Thefactthatthespecifickindoflabourisirrelevantpresupposesahighlydevelopedcomplexofactuallyexistingkindsoflabour,noneofwhichisanymoretheall—importantone。Themostgeneralabstractionsariseonthewholeonlywhenconcretedevelopmentismostprofuse,sothataspecificqualityisseentobecommontomanyphenomena,orcommontoall。Thenitisnolongerperceivedsolelyinaparticularform。Thisabstractionoflabouris,ontheotherhand,bynomeanssimplytheconceptualresultantofavarietyofconcretetypesoflabour。Thefactthattheparticularkindoflabouremployedisimmaterialisappropriatetoaformofsocietyinwhichindividualseasilypassfromonetypeoflabourtoanother,theparticulartypeoflabourbeingaccidentaltothemandthereforeirrelevant。Labour,notonlyasacategorybutinreality,hasbecomeameanstocreatewealthingeneral,andhasceasedtobetiedasanattributetoaparticularindividual。ThisstateofaffairsismostpronouncedintheUnitedStates,themostmodernformofbourgeoissociety。
Theabstractcategory\"labour\",\"labourassuch\",laboursansphrase,thepointofdepartureofmoderneconomics,thusbecomesapracticalfactonlythere。Thesimplestabstraction,whichplaysadecisiveroleinmodempoliticaleconomy,anabstractionwhichexpressesanancientrelationexistinginallsocialformations,neverthelessappearstobeactuallytrueinthisabstractformonlyasacategoryofthemostmodernsociety。ItmightbesaidthatphenomenawhicharehistoricalproductsintheUnitedStates——e。g。,theirrelevanceoftheparticulartypeoflabour——appeartobeamongtheRussians,forinstance,naturallydevelopedpredispositions。
Butinthefirstplace,thereisanenormousdifferencebetweenbarbarianshavingapredispositionwhichmakesitpossibletoemploytheminvarioustasks,andcivilisedpeoplewhoapplythemselvestovarioustasks。AsregardstheRussians,moreover,theirindifferencetotheparticularkindoflabourperformedisinpracticematchedbytheirtraditionalhabitofclingingfasttoaverydefinitekindoflabourfromwhichtheyareextricatedonlybyexternalinfluences。
Theexampleoflabourstrikinglydemonstrateshoweventhemostabstractcategories,despitetheirvalidityinallepochs——preciselybecausetheyareabstractions——areequallyaproductofhistoricalconditionseveninthespecificformofabstractions,andtheyretaintheirfullvalidityonlyforandwithintheframeworkoftheseconditions。
Bourgeoissocietyisthemostadvancedandcomplexhistoricalorganisationofproduction。Thecategorieswhichexpressitsrelations,andanunderstandingofitsstructure,therefore,provideaninsightintothestructureandtherelationsofproductionofallformerlyexistingsocialformationstheruinsandcomponentelementsofwhichwereusedinthecreationofbourgeoissociety。Someoftheseunassimilatedremainsarestillcarriedonwithinbourgeoissociety,others,however,whichpreviouslyexisted。onlyinrudimentaryform,havebeenfurtherdevelopedandhaveattainedtheirfullsignificance,etc。Theanatomyofmanisakeytotheanatomyoftheape。Ontheotherhand,rudimentsofmoreadvancedformsinthelowerspeciesofanimalscanonlybeunderstoodwhenthemoreadvancedformsarealreadyknown。Bourgeoiseconomythusprovidesakeytotheeconomyofantiquity,etc。Butitisquiteimpossible（togainthisinsight）inthemannerofthoseeconomistswhoobliterateallhistoricaldifferencesandwhoseeinallsocialphenomenaonlybourgeoisphenomena。Ifoneknowsrent,itispossibletounderstandtribute,tithe,etc。,buttheydonothavetobetreatedasidentical。
Sincebourgeoissocietyis,moreover,onlyacontradictoryformofdevelopment,itcontainsrelationsofearliersocietiesoftenmerelyinverystuntedformorevenintheformoftravesties,e。g。,communalownership。Thus,althoughitistruethatthecategoriesofbourgeoiseconomyarevalidforallothersocialformations,thishastobetakencumgranosalis,fortheymaycontaintheminanadvanced,stunted,caricatured,etc。,form,thatisalwayswithsubstantialdifferences。Whatiscalledhistoricalevolutiondependsingeneralonthefactthatthelatestformregardsearlieronesasstagesinthedevelopmentofitselfandconceivesthemalwaysinaone—sidedmanner,sinceonlyrarelyandunderquitespecialconditionsisasocietyabletoadoptacriticalattitudetowardsitself;inthiscontextwearenotofcoursediscussinghistoricalperiodswhichthemselvesbelievethattheyareperiodsofdecline。TheChristianreligionwasabletocontributetoanobjectiveunderstandingofearliermythologiesonlywhenitsself—criticismwastoacertainextentprepared,asitwerepotentially。
Similarly,onlywhentheself—criticismofbourgeoissocietyhadbegun,wasbourgeoispoliticaleconomyabletounderstandthefeudal,ancientandorientaleconomies。Insofarasbourgeoispoliticaleconomydidnotsimplyidentifyitselfwiththepastinamythologicalmanner,itscriticismofearliereconomies—especiallyofthefeudalsystemagainstwhichitstillhadtowageadirectstruggle—resembledthecriticismthatChristianitydirectedagainstheathenism,orwhichProtestantismdirectedagainstCatholicism。
Justasingeneralwhenexamininganyhistoricalorsocialscience,soalsointhecaseofthedevelopmentofeconomiccategoriesisitalwaysnecessarytorememberthatthesubject,inthiscontextcontemporarybourgeoissociety,ispresupposedbothinrealityandinthemind,andthatthereforecategoriesexpressformsofexistenceandconditionsofexistence——andsometimesmerelyseparateaspects——ofthisparticularsociety,thesubject;
thusthecategory,evenfromthescientificstandpoint,bynomeansbeginsatthemomentwhenitisdiscussedassuch。Thishastoberememberedbecauseitprovidesimportantcriteriaforthearrangementofthematerial。Forexample,nothingseemsmorenaturalthantobeginwithrent,i。e。,withlandedproperty,sinceitisassociatedwiththeearth,thesourceofallproductionandalllife,andwithagriculture,thefirstformofproductioninallsocietiesthathaveattainedameasureofstability。
Butnothingwouldbemoreerroneous。Thereisineverysocialformationaparticularbranchofproductionwhichdeterminesthepositionandimportanceofalltheothers,andtherelationsobtaininginthisbranchaccordinglydeterminetherelationsofallotherbranchesaswell。Itisasthoughlightofaparticularhuewerecastuponeverything,tingeingallothercoloursandmodifyingtheirspecificfeatures;orasifaspecialetherdeterminedthespecificgravityofeverythingfoundinit。Letustakeasanexamplepastoraltribes。（Tribeslivingexclusivelyonhuntingorfishingarebeyondtheboundarylinefromwhichrealdevelopmentbegins。）
Acertaintypeofagriculturalactivityoccursamongthemandthisdetermineslandownership。Itiscommunalownershipandretainsthisforminalargerorsmallermeasure,accordingtothedegreetowhichthesepeoplemaintaintheirtraditions,e。g。,communalownershipamongtheSlavs。Amongsettledagriculturalpeople—settledalreadytoalargeextent—whereagriculturepredominatesasinthesocietiesofantiquityandthefeudalperiod,evenmanufacture,itsstructureandtheformsofpropertycorrespondingthereto,have,insomemeasure,specificallyagrarianfeatures。Manufactureiseithercompletelydependentonagriculture,asintheearlierRomanperiod,orasintheMiddleAges,itcopiesinthetownandinitsconditionstheorganisationofthecountryside。IntheMiddleAgesevencapital——unlessitwassolelymoneycapital——consistedofthetraditionaltools,etc。,andretainedaspecificallyagrariancharacter。Thereversetakesplaceinbourgeoissociety。Agriculturetoanincreasingextentbecomesjustabranchofindustryandiscompletelydominatedbycapital。Thesameappliestorent。Inallformsinwhichlandedpropertyisthedecisivefactor,naturalrelationsstillpredominate;intheformsinwhichthedecisivefactoriscapital,social,historicallyevolvedelementspredominate。
Rentcannotbeunderstoodwithoutcapital,butcapitalcanbeunderstoodwithoutrent。Capitalistheeconomicpowerthatdominateseverythinginbourgeoissociety。Itmustformboththepointofdepartureandtheconclusionandithastobeexpoundedbeforelandedproperty。Afteranalysingcapitalandlandedpropertyseparately,theirinterconnectionmustbeexamined。
Itwouldbeinexpedientandwrongthereforetopresenttheeconomiccategoriessuccessivelyintheorderinwhichtheyhaveplayedthedominantroleinhistory。Onthecontrary,theirorderofsuccessionisdeterminedbytheirmutualrelationinmodernbourgeoissocietyandthisisquitethereverseofwhatappearstobenaturaltothemorinaccordancewiththesequenceofhistoricaldevelopmentThepointatissueisnottherolethatvariouseconomicrelationshaveplayedinthesuccessionofvarioussocialformationsappearinginthecourseofhistory;evenlessisittheirsequence\"asconcepts\"（Proudhon）（anebulousnotionofthehistoricalprocess）,buttheirpositionwithinmodernbourgeoissociety。
Itispreciselythepredominanceofagriculturalpeoplesintheancientworldwhichcausedthemerchantnations——Phoenicians,Carthaginians——
todevelopinsuchpurity（abstractprecision）。Forcapitalintheshapeofmerchantormoneycapitalappearsinthatabstractformwherecapitalhasnotyetbecomethedominantfactorinsociety。LombardsandJewsoccupiedthesamepositionwithregardtomediaevalagrariansocieties。
Anotherexampleofthevariousroleswhichthesamecategorieshaveplayedatdifferentstagesofsocietyarejoint—stockcompanies,oneofthemostrecentfeaturesofbourgeoissociety;buttheyarisealsoinitsearlyperiodintheformoflargeprivilegedcommercialcompanieswithrightsofmonopoly。
TheconceptofnationalwealthfindsitswayintotheworksoftheeconomistsoftheseventeenthcenturyasthenotionthatwealthiscreatedfortheState,whosepower,ontheotherhand,isproportionaltothiswealth——
anotionwhichtosomeextentstillsurvivesevenamongeighteenth—centuryeconomists。ThisisstillanunintentionallyhypocriticalmannerinwhichwealthandtheproductionofwealthareproclaimedtobethegoalofthemodernState,whichisregardedmerelyasameansforproducingwealth。
Thedispositionofmaterialhasevidentlytobemadeinsuchawaythat（section）onecomprisesgeneralabstractdefinitions,whichthereforeappertaininsomemeasuretoallsocialformations,butinthesensesetforthearlier。
Two,thecategorieswhichconstitutetheinternalstructureofbourgeoissocietyandonwhichtheprincipalclassesarebased。Capital,wage—labour,landedpropertyandtheirrelationstooneanother。Townandcountry。Thethreelargesocialclasses;exchangebetweenthem。Circulation。The（private）
creditsystem。Three,theStateastheepitomeofbourgeoissociety。Analysisofitsrelationstoitself。The44unproductive\"classes。Taxes。Nationaldebt。Publiccredit。Population。Colonies。Emigration。Four,internationalconditionsofproduction。Internationaldivisionoflabour。Internationalexchange。Exportandimport。Rateofexchange。Five,worldmarketandcrises。4。PRODUCTIONMeansofProductionandConditionsofProduction。
ConditionsofProductionandCommunication。
PoliticalFormsandFormsofCognitioninRelationtotheConditionsofProductionandCommunication。
LegalRelations。FamilyRelationsNotesregardingpointswhichhavetobementionedinthiscontextandshouldnotbeforgotten。
1。Wardevelops[certainfeatures]earlierthanpeace;thewayinwhichasaresultofwar,andinthearmies,etc。,certaineconomicconditions,e。g。,wage—labour,machinery,etc。,wereevolvedearlierthanwithincivilsociety。Therelationsbetweenproductivepowerandconditionsofcommunicationarelikewiseparticularlyobviousinthearmy。
2。Therelationofthehithertoexistingidealistichistoriographytorealistichistoriography。Inparticularwhatisknownashistoryofcivilisation,theoldhistoryofreligionandstates。（Thevariouskindsofhistoriographyhithertoexistingcouldalsobediscussedinthiscontext;theso—calledobjective,subjective（moralandothers）,philosophical[historiography）。）
3。Secondaryandtertiaryphenomena,ingeneralderivedandtransmitted,i。e。,non—primary,conditionsofproduction。Theinfluenceofinternationalrelations。
4。Reproachesaboutthematerialismofthisconception;relationtonaturalisticmaterialism。
5。Dialecticsoftheconceptsproductivepower（meansofproduction）
andrelationsofproduction,thelimitsofthisdialecticalconnection,whichdoesnotabolishtherealdifferences,havetobedefined。
6。Theunequaldevelopmentofmaterialproductionand,e。g。,thatofart。Theconceptofprogressisonthewholenottobeunderstoodintheusualabstractform。Modernart,etc。Thisdisproportionisnotasimportantanddifficulttograspaswithinconcretesocialrelations,e。g。,ineducation。RelationsoftheUnitedStatestoEurope。However,thereallydifficultpointtobediscussedhereishowtherelationsofproductionaslegalrelationstakepartinthisunevendevelopment。ForexampletherelationofRomancivillaw（thisappliesinsmallermeasuretocriminalandconstitutionallaw）tomodernproduction。
7。Thisconceptionappearstobeaninevitabledevelopment。Butvindicationofchance。How？（Freedom,etc。,aswell。）（Influenceofthemeansofcommunication。Worldhistorydidnotalwaysexist;historyasworldhistoryisaresult。）
8。Thestartingpointisofcoursethenaturallydeterminedfactors;
bothsubjectiveandobjective。Tribes,races,etc。
Asregardsart,itiswellknownthatsomeofitspeaksbynomeanscorrespondtothegeneraldevelopmentofsociety;nor,dotheythereforetothematerialsubstructure,theskeletonasitwereofitsorganisation。
ForexampletheGreekscomparedwithmodern[nations）,orelseShakespeare。Itisevenacknowledgedthatcertainbranchesofart,e。g。,theepos,cannolongerbeproducedintheirepoch—makingclassicformafterartisticproductionassuchhasbegun;inotherwordsthatcertainimportantcreationswithinthecompassofartareonlypossibleatanearlystageinthedevelopmentofart。Ifthisisthecasewithregardtodifferentbranchesofartwithinthesphereofartitself,itisnotsoremarkablethatthisshouldalsobethecasewithregardtotheentiresphereofartanditsrelationtothegeneraldevelopmentofsociety。Thedifficultyliesonlyinthegeneralformulationofthesecontradictions。Assoonastheyarereducedtospecificquestionstheyarealreadyexplained。
Letustake,forexample,therelationofGreekart,andthatofShakespeare,tothepresenttime。WeknowthatGreekmythologyisnotonlythearsenalofGreekart,butalsoitsbasis。IstheconceptionofnatureandofsocialrelationswhichunderliesGreekimaginationandthereforeGreek（art）possiblewhenthereareself—actingmules,railways,locomotivesandelectrictelegraphs？
WhatisaVulcancomparedwithRobertsandCo。,Jupitercomparedwiththelightningconductor,andHermescomparedwiththeCreditMobilier？
Allmythologysubdues,controlsandfashionstheforcesofnatureintheimaginationandthroughimagination;itdisappearsthereforewhenrealcontrolovertheseforcesisestablished。WhatbecomesofFamasidebysidewithPrintingHouseSquare？GreekartpresupposesGreekmythology,inotherwordsthatnaturalandsocialphenomenaarealreadyassimilatedinanunintentionallyartisticmannerbytheimaginationofthepeople。
ThisisthematerialofGreekart,notjustanymythology,i。e。,noteveryunconsciouslyartisticassimilationofnature（herethetermcomprisesallphysicalphenomena,includingsociety）;EgyptianmythologycouldneverbecomethebasisoforgiverisetoGreekart。Butatanyrate（itpresupposes）
amythology;onnoaccounthoweverasocialdevelopmentwhichprecludesamythologicalattitudetowardsnature,i。e。,anyattitudetonaturewhichmightgiverisetomyth;asocietythereforedemandingfromtheartistanimaginationindependentofmythology。
Regardedfromanotheraspect:isAchillespossiblewhenpowderandshothavebeeninvented？AndistheIliadpossibleatallwhentheprintingpressandevenprintingmachinesexist？Isitnotinevitablethatwiththeemergenceofthepressbarthesingingandthetellingandthemusecease,thatistheconditionsnecessaryforepicpoetrydisappear？
Thedifficultyweareconfrontedwithisnot,however,thatofunderstandinghowGreekartandepicpoetryareassociatedwithcertainformsofsocialdevelopment。Thedifficultyisthattheystillgiveusaestheticpleasureandareincertainrespectsregardedasastandardandunattainableideal。
Anadultcannotbecomeachildagain,orhebecomeschildish。Butdoesthenaiveteofthechildnotgivehimpleasure,anddoesnothehimselfendeavourtoreproducethechild\'sveracityonahigherlevel？Doesnotthechildineveryepochrepresentthecharacteroftheperiodinitsnaturalveracity？Whyshouldnotthehistoricalchildhoodofhumanity,whereitattaineditsmostbeautifulform,exertaneternalcharmbecauseitisastagethatwillneverrecur？Therearerudechildrenandprecociouschildren。
Manyoftheancientpeoplesbelongtothiscategory。TheGreekswerenormalchildren。Thecharmtheirarthasforusdoesnotconflictwiththeimmaturestageofthesocietyinwhichitoriginated。Onthecontraryitscharmisaconsequenceofthisandisinseparablylinkedwiththefactthattheimmaturesocialconditionswhichgaverise,andwhichalonecouldgiverise,tothisartcannotrecur。
WrittenbetweentheendofAugustandthemiddleofSeptember1857
Engels\'ReviewofMarx\'sBookKarlMarx\'sACONTRIBUTIONTOTHECRITIQUEOFPOLITICALECONOMY
FREDERICKENGELS（Reviewof）KARLMARX,\"ACONTRIBUTIONTOTHECRITIQUEOFPOLITICALECONOMY\"I[DasVolk,30No。14,August6,1859]
TheGermanshavelongsinceshownthatinallspheresofsciencetheyareequal,andinmostofthemsuperior,toothercivilisednations。Onlyonebranchofscience,politicaleconomy,hadnoGermannameamongitsforemostscholars。Thereasonisobvious。Politicaleconomyisthetheoreticalanalysisofmodernbourgeoissocietyandthereforepresupposesdevelopedbourgeoisconditions,conditionswhichforcenturies,followingthewarsinthewakeoftheReformationandthepeasantwarsandespeciallytheThirtyYears\'War,couldnotestablishthemselvesinGermany。TheseparationoftheNetherlandsfromtheEmpireremovedGermanyfromtheinternationaltraderoutesandrestrictedherindustrialdevelopmentfromtheverybeginningtothepettiestscale。WhiletheGermanspainfullyandslowlyrecoveredfromthedevastationsofthecivilwars,whiletheyuseduptheirstoreofcivicenergy,whichhadneverbeenverylarge,infutilestruggleagainstthecustomsbarriersandabsurdcommercialregulationswhicheverypettyprincelingandimperialbaroninflictedupontheindustryofhissubjects,whiletheimperialcitieswiththeircraft—guildpracticesandpatricianspiritwenttoruin——Holland,EnglandandFrancemeanwhileconqueredtheleadingpositionsininternationaltrade,establishedonecolonyafteranotherandbroughtmanufactoryproductiontotheheightofitsdevelopment,untilfinallyEngland,withtheaidofsteampower,whichmadehercoalandirondepositsvaluable,headedmodernbourgeoisdevelopment。ButpoliticaleconomycouldnotariseinGermanysolongasastrugglehadstilltobewagedagainstsopreposterouslyantiquatedremnantsoftheMiddleAgesasthosewhichhamperedthebourgeoisdevelopmentofhermaterialforcesuntil1830。OnlytheestablishmentoftheCustomsUnionenabledtheGermanstocomprehendpoliticaleconomyatall。ItwasindeedatthistimethatEnglishandFrencheconomicworksbegantobeimportedforthebenefitoftheGermanmiddleclass。Menoflearningandbureaucratssoongotholdoftheimportedmaterialandtreateditinawaywhichdoeslittlecredittothe\"Germanintellect\"。Theliteraryeffortsofahotchpotchofchevaliersd\'industrie,traders,schoolmastersandbureaucratsproducedabunchofGermaneconomicpublicationswhichasregardstriteness,banality,frivolity,verbosityandplagiarismareequalledonlybytheGermannovel。Amongpeoplepursuingpracticalobjectivestherearosefirsttheprotectionistschooloftheindustrialists,whosechiefspokesman,List,isstillthebestthatGermanbourgeoispoliticaleconomyhasproducedalthoughhiscelebratedworkisentirelycopiedfromtheFrenchmanFerrier,thetheoreticalcreatoroftheContinentalSystem。Inoppositiontothistrendthefree—tradeschoolwasformedinthefortiesbymerchantsfromtheBalticprovinces,whofumblinglyrepeatedtheargumentsoftheEnglishFreeTraderswithchildlike,butnotdisinterested,faith。Finally,amongtheschoolmastersandbureaucratswhohadtohandlethetheoreticalaspectstherewereuncriticalanddesiccatedcollectorsofherbaria,likeHerrRau,pseudo—cleverspeculatorswhotranslatedforeignpropositionsintoundigestedHegelianlanguagelikeHerrStein,orgleanerswithliterarypretensionsinthefieldofso—calledhistoryofcivilisation,likeHerrRiehl。Theupshotofallthiswascameralistics,aneclecticeconomicsaucecoveringahotchpotchofsundrytrivialities,ofthesortajuniorcivilservantmightfindusefultorememberduringhisfinalexamination。
WhileinthiswayinGermanythebourgeoisie,theschoolmastersandthebureaucratswerestillmakinggreatexertionstolearnbyrote,andinsomemeasuretounderstand,thefirstelementsofAnglo—Frenchpoliticaleconomy,whichtheyregardedasincontestabledogmas,theGermanproletarianpartyappearedonthescene。Itstheoreticalaspectwaswhollybasedonastudyofpoliticaleconomy,andGermanpoliticaleconomyasanindependentsciencedatesalsofromtheemergenceofthisparty。TheessentialfoundationofthisGermanpoliticaleconomyisthematerialistconceptionofhistorywhoseprincipalfeaturesarebrieflyoutlinedinthe\"Preface\"totheabove—namedwork。Sincethe\"Preface\"hasinthemainalreadybeenpublishedinDasVolk,werefertoit。Thepropositionthat\"theprocessofsocial,politicalandintellectuallifeisaltogethernecessitatedbythemodeofproductionofmateriallife\";thatallsocialandpoliticalrelations,allreligiousandlegalsystems,alltheoreticalconceptionswhichariseinthecourseofhistorycanonlybeunderstoodifthematerialconditionsoflifeobtainingduringtherelevantepochhavebeenunderstoodandtheformeraretracedbacktothesematerialconditions,wasarevolutionarydiscoverynotonlyforeconomicsbutalsoforallhistoricalsciences——andallbranchesofsciencewhicharenotnaturalsciencesarehistorical。\"Itisnottheconsciousnessofmenthatdeterminestheirexistence,buttheirsocialexistencethatdeterminestheirconsciousness。\"
Thispropositionissosimplethatitshouldbeself—evidenttoanyonenotboggeddowninidealisthumbug。Butitleadstohighlyrevolutionaryconsequencesnotonlyinthetheoreticalspherebutalsointhepracticalsphere。\"Atacertainstageofdevelopment,thematerialproductiveforcesofsocietycomeintoconflictwiththeexistingrelationsofproductionor——thismerelyexpressesthesamethinginlegalterms——withthepropertyrelationswithintheframeworkofwhichtheyhaveoperatedhitherto。Fromformsofdevelopmentoftheproductiveforcestheserelationsturnintotheirfetters。Thenbeginsaneraofsocialrevolution。Thechangesintheeconomicfoundationleadsoonerorlatertothetransformationofthewholeimmensesuperstructure……Thebourgeoismodeofproductionisthelastantagonisticformofthesocialprocessofproduction——antagonisticnotinthesenseofindividualantagonismbutofanantagonismthatemanatesfromtheindividuals\'socialconditionsofexistence——buttheproductiveforcesdevelopingwithinbourgeoissocietycreatealsothematerialconditionsforasolutionofthisantagonism。\"Theprospectofagiganticrevolution,themostgiganticrevolutionthathasevertakenplace,accordinglypresentsitselftousassoonaswepursueourmaterialistthesisfurtherandapplyittothepresenttime。
Closerconsiderationshowsimmediatelythatalreadythefirstconsequencesoftheapparentlysimpleproposition,thattheconsciousnessofmenisdeterminedbytheirexistenceandnottheotherwayround,spurnallformsofidealism,eventhemostconcealedones,rejectingallconventionalandcustomaryviewsofhistoricalmatters。Theentiretraditionalmannerofpoliticalreasoningisupset;patrioticmagnanimityindignantlyobjectstosuchanunprincipledinterpretation。ItwasthusinevitablethatthenewpointofviewshouldshocknotonlytheexponentsofthebourgeoisiebutalsothemassofFrenchsocialistswhointendedtorevolutionisetheworldbyvirtueofthemagicwords,liberté,égalité,fraternite。ButitutterlyenragedthevociferousGermanvulgardemocrats。
Theyneverthelesshaveapartialityforattemptingtoplagiarisethenewideasintheirowninterest,althoughwithanexceptionallackofunderstanding。
Thedemonstrationofthematerialistconceptionevenuponasinglehistoricalexamplewasascientifictaskrequiringyearsofquietresearch,foritisevidentthatmereemptytalkcanachievenothinginthiscontextandthatonlyanabundanceofcriticallyexaminedhistoricalmaterialwhichhasbeencompletelymasteredcanmakeitpossibletosolvesuchaproblem。
OurpartywaspropelledontothepoliticalstagebytheFebruaryRevolutionandthuspreventedfrompursuingpurelyscientificaims。Thefundamentalconception,nevertheless,runslikeanunbrokenthreadthroughallliteraryproductionsoftheparty。Everyoneofthemshowsthattheactionsineachparticularcasewereinvariablyinitiatedbymaterialcausesandnotbytheaccompanyingphrases,thatonthecontrarythepoliticalandlegalphrases,likethepoliticalactionsandtheirresults,originatedinmaterialcauses。
AfterthedefeatoftheRevolutionof1848—49,atatimewhenitbecameincreasinglyimpossibletoexertanyinfluenceonGermanyfromabroad,ourpartyrelinquishedthefieldofemigrantsquabbles——forthatwastheonlyfeasibleactionleft——tothevulgardemocrats。Whilethesewerechasingabouttotheirheart\'scontent,scufflingtoday,fraternisingtomorrowandthedayafteroncemorewashingtheirdirtylineninpublic,whiletheywentbeggingthroughoutAmericaandimmediatelyafterwardsstartedanotherrowoverthedivisionofthefewcoinstheyhadcollected——ourpartywasgladtofindoncemoresomequiettimeforresearchwork。Ithadthegreatadvantagethatitstheoreticalfoundationwasanewscientificconceptiontheelaborationofwhichprovidedadequatework;
evenforthisreasonaloneitcouldneverbecomesodemoralisedasthe\"greatmen\"oftheemigration。
Thebookunderconsiderationisthefirstresultofthesestudies。II[DasVolk,No。16,August20,1859]
Thepurposeofaworkliketheoneunderreviewcannotsimplybedesultorycriticismofseparatesectionsofpoliticaleconomyorthediscussionofoneoranothereconomicissueinisolation。Onthecontrary,itisfromthebeginningdesignedtogiveasystematicrésuméofthewholecomplexofpoliticaleconomyandacoherentelaborationofthelawsgoverningbourgeoisproductionandbourgeoisexchange。Thiselaborationisatthesametimeacomprehensivecritiqueofeconomicliterature,foreconomistsarenothingbutinterpretersofandapologistsfortheselaws。
HardlyanyattempthasbeenmadesinceHegel\'sdeathtosetforthanybranchofscienceinitsspecificinnercoherence。TheofficialHegelianschoolhadassimilatedonlythemostsimpledevicesofthemaster\'sdialecticsandappliedthemtoeverythingandanything,oftenmoreoverwithridiculousincompetence。Hegel\'swholeheritagewas,sofarastheywereconcerned,confinedexclusivelytoatemplate,bymeansofwhichanysubjectcouldbeknockedintoshape,andasetofwordsandphraseswhoseonlyremainingpurposewastoturnupconvenientlywhenevertheyexperiencedalackofideasandofconcreteknowledge。Thusithappened,asaprofessoratBonnhassaid,thattheseHegeliansknewnothingbutcouldwriteabouteverything。
Theresultswere,ofcourse,accordingly。Foralltheirconceitthesegentlemenwere,however,sufficientlyconsciousoftheirfailingstoavoidmajorproblemsasfaraspossible。Thesuperannuatedfossilisedtypeoflearninghelditsgroundbecauseofitssuperiorfactualknowledge,andafterFeuerbach\'srenunciationofthespeculativemethod,Hegelianismgraduallydiedaway,anditseemedthatsciencewasoncemoredominatedbyantiquatedmetaphysicswithitsrigidcategories。
Forthistherewerequitenaturalreasons。TheruleoftheHegelianDiadochi,whichendedinemptyphrases,wasnaturallyfollowedbyaperiodinwhichtheconcretecontentofsciencepredominatedoncemoreovertheformalaspect。Moreover,Germanyatthesametimeapplieditselfwithquiteextraordinaryenergytothenaturalsciences,inaccordancewiththeimmensebourgeoisdevelopmentsettinginafter1848;withthecomingintofashionofthesesciences,inwhichthespeculativetrendhadneverachievedanyrealimportance,theoldmetaphysicalmodeofthinking,evendowntotheextremetrivialityofWolff,gainedgroundrapidly。Hegelwasforgottenandanewmaterialismaroseinthenaturalsciences;itdifferedinprincipleverylittlefromthematerialismoftheeighteenthcenturyanditsmainadvantagewasmerelyagreaterstockofdatarelatingtothenaturalsciences,especiallychemistryandphysiology。Thenarrow—mindedmodeofthinkingofthepre—KantianperiodinitsmostbanalformisreproducedbyBüchnerandVogt,andevenMoleschott,whoswearsbyFeuerbach,frequentlyfloundersinahighlydivertingmannerthroughthemostsimplecategories。Thejadedcart—horseofthecommonplacebourgeoismindfaltersofcourseinconfusioninfrontoftheditchseparatingsubstancefromappearance,andcausefromeffect;butoneshouldnotridecarthorsesifoneintendstogo。coursingovertheveryroughgroundofabstractreasoning。
Inthiscontext,therefore,aquestionhadtobesolvedwhichwasnotconnectedwithpoliticaleconomyassuch。Whichscientificmethodshouldbeused？Therewas,ontheonehand,theHegeliandialecticsinthequiteabstract\"speculative\"forminwhichHegelhadleftit,andontheotherhandtheordinary,mainlyWolffian,metaphysicalmethod,whichhadcomeagainintovogue,andwhichwasalsoemployedbythebourgeoiseconomiststowritetheirbulkyramblingvolumes。ThesecondmethodhadbeentheoreticallydemolishedbyKantandparticularlybyHegelsothatitscontinueduseinpracticecouldonlyberenderedpossiblebyinertiaandtheabsenceofanalternativesimplemethod。TheHegelianmethod,ontheotherhand,wasinitsexistingformquiteinapplicable。Itwasessentiallyidealistandthemainpointinthiscasewastheelaborationofaworldoutlookthatwasmorematerialistthananypreviousone。Hegel\'smethodtookasitspointofdeparturepurethought,whereasherethestartingpointwastobeinexorablefacts。Amethodwhich,accordingtoitsownavowal,\"camefromnothingthroughnothingtonothing\"wasinthisshapebynomeanssuitable。
Itwas,nevertheless,theonlyelementintheentireavailablelogicalmaterialwhichcouldatleastserveasapointoforigin。Ithadnotbeensubjectedtocriticism,notbeenoverthrown;noneoftheopponentsofthegreatdialecticianhadbeenabletomakeabreachintheproudedifice。
IthadbeenforgottenbecausetheHegelianschooldidnotknowhowtoapplyit。Hence,itwasfirstofallessentialtocarrythroughathoroughcritiqueoftheHegelianmethod。
ItwastheexceptionalhistoricalsenseunderlyingHegel\'smannerofreasoningwhichdistinguisheditfromthatofallotherphilosophers。Howeverabstractandidealisttheformemployed,yethisevolutionofideasrunsalwaysparallelwiththeevolutionofuniversalhistory,andthelatterwasindeedsupposedtobeonlytheproofoftheformer。Althoughthisreversedtheactualrelationandstooditonitshead,yettherealcontentwasinvariablyincorporatedinhisphilosophy,especiallysinceHegel——unlikehisfollowers——didnotrelyonignorance,butwasoneofthemosteruditethinkersofalltime。Hewasthefirsttotrytodemonstratethatthereisanevolution,anintrinsiccoherenceinhistory,andhoweverstrangesomethingsinhisphilosophyofhistorymayseemtousnow,thegrandeurofthebasicconceptionisstilladmirabletoday,comparedbothwithhispredecessorsandwiththosewhofollowinghimventuredtoadvancegeneralhistoricalobservations。ThismonumentalconceptionofhistorypervadesthePhänomenologies,AsthetikandGeschichtederPhilosophie,andthematerialiseverywheresetforthhistorically,inadefinitehistoricalcontext,evenifinanabstractdistortedmanner。
Thisepoch—makingconceptionofhistorywasadirecttheoreticalpre—conditionofthenewmaterialistoutlook,andalreadythisconstitutedaconnectinglinkwiththelogicalmethodaswell。Since,evenfromthestandpointof\"purereasoning\",thisforgottendialecticshadledtosuchresults,andhadmoreoverwiththegreatesteasecopedwiththewholeoftheformerlogicandmetaphysics,itmustatalleventscomprisemorethansophistryandhairsplitting。Butthecritiqueofthismethod,whichtheentireofficialphilosophyhadevadedandstillevades,wasnosmallmatter。
MarxwasandistheonlyonewhocouldundertaketheworkofextractingfromtheHegelianlogicthenucleuscontainingHegel\'srealdiscoveriesinthisfield,andofestablishingthedialecticalmethod,divestedofitsidealistwrappings,inthesimpleforminwhichitbecomestheonlycorrectmodeofconceptualevolution。TheworkingoutofthemethodwhichunderliesMarx\'scritiqueofpoliticaleconomyis,wethink,aresulthardlylesssignificantthanthebasicmaterialistconception。
Evenafterthedeterminationofthemethod,thecritiqueofeconomicscouldstillbearrangedintwoways——historicallyorlogically。Sinceinthecourseofhistory,asinitsliteraryreflection,theevolutionproceedsbyandlargefromthesimplesttothemorecomplexrelations,thehistoricaldevelopmentofpoliticaleconomyconstitutedanaturalclue,whichthecritiquecouldtakeasapointofdeparture,andthentheeconomiccategorieswouldappearonthewholeinthesameorderasinthelogicalexposition。Thisformseemstohavetheadvantageofgreaterlucidity,forittracestheactualdevelopment,butinfactitwouldthusbecome,atmost,morepopular。Historymovesofteninleapsandboundsandinazigzagline,andasthiswouldhavetobefollowedthroughout,itwouldmeannotonlythataconsiderableamountofmaterialofslightimportancewouldhavetobeincluded,butalsothatthetrainofthoughtwouldfrequentlyhavetobeinterrupted;itwould,moreover,beimpossibletowritethehistoryofeconomywithoutthatofbourgeoissociety,andthetaskwouldthusbecomeimmense,becauseoftheabsenceofallpreliminarystudies。
Thelogicalmethodofapproachwasthereforetheonlysuitableone。This,however,isindeednothingbutthehistoricalmethod,onlystrippedofthehistoricalformanddivertingchanceoccurrences。Thepointwherethishistorybeginsmustalsobethestartingpointofthetrainofthought,anditsfurtherprogresswillbesimplythereflection,inabstractandtheoreticallyconsistentform,ofthehistoricalcourse。Thoughthereflectioniscorrected,itiscorrectedinaccordancewithlawsprovidedbytheactualhistoricalcourse,sinceeachfactorcanbeexaminedatthestageofdevelopmentwhereitreachesitsfullmaturity,itsclassicalform。
Withthismethodwebeginwiththefirstandsimplestrelationwhichishistorically,actuallyavailable,thusinthiscontextwiththefirsteconomicrelationtobefound。Weanalysethisrelation。Thefactthatitisarelationalreadyimpliesthatithastwoaspectswhicharerelatedtoeachother。Eachoftheseaspectsisexaminedseparately;thisrevealsthenatureoftheirmutualbehaviour,theirreciprocalaction。Contradictionswillemergedemandingasolution。Butsincewearenotexamininganabstractmentalprocessthattakesplacesolelyinourmind,butanactualeventwhichreallytookplaceatsometimeorother,orwhichisstilltakingplace,thesecontradictionswillhaveariseninpracticeandhaveprobablybeensolved。Weshalltracethemodeofthissolutionandfindthatithasbeeneffectedbyestablishinganewrelation,whosetwocontradictoryaspectsweshallthenhavetosetforth,andsoon。
Politicaleconomybeginswithcommodities,withthemomentwhenproductsareexchanged,eitherbyindividualsorbyprimitivecommunities。
Theproductbeingexchangedisacommodity。Butitisacommoditymerelybyvirtueofthething,theproductbeinglinkedwitharelationbetweentwopersonsorcommunities,therelationbetweenproducerandconsumer,whoatthisstagearenolongerunitedinthesameperson。Hereisatonceanexampleofapeculiarfact,whichpervadesthewholeeconomyandhasproducedseriousconfusioninthemindsofbourgeoiseconomists——economicsisnotconcernedwiththingsbutwithrelationsbetweenpersons,andinthefinalanalysisbetweenclasses;theserelationshoweverarealwaysboundtothingsandappearasthings。Althoughafeweconomistshadaninklingofthisconnectioninisolatedinstances,Marxwasthefirsttorevealitssignificancefortheentireeconomythusmakingthemostdifficultproblemssosimpleandclearthatevenbourgeoiseconomistswillnowbeabletograspthem。
Ifweexaminethevariousaspectsofthecommodity,thatisofthefullyevolvedcommodityandnotasitatfirstslowlyemergesinthespontaneousbarteroftwoprimitivecommunities,itpresentsitselftousfromtwoangles,thatofuse—valueandofexchange—value,andthuswecomeimmediatelytotheprovinceofeconomicdebate。AnyonewishingtofindastrikinginstanceofthefactthattheGermandialecticmethodatitspresentstageofdevelopmentisatleastassuperiortotheoldsuperficiallyglibmetaphysicalmethodasrailwaysaretothemediaevalmeansoftransport,shouldlookupAdamSmithoranyotherauthoritativeeconomistofreputetoseehowmuchdistressexchange—valueanduse—valuecausedthesegentlemen,thedifficultytheyhadindistinguishingthetwoproperlyandinexpressingthedeterminateformpeculiartoeach,andthencomparetheclear,simpleexpositiongivenbyMarx。
Afteruse—valueandexchange—valuehavebeenexpounded,thecommodityasadirectunityofthetwoisdescribedasitenterstheexchangeprocess。Thecontradictionsarisingheremaybefoundonpp。20and21。Wemerelynotethatthesecontradictionsarenotonlyofinterestfortheoretical,abstractreasons,butthattheyalsoreflectthedifficultiesoriginatingfromthenatureofdirectinterchange,i。e。,simplebarter,andtheimpossibilitiesinevitablyconfrontingthisfirstcrudeformofexchange。Thesolutionoftheseimpossibilitiesisachievedbyinvestingaspecificcommodity——money——withtheattributeofrepresentingtheexchange—valueofallothercommodities。Moneyorsimplecirculationisthenanalysedinthesecondchapter,namely（1）moneyasameasureofvalue,and,atthesametime,valuemeasuredintermsofmoney,i。e。,price,ismorecloselydefined;（2）moneyasmeansofcirculationand（3）
theunityofthetwoaspects,realmoneywhichrepresentsbourgeoismaterialwealthasawhole。Thisconcludesthefirstpart,theconversionofmoneyintocapitalisleftforthesecondpart。
Onecanseethatwiththismethod,thelogicalexpositionneedbynomeansbeconfinedtothepurelyabstractsphere。Onthecontrary,itrequireshistoricalillustrationandcontinuouscontactwithreality。Agreatvarietyofsuchevidenceisthereforeinserted,comprisingreferencesbothtodifferentstagesintheactualhistoricalcourseofsocialdevelopmentandtoeconomicworks,inwhichtheworkingoutofluciddefinitionsofeconomicrelationsistracedfromtheoutset。Thecritiqueofparticular,moreorlessone—sidedorconfusedinterpretationsisthussubstantiallygivenalreadyinthelogicalexpositionandcanbekeptquiteshort。
Theeconomiccontentofthebookwillbediscussedinathirdarticle。
WrittenbetweenAugust8and15,1859
