英文录入.docx

英文录入.docx

《英文录入.docx》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《英文录入.docx（7页珍藏版）》请在冰点文库上搜索。

英文录入

ThelattergroupofMarxistsmadetwomajorcriticismsofthepopulistunder-consumptionargument.First,theynotedthatitwasafactthatcapitalistsandcommodityrelationswererapidlygrowingeverywhereinRussia.Lenin’sfirstbookTheDevelopmentofCapitalisminRussia（1899）wasaimedatmakingjustthatpoint.Secondly,Leninandtheothersattackedthelogicalbasisofthepopulistargument.Thebasicerror,theysaid,layinimaginingthatevenunder-capitalism,consumptionwasthegoalofproduction.Capitalismproducedforprofit,notconsumption,andMarx’sanalysisofexpandedreproductionestablishedbeyondadoubtthatthisprofit-motivatedproductionwasentirelycapableofgeneratingitsowninternalmarkets.Under-consumptionwasnotanintrinsicproblem.Capitalismwasalreadythere,itwasviableandspreading,andorganizingtheurbanproletariatwasanurgenttask.

ThatroundofthedebatewasdecisivelywonbyStruve,Bulgakov,Tugan-BaranowskyandLenin.Buttheirvictoryonlysetthestageforanother,evenmoreimportantseriesofquestions:

ifcapitalismwasindeedcapableofself-sustainedgrowth,whatistheretopreventitfromgrowingforever?

Whatareitslimits,inotherwords?

Moreover,howarewetounderstandthedevastatingcrisisitisperiodicallysubjectto?

Tugan-Baranowsky’sresponsewastoarguetheextremepositionthatcapitalismwastotallyindependentofconsumption,providedDepartmentsIandIIgrewinthecorrectproportionstooneanother.But,heargued,giventheanarchyofcapitalistproduction,thiscorrectproportionalitywasamatterofchance.Thetrial-by-errornatureofcapitalistproductionwouldthereforeperiodicallygiverisetosuchgreatimbalancesthatreproductionwouldbeinterruptedandacrisisbreakout.LeninrejectedTugan-Baranowsky’sassertionthatconsumptionwasirrelevant,butatthistimeotherthanemphasizingtheanarchyofcapitalistproductionasasourceofcrisistheory.Hewasnottoreturntohissubject.InGermany,sometenyearslaterthedisproportionalitytheoryofcrisescroppedupagain,thistimeinRudolphHilfer-ding’smassiveworkonmonopolycapitalism.BothTugan-BaranowskyandHilferdingwerelatertoarguethatsinceitwastheanarchyofcapitalismwhichledtocrises,planningwouldeliminatecrises.“Organizedcapitalism,”inHilferding’swords,wasthesolution,andtheparliamentarypathtoStatecontrolwasthemeans.

RosaLuxemburgrefusedtoacceptthisresolutionofthedebate.Asarevolutionaryactivist,shewascompletelyopposedtothereformismwhichthedisproportionalitytheoryseemedtoengender.Onceoneadmits“thatcapitalistdevelopmentdosenotmoveinthedirectionofitsownruin,”shedeclared,“thensocialismceasestobeobjectivelynecessary.”Toabandonthetheoryofcapitalistcollapsewastoabandonscientificsocialism.AndsoshesetouttorevivetheMarxistunder-consumptiondebate.

SinceitwasMarx’sexamplesofexpandingreproduction（balancedgrowth）whichprovedtobethedecisivefactorintheearlierdebateamongRussianMarxists,Luxemburgattackedtheseexamplesdirectly.Marxplainlydemonstratedtheabstractpossibilityofexpandedreproduction,sheconcerned,buthedidnotseemtorealizebecause,fromasocialpointofview,thecapitalistbehavioritrequiresmakesnosense.Imaginethatattheendofaproductioncyclethewholesocialproductisdepositedinawarehouse.Atthispointcapitalistscomeforwardandwithdrawaportionofthetotalproducttoreplacetheirproducergoodsusedupinthelastcycle,andworkerscomeandwithdrawtheirmeansofconsumption.Thisleavesthesurplusproduct,fromwhichcapitalistswithdrawaportionfortheirpersonalconsumption.NowLuxemburgasks,wheredothebuyersfortherestoftheproductcomefrom?

（Thisisofcoursethetraditionalunder-consumptionproblemoffillingthe“demandgap”）.IfMarxisright,shesays,thenitisthecapitalistclasswhichbuysbacktherestoftheproductinordertoinvestitandthusexpandproductivecapacity.Butthatmakesnosenseatall,for“whoarethenewconsumersforwhosesakeproductionisevermoretobeenlarged?

”EvenifcapitalistsdidwhatMarxsaystheywill,inthenextperiodproductivecapacitywillbeevengreater,thegaptobefilledevenlarger,andtheproblemevenmoreintractable.“Marx’sdiagramofaccumulationdoesnotsolvethequestionofwhoistobenefitintheendbyenlargedreproduction…”Expandedreproductionisalgebraicallypossiblebutsociallyimpossible.

Itfollowsthatactualcapitalistaccumulationcanbeexplainedonlythroughsomeforcesexternalto“pure”capitalistrelations.LuxemburgnotesthattheMalthusiansolutionofathirdclassofunproductiveconsumersmakesnosense,sincetheirrevenuecouldonlycomefromprofitsorwages.Similarly,foreigntradeamongcapitalistnationsalsoprovidesnosolutionforcapitalismasawhole,sinceitisinternaltotheworldsystem.Shethereforearguesthatcapitalistaccumulationrequiresastrataofbuyersoutsideofcapitalistsocietywhocontinuallybuymorefromitthantheyselltoit.Thustradebetweencapitalistandnon-capitalistspheresisaprimenecessityforthehistoricalexistenceofcapitalism,andimperialismnecessarilyarisesascapitalistnationsstruggleovercontroloftheseallimportantsourcesofeffectivedemand.Moreover,ascapitalismexpandstocovertheglobethenon-capitalismmilieushrinkscorrespondingly,andwithitshrinkstheprimesourceofaccumulation.Thetendencytocrisesisheightened,andcompetitionamongcapitalistnationfortheremainingnon-capitalistareasintensifies.Worldcrises,warsandrevolutionsaretheinevitableoutcomesofthisprocess.

EvenifLuxemburgwererightabouttheimpossibilityofaccumulation,hersolutionwouldnotworksinceitrequiresthe“ThirdWorld”tocontinuallybuymorethanitsells.Wherewouldtheexcessrevenuecomefrom?

Butinfactsheisalsowrongaboutthepossibilityofaccumulation.Toseethisweneedtoreturnbrieflytotheanalysispresentedatthebeginningofthissection.Recallthatattheendoftheproductioncycle,itisthecapitalistswhoareinpossessionofthewholesocialproduct.Atthesametime,itisalsotheirgrossinvestmentandpersonalconsumptionexpenditureswhicharetheoriginalsourceofeffectivedemandforthisveryproduct（sinceworker’swagesareapartofoverallinvestment）.Now,asidefromtheirownpersonalconsumption,theirremainingexpenditure（grossinvestment）isinnowaymotivatedbyconsumptionassuch.Itismotivatedentirelybytheanticipationofprofit.WhatMarx’sexamplesshowisthatifcapitalistsdidundertaketheappropriateamountofinvestment,thentheywouldindeedbeabletoselltheirproductandmaketheanticipatedprofits.Ifthissuccessspursthemtoreinvestonceagaininanticipationofyetmoreprofits,theywouldberewardedonceagain,andsoon.Allthewhileconsumptionwouldexpandduetothegrowingemploymentofworkersandthegrowingwealthofcapitalists.Butthisexpansionofconsumptionwouldbeaconsequence,notacause.

YetifthisrefutesLuxemburg’scriticismsofexpandedreproduction,itstilldoesnotanswerthetwocrucialquestionsshebeganwith.First,whatforces,ifany,makeexpandedreproductionpossibleinreality?

Andsecond,isitnottruethatifexpandedreproductionisactuallypossible,“capitalistdevelopmentdosenotmoveinthedirectionofitsownruin?

”

Thatwhichtheorydebates,realitydecides.In1929adevastatingworldwidecapitalistcrisiserupted,tobefollowedbyovertenyearsofdeepdepressionandunemployment.Giventhisback-ground,morerapidlyrosetoprominence.

Thefirstmajorattempttoreviveunder-consumptiontheoryasanexplanationofcriseswasmadebyPaulSweezy,inhisinfluentialbookTheTheoryofCapitalistDevelopment（1942）.Sweezyexplicitlysetouttoformulateanunder-consumptiontheory“freeoftheobjectionswhichhavebeenleveledatearlierversions.”

InthisearlyattemptSweezyisstillverymuchinthegripofthetraditionalunder-consumptionnotionthatthedemandforconsumergoodsregulatesoverallproduction.FromthispointofviewDepartmentIappearsaspartoftheverticallyintegratedproductiveapparatusofDepartmentIIsothatchangesintheoutputofDepartmentI（producergoods）areineffectchangesinthecapacitytoproduceconsumergoods.Inaddition,Sweezyarguesthat“empiricalevidence”suggeststhata1%changeinDepartmentIoutputwillincreasecapacityoutputofconsumergoodsby1%.ThisisavirtualreplayofHobson,whomweanalyzedearlier.

Nowconsidereffectivedemand,whichaswehaveseeniscomposedofcapitalistconsumptionandtotalinvestmentexpenditures（thelatterinturnbeingcomposedofexpendituresonproducergoodsandonhiringworkers）.Ascapitalismdevelops,Sweezynotes,mechanizationproceedsapaceandittakesmoreandmoremachinesandmaterialstobackuponeworker;thismeansthatcapitalistinvestmentexpendituresonproducergoodsrisefasterthanthoseonwages.Givenhisanalysisofproduction,theinvestmentexpendituresonproducergoodsimplyproportionalincreasesinconsumergoodscapacity,whereasthemoreslowlyrisingexpendituresonwagesofcoursetranslateintoworkers’consumption.Itappears,therefore,thatthecapacitytoproduceconsumergoodsexpandsfasterthantheconsumptiondemandofworkers.A“demandgap”thusopensup.Ofcourse,capitalistconsumptiondemandmightfillthegap.Butascapitalismdevelopscapitaliststendtoinvestproportionatelymore,andconsumeproportionatelyless,oftheirprofits,sothattheirconsumptionlagsbehindtheproductivecapacityofDepartmentII.Sweezyconcludes:

…itfollowsthattherei