The relationship of private property persists as the relationship of the community to the world of things. The category of the worker is not done away with, but extended to all men. For it the sole purpose of life and existence is direct, physical possession. It wants to disregard talent, etc., in an arbitrary manner. As such it appears in a two-fold form: on the one hand, the dominion of material property bulks so large that it wants to destroy everything which is not capable of being possessed by all as private property. (1) In its first form only a generalisation and consummation of it. Finally, communism is the positive expression of annulled private property – at first as universal private property.īy embracing this relation as a whole, communism is: For instance, Fourier, who, like the Physiocrats, also conceives agricultural labour to be at least the exemplary type, whereas Saint-Simon declares in contrast that industrial labour as such is the essence, and accordingly aspires to the exclusive rule of the industrialists and the improvement of the workers’ condition. Or a particular form of labour – labour levelled down, fragmented, and therefore unfree – is conceived as the source of private property’s perniciousness and of its existence in estrangement from men. Its form of existence is therefore capital, which is to be annulled “as such” (Proudhon). Private property is first considered only in its objective aspect – but nevertheless with labour as its essence. The transcendence of self-estrangement follows the same course as self-estrangement. But labour, the subjective essence of private property as exclusion of property, and capital, objective labour as exclusion of labour, constitute private property as its developed state of contradiction – hence a dynamic relationship driving towards resolution. It does not yet appear as having been established by private property itself. It can find expression in this first form even without the advanced development of private property (as in ancient Rome, Turkey, etc.). The antithesis between lack of property and property, so long as it is not comprehended as the antithesis of labour and capital, still remains an indifferent antithesis, not grasped in its active connection, in its internal relation, not yet grasped as a contradiction. Private Property and Communism, Marx, 1844Įconomic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |