首页 >出版文学> THE POVERTY OF PHILOSOPHY>第5章
  WhenM。Proudhonwantstobeaneconomist,andtoabandonforamomentthe"evolutionofideasinserialrelationintheunderstanding",thenhegoesanddrawseruditionfromAdamSmith,fromatimewhentheautomaticworkshopwasonlyjustcomingintoexistence。Indeed,whatadifferencebetweenthedivisionoflaborasitexistedinAdamSmith’sdayandasweseeitintheautomaticworkshop!Inordertomakethisproperlyunderstood,weneedonlyquoteafewpassagesfromDr。Ure’sThePhilosophyofManufactures。
  "WhenAdamSmithwrotehisimmortalelementsofeconomics,automaticmachinerybeinghardlyknown,hewasproperlyledtoregardthedivisionoflaborasthegrandprincipleofmanufacturingimprovement;andheshowed,intheexampleofpin—making,howeachhandicraftsman,beingtherebyenabledtoperfecthimselfbypracticeinonepoint,becameaquickerandcheaperworkman。Ineachbranchofmanufacturehesawthatsomepartswere,onthatprinciple,ofeasyexecution,likethecuttingofpinwiresintouniformlengths,andsomewerecomparativelydifficult,liketheformationandfixationoftheirheads;andthereforeheconcludedthattoeachaworkmanofappropriatevalueandcostwasnaturallyassigned。Thisappropriationformstheveryessenceofthedivisionoflabor……
  "ButwhatwasinDr。Smith’stimeatopicofusefulillus—tration,cannotnowbeusedwithoutriskofmisleadingthepublicmindastotherightprincipleofmanufacturingindustry。Infact,thedivision,orratheradaptationoflabortothedifferenttalentsofmen,islittlethoughtofinfactoryemployment。Onthecontrary,whereveraprocessrequiresapeculiardexterityandsteadinessofhand,itiswithdrawnassoonaspossiblefromthecunningworkman,whoispronetoirregularitiesofmanykinds,anditisplacedinchargeofapeculiarmechanism,soself—regulating,thatachildmaysuperintendit。
  "Theprincipleofthefactorysystemthenis,tosubstitutemechanicalscienceforhandskill,andthepartitionofaprocessintoitsessentialconstituents,forthedivisionorgradationoflaboramongartisans。Onthehandicraftplan,labormoreorlessskilled,wasusuallythemostexpensiveelementofproduction……butontheautomaticplan,skilledlaborgetsprogressivelysuperseded,andwill,eventually,bereplacedbymereoverlookersofmachines。
  "Bytheinfirmityofhumannatureithappens,thatthemoreskillfultheworkman,themoreself—willedandintractableheisapttobecome,and,ofcourse,thelessfitacompon—entofamechanicalsystem,inwhich,byoccassionalirreg—ularities,hemaydogreatdamagetothewhole。Thegrandobjectthereforeofthemodernmanufactureris,throughtheunionofcapitalandscience,toreducethetaskofhisworkpeopletotheexerciseofvigilanceanddexterity——faculties,whenconcentratedtooneprocess,speedilybroughttoperfectionintheyoung。
  "Onthegradationsystem,amanmustserveanapprenticeshipofmanyyearsbeforehishandandeyebecomeskilledenoughforcertainmechanicalfeats;butonthesystemofdecompos—ingaprocessintoitsconstituents,andembodyingeachpartinanautomaticmachine,apersonofcommoncareandcapa—citymaybeentrustedwithanyofthesaidelementarypartsafterashortprobation,andmaybetransferredfromonetoanother,onanyemergency,atthediscretionofthemaster。Suchtranslationsareutterlyatvariancewiththeoldprac—ticeofthedivisionoflabor,whichfixedonemantoshapingtheheadofapin,anothertoshapingtheheadofapin,andanothertosharpeningitspoint,withthemostirksomeandspirit—wastinguniformity,forawholelife……
  "Butontheequalizationplanofself—actingmachines,theoperativeneedstocallhisfacultiesonlyintoagreeableexercise……Ashisbusinessconsistsinendingtheworkofawell—regulatedmechanism,hecanlearnitinashortperiod;andwhenhetransfershisservices,fromonemachinetoanother,hevarieshistask,andenlargeshisviews,bythinkingonthosegeneralcombinationswhichresultfromhisandhiscompanions’labors。
  Thus,thatcrampingofthefac—ulties,thatnarrowingofthemind,thatstuntingoftheframe,whichwereascribed,andnotunjustly,bymoralwriters,tothedivisionoflabor,cannot,incommoncircum—stances,occurundertheequabledistributionofindustry……
  "Itis,infact,theconstantaimandtendencyofeveryimprovementinmachinerytosupersedehumanlaboraltogether,ortodiminishitscost,bysubstitutingtheindustryofwomenandchildrenforthatofmen;ofthatofordinarylaborersfortrainedartisans……Thistendencytoemploymerelychildrenwithwatchfuleyesandnimblefingers,insteadofjourneymenoflongexperience,showshowthescholasticdogmaofthedivisionoflaborintodegreesofskillhasbeenexplodedbyourenlightenedmanufacturers。"
  (AndreUre,Philosophiedesmanufacturesoueconomieindustrielle,Vol。I,Chap。1[pp。34—35])
  Whatcharacterizesthedivisionoflaborinsidemodernsocietyisthatitengendersspecializedfunctions,specialists,andwiththemcraft—idiocy。
  "Wearestruckwithadmiration,"saysLemontey,"whenweseeamongtheAncientsthesamepersondistinguishinghimselftoahighdegreeasphilosopher,poet,orator,historian,priest,administrator,generalofanarmy。Oursoulsareappalledatthesightofsovastadomain。Eachoneofusplantshishedgeandshutshimselfupinhisenclosure。Idonotknowwhetherbythisparcellationthefieldisenlarged,butIdoknowthatmanisbelittled。"
  Whatcharacterizesthedivisionoflaborintheautomaticworkshopisthatlaborhastherecompletelylostitsspecializedcharacter。Butthemomenteveryspecialdevelopmentstops,theneedforuniversality,thetendencytowardsanintegraldevelopmentoftheindividualbeginstobefelt。Theautomaticworkshopwipesoutspecialistsandcraft—idiocy。
  M。Proudhon,nothavingunderstoodeventhisonerevolutionarysideoftheautomaticworkshop,takesastepbackwardandproposestotheworkerthathemakenotonlythe12thpartofapin,butsuccessivelyall12partsofit。Theworkerwouldthusarriveattheknowledgeandtheconsciousnessofthepin。ThisisM。Proudhon’ssyntheticlabor。Nobodywillcontestthattomakeamovementforwardandanothermovementbackwardistomakeasyntheticmovement。
  Tosumup,M。Proudhonhasnotgonefurtherthanthepetty—bourgeoisideal。Andtorealizethisideal,hecanthinkofnothingbetterthantotakeusbacktothejourneymanor,atmost,tothemastercraftsmanoftheMiddleAges。Itisenough,hesayssomewhereinhisbook,tohavecreatedamasterpieceonceinone’slife,tohavefeltoneselfjustoncetobeaman。Isnotthis,informasincontent,themasterpiecedemandedbythetradeguildoftheMiddleAges?
  3。
  COMPETITIONANDMONOPOLY
  "CompetitionisasessentialtoGoodsideoflaborasdivision……Itiscompetitionnecessaryfortheadventofequality。"
  [I186,188]
  "TheprincipleisthenegationofBadsideofitself。Itsmostcertainresultcompetitionistoruinthosewhomitdragsinitstrain。"
  [I185]
  "ThedrawbackwhichfollowGeneralreflectioninitswake,justasthegooditprovides……bothflowlogicallyfromtheprinciple。"
  [I185—86]
  "Toseektheprincipleofaccommodation,whichmustbederivedfromalawsuperiortolibertyitself。"
  [I185]
  Variant
  Problemtobesolved"Therecan,therefore,benoquestionhereofdestroyingcompetition,athingasimpos—
  sibletodestroyasliberty;wehaveonlytofinditsequilibriumIwouldbereadytosayitspolice。"
  [I223]M。Proudhonbeginsbydefendingtheeternalnecessityofcompetitionagainstthosewhowishtoreplaceitbyemulation[Engels:TheFourierists]。
  Thereisno"purposelessemulation",andas"theobjectofeverypassionisnecessarilyanalogoustothepassionitself——awomanforthelover,powerfortheambitious,goldforthemiser,agarlandforthepoet——
  theobjectofindus—trialemulationisnecessarilyprofit。Emulationisnothingbutcompetitionitself。"
  [I187]
  Competitionisemulationwithaviewtoprofit。Isindustrialemulationnecessarilyemulationwithaviewtoprofit,thatis,competition??M。
  Proudhonprovesitbyaffirmingit。Wehaveseenthat,forhim,toaffirmistoprove,justastosupposeistodeny。
  Iftheimmediateobjectoftheloveristhewoman,theimmediateobjectofindustrialemulationistheproductandnottheprofit。
  Competitionisnotindustrialemulation,itiscommercialemulation。
  Inourtimeindustrialemulationexistsonlyinviewofcommerce。Thereareevenphasesintheeconomiclifeofmodernnationswheneverybodyisseizedwithasortofcrazeformakingprofitwithoutproducing。Thisspeculationcraze,whichrecursperiodically,laysbarethetruecharacterofcompetition,whichseekstoescapetheneedforindustrialemulation。
  Ifyouhadtoldanartisanofthe14thcenturythattheprivilegesandthewholefeudalorganizationofindustryweregoingtobeabrogatedinfavorofindustrialemulation,calledcompetition,hewouldhaverepliedthattheprivilegesofthevariouscorporations,guildsandfraternitieswereorganizedcompetition。M。Proudhondoesnotimposeuponthiswhenheaffirmsthat"emulationisnothingbutcompetitionitself"。
  "DecreethatfromthefirstofJanuary1847,laborandwagesshallbeguaranteedtoeverybody:immediatelyanimmenserelaxationwillsucceedthehightensionofindustry。"
  [I189]
  Insteadofasupposition,anaffirmationandanegation,wehavenowadecreethatM。Proudhonissuespurposelytoprovethenecessityofcompetition,itseternityasacategory,etc。
  Ifweimaginethatdecreesareallthatisneededtogetawayfromcompetition,weshallnevergetawayfromit。Andifwegosofarastoproposetoabolishcompetitionwhileretainingwages,weshallbeproposingnonsensebyroyaldecree。Butnationsdonotproceedbyroyaldecree。Beforeframingsuchordinances,theymustatleasthavechangedfromtoptobottomtheconditionsoftheirindustrialandpoliticalexistence,andconsequentlytheirwholemannerofbeing。
  M。Proudhonwillreply,withhisimperturbableassurance,thatitisthehypothesisof"atransformationofournaturewithouthistoricalantecedents",andthathewouldberightin"excludingisfromthediscussion",weknownotinvirtueofwhichordinance。
  M。Proudhondoesnotknowthatallhistoryisnothingbutacontinuoustransformationofhumannature。
  "Letussticktothefacts。TheFrenchRevolutionwasmadeforindustriallibertyasmuchasforpoliticalliberty;andalthoughFrance,in1789,hadnotperceived——letussayitopenly——alltheconsequencesoftheprinciplewhosereal—izationitdemanded,itwasmistakenneitherinitswishesnorinitsexpectations。Whoeverattemptstodenythisloses,inmyview,therighttocriticisM。Iwillneverdisputewithanadversarywhoputsasprinciplethespont—aneouserrorof25millionmen……
  "Whythen,ifcompetitionhadnotbeenaprincipleofsocialeconomy,adecreeoffate,anecessityofthehumansoul,why,insteadofabolishingcorporations,guildsandbrother—hoods,didnobodythinkratherofrepairingthewhole??"
  [I191,192]
  So,sincetheFrenchofthe18thcenturyabolishedcorporations,guilds,andfraternitiesinsteadofmodifyingthem,theFrenchofthe19thcenturymustmodifycompetitioninsteadofabolishingit。SincecompetitionwasestablishedinFranceinthe18thcenturyasaresultofhistoricalneeds,thiscompetitionmustnotbedestroyedinthe19thcenturybecauseofotherhistoricalneeds。M。Proudhon,notunderstandingthattheestablishmentofcompetitionwasboundupwiththeactualdevelopmentofthemenofthe18thcentury,makesofcompetitionanecessityofthehumansoul,inpartibusinfidelium[ed:literally,"territoryoftheinfidels";here,meaning,"beyondtherealmofreality"。]WhatwouldhehavemadeofthegreatColbertforthe17thcentury??
  Aftertherevolutioncomesthepresentstateofaffairs。M。Proudhonequallydrawsfactsfromittoshowtheeternityofcompetition,byprovingthatallindustriesinwhichthiscategoryisnotyetsufficientlydeveloped,asinagriculture,areinastateofinferiorityanddecrepitude。
  Tosaythatthereareindustrieswhichhavenotyetreachedthestageofcompetition,thatothersgainsarebelowthelevelofbourgeoisproduction,isdrivelwhichgivesnottheslightestproofoftheeternityofcompetition。
  AllM。Proudhon’slogicamountstoisthis:competitionisasocialrelationinwhichwearenowdevelopingourproductiveforces。Tothistruth,hegivesnologicaldevelopment,butonlyforms,oftenverywelldeveloped,whenhesaysthatcompetitionisindustrialemulation,thepresent—daymodeoffreedom,responsibilityinlabor,constitutionofvalue,aconditionfortheadventofequality,aprincipleofsocialeconomy,adecreeoffate,anecessityofthehumansoul,aninspirationofeternaljustice,libertyindivision,divisiononliberty,aneconomiccategory。
  "Competitionandassociationsupporteachother。Farfromexcludingeachothertheyarenotevendivergent。WhoeversayscompetitionalreadysupposesacommonaiM。Competitionisthereforenotegoism,andthemostdeplorableerrorcom—mittedbysocialismistohaveregardeditastheoverthrowofsociety。"
  [I223]
  Whoeversayscompetitionsayscommonaim,andthatproves,ontheonehand,thatcompetitionisassociation;ontheother,thatcompetitionisnotegoisM。Andwhoeversaysegoism,doeshenotsaycommonaim??Everyegoismoperatesinsocietyandbythefactofsociety。Henceitpresupposessociety,thatistosay,commonaims,commonneeds,commonmeansofproduction,etc。,etc。Isit,then,bemerechancethatthecompetitionandassociationwhichtheSocialiststalkaboutarenotevendivergent??
  Socialistsknowwellenoughthatpresent—daysocietyisfoundedoncompetition。Howcouldtheyaccusecompetitionofoverthrowingpresent—daysocietywhichtheywanttooverthrowthemselves??Andhowcouldtheyaccusecompetitionofoverthrowingthesocietytocome,inwhichtheysee,onthecontrary,theoverthrowofcompetition??
  M。Proudhonsays,lateron,thatcompetitionistheoppositeofmonopoly,andconsequentlycannotbetheoppositeofassociation。
  Feudalismwas,fromitsorigins,opposedtopatriarchalmonarchy;
  itwasthusnotopposedtocompetition,whichwasnotyetinexistence。
  Doesitfollowthatcompetitionisnotopposedtofeudalism??
  Inactualfact,society,associationaredenominationswhichcanbegiventoeverysociety,tofeudalsocietyaswellastobourgeoissocietywhichisassociationfoundedoncompetition。HowthencantherebeSocialists,who,bythesinglewordassociation,thinktheycanrefutecompetition??AndhowcanM。Proudhonhimselfwishtodefendcompetitionagainstsocialismbydescribingcompetitionbythesinglewordassociation??
  AllwehavejustsaidmakesupthebeautifulsideofcompetitionasM。Proudhonseesit。Nowletuspassontotheuglyside,thatisthenegativeside,ofcompetition,itsdrawbacks,itsdestructive,subversiveelements,itsinjuriousqualities。
  ThereissomethingdismalaboutthepictureM。Proudhondrawsofit。
  Competitionengendersmisery,itfomentscivilwar,it"changesnaturalzones",mixesupnationalities,causestroubleinfamilies,corruptsthepublicconscience,"subvertsthenotionofequity,ofjustice",ofmorality,andwhatisworse,itdestroysfree,honesttrade,anddoesnotevengiveinexchangesyntheticvalue,fixed,honestprice。Itdisillusionseveryone,eveneconomists。Itpushesthingssofarastodestroyitsveryself。
  AfteralltheillM。Proudhonsaysofit,cantherebefortherelationsofbourgeoissociety,foritsprinciplesanditsillusions,amoredisintegrating,moredestructiveelementthancompetition??
  Itmustbecarefullynotedthatcompetitionalwaysbecomesthemoredestructiveforbourgeoisrelationsinproportionasiturgesonafeverishcreationofnewproductiveforces,thatis,ofthematerialconditionsofanewsociety。Inthisrespectatleast,thebadsideofcompetitionwouldhaveitsgoodpoints。
  "Competitionasaneconomicpositionorphase,consideredinitsorigin,isthenecessaryresult……ofthetheoryofthereductionofgeneralexpenses。"
  [I235]
  ForM。Proudhon,thecirculationofthebloodmustbeaconsequenceofHarvey’stheory。
  "Monopolyistheinevitableendofcompetition,whichengen—dersitbyacontinualnegationofitself。Thisgenerationofmonopolyisinitselfajustificationofit……
  "Monopolyisthenaturaloppositeofcompetition……butassoonascompetitionisnecessary,itimpliestheideaofmonopoly,sincemonopolyis,asitwere,theseatofeachcompetingindividuality。"
  [I236,237]
  WerejoicewithM。Proudhonthathecanforonceatleastproperlyapplyhisformulatothesisandantithesis。Everyoneknowsthatmodernmonopolyisengenderedbycompetitionitself。
  Asforthecontent,M。Proudhonclingstopoeticimages。Competitionmade"ofeverysubdivisionoflaborasortofsovereigntyinwhicheachindividualstoodwithhispowerandhisindependence"。Monopolyis"theseatofeverycompetingindividuality"。Thesovereigntyisworthatleastasmuchastheseat。
  M。Proudhontalksofnothingbutmodernmonopolyengenderedbycompetition。Butweallknowthatcompetitionwasengenderedbyfeudalmonopoly。Thuscompetitionwasoriginallytheoppositeofmonopolyandnotmonopolytheoppositeofcompetition。Sothatmodernmonopolyisnotasimpleantithesis,itisonthecontrarythetruesynthesis。
  THESIS:Feudalmonopoly,beforecompetition。
  ANTITHESIS:Competition。
  SYNTHESIS:Modernmonopoly,whichisthenegationoffeudalmonopoly,insofarasitimpliesthesystemofcompetition,andthenegationofcompetitioninsofarasitismonopoly。
  Thusmodernmonopoly,bourgeoismonopoly,issyntheticmonopoly,thenegationofthenegation,theunityofopposites。Itismonopolyinthepure,normal,rationalstate。
  M。Proudhonisincontradictionwithhisownphilosophywhenheturnsbourgeoismonopolyintomonopolyinthecrude,primitive,contradictory,spasmodicstate。M。Rossi,whomM。Proudhonquotesseveraltimesonthesubjectofmonopoly,seemstohaveabettergraspofthesyntheticcharacterofbourgeoismonopoly。InhisCoursd’economiepolitique,hedistinguishesbetweenartificialmonopoliesandnaturalmonopolies。Feudalmonopolies,hesays,areartificial,thatis,arbitrary;bourgeoismonopoliesarenatural,thatis,rational。
  Monopolyisagoodthing,reasonsM。Proudhon,sinceitisaneconomiccategory,anemanation"fromtheimpersonalreasonofhumanity"。
  Competition,again,isagoodthingsinceitalsoisaneconomiccategory。
  Butwhatisnotgoodistherealityofmonopolyandtherealityofcompetition。
  Whatisstillworseisthatcompetitionandmonopolydevoureachother。
  Whatistobedone??Lookforthesynthesisofthesetwoeternalthoughts,wrestitfromthebosomofGod,whereishasbeendepositedfromtimeimmemorial。
  Inpracticallifewefindnotonlycompetition,monopolyandtheantagonismbetweenthem,butalsothesynthesisofthetwo,whichisnotaformula,butamovement。Monopolyproducescompetition,competitionproducesmonopoly。Monopolistsaremadefromcompetition;competitorsbecomemonopolists。
  Ifthemonopolistsrestricttheirmutualcompetitionbymeansofpartialassociations,competitionincreasesamongtheworkers;andthemorethemassoftheproletariansgrowsasagainstthemonopolistsofonenation,themoredesperatecompetitionbecomesbetweenthemonopolistsofdifferentnations。Thesynthesisisofsuchacharacterthatmonopolycanonlymaintainitselfbycontinuallyenteringintothestruggleofcompetition。
  Tomakethedialecticaltransitiontothetaxeswhichcomeaftermonopoly,M。Proudhontalkstousaboutthesocialgeniuswhich,afterzigzaggingintrepidlyonward,,"afterstridingwithajauntystep,withoutrepentingandwithoutblting,reachesthecornerofmonopoly,castsbackwardamelancholyglance,and,afterprofoundreflection,assailsalltheobjectsofproductionwithtaxes,andcreatesawholeadministrativeorganization,inorderthatallemploymentsbegiventotheproletariatandpaidbythemenofmonopoly。"
  [I284,285]
  Whatcanwesayofthisgenius,which,whilefasting,walksaboutinazigzag??Andwhatcanwesayofthiswalkingwhichhasnootherobjectinviewthanthatofdestroyingthebourgeoisbytaxes,whereastaxesaretheverymeansofgivingthebourgeoisthewherewithaltopreservethemselvesastherulingclass??
  MerelytogiveaglimpseofthemannerinwhichM。Proudhontreatseconomicdetails,itsufficestosaythat,accordingtohim,thetaxonconsumptionwasestablishedwithaviewtoequality,andtorelievetheproletariat。
  Thetaxonconsumptionhasassumeditstruedevelopmentonlysincetheriseofthebourgeoisie。Inthehandsofindustrialcapital,thatis,ofsoberandeconomicalwealth,whichmaintains,reproduces,andincreasesitselfbythedirectexploitationoflabor,thetaxonconsumptionwasameansofexploitingthefrivolous,gay,prodigalwealthofthefinelordswhodidnothingbutconsume,JamesSteuartclearlydevelopedthisoriginalpurposeofthetaxonconsumptioninhisRecherchesdesprincipesdel’economiepolitique,whichhepublished10yearsbeforeAdamSmith。
  "Underthepuremonarchy,theprinceseemsjealous,asitwere,ofgrowingwealth,andthereforeimposestaxesuponpeoplewhoaregrowingricher。Underthelimitedgovernmenttheyarecalculatedchieflytoaffectthosewhofromricharegrowingpoorer。Thusthemonarchimposesataxuponindustry,whereeveryoneisratedinproportiontothegainheissupposedtomakebyhisprofession。Thepoll—taxandtaillearelikewiseproportionedtothesupposedopulenceofeveryonelibeltothem……
  Inlimitedgovernments,impositionsaremoregenerallylaiduponconsumption。"
  [II190—91]
  Asforthelogicalsequenceoftaxes,ofthebalanceoftrade,ofcredit——intheunderstandingofM。Proudhon——wecouldonlyremarkthattheEnglishbourgeoisie,onattainingitspoliticalconstitutionunderWilliamofOrange,createdallatonceanewsystemoftaxes,publiccredit,andthesystemofprotectiveduties,assoonasitwasinapositionfreelytodevelopitsconditionsofexistence。
  ThisbriefsummarywillsufficetogivethereaderatrueideaofM。Proudhon’slubricationsonthepoliceorontaxes,thebalanceoftrade,credit,communism,andpopulation。Wedefythemostindulgentcriticismtotreatthesechaptersseriously。
  4。
  PROPERTYORGROUNDRENT
  Ineachhistoricalepoch,propertyhasdevelopeddifferentlyandunderasetofentirelydifferentsocialrelations。thustodefinebourgeoispropertyisnothingelsethantogiveanexpositionofallthesocialrelationsofbourgeoisproduction。
  Totrytogiveadefinitionofpropertyasofanindependentrelation,acategoryapart,anabstractandeternalidea,canbenothingbutanillusionofmetaphysicsorjurisprudence。
  M。Proudhon,whileseemingtospeakofpropertyingeneral,dealsonlywithlandedproperty,withgroundrent。
  "Theoriginofrent,asproperty,is,sotospeak,extra—economic:
  itrestsinpsychologicalandmoralconsiderationswhichareonlyverydistantlyconnectedwiththeproductionofwealth。"
  (Vol。II,p。265)
  SoM。Proudhondeclareshimselfincapableofunderstandingtheeconomicoriginofrentandofproperty。Headmitsthatthisincapacityobligeshimtoresorttopsychologicalandmoralconsiderations,which,indeed,whileonlydistantlyconnectedwiththeproductionofwealth,haveyetaverycloseconnectionwiththenarrownessofhishistoricalviews。M。
  Proudhonaffirmsthatthereissomethingmysticalandmysteriousabouttheoriginofproperty。Now,toseemysteryintheoriginofproperty——thatis,tomakeamysteryoftherelationbetweenproductionitselfandthedistributionoftheinstrumentsofproduction——isnotthis,touseM。Proudhon’slanguage,arenunciationofallclaimstoeconomicscience??
  M。Proudhon"confineshimselftorecallingthatattheseventhepochofeconomicevolution——credit——whenfictionhadcausedrealitytovanish,andhumanactivitythreatenedtoloseitselfinemptyspace,ithadbecomenecessarytobindmanmorecloselytonature。Now,rentwasthepriceofthisnewcontract。"
  (Vol。II,p。269)
  L’hommeauxquaranteecus[ed:"theManofFortyEcus"——theheroofVoltaire’sstoryofthesamename,amodest,hard—workingpeasantwithanannualincomeof40ecus;thefollowingpassageisquotedfromthestory]foresawaM。
  Proudhonofthefuture:
  "Mr。Creator,byyourleave:everyoneismasterinhisownworld:butyouwillnevermakemebelievethattheoneweliveinismadeofglass。"
  Inyourworld,wherecreditwasameansoflosingoneselfinemptyspace,itisverypossiblethatpropertybecamenecessaryinordertobindmantonature。Intheworldofrealproduction,wherelandedpropertyalwaysprecedescredit,M。Proudhon’shorrorvacuicouldnotexist。
  Theexistenceofrentonceadmitted,whateveritsorigin,itbecomesasubjectofmutuallyantagonisticnegotiationsbetweenthefarmerandthelandedproprietor。Whatistheultimateresultofthesenegotiations,inotherwords,whatistheaverageamountofrent??ThisiswhatM。Proudhonsays:
  "Ricardo’stheoryanswersthisquestion。Inthebeginningofsociety,whenman,newtoearth,hadbeforehimnothingbuthugeforests,whentheearthwasvastandwhenindustrywasbeginningtocometolife,rentmusthavebeennil。Land,asyetunformedbylabor,wasanobjectofutility;
  itwasnotanexchangevalue,itwascommon,notsocial。Littlebylittle,themultiplicationoffamiliesandtheprogressofagriculturecausedthepriceoflandtomakeitselffelt。Laborcametogivethesoilitsworth;
  fromthis,rentcameintobeing。Themorefruitafieldyieldedwiththesameamountoflabor,thehigheritwasvalued;hencethetendencyofproprietorswasalwaystoarrogatetothemselvesthewholeamountofthefruitsofthesoil,lessthewagesofthefarm——thatis,lessthecostsofproduc—
  tion。Thuspropertyfollowedontheheelsoflabortotakefromitalltheproductthatexceededtheactualexpenses。Astheproprietorfulfilsamysticdutyandrepresentsthecommunityasagainstthecolonus,thatfarmeris,bythedispensationofProvidence,nomorethanaresponsiblelaborer,whomustaccounttosocietyforallhereapsabovehislegitimatewage……
  "Inessenceandbydestination,then,rentisaninstrumentofdistributivejustice,oneofthethousandmeansthatthegeniusofeconomyemploystoattaintoequality。Itisanimmediatelandvaluationwhichiscarriedoutcontradictor—ilybylandownersandfarmers,withoutanypossiblecollu—sion,inahigherinterest,andwhoseultimateresultmustbetoequalizethepossessionofthelandbetweentheex—ploitersofthesoilandtheindustrialists……
  "Itneedednolessthanthismagicofpropertytosnatchfromthecolonusthesurplusofhisproductwhichhecannothelpregardingashisownandofwhichheconsidershimselftobeexclusivelytheauthor。
  Rent,orratherproperty,hasbrokendownagriculturalegoismandcreatedasolidaritythatnopower,nopartitionofthelandcouldhavebroughtintobeing……
  "Themoraleffectofpropertyhavingbeensecured,atpresentwhatremainstobedoneistodistributetherent。"
  [II270—72]
  Allthistumultofwordsmaybereducedfirstlytothis:Ricardosaysthattheexcessofthepriceofagriculturalproductsovertheircostofproduction,includingtheordinaryprofitandinterestonthecapital,givesthemeasureoftherent。M。Proudhondoesbetter。Hemakesthelandownerintervene,likeaDeusexmachina,andsnatchfromthecolonusallthesurplusofhisproductionoverthecostofproduction。Hemakesuseoftheinterventionofthelandowner[proprietaire]toexplainproperty[propriete],oftheinterventionoftherent—receiver[rentier]toexplainrent[rente]。
  Heanswerstheproblembyformulatingthesameproblemandaddinganextrasyllable。[Marxmakesaplayonwords:turning"propriete"into"proprietaire"
  and"rente"into"rentier"。]
  Letusnotealsothatindeterminingrentbythedifferenceinfertilityofthesoil,M。Proudhonassignsaneworigintoit,sinceland,beforebeingassessedaccordingtodifferentdegreesoffertility,"wasnot",inhisview,"anexchangevalue,butwascommon"。What,then,hashappenedtothefictionaboutrenthavingcomeintobeingthroughthenecessityofbringingbacktothelandmanwhowasabouttolosehimselfintheinfinityofemptyspace??
  NowletusfreeRicardo’sdoctrinefromtheprovidential,allegorical,andmysticalphrasesinwhichM。Proudhonhasbeencarefultowrapit。
  Rent,intheRicardiansense,ispropertyinlandinitsbourgeoisstate;thatis,feudalpropertywhichhasbecomesubjecttotheconditionsofbourgeoisproduction。
  Wehaveseenthat,accordingtotheRicardiandoctrine,thepriceofallobjectsisdeterminedultimatelybythecostofproduction,includingtheindustrialprofit;inotherwords,bythelabortimeemployed。Inmanufacturingindustry,thepriceoftheproductobtainedbytheminimumoflaborregulatesthepriceofallothercommoditiesofthesamekind,seeingthatthecheapestandmostproductiveinstrumentsofproductioncanbemultipliedtoinfinityandthatcompetitionnecessarilygivesrisetoamarketprice——thatis,acommonpriceforallproductsofthesamekind。
  Inagriculturalindustry,onthecontrary,itisthepriceoftheproductobtainedbythegreatestamountoflaborwhichregulatesthepriceofallproductsofthesamekind。Inthefirstplace,onecannot,asinmanufacturingindustry,multiplyatwilltheinstrumentsofproductionpossessingthesamedegreeofproductivity,thatis,plotsoflandwiththesamedegreeoffertility。Then,aspopulationincreases,landofaninferiorqualitybeginstobeexploited,ornewoutlaysofcapital,proportionatelylessproductivethanbefore,aremadeuponthesameplotofland。Inbothcasesagreateramountoflaborisexpendedtoobtainaproportionatelysmallerproduct。Theneedsofthepopulationhavingrenderednecessarythisincreaseoflabor,theproductofthelandwhoseexploitationisthemorecostlyhasascertainasaleasthatofapieceoflandwhoseexploitationischeaper。Ascompetitionlevelsthemarketprice,theproductofthebettersoilwillbepaidforasdearlyasthatoftheinferior。Itistheexcessofthepriceoftheproductsofthebettersoiloverthecostoftheirproductionthatconstitutesrent。Ifonecouldalwayshaveatone’sdisposalplotsoflandofthesamedegreeoffertility;ifonecould,asinmanufacturingindustry,haverecoursecontinuallytocheaperandmoreproductivemachines,orifthesubsequentoutlaysofcapitalproducedasmuchasthefirst,thenthepriceofagriculturalproductswouldbedeterminedbythepriceofcommoditiesproducedbythebestinstrumentsofproduction,aswehaveseenwiththepriceofmanufacturedproducts。But,fromthismomentrentwouldhavedisappearedalso。
  FortheRicardiandoctrine——"oncethepremisesgranted"[MarxpennedthesewordsintothecopyhegaveN。Utina]——tobegenerallytrue,itismoreoveressentialthatcapitalshouldbefreelyapplicabletodifferentbranchesofindustry;thatastronglydevelopedcompetitionamongthecapitalistsshouldhavebroughtprofitstoanequallevel;thatthefarmershouldbenomorethananindustrialcapitalistclaimingfortheuseofhiscapitaloninferiorland[Marxscratchedouttheword"inferior"inthecopyhegaveN。Utina],aprofitequaltothatwhichhewoulddrawfromhiscapitalifitwereappliedinanykindofmanufacture;thatagriculturalexploitationshouldbesubjectedtotheregimeoflarge—scaleindustry;andfinally,thatthelandownerhimselfshouldaimatnothingbeyondthemoneyreturn。
  Itmayhappen,asinIreland,thatrentdoesnotyetexist,althoughthelettingoflandhasreachedanextremedevelopmentthere。Rentbeingtheexcessnotonlyoverwages,butalsooverindustrialprofit,itcannotexistwherethelandowner’srevenueisnothingbutamerelevyonwages。
  Thus,farfromconvertingtheexploiteroftheland,thefarmer,intoasimplelaborer,and"snatchingfromthecultivatorthesurplusofhisproduct,whichhecannothelpregardingashisown",rentconfrontsthelandowner,notwiththeslave,theserf,thepayeroftribute,thewagelaborer,butwiththeindustrialcapitalist。
  Onceconstitutedasgroundrent,groundpropertyhasinitspossessiononlythesurplusoverproductioncosts,whicharedeterminednotonlybywagesbutalsobyindustrialprofit。Itisthereforefromthelandownerthatgroundrentsnatchedapartofhisincome。Thus,therewasabiglapseoftimebeforethefeudalfarmerwasreplacedbytheindustrialcapitalist。
  InGermany,forexample,thistransformationbeganonlyinthelastthirdofthe18thcentury。ItisinEnglandalonethatthisrelationbetweentheindustrialcapitalistandthelandedproprietorhasbeenfullydeveloped。
  SolongastherewasonlyM。Proudhon’scolonus,therewasnorent。Theremomentrentexists,thecolonusisnolongerthefarmer,buttheworker,thefarmer’scolonus。Theabasementofthelaborer,reducedtotheroleofasimpleworker,daylaborer,wage—earner,workingfortheindustrialcapitalist;theinventionoftheindustrialcapitalist,exploitingthelandlikeanyotherfactory;thetransformationofthelandedproprietorfromapettysovereignintoavulgarusurer;thesearethedifferentrelationsexpressedbyrent。
  Rent,intheRicardiansense,ispatriarchalagriculturetransformedintocommercialindustry,industrialcapitalappliedtoland,thetownbourgeoisietransplantedintothecountry。Rent,insteadofbindingmantonature,hasmerelyboundtheexploitationofthelandtocompetition。
  Onceestablishedasrent,landedpropertyitselfistheresultofcompetition,sincefromthattimeonwardsitdependsonthemarketvalueofagriculturalproduce。Asrent,landedpropertyismobilizedandbecomesanarticleofcommerce。Rentispossibleonlyfromthemomentwhenthedevelopmentofurbanindustry,andthesocialorganizationresultingtherefrom,forcethelandownertoaimsolelyatcashprofits,atthemonetaryrelationofhisagriculturalproducts——infacttolookuponhislandedpropertyonlyasamachineforcoiningmoney。Renthassocompletelydivorcedthelandedproprietorfromthesoil,fromnature,thathehasnoneedeventoknowhisestates,asistobeseeninEngland。Asforthefarmer,theindustrialcapitalistandtheagriculturalworker,theyarenomoreboundtothelandtheyexploitthanaretheemployerandtheworkerinthefactoriestothecottonandwooltheymanufacture;theyfeelanattachmentonlyforthepriceoftheirproduction,themonetaryproduct。Hencethejeremiadsofthereactionaryparties,whoofferupalltheirprayersforthereturnoffeudalism,ofthegoodoldpatriarchallife,ofthesimplemannersandthefinevirtuesofourforefathers。Thesubjectionofthesoiltothelawswhichdominateallotherindustriesisandalwayswillbethesubjectofinterestedcondolences。Thusitmaybesaidthatrenthasbecomethemotivepowerwhichhasintroducedidyllintothemovementofhistory。
  Ricardo,afterpostulatingbourgeoisproductionasnecessaryfordeterminingrent,appliestheconceptionofrent,nevertheless,tothelandedpropertyofallagesandallcountries。Thisisanerrorcommontoalltheeconomists,whorepresentthebourgeoisrelationsofproductionaseternalcategories。
  Fromtheprovidentialaimofrent——whichis,forM。Proudhon,thetransformationofthecolonusintoaresponsibleworker,hepassestotheequalizedrewardofrent。
  Rent,aswehavejustseen,isconstitutedbytheequalpriceoftheproductsoflandsofunequalfertility,sothatahectolitreofcornwhichhascost10francsissoldfor20francsifthecostofproductionrisesto20francsuponsoilofinferiorquality。
  Solongasnecessityforcesthepurchaseofalltheagriculturalproductsintothemarket,themarketpriceisdeterminedbythecostofthemostexpensiveproduct。Thusitisthisequalizationofprice,resultingfromcompetitionandnotfromthedifferentfertilitiesofthelands,thatsecurestotheownerofthebettersoilarentfor10francsforeveryhectolitrethathistenantsells。
  Letussupposeforamomentthatthepriceofcornisdeterminedbythelabortimeneededtoproduceit,andatoncethehectolitreofcornobtainedfromthebettersoilwillsellat10francs,whilethehectolitreofcornobtainedontheinferiorsoilwillcost20francs。Thisbeingadmitted,theaveragemarketpricewillbe15francs,whereas,accordingtothelawofcompetition,itis20francs。Iftheaveragepricewere15francs,therewouldbenooccassionforanydistribution,whetherequalizedorotherwise,fortherewouldbenorent。Rentexistsonlywhenonecansellfor20francsthehectolitreofcornwhichhascosttheproducer10francs。M。Proudhonsupposesequalityofthemarketprice,withunequalcostsofproduction,inordertoarriveatanequalizedsharingoutoftheproductofinequality。
  WeunderstandsucheconomistsasMill,Cherbuliez,Hilditch,andothersdemandingthatrentshouldbehandedovertothestatetoserveinplaceoftaxes。Thatisafrankexpressionofthehatredtheindustrialcapitalistbearstowardsthelandedproprietor,whoseemstohimauselessthing,anexcrescenceuponthegeneralbodyofbourgeoisproduction。
  Butfirsttomakethepriceofthehectolitreofcorn20francsinorderthentomakeageneraldistributionofthe10francsoverchargeleviedontheconsumer,isindeedenoughtomakethesocialgeniuspursueitszigzagcoursemournfully——andknockitsheadagainstsomecorner。
  Rentbecomes,underM。Proudhon’spen,"animmenselandvaluation,whichiscarriedoutcontradictorilybyland—ownersandfarmers……inahigherinterest,andwhoseultimateresultmustbetoequalizethepossesionoflandbetweenexploitersofthesoilandtheindustrialists。"
  [II271]
  Foranylandvaluationbaseduponrenttobeofpracticalvalue,theconditionsofpresentsocietymustnotbedepartedfrom。
  Now,wehaveshownthatthefarmrentpaidbythefarmertothelandlordexpressestherentwithanyexactitudeonlyinthecountriesmostadvancedinindustryandcommerce。Andeventhisrentoftenincludesinterestpaidtothelandlordoncapitalincorporatedintheland。Thelocationoftheland,thevicinityoftowns,andmanyothercircumstancesinfluencethefarmrentandmodifythegroundrent。Theseperemptoryreasonswouldbeenoughtoprovetheinaccuracyofalandvaluationbasedonrent。
  Thushistory,farfromsupplying,inrent,aready—madelandvaluation,doesnothingbutchangeandturntopsy—turvythelandvaluationsalreadymade。
  Finally,fertilityisnotsonaturalaqualityasmightbethought;
  itiscloselyboundupwiththesocialrelationsofthetime。Apieceoflandmaybeveryfertileforcorngrowing,andyetthemarketpricemaydecidethecultivatortoturnitintoanartificialpasturelandandthusrenderitinfertile。
  M。Proudhonhasimprovisedhislandvaluation,whichhasnoteventhevalueofanordinarylandvaluation,onlytogivesubstancetotheprovidentiallyequalitarianaimofrent。
  "Rent,"continuesM。Proudhon,"istheinterestpaidonacapitalwhichneverperishes,namely——land。Andasthecapitaliscapableofnoincreaseinmatter,butonlyofanindefiniteimprovementinitsuse,itcomesaboutthatwhiletheinterestorprofitonaloan(mutuum)tendstodiminishcontinuallythroughabundanceofcapital,renttendsalwaystoincreasethroughtheperfectingofindustry,fromwhichresultstheimprovementintheuseoftheland……Such,initsessence,isrent。"
  (Vol。II,p。265)
  Thistime,M。Proudhonseesinrentallthecharacteristicsofinterest,savethatitisderivedfromcapitalofaspecificnature。Thiscapitalisland,aneternalcapital,"whichiscapableofnoincreaseinmatter,butonlyanindefiniteimprovementinitsuse"。Intheprogressiveadvanceofcivilization,interesthasacontinualtendencytofall,whilstrentcontinuallytendstorise。Interestfallsbecauseoftheabundanceofcapital;
  rentrisesowningtotheimprovementsbroughtaboutinindustry,whichresultsinaneverbetterutilizationofland。
  Such,initsessence,istheopinionofM。Proudhon。
  Letusfirstexaminehowfaritistruetosaythatrentisinterestoncapital。
  Forthelandedproprietorhimself,rentrepresentstheinterestonthecapitalthatthelandhascosthim,orthathewoulddrawfromitifhesoldit。Butinbuyingorsellinglandheonlybuysorsellsrent。
  Thepricehepaystomakehimselfareceiverofrentisregulatedbytherateofinterestingeneralandhasnothingtodowithwithactualnatureofrent。Theinterestoncapitalinvestedinlandisingenerallowerlowerthantheinterestoncapitalinvestedinmanufactureorcommerce。Thus,forthosewhomakenodistinctionbetweentheinterestthatthelandrepresentstotheownerandtherentitself,theinterestonlandcapitaldiminishesstillmorethandoestheinterestonothercapital。Butitisnotaquestionofthepurchaseorsalepriceofrent,ofthemarketablevalueofrent,ofcapitalizedrent,itisaquestionofrentitself。
  Farmrentcanimplyagain,apartfromrentproper,theinterestonthecapitalincorporatedintheland。Inthisinstancethelandlordreceivesthispartofthefarmrent,notasalandlordbutasacapitalist;
  butthisisnottherentproperthatwearetodealwith。
  Land,solongasitisnotexploitedasameansofproduction,isnotcapital。Landascapitalcanbeincreasedjustasmuchasalltheotherinstrumentsofproduction。Nothingisaddedtoitsmatter,touseM。Proudhon’slanguage,butthelandswhichserveasinstrumentsofproductionaremultiplied。Theveryfactofapplyingfurtheroutlaysofcapitaltolandalreadytransformedintomeansofproductionincreaseslandascapitalwithoutaddinganythingtolandasmatter——thatis,totheextentoftheland。M。Proudhon’slandasmatteristheEarthinitslimitation。
  Asfortheeternityheattributestoland,wegrantreadilyithasthisvirtueasmatter。Landascapitalisnomoreeternalthananyothercapital。
  Goldandsilver,whichyieldinterest,arejustaslastingandeternalasland。Ifthepriceofgoldandsilverfalls,whilethatoflandkeepsrising,thisiscertainlynotbecauseofitsmoreorlesseternalnature。
  Landascapitalisfixedcapital;butfixedcapitalgetsusedupjustasmuchascirculatingcapital。Improvementstothelandneedproductionandupkeep;theylastonlyforatime;andthistheyhaveincommonwithallotherimprovementsusedtotransformmatterintomeansofproduction。
  Iflandascapitalwereeternal,somelandswouldpresentaverydifferentappearancefromwhattheydotoday,andweshouldseetheRomanCampagna,Sicily,Palestine,inallthesplendouroftheirformerprosperity。
  Thereareeveninstanceswhenlandascapitalmightdisappear,eventhoughtheimprovementsremainincorporatedintheland。
  Inthefirstplace,thisoccurseverytimerentproperiswipedoutbythecompetitionofnewandmorefertilesoils;secondly,theimprovementswhichmighthavebeenvaluableatonetimeceasetobeofvaluethemomenttheybecomeuniversalowingtothedevelopmentofagronomy。
  Therepresentativeoflandascapitalisnotthelandlord,butthefarmer。Theproceedsyieldedbylandascapitalareinterestandindustrialprofit,notrent。Therearelandswhichyieldsuchinterestandprofitbutstillyieldnorent。
  Briefly,landinsofarasityieldsinterest,islandcapital,andaslandcapitalityieldsnorent,itisnotlandedproperty。Rentresultsfromthesocialrelationsinwhichtheexploitationofthelandtakesplace。Itcannotbearesultofthemoreorlesssolid,moreorlessdurablenatureofthesoil。Rentisaproductofsocietyandnotofthesoil。
  AccordingtoM。Proudhon,"improvementintheuseoftheland"
  ——aconsequence"oftheperfectingofindustry"——causesthecontinualriseinrent。Onthecontrary,thisimprovementcausesitsperiodicfall。
  Whereinconsists,ingeneral,anyimprovement,whetherinagricultureorinmanufacture??Inproducingmorewiththesamelabor;inproducingasmuch,orevenmore,withlesslabor。Thankstotheseimprovements,thefarmerissparedfromusingagreateramountoflaborforarelativelysmallerproduct。Hehasnoneed,therefore,toresorttoinferiorsoils,andinstallmentsofcapitalappliedsuccessivelytothesamesoilremainequallyproductive。
  Thus,theseimprovements,farfromcontinuallyraisingrentasM。Proudhonsays,becomeonthecontrarysomanytemporaryobstaclespreventingitsrise。
  TheEnglishlandownersofthe17thcenturyweresowellawareofthistruth,thattheyopposedtheprogressofagricultureforfearofseeingtheirincomesdiminish。(SeePetty,anEnglisheconomistofthetimeofCharlesII。)
  5。
  STRIKESANDCOMBINATIONSOFWORKERS
  "Everyupwardmovementinwagescanhavenoothereffectthanariseinthepriceofcorn,wine,etc。,thatis,theeffectofadearth。Forwhatarewages?Theyarethecostpriceofcorn,etc。;theyaretheintegrantpriceofevery—thing。Wemaygoevenfurther:wagesaretheproportionoftheelementscomposingwealthandconsumedreproductivelyeverydaybythemassoftheworkers。Now,todoublewages……istoattributetoeachoneoftheproducersagreatersharethanhisproduct,whichiscontradictory,andiftheriseextendsonlytoasmallnumberofindustries,itbringsageneraldisturbanceinexchange;inaword,adearth……
  "Itisimpossible,Ideclare,forstrikesfollowedbyanincreaseinwagesnottoculminateinageneralriseinprices:thisisascertainasthattwoandtwomakefour。"
  (Proudhon,Vol。I,pp。110and111)
  Wedenyalltheseassertions,exceptthattwoandtwomakefour。
  Inthefirstplace,thereisnogeneralriseinprices。
  Ifthepriceofeverythingdoublesatthesametimeaswages,thereisnochangeinprice,theonlychangeisinterms。
  Thenagain,ageneralriseinwagescanneverproduceamoreorlessgeneralriseinthepriceofgoods。Actually,ifeveryindustryemployedthesamenumberofworkersinrelationtofixedcapitalortotheinstrumentsused,ageneralriseinwageswouldproduceageneralfallinprofitsandthecurrentpriceofgoodswouldundergonoalteration。
  Butastherelationofmanuallabortofixedcapitalisnotthesameindifferentindustries,alltheindustrieswhichemployarelativelygreatermassofcapitalandfewerworkers,willbeforcedsoonerorlatertolowerthepriceoftheirgoods。Intheoppositecase,inwhichthepriceoftheirgoodsisnotlowered,theirprofitwillriseabovethecommonrateofprofits。Machinesarenotwage—earners。Therefore,thegeneralriseinwageswillaffectlessthoseindustries,which,comparedwiththeothers,employmoremachinesthanworkers。Butascompetitionalwaystendstoleveltherateofprofits,thoseprofitswhichriseabovetheaverageratecannotbutbetransitory。Thus,apartfromafewfluctuations,ageneralriseinwageswilllead,notasM。Proudhonsays,toageneralincreaseinprices,buttoapartialfall——thatisafallinthecurrentpriceofthegoodsthataremadechieflywiththehelpofmachines。
  Theriseandfallofprofitsandwagesexpressesmerelytheproportioninwhichcapitalistsandworkersshareintheproductofaday’swork,withoutinfluencinginmostinstancesthepriceoftheproduct。Butthat"strikesfollowedbyanincreaseinwagesculminateinageneralriseinprices,inadeartheven"——thosearenotionswhichcanblossomonlyinthebrainofapoetwhohasnotbeenunderstood。
  InEngland,strikeshaveregularlygivenrisetotheinventionandapplicationofnewmachines。Machineswere,itmaybesaid,theweaponemployedbythecapitalisttoquelltherevoltofspecializedlabor。Theself—actingmule,thegreatestinventionofmodernindustry,putoutofactionthespinnerswhowereinrevolt。Ifcombinationsandstrikeshadnoothereffectthanthatofmakingtheeffortsofmechanicalgeniusreactagainstthem,theywouldstillexerciseanimmenseinfluenceonthedevelopmentofindustry。
  "Ifind,"continuesM。Proudhon,"inanarticlepublishedbyM。LeonFaucher……September1845,thatforsometimetheBritishworkershavegotoutthehabitofcombination,whichisassuredlyaprogressforwhichonecannotbutcongratu—latethem:butthisimprovementinthemoraleoftheworkerscomeschieflyfromtheireconomiceducation。’Itisnotonthemanufacturers,’criesaspinning—millworkerataBoltonmeeting,’thatwagesdepend。Inperiodsofdepressionthemastersare,sotospeak,merelythewhipwithwhichneces—sityarmsitself,andwhethertheywanttoornot,theyhavetodealblows。Theregulativeprincipleistherelationofsupplyanddemand;andthemastershavenotthispower’……
  "Welldone!"criesM。Proudhon。"Thesearewell—trainedworkers,modelworkers,etc。,etc。,etc。SuchpovertydidnotexistinBritain;
  itwillnotcrosstheChannel。"
  (Proudhon,Vol。I,pp。261and262)
  OfallthetownsinEngland,Boltonistheoneinwhichtheradicalismisthemostdeveloped。TheBoltonworkersareknowntobethemostrevolutionaryofall。AtthetimeofthegreatagitationinEnglandfortheabolitionoftheCornLaws,theEnglishmanufacturersthoughtthattheycouldcopewiththelandownersonlybythrustingtheworkerstothefore。Butastheinterestsoftheworkerswerenolessopposedtothoseofthemanufacturersthantheinterestsofthemanufacturersweretothoseofthelandowners,itwasnaturalthatthemanufacturersshouldfarebadlyintheworkers’
  meetings。Whatdidthemanufacturersdo?Tosaveappearancestheyorganizedmeetingscomposed,toalargeextent,offoremen,ofthesmallnumberofworkerswhoweredevotedtothem,andoftherealfriendsoftrade。
  Whenlateronthegenuineworkerstried,asinBoltonandManchester,totakepartintheseshamdemonstrations,inordertoprotestagainstthem,theywereforbiddenadmittanceonthegroundthatitwasaticketmeeting——ameetingtowhichonlypersonswithentrancecardswereadmitted。Yetthepostersplacardedonthewallshadannouncedpublicmeetings。Everytimeoneofthesemeetingswasheld,themanufacturers’newspapersgaveapompousanddetailedaccountofthespeechesmade。Itgoeswithoutsayingthatitwastheforemenwhomadethesespeeches。TheLondonpapersreproducedthemwordforword。M。Proudhonhasthemisfortunetotakeforemenforordinaryworkers,andenjoinsthemnottocrosstheChannel。
  Ifin1844and1845strikesdrewlessattentionthanbefore,itwasbecause1844and1845werethefirsttwoyearsofprosperitythatBritishindustryhadhadsince1837。Neverthelessnoneofthetradesunionshadbeendissolved。
  NowletuslistentotheforemenofBolton。Accordingtothemmanufacturershavenocommandoverwagesbecausetheyhavenocommandoverthepriceofproducts,andtheyhavenocommandoverthepriceofproductsbecausetheyhavenocommandovertheworldmarket。Forthisreason,theywishittobeunderstoodthatcombinationsshouldnotbeformedtoextortanincreaseinwagesfromthemasters。M。Proudhon,onthecontrary,forbidscombinationsforfeartheyshouldbefollowedbyariseinwageswhichwouldbringwithitageneraldearth。WehavenoneedtosaythatononepointthereisanententecordialebetweentheforemenandM。Proudhon:
  thatariseinwagesisequivalenttoariseinthepriceofproducts。
  ButisthefearofadearththetruecauseofM。Proudhon’srancour?
  No。Quitesimple,heisannoyedwiththeBoltonforemenbecausetheydeterminevaluebysupplyanddemandandhardlytakeanyaccountofconstitutedvalue,ofvaluewhichhaspassedintothestateofconstitution,oftheconstitutionofvalue,includingpermanentexchangeabilityandalltheotherproportionalitiesofrelationsandrelationsofproportionality,withProvidenceattheirside。
  "Aworkers’strikesisillegal,anditisnotonlythePenalCodethatsaysso,itistheeconomicsystem,thenecessityoftheestablishedorder……
  "Thateachworkerindividuallyshoulddisposefreelyoverhispersonandhishands,thiscanbetolerated,butthatworkersshouldundertakebycombinationtodoviolencetomonopoly,issomethingsocietycannotpermit。"
  (Vol。I,pp。334and335)
  M。ProudhonwantstopassoffanarticleofthePenalCodeasanecessaryandgeneralresultofbourgeoisrelationsofproduction。
  InEngland,combinationisauthorizedbyanActofParliament,anditistheeconomicsystemwhichhasforcedParliamenttograntthislegalauthorization。In1825,when,undertheMinisterHuskisson,Parliamenthadtomodifythelawinordertobringitmoreandmoreintolinewiththeconditionsresultingfromfreecompetition,ithadofnecessitytoabolishalllawsforbiddingcombinationsofworkers。Themoremodernindustryandcompetitiondevelop,themoreelementstherearewhichcallforthandstrengthcombination,andassoonascombinationbecomesaneconomicfact,dailygaininginsolidity,itisboundbeforelongtobecomealegalfact。
  ThusthearticleofthePenalCodeprovesatthemostthatmodernindustryandcompetitionwerenotyetwelldevelopedundertheConstituentAssemblyandundertheEmpire。[Note:ThelawsinoperationatthattimeinFrance——theso—calledLeChapelierlawadoptedin1791duringthebourgeoisrevolutionbytheConstituentAssemblyandthecriminalcodeelaboratedundertheNapoleonicEmpire——forbadetheworkerstoformlaborunionsoftogoonstrikeonpainofseverepunishment。TheprohibitionoftradeunionswasabolishedinFranceaslateas1884。]
  EconomistsandSocialists[thatis,theSocialistsofthattime:
  theFourieristsinFrance,theOwenitesinEngland——Engels,1885]areinagreementononepoint:thecondemnationofcombination。Onlytheyhavedifferentmotivesfortheiractofcondemnation。
  Theeconomistssaytoworkers:
  Donotcombine。Bycombinationyouhindertheregularprogressofindustry,youpreventmanufacturersfromcarryingouttheirorders,youdisturbtradeandyouprecipitatetheinvasionofmachineswhich,byrenderingyourlaborinpartuseless,forceyoutoacceptastilllowerwage。Besides,whateveryoudo,yourwageswillalwaysbedeterminedbytherelationofhandsdemandedtohandssupplied,anditisaneffortasridiculousasitisdangerousforyoutorevoltagainsttheeternallawsofpoliticaleconomy。
  TheSocialistssaytotheworkers:
  Donotcombine,becausewhatwillyougainbyitanyway?Ariseinwages?Theeconomistswillprovetoyouquiteclearlythatthefewha’penceyoumaygainbyitforafewmomentsifyousucceedwillbefollowedbyapermanentfall。Skilledcalculatorswillprovetoyouthatitwouldtakeyouyearsmerelytorecover,throughtheincreaseinyourwages,theexpensesincurredfortheorganizationandupkeepofthecombinations。
  Andwe,asSocialists,tellyouthat,apartfromthemoneyquestion,youwillcontinuenonethelesstobeworkers,andthemasterswillstillcontinuetobethemasters,justasbefore。Sonocombination!Nopolitics!
  Forisnotenteringintocombinationengaginginpolitics?
  Theeconomistswanttheworkerstoremaininsocietyasitisconstitutedandasithasbeensignedandsealedbythemintheirmanuals。
  TheSocialistswanttheworkerstoleavetheoldsocietyalone,thebettertobeabletoenterthenewsocietywhichtheyhavepreparedforthemwithsomuchforesight。
  Inspiteofbothofthem,inspiteofmanualsandutopias,combinationhasnotyetceasedforaninstanttogoforwardandgrowwiththedevelopmentandgrowthofmodernindustry。Ithasnowreachedsuchastage,thatthedegreetowhichcombinationhasdevelopedinanycountryclearlymarkstherankitoccupiesinthehierarchyoftheworldmarket。England,whoseindustryhasattainedthehighestdegreeofdevelopment,hasthebiggestandbestorganizedcombinations。
  InEngland,theyhavenotstoppedatpartialcombinationswhichhavenootherobjectivethanapassingstrike,andwhichdisappearwithit。Permanentcombinationshavebeenformed,tradesunions,whichserveasrampartsfortheworkersintheirstruggleswiththeemployers。
  AndatthepresenttimealltheselocaltradesunionsfindarallyingpointintheNationalAssociationofUnitedTrades,thecentralcommitteeofwhichisinLondon,andwhichalreadynumbers80,000members。[NAUT——
  AtradeunionorganizationestablishedinEnglandin1845。Itsactivitiesdidnotextendbeyondthescopeofeconomicstruggleforbetterconditionsofsaleoflaborpower,forbetterlaborlaws。TheAssociationexisteduntiltheearly’60s,butafter1851,itdidnotplayanimportantpartinthetradeunionmovement。——ed。]theorganizationofthesestrikes,combinations,andtradesunionswentonsimultaneouslywiththepoliticalstrugglesoftheworkers,whonowconstitutealargepoliticalparty,underthenameofChartists。
  Thefirstattemptofworkerstoassociateamongthemselvesalwaystakesplaceintheformofcombinations。
  Large—scaleindustryconcentratesinoneplaceacrowdofpeopleunknowntooneanother。Competitiondividestheirinterests。Butthemaintenanceofwages,thiscommoninterestwhichtheyhaveagainsttheirboss,unitestheminacommonthoughtofresistance——combination。Thuscombinationalwayshasadoubleaim,thatofstoppingcompetitionamongtheworkers,sothattheycancarryongeneralcompetitionwiththecapitalist。Ifthefirstaimofresistancewasmerelythemaintenanceofwages,combinations,atfirstisolated,constitutethemselvesintogroupsasthecapitalistsintheirturnuniteforthepurposeofrepression,andinthefaceofalwaysunitedcapital,themaintenanceoftheassociationbecomesmorenecessarytothemthanthatofwages。ThisissotruethatEnglisheconomistsareamazedtoseetheworkerssacrificeagoodpartoftheirwagesinfavorofassociations,which,intheeyesoftheseeconomists,areestablishedsolelyinfavorofwages。Inthisstruggle——averitablecivilwar——
  alltheelementsnecessaryforacomingbattleuniteanddevelop。Onceithasreachedthispoint,associationtakesonapoliticalcharacter。
  Economicconditionshadfirsttransformedthemassofthepeopleofthecountryintoworker。Thecombinationofcapitalhascreatedforthismassacommonsituation,commoninterests。Thismassisthusalreadyaclassasagainstcapital,butnotyetforitself。Inthestruggle,ofwhichwehavenotedonlyafewphases,thismassbecomesunited,andconstitutesitselfasaclassforitself。Theinterestsitdefendsbecomesclassinterests。
  Butthestruggleofclassagainstclassisapoliticalstruggle。
  Inthebourgeoisiewehavetwophasestodistinguish:thatinwhichitconstituteditselfasaclassundertheregimeoffeudalismandabsolutemonarchy,andthatinwhich,alreadyconstitutedasaclass,itoverthrewfeudalismandmonarchytomakesocietyintoabourgeoissociety。
  Thefirstofthesephaseswasthelongerandnecessitatedthegreaterefforts。
  Thistoobeganbypartialcombinationsagainstthefeudallords。
  Muchresearchhasbeencarriedouttotracethedifferenthistoricalphasesthatthebourgeoisiehaspassedthrough,fromthecommuneuptoitsconstitutionasaclass。
  Butwhenitisaquestionofmakingaprecisestudyofstrikes,combinationsandotherformsinwhichtheproletarianscarryoutbeforeoureyestheirorganizationasaclass,someareseizedwithrealfearandothersdisplayatranscendentaldisdain。
  Anoppressedclassisthevitalconditionforeverysocietyfoundedontheantagonismofclasses。Theemancipationoftheoppressedclassthusimpliesnecessarilythecreationofanewsociety。Fortheoppressedclasstobeabletoemancipateitself,itisnecessarythattheproductivepowersalreadyacquiredandtheexistingsocialrelationsshouldnolongerbecapableofexistingsidebyside。Ofalltheinstrumentsofproduction,thegreatestproductivepoweristherevolutionaryclassitself。Theorganizationofrevolutionaryelementsasaclasssupposestheexistenceofalltheproductiveforceswhichcouldbeengenderedinthebosomoftheoldsociety。
  Doesthismeanthatafterthefalloftheoldsocietytherewillbeanewclassdominationculminatinginanewpoliticalpower?No。
  Theconditionfortheemancipationoftheworkingclassistheabolitionofeveryclass,justastheconditionfortheliberationofthethirdestate,ofthebourgeoisorder,wastheabolitionofallestatesandallorders。[Estateshereinthehistoricalsenseoftheestatesoffeudalism,estateswithdefiniteandlimitedprivileges。Therevolutionofthebourgeoisieabolishedtheestatesandtheirprivileges。Bourgeoissocietyknowsonlyclasses。Itwas,therefore,absolutelyincontradictionwithhistorytodescribetheproletariatasthe"fourthestate"——Engels,1885Germanedition。]
  Theworkingclass,inthecourseofitsdevelopment,willsubstitutefortheoldcivilsocietyanassociationwhichwillexcludeclassesandtheirantagonism,andtherewillbenomorepoliticalpowerproperlyso—called,sincepoliticalpowerispreciselytheofficialexpressionofantagonismincivilsociety。
  Meanwhiletheantagonismbetweentheproletariatandthebourgeoisieisastruggleofclassagainstclass,astrugglewhichcarriedtoitshighestexpressionisatotalrevolution。Indeed,isitatallsurprisingthatasocietyfoundedontheoppositionofclassesshouldculminateinbrutalcontradiction,theshockofbodyagainstbody,asitsfinaldenouement?
  Donotsaythatsocialmovementexcludespoliticalmovement。Thereisneverapoliticalmovementwhichisnotatthesametimesocial。
  Itisonlyinanorderofthingsinwhichtherearenomoreclassesandclassantagonismsthatsocialevolutionswillceasetobepoliticalrevolutions。Tillthen,ontheeveofeverygeneralreshufflingofsociety,thelastwordofsocialsciencewillalwaysbe:
  "Lecombatonlamort;laluttesanguinaireouleneant。C’estainsiquelaquestionestinvinciblementposee。"
  GeorgeSand[FromthenovelJeanSiska:"CombatorDeath:bloodystruggleorextinction。Itisthusthatthequestionisinexorablyput。"]