplethatalllabormustleaveasurplusappearedtothemwiththischainofpremisesandconsequencesthatwehaverevealed。"
　　[I80]
　　NOTES
　　[1]ReferencestoquotationsfromworksbyEnglishauthorsaretotheeditionwhichMarxhimselfused。
　　[2]NOTEbyEngelsto1885Germanedition：Ricardo，asiswellknown，determinesthevalueofacommoditybythequantityoflabornecessaryforitsproduction。Owing，however，totheprevailingformofexchangeineverymodeofproductionbasedonproductionofcommodities，includingthereforethecapitalistmodeofproduction，thisvalueisnotexpresseddirectlyinquantitiesoflaborbutinquantitiesofsomeothercommodity。Thevalueofacommodityexpressedinaquantityofsomeothercommodity（whethermoneyornot）istermedbyRicardoitsrelativevalue。
　　[3]NOTEbyEngelstothe1885Germanedition：Thethesisthatthe"natural"，i。e。，normal，priceoflaborpowercoincideswiththewageminimum，i。e。，withtheequivalentinvalueofthemeansofsubsistenceabsolutelyindispensableforthelifeandprocreationoftheworker，wasfirstputforwardbymeinSketchesforaCritiqueofPoliticalEconomy（Deutsch—FranzosischeJahrbucher[Franco—GermanAnnual]，Paris1844）andinTheConditionoftheWorkingClassinEnglandin1844。Asseenhere，Marxatthattimeexceptedthethesis。Lassalletookitoverfrombothofus。Although，however，inrealitywageshaveaconstanttendencytoapproachtheminimum，theabovethesisisneverthelessincorrect。Thefactthatlaborisregularlyandontheaveragepaidbelowitsvaluecannotalteritsvalue。InCapital，Marxhasputtheabovethesisright（SectiononBuyingandSellingLaborofPower）andalso（Chapter25：TheGeneralLawofCapitalistAccumulation）analyzedthecircumstanceswhichpermitcapitalistproductiontodepressthepriceoflaborpowermoreandmorebelowitsvalue。
　　[4]InthecopyMarxpresentedtoN。Utinain1876afterthisword"labor"Marxadds"laborpower";thisadditionisfoundinthe1896Frenchedition。
　　[5]BACKGROUNDNOTE：TheTenHours’
　　Bill，whichappliedonlytowomenandchildren，waspassedbytheBritishParliamentonJune8，1847。Manymanufacturers，however，ignoredthelawinpractice。
　　[6]NOTEbyMarx：Mr。Bray’stheory，likealltheories，hasfoundsupporterswhohaveallowedthemselvestobedeludedbyappearances。Equitablelabor—exchangebazaarshavebeensetupinLondon，Sheffield，LeedsandmanyothertownsinEngland。Thesebazaarshaveallendedinscandalousfailuresafterhavingabsorbedconsiderablecapital。Thetasteforthemhasgoneforever。Youarewarned，M。Proudhon！
　　NOTEbyEngelstothe1885Germanedition：ItisknownthatProudhondidnottakethiswarningtoheart。In1849hehimselfmadeanattemptwithanewExchangeBankinParis。Thebank，however，failedbeforeithadgotgoingproperly：acourtcaseagainstProudhonhadtoservetocoveritscollapse。
　　chapter2
　　THEMETAPHYSICS
　　OFPOLITICALECONOMY
　　1。
　　THEMETHOD
　　Hereweare，rightinGermany！Weshallnowhavetotalkmetaphysicswhiletalkingpoliticaleconomy。AndinthisagainweshallbutfollowM。Proudhon’s"contradictions"。JustnowheforcedustospeakEnglish，tobecomeprettywellEnglishourselves。Nowthesceneischanging。M。Proudhonistransportingustoourdearfatherlandandisforcingus，whetherwelikeitornot，tobecomeGermanagain。
　　IftheEnglishmantransformsmenintohats，theGermantransformshatsintoideas。TheenglishmanisRicardo，richbankeranddistinguishedeconomist;theGermanisHegel，simpleprofessorattheUniversityofBerlin。
　　LouisXV，thelastabsolutemonarchandrepresentativeofthedecadenceofFrenchroyalty，hadattachedtohispersonaphysicianwhowashimselfFrance’sfirsteconomist。Thisdoctor，thiseconomist，representedtheimminentandcertaintriumphoftheFrenchbourgeoisie。DoctorQuesnaymadeascienceoutofpoliticaleconomy;hesummarizeditinhisfamousTablueaueconomique。Besidesthethousandandonecommentariesonthistablewhichhaveappeared，wepossessonebythedoctorhimself。Itisthe"analysisoftheeconomictable"，followedby"sevenimportantobservations"。
　　M。ProudhonisanotherDr。Quesnay。HeistheQuesnayofthemetaphysicsofpoliticaleconomy。
　　Nowmetaphysics——indeedallphilosophy——canbesummedup，accordingtoHegel，inmethod。Wemust，therefore，trytoelucidatethemethodofM。Proudhon，whichisatleastasfoggyastheEconomicTable。
　　Itisforthisreasonthatwearemakingsevenmoreorlessimportantobservations。
　　IfDr。Proudhonisnotpleasedwithourobservations，well，then，hewillhavetobecomeanAbbeBaydeauandgivethe"explanationoftheeconomico—metaphysicalmethod"himself。
　　FirstObservation"Wearenotgivingahistoryaccordingtotheorderintime，butaccordingtothesequenceofideas。Economicphasesorcategoriesareintheirmanifestationsometimescontemporary，sometimesinverted……Economictheorieshavenonethelesstheirlogicalsequenceandtheirserialrelationintheunderstanding：
　　itisthisorderthatweflatterour—selvestohavediscovered。"
　　（Proudhon，Vol。I，p。146）
　　M。ProudhonmostcertainlywantedtofrightentheFrenchbyflingingquasi—HegelianphrasesattheM。Sowehavetodealwithtwomen：firstlywithM。Proudhon，andthenwithHegel。HowdoesM。Proudhondistinguishhimselffromothereconomists？AndwhatpartdoesHegelplayinM。Proudhon’spoliticaleconomy？
　　Economistsexpresstherelationsofbourgeoisproduction，thedivisionoflabor，credit，money，etc。，asfixed，immutable，eternalcategories。
　　M。Proudhon，whohastheseready—madecategoriesbeforehim，wantstoexplaintoustheactofformation，thegenesisofthesecategories，principles，laws，ideas，thoughts。
　　Economistsexplainhowproductiontakesplaceintheabove—mentionedrelationsthemselvesareproduced，butwhattheydonotexplainishowtheserelationsthemselvesareproduced，thatis，thehistoricalmovementwhichgavethembirth。M。Proudhon，takingtheserelationsforprinciples，categories，abstractthoughts，hasmerelytoputintoorderthesethoughts，whicharetobefoundalphabeticallyarrangedattheendofeverytreatiseonpoliticaleconomy。Theeconomists’materialistheactive，energeticlifeofman;M。Proudhon’smaterialisthedogmasoftheeconomists。Butthemomentweceasetopursuethehistoricalmovementofproductionrelations，ofwhichthecategoriesarebutthetheoreticalexpression，themomentwewanttoseeinthesecategoriesnomorethanideas，spontaneousthoughts，independentofrealrelations，weareforcedtoattributetheoriginofthesethoughtstothemovementofpurereason。Howdoespure，eternal，impersonalreasongiverisetothesethoughts？Howdoesitproceedinordertoproducethem？
　　IfwehadM。Proudhon’sintrepidityinthematterofHegelianismweshouldsay：itisdistinguishedinitselffromitself。Whatdoesthismean？Impersonalreason，havingoutsideitselfneitherabaseonwhichitcanposeitself，noranobjecttowhichitcanopposeitself，norasubjectwithwhichitcancomposeitself，isforcedtoturnheadoverheels，inposingitself，opposingitselfandcomposingitself——position，opposition，composition。Or，tospeakGreek——wehavethesis，antithesis，andsynthesis。
　　ForthosewhodonotknowtheHegelianformula：affirmation，negationandnegationofthenegation。Thatiswhatlanguagemeans。ItiscertainlynotHebrew（withdueapologiesM。Proudhon）;butitisthelanguageofthispurereason，separatefromtheindividual。Insteadoftheordinaryindividualwithhisordinarymannerofspeakingandthinkingwehavenothingbutthisordinarymannerinitself——withouttheindividual。
　　Isitsurprisingthateverything，inthefinalabstraction——
　　forwehavehereanabstraction，andnotananalysis——presentsitselfasalogicalcategory？Isitsurprisingthat，ifyouletdroplittlebylittleallthatconstitutestheindividualityofahouse，leavingoutfirstofallthematerialsofwhichitiscomposed，thentheformthatdistinguishesit，youendupwithnothingbutabody;that，ifyouleaveoutofaccountthelimitsofthisbody;yousoonhavenothingbutaspace——thatif，finally，youleaveoutoftheaccountthedimensionsofthisspace，thereisabsolutelynothingleftbutpurequantity，thelogicalcategory？Ifweabstractthusfromeverysubjectalltheallegedaccidents，animateorinanimate，menorthings，wearerightinsayingthatinthefinalabstraction，theonlysubstanceleftisthelogicalcategory。Thusthemetaphysicianswho，inmakingtheseabstractions，thinktheyaremakinganalyses，andwho，themoretheydetachthemselvesfromthings，imaginethemselvestobegettingallthenearertothepointofpenetratingtotheircore——
　　thesemetaphysiciansinturnarerightinsayingthatthingsherebelowareembroideriesofwhichthelogicalcategoriesconstitutethecanvas。
　　ThisiswhatdistinguishesthephilosopherfromtheChristian。TheChristian，inspiteoflogic，hasonlyoneincarnationoftheLogos;thephilosopherhasneverfinishedwithincarnations。Ifallthatexists，allthatlivesonland，andunderwater，canbereducedbyabstractiontoalogicalcategory——ifthewholerealworldcanbedrownedthusinaworldofabstractions，intheworldoflogicalcategories——whoneedbeastonishedatit？
　　Allthatexists，allthatlivesonlandandunderwater，existsandlivesonlybysomekindofmovement。Thus，themovementofhistoryproducessocialrelations;industrialmovementgivesusindustrialproducts，etc。
　　Justasbydintofabstractionwehavetransformedeverythingintoalogicalcategory，soonehasonlytomakeanabstractionofeverycharacteristicdistinctiveofdifferentmovementstoattainmovementinitsabstractcondition——purelyformalmovement，thepurelylogicalformulaofmovement。Ifonefindsinlogicalcategoriesthesubstanceofalltings，oneimaginesonehasfoundinthelogicalformulaofmovementtheabsolutemethod，whichnotonlyexplainsallthings，butalsoimpliesthemovementofthings。
　　ItisofthisabsolutemethodthatHegelspeaksintheseterms：
　　"Methodistheabsolute，unique，supreme，infiniteforce，whichnoobjectcanresist;itisthetendencyofreasontofinditselfagain，torecognizeitselfineveryobject。"
　　（Logic，Vol。III）[29]
　　Allthingsbeingreducedtoalogicalcategory，andeverymovement，everyactofproduction，tomethod，itfollowsnaturallythateveryaggregateofproductsandproduction，ofobjectsandofmovement，canbereducedtoaformofappliedmetaphysics。WhatHegelhasdoneforreligion，law，etc。，M。Proudhonseekstodoforpoliticaleconomy。
　　Sowhatisthisabsolutemethod？Theabstractionofmovement。
　　Whatistheabstractionofmovement？Movementinabstractcondition。Whatismovementinabstractcondition？Thepurelylogicalformulaofmovementorthemovementofpurereason。Whereindoesthemovementofpurereasonconsist？Inposingitself，opposingitself，composingitself;informulatingitselfasthesis，antithesis，synthesis;or，yet，inaffirmingitself，negatingitself，andnegatingitsnegation。
　　Howdoesreasonmanagetoaffirmitself，toposeitselfinadefinitecategory？Thatisthebusinessofreasonitselfandofitsapologists。
　　Butonceithasmanagedtoposeitselfasathesis，thisthesis，thisthought，opposedtoitself，splitsupintotwocontradictorythoughts——thepositiveandthenegative，theyesandno。Thestrugglebetweenthesetwoantagonisticelementscomprisedintheantithesisconstitutesthedialecticalmovement。Theyesbecomingno，thenobecomingyes，theyesbecomingbothyesandno，thenobecomingbothnoandyes，thecontrariesbalance，neutralize，paralyzeeachother。Thefusionofthesetwocontradictorythoughtsconstitutesanewthought，whichisthesynthesisoftheM。Thisthoughtsplitsuponceagainintotwocontradictorythoughts，whichinturnfuseintoanewsynthesis。Ofthistravailisbornagroupofthoughts。
　　Thisgroupofthoughtsfollowsthesamedialecticmovementasthesimplecategory，andhasacontradictorygroupasantithesis。Ofthesetwogroupsofthoughtsisbornanewgroupofthoughts，whichistheantithesisofthem。
　　Justasfromthedialecticmovementofthesimplecategoriesisbornthegroup，sofromthedialecticmovementofthegroupsisborntheseries，andfromthedialecticmovementoftheseriesisborntheentiresystem。
　　Applythismethodtothecategoriesofpoliticaleconomyandyouhavethelogicandmetaphysicsofpoliticaleconomy，or，inotherwords，youhavetheeconomiccategoriesthateverybodyknows，translatedintoalittle—knownlanguagewhichmakesthemlookasiftheyhadneverblossomedforthinanintellectofpurereason;somuchdothesecategoriesseemtoengenderoneanother，tobelinkedupandintertwinedwithoneanotherbytheveryworkingofthedialecticmovement。Thereadermustnotgetalarmedatthesemetaphysicswithalltheirscaffoldingofcategories，groups，series，andsystems。M。Proudhon，inspiteofallthetroublehehastakentoscaletheheightsofthesystemofcontradictions，hasneverbeenabletoraisehimselfabovethefirstworungsofsimplethesisandantithesis;andeventhesehehasmountedonlytwice，andononeofthesetwooccasionshefelloverbackwards。
　　UptonowwehaveexpoundedonlythedialecticsofHegel。WeshallseelaterhowM。Proudhonhassucceededinreducingittothemeanestproportions。
　　Thus，forHegel，allthathashappenedandisstillhappeningisonlyjustwhatishappeninginhisownmind。Thusthephilosophyofhistoryisnothingbutthehistoryofphilosophy，ofhisownphilosophy。Thereisnolongera"historyaccordingtotheorderintime"，thereisonly"thesequenceofideasintheunderstanding"。Hethinksheisconstructingtheworldbythemovementofthought，whereasheismerelyreconstructingsystematicallyandclassifyingbytheabsolutemethodofthoughtswhichareinthemindsofall。
　　SecondObservationEconomiccategoriesareonlythetheoreticalexpressions，theabstractionsofthesocialrelationsofproduction，M。Proudhon，holdingthisupsidedownlikeatruephilosopher，seesinactualrelationsnothingbuttheincarnationoftheprinciples，ofthesecategories，whichwereslumbering——soM。Proudhonthephilosophertellsus——inthebosomofthe"impersonalreasonofhumanity"。
　　M。Proudhontheeconomistsunderstandsverywellthatmenmakecloth，linen，orsilkmaterialsindefiniterelationsofproduction。Butwhathehasnotunderstoodisthatthesedefinitesocialrelationsarejustasmuchproducedbymenaslinen，flax，etc。Socialrelationsarecloselyboundupwithproductiveforces。Inacquiringnewproductiveforcesmenchangetheirmodeofproduction;andinchangingtheirmodeofproduction，inchangingthewayofearningtheirliving，theychangealltheirsocialrelations。Thehand—millgivesyousocietywiththefeudallord;thesteam—millsocietywiththeindustrialcapitalist。
　　Thesamemenwhoestablishtheirsocialrelationsinconformitywiththematerialproductivity，producealsoprinciples，ideas，andcategories，inconformitywiththeirsocialrelations。
　　Thustheideas，thesecategories，areaslittleeternalastherelationstheyexpress。Theyarehistoricalandtransitoryproducts。
　　Thereisacontinualmovementofgrowthinproductiveforces，ofdestructioninsocialrelations，offormationinideas;theonlyimmutablethingistheabstractionofmovement——morsimmortalis。
　　[Ed：MarxquotesthesewordsfromthefollowingpassageofLucretius’spoemOnTheNatureofThings（BookIII，line869）："mortalemvitammarsimmortalisademit"（"immoratldeathhathtakenawaymorallife"）。]
　　ThirdObservationTheproductionrelationsofeverysocietyformawhole。M。Proudhonconsiderseconomicrelationsassomanysocialphases，engenderingoneanother，resultingonefromtheotherliketheantithesisfromthethesis，andrealizingintheirlogicalsequencetheimpersonalreasonofhumanity。