Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jn8rn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T20:43:39.511Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Justice and Capitalist Production: Marx and Bourgeois Ideology

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2020

Gary Young
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Is capitalist production unjust? It is easy to think, upon first reading Marx, that he answers this question in the affirmative. And I shall argue that this naive reading is correct. This needs to be argued, however, for a more careful scrutiny of Marx's writings reveals passages in which he seems to call capitalist production just or fair. Relying upon these passages, Robert Tucker and Allen W. Wood have urged that, in Wood's words,

it is simply not the case that Marx's condemnation of capitalism rests on some conception of justice (whether explicit or implicit), and those who attempt to reconstruct a “Marxian idea of justice” from Marx's manifold charges against capitalism are at best only translating Marx's critique of capitalism, or some aspect of it, into what Marx himself would have consistently regarded as a false, ideological, or “mystified” form.

What Marx regarded as false and mystified, however, is not the practice of assessing social institutions as just or unjust, but rather the picture of those institutions, and especially of capitalist production, to be found in bourgeois ideology.

Type
Research Article
Information
Canadian Journal of Philosophy , Volume 8 , Issue 3 , September 1978 , pp. 421 - 455
Copyright
Copyright © The Authors 1978

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 “The Marxian Critique of Justice”, Philosophy & Public Affairs 1 (1972) 244-82, at p. 272. See also Tucker, Robert C. The Marxian Revolutionary Idea (New York, 1969), pp. 33–53,Google Scholar and Philosophy and Myth in Karl Marx (New York, 1961 ), pp. 18–20, 222f.

2 Capital, vol. 1 (New York, 1967), chaps. 1-3 and pp. 158f; German text in Marx-Engels Werke (henceforth MEW) 23 (Berlin, 1963) chaps. 1-3 and pp. 172f. See also Sweezy, Paul The Theory of Capitalist Development (New York, 1942),Google Scholar chap. 3.

3 Capital, vol. 1, chap. 4; ‘surplus value’ is defined at p. 150 (MEW 23, chap. 4, sect. 1, esp. p. 165).

4 Capital, vol. 1, chap. 5, pp. 157–60 (MEW 23, chap. 4, sect. 2, pp. 171–74).

5 Capital, vol.1, p. 541 (MEW 23, 564); Capital, vol. 3 (New York, 1967), pp. 38ff, 43f (MEW 25) (Berlin, 1964), 48ff, 53f).

6 Capital, vol.1, p.163 (MEW 23, 177).

7 See also Grundrisse: Foundations of the Critique of Political Economy (Rough Draft), trans. Nicolaus, Martin (New York, 1974), p. 424Google Scholar (German text in Grundrisse der Kritik der Politischen Okonomie [Rohentwurf] (Berlin, 1953), pp. 326f); Theories of Surplus Value, vol. 3 (Moscow, 1971), p. 20 (MEW 26.3 (Berlin, 1968) 14); “Wages, Price and Profits”, in Marx, and Engels, Selected Works (New York, 1969), pp. 207-9.Google Scholar

8 Capital, vol. 1, pp. 163 and 168 (MEW 23, 177f and 180f).

9 This simplifies by ignoring the possibility that surplus value is created by entrepreneurial labor of the capitalist. See below, text to note 22.

10 More precisely, what the worker “sells to the capitalist is not his labor but the temporary use of himself as a working power”; “what is bought and sold is the temporary use of labor power” (Theories of Surplus Value, vol. 3 (Moscow, 1971), 113, 110 (MEW 26.3, 109, 106, but see 290 [285]). Thus Marx speaks of “the value of a day's labor power”, e.g. at Capital, vol. 1, p. 193 (MEW 23, 207); see also pp. 193f, 196, 232f (MEW 23, 208,210, 247). Compare renting a car. What one rents is not the actual use of the car, but the “car power”. The renter owes rent even if the car sits unused during the term of rent.

11 Capital, vol. 1, p. 171 (MEW 23, 184f).

12 Capital, vol.1, pp.194f (MEW 23, 209).

13 See the Preface to On the Principles of Political Economy and Taxation, in vol. 1 of The Works and Correspondence of David Ricardo, ed. Sraffa, P. (Cambridge, 1951),Google Scholar and the letter to Malthus, October 9, 1820, in vol. 8 of Works (Cambridge, 1962), pp. 278f.

14 Capital, vol.1, p. 540 (MEW 23, 562); see also Capital, vol. 3, p. 30 (MEW 25, 41) and Theories of Surplus Value, vol. 3, pp. 480f (MEW 26.3, 472). Regarding the origins of this necessary illusion, see Capital, vol. 1, pp. 541f. (MEW 23, 564); Capital, vol.2, pp. 125f. (MEW 24, 128); Capital, vol. 3, pp. 44f. (MEW 25, 54f.).

15 Theories of Surplus Value, vol. 1 (Moscow, 1963), pp. 86–88 (MEW 26.1 (Berlin, 1965), 57-60); Theories of Surplus Value, vol. 2 (Moscow, 1968), pp. 399–403, 417ff (MEW 26.2 (Berlin, 1967), 402-06, 419ff).

16 Capital, vol. 3, pp. 44, 243, 827 (MEW 25, 54, 257, 835), Theories of Surplus Value, vol. 2, p. 406 (MEW 26.2), Theories of Surplus Value, vol. 3, p. 481 (MEW 26.3, 472f). Marx to Engels, June 27, 1867, Marx and Engels, Selected Correspondence (Moscow, 1975), p. 179. On the Factory Acts and this “inkling,” see my “Marx's Theory of Bourgeois Law,” Research in Law and Sociology, vol. 2, ed. Steven Spitzer (JAI Press, Greenwich, Conn., 1978).

17 Theories of Surplus Value, vol. 2, p. 400 (MEW 26.2, 402f).

18 Samuel Bailey, quoted approvingly at Theories of Surplus Value, vol. 2, p. 401 (MEW 26.2, 403), and Capital, vol. 1, p. 535 note 1 (MEW 23, 557 note 21).

19 Marx describes Ricardo as “disregarding the law of value of commodities and taking refuge in the law of supply and demand”. Theories of Surplus Value, vol. 2, p. 403 (MEW 26.2, 406).

20 Capital, vol. 1, p. 538 (MEW 23, 561 ).

21 Capital, vol. 1, pp. 14f (MEW 23, 20-21 ).

22 Capital, vol. 3, pp. 379–90 (MEW 25, 393-403); Theories of Surplus Value, vol. 3, pp. 355–58, 492-98 (MEW 26.3, 347-50, 484-89).

23 Capital, vol. 3, pp. 44 and 825 and chap. 48 generally (MEW 25, 54, 833, chap. 48); Theories of Surplus Value, vol. 2, pp. 69, 347 (MEW 26.2, 63, 346f); Theories of Surplus Value, vol. 3, pp. 481–85 (MEW 26.3, 472-77).

24 See note 5, above, and accompanying text; Capital, vol. 1, p. 541 (MEW 23, 563f) Capital, vol. 2 (New York, 1967), pp. 125f (MEW 24, (Berlin, 1963), 128); Capital, vol. 3, pp. 38–40, 43f (MEW 25, 48-50, 53f); Theories of Surplus Value, vol. 3, pp. 20–22, 190 (MEW 26.3, 14-16, 190); Grundrisse, pp. 240f, 424 (German ed., pp. 152f, 326f); “Wages, Price and Profit”, pp. 207–9.

25 See passages cited in note 24. For the continuing dominance of this view, see Dobb, Maurice Theories of Value and Distribution Since Adam Smith (Cambridge, 1973),CrossRefGoogle Scholarchaps. 7-8. On bourgeois law, see “Marx's Theory of Bourgeois law,” supra, n. 16.

26 Theories of Surplus Value, vol.1, p. 315 (MEW 26.1, 291).

27 Capital, vol. 1, p. 582 (MEW 23, 608).

28 Capital, vol. 1, pp. 239, 506, 596, 611 (MEW 23, 253, 529, 622, 639); Grundrisse, p. 705 (German ed., 593); Theories of Surplus Value, vol. 2, p. 29 (MEW 26.2, 23). For Marx's use of the expressions ‘rights,’ ‘morals,’ and ‘justice’ in connection with the program of the First International, see Karl Marx, Political Writings,vol.3, ed. Fernbach, David (New York, 1974), pp. 81, 83, 88.Google Scholar

29 Tucker seems to grant this important premise when he argues: Marx does “not admit that profit derived from wage-labor under the capitalist system is ‘theft’. We may therefore conclude that the Marxist condemnation of capitalism is not predicated upon a belief that its mode of distribution is unjust.” The Marxian Revolutionary Idea, p. 46. (Of course the assertions contained here, that Marx did not call extraction of surplus value theft, and that absence of theft entails absence of injustice, are simply false.) Wood also admits that theft is unjust (p. 264, lines 13-15).

30 Capital, vol. 1, pp. 74, 540f, 550 (MEW 23, 88, 563f, 572f); Capital, vol. 3, pp. 817ff (MEW 25, 825ff); Theories of Surplus Value, vol. 3, p. 485 (MEW 26.3, 476f); “Wages, Price and Profit”, p. 209.

31 Capital,vol. 1, pp. 10, 85,566 (MEW 23, 16,100,591 ); Capital, vol. 3, pp. 818ff (MEW 25, 826ff); Theories of Surplus Value, vol. 3, p. 296 (MEW 26.3, 290).

32 Capital, vol. 1, pp. 152, 233, 586, 592 (MEW 23, 167f, 247f, 612, 618).

33 Capital, vol. 1, p. 194 (MEW 23, 208). See also pp. 196, 584-86 (MEW 23, 210, 610-12); “Critique of the Gotha Program”, Karl Marx: Political Writings, vol. 3, ed. Fernbach, David (New York, 1974), p. 344Google Scholar (MEW 19 (Berlin, 1962), 18).

34 The Marxian Revolutionary Idea, p.44.

35 McBride, William Leon “The Concept of Justice in Marx, Engels,and Others”, Ethics 85 (1975) 204-18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

36 Capital, vol. 3, pp. 339f (MEW 25, 351 f).

37 Wood, p. 265.

38 Capital, vol. 3, p. 818 (MEW 25, 826).

39 Wood, p. 256.

40 Capital, vol. 1, p. 84, 176 (MEW 23, 99, 189-91 ).

41 “Wage Labor and Capital”, Selected Works, p. 75. See also Grundrisse, pp. 464f, German ed., 368f.

42 Theories of Surplus Value, vol. 3, p. 419 (MEW 26.3, 410).

43 Wood, pp. 263, 266.

44 Wood too says that Marx rejected this simple theory, but he rests his claim on the erroneous reading of P discussed above, section 4.

45 Pp. 344-48 (MEW 19, 18-22).

46 “Critique of the Gotha Program”, p. 345 (MEW 19, 19).

47 Capital, vol. 1, p. 530 (MEW 23, 552); Capital, vol. 3, p. 819 (MEW 25, 827).

48 “Critique of the Gotha Program”, p. 346 (MEW 19, 20).

49 For instance, rent is essentially “tribute”, Capital, vol. 3, p. 775 (MEW 25, 784).

50 Capital, vol. 1, p. 583 (MEW 23, 609).

51 Grundrisse, p. 458 (German ed., p. 362). See also pp. 464, 509, 674 (German ed., pp. 368,409, 566); Theories of Surplus Value, vol. 3, p. 378 (MEW 26.3, 369).

52 Theories of Surplus Value, vol. 1, p. 86 (MEW 26.1, 58).

53 Marx's use of Hegelian terminology in this context is unusually striking. The appropriation of surplus labor in capitalist production is mediated by the wage-exchange, but this mediating process is suspended (aufgehoben) in the result, which is the dialectical reversal of the law of value into its opposite. Though suspended, the wage-exchange does not simply disappear, however; it remains as a false appearance veiling the actual class relationship. See the passages cited in notes 50-52 and also Theories of Surplus Value, vol. 3, p. 400 (MEW 26.3. 391).

54 Theories of Surplus Value, vol. 1, p. 87, 397-9 (MEW 26.1, 59, 373-5).

55 Capital, vol. 1, p. 586 (MEW 23, 612f). Marx invokes the perspective of class relations in reproduction also at pp. 568, 572, 582 (MEW 23, 593, 597, 608); Capital, vol. 2, 381,392 (MEW 24,380,391 ); Grundrisse, p. 464 (German ed., p. 368); “Results of the Immediate Process of Production”, in Marx, Karl Capital,vol. I (New York, 1976), p. 1003.Google Scholar From the account given here, it should be evident that non-reality infects not merely the exchange of wages for labor power but all other exchanges between workers and capitalists, in which the working class “buys” from the capitalists the products of its labor. But not all exchanges in bourgeois society are false appearances. Exchanges between capitalists, and exchanges between workers, are really exchanges.

56 Grundrisse, p. 245 (German ed., p. 156).

57 Grundrisse, p. 247 (German ed., p. 159). The same contrast occurs in Capital, vol.1: Compare p.176 with pp. 301f (MEW 23, 189-91, 319f). See also pp.169, 271, 297 (note 4, end), 396f, 574, 578 (note 1) and 769 (MEW 23, 183, 287, 315 (note 185), 417-19, 599, 603 (and note 19), 796f).

58 See Grundrisse, pp. 241ff (German ed., pp.152ff); Capital, vol. 1, p. 176 (MEW 23, 189-91 ). The key move in Marx's argument is that because the parties exchange equivalents, they are of equal worth.

59 Capital, vol. 1, pp. 583f (MEW 23, 609f).

60 Capital, vol. 1, p. 176 (MEW 23, 189-91); Grundrisse, pp. 242ff (German ed., pp. 154ff).

61 Capital, vol. 1, pp. 271, 301f (MEW 23, 286f, 319f); Grundrisse, p. 464 (German ed., p. 368).

62 Theories of Surplus Value, vol. 2, p. 406 (MEW 26.2, 409). See also Theories of Surplus Value, vol. 1, pp. 93 and 389f (MEW 26.1, 64 and 366).

63 “Critique of the Gotha Program”, p. 352 (MEW 19, 25f).

64 Wood, p. 277.

65 Theories of Surplus Value, vol. 1, pp. 285,287, 300f. (MEW 26.1, 257,259, 273); A Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy (New York, 1970), Preface, p. 21 (MEW 13 (Berlin, 1964), 9); Capital, vol. 1, pp. 372f note 3, 446 (MEW 23, 392f, note 89, 469); “Results of the Immediate Process of Production, p. 990.” See also Marx's talk of “bourgeois horizons”, Capital, vol. 1, p. 14 (MEW 23, 19); Theories of Surplus Value, vol. 3, p. 259 (MEW 26.3, 254f).

66 Propositions may be expressed indifferently in thought, speech, and visible or tangible form. For present purposes their ontological status is irrelevant.

67 Possible examples of each of these criteria may be found in the following authors: (a) Cause: “Modern critical philosophy springs from the reified structure of consciousness” and the reified structure of consciousness is caused by the reified structure of bourgeois society (Lukacs, Georg “Reification and the Consciousness of the Proletariat”, in History and Class Consciousness (Cambridge, Mass., 1971), pp. 110fGoogle Scholar and passim); compare Mannheim's, Karl concept of “sociology of knowledge”, in Ideology and Utopia (New York, 1936), pp. 265f.Google Scholar (b) Function: “My intention here is to try to identify the prevailing ideology in the field of the social sciences as taught in British universities and colleges. This ideology, I hope to show, consistently defends the existing social arrangements of the capitalist world. It endeavors to suppress the idea that any preferable alternative does or could exist.” Blackburn, Robin “A Brief Guide to Bourgeois Ideology”, in Student Power (Baltimore, 1969), p. 164Google Scholar. (c) Content: “Ideology interpellates individuals as subjects.” Althusser, Louis “Ideology and the State”, in Lenin and Philosophy (New York, 1971), pp. 170-83.Google Scholar (d) Epistemic properties: See Miller, David “Ideology and False Consciousness”, Political Studies 20 (1972) 432-47,CrossRefGoogle Scholar especially pp. 435ff; compare Mannheim's concept of “ideology”, Ideology and Utopia, pp. 265f.

68 See Marx, “Money and Alienated Man”, written in 1844, in Writings of the Young Marx on Philosophy and Society, ed. Easton, Loyd D. and Guddat, Kurt H. (Garden City, N.Y., 1967), pp. 265-77.Google Scholar Does Marx's later critique of the wage-exchange as a false appearance make this earlier critique irrelevant?

69 Wood, p. 282. But for a sketch of an argument deserving serious consideration that might conceivably be used to justify such a system, see Rawls, John A Theory of justice (Cambridge, Mass., 1971), p. 78Google Scholar, and “Distributive Justice”, in Laslett, Peter and Runciman, W. G. eds., Philosophy, Politics and Society,Third Series (Oxford, 1967), p. 67.Google Scholar Note that this is but a sketch of a position which, so far as I know, Rawls never conclusively endorses. And it is unclear that the system he considers is relevantly like that Marx describes.

70 Capital, vol. 1, pp. 591–98 (MEW 23, 617-25).

71 “Lawyers and Revolution”, University of Pittsburgh Law Review 30 (1969) 126f.

72 Ibid.

73 I am grateful to Holmstrom, Nancy for discussions on these matters. For her own views, see “Exploitation”, Canadian journal of Philosophy 7 (1977) 353-69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar An earlier version of the present paper was given at the Conference on Critical Legal Studies, May 1, 1977, at the University of Wisconsin at Madison, where my commentator was Stewart Macaulay. Sections 1 and 2 originally appeared in my “Marx's Theory of Bourgeois Law,” supra, n. 16.