Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 02:25, 26 December 2020

The neutrality of this article is disputed. Relevant discussion may be found on the talk page. Please do not remove this message until conditions to do so are met. (December 2020) (Learn how and when to remove this message)

This article relies excessively on references to primary sources. Please improve this article by adding secondary or tertiary sources. Find sources: "Exploitation of labour" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR (December 2020) (Learn how and when to remove this message)

Exploitation of labour is the act of using power to systematically extract more value from workers than is given to them. It is a social relationship based on an asymmetry of power between workers and their employers. When speaking about exploitation, there is a direct affiliation with consumption in social theory and traditionally this would label exploitation as unfairly taking advantage of another person because of their inferior position, giving the exploiter the power.

Karl Marx is considered the most classical and influential theorist of exploitation. In analyzing exploitation, economists are split on the explanation of the exploitation of labour given by Marx and Adam Smith. Smith did not see exploitation as an inherent systematic phenomenon in certain economic systems as Marx did, but rather as an optional moral injustice.

Marxism

Part of a series on
Marxian economics
Concepts Capital (accumulation) Capitalist mode of production Class process Commodity Concrete and abstract labuor Constant capital Critique of political economy Exchange value Exploitation Labour power Labour theory of value Law of accumulation Law of value Means of production Mode of production Monopoly capitalism Organic composition of capital Productive forces Profit Prices of production Primitive accumulation Rate of exploitation Rate of profit Real prices and ideal prices Relations of production Reproduction Reserve army of labour Socially necessary labour time Socialist mode of production Socialization Simple commodity production Surplus value Surplus labour Surplus product Use value Wage labour Wage slavery Value-form Value product Variable capital
Topics Capital controversy Crisis theory Economic determinism Immiseration thesis Imperialism Historical materialism Okishio's theorem Overaccumulation Overdetermination Overproduction Kondratiev wave Technological determinism Technological unemployment Temporal single-system interpretation Falling profit-rate tendency Transformation problem Underconsumption Value
Variants Analytical Marxism Classical Marxism Orthodox Marxism Neo-Marxian economics
Works A Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy Das Kapital Grundrisse Economic and Philosophical Manuscripts of 1844 The Accumulation of Capital Monopoly Capital The Theory of Capitalist Development Finance Capital
People Karl Marx Friedrich Engels Vladimir Lenin Rosa Luxemburg Rudolf Hilferding Leon Trotsky Karl Kautsky Ernest Mandel Antonie Pannekoek János Kornai Andrew Kliman Richard D. Wolff Nikolai Kondratiev Paul Sweezy Nobuo Okishio Ian Steedman John Roemer David Laibman Paul A. Baran Stephen Resnick Michał Kalecki
Journals Cambridge Journal of Economics International Journal of Political Economy Monthly Review New School Economic Review Real-World Economics Review Rethinking Marxism Science and Society
Related topics Evolutionary economics Classical economics Marxism Marxist sociology Neoclassical economics Perspectives on capitalism Political economy Schools of economic thought Socialist economics Critiques of capitalism
Economics portal Marxism portal
v t e

Marx's exploitation theory is one of the major elements analyzed in Marxian economics and some social theorists consider it to be a cornerstone in Marxist thought. Marx credited the Scottish Enlightenment writers for originally propounding a materialist interpretation of history. In his Critique of the Gotha Program, Marx set principles that were to govern the distribution of welfare under socialism and communism—these principles saw distribution to each person according to their work and needs. Exploitation is when these two principles are not met, when the agents are not receiving according to their work or needs. This process of exploitation is a part of the redistribution of labour, occurring during the process of separate agents exchanging their current productive labour for social labour set in goods received. The labour put forth toward production is embodied in the goods and exploitation occurs when someone purchases a good, with their revenue or wages, for an amount unequal to the total labour he or she has put forth. This labour performed by a population over a certain time period is equal to the labour embodied to the goods that make up the net national product (NNP). The NNP is then parceled out to the members of the population in some way and this is what creates the two groups, or agents, involved in the exchange of goods: exploiters and exploited.

In Marxist theory, the exploiters are the agents able to command goods, with revenue from their wages, that are embodied with more labour than the exploiters themselves have put forth- based on the exploitative social relations of capitalist production. These agents often have class status and ownership of productive assets that aid the optimization of exploitation. The exploiters would typically be the bourgeoisie. Meanwhile, the exploited are those who receive less than the average product he or she produces. If workers receive an amount equivalent to their average product, there is no revenue left over and therefore these workers cannot enjoy the fruits of their own labours and the difference between what is made and what that can purchase cannot be justified by redistribution according to need. The exploited are the proletariat. For Engels, the explanation of the exploitation of the working class under capitalism was Marx's second great discovery, along with his materialist conception of history, which elevated socialism to a Wissenschaft.

Marxist Theory

In Marx's major work Das Kapital, the concept of exploitation is not a moral concept. Marx did not claim to make value judgements when he claimed that the capitalist exploits the worker. In the preface to the first edition of the first volume, he explicitly wrote that he did not want to make the individual "responsible for conditions of which he remains the social creature". In the context of factory legislation, Marx explicitly stated that the capitalist had to exploit the worker as much as possible in order to maintain himself as a capitalist in competition, and that this was not due to the "bad will" of the capitalist.

According to Michael Heinrich, Marx did not intend an idealistic critique that measured bourgeois relations against the idea of justice. The fact that the capitalist exploits the worker is not an injustice. According to Marx, it does not violate the law of value of commodity exchange. Marx was also later very sceptical about the idea that in a communist society based on co-operative production, the worker should simply receive his entire labour product. In "Critique of the Gotha Programme" he criticised bourgeois as well as socialist ideas of fair distribution. This concerned above all Ferdinand Lassalle's demand for an unabridged labour yield.

Furthermore, Marx did not think that exploitation always had to mean that the exploited had a low wage or standard of living. This could rise in times of increased demand for labour.

As a central concept of Marx's critique of political economy and Marxist theory of history and society, exploitation refers to a class relationship or the unremunerated appropriation of other people's labour power and other people's labour products, which goes beyond the work necessary to maintain labour power. Exploitation is therefore the appropriation of surplus labour and the resulting surplus product. If, for example, 6 hours of labour are necessary daily to maintain the worker and his labour power, but he works 8 hours, he has done 2 hours of extra labour. If the product of this surplus labour is extorted from another person, the worker has been exploited in this sense. In class societies, the members of the exploiting class have the labour power of the exploited and the essential social means of production. In order for a class to form whose members can permanently and securely appropriate the surplus product of another class, a certain social productive power of labour must have been achieved; otherwise the existence of the exploited is endangered. Depending on the social mode of production, the relations of production through which the surplus product is appropriated differ from "direct forced labour" as in slavery to "mediated forced labour" as in wage labour.

Slavery, feudalism & transition to capitalist production

According to Engels, "under the given overall historical conditions, the first significant increases in productivity necessarily led to slavery. From the first great social division of labour sprang the first great division of society into two classes: Masters and slaves, exploiters and exploited." The first opportunity presented itself when tribes waged war against each other and robbed members of foreign tribes whom they could enslave. While slavery was "the first form of exploitation peculiar to the ancient world" and experienced its heyday there, it did not remain limited to that. Rather, it lasted throughout the "civilised period" and was also an important moment in the development of capitalism in the form of colonialism.

In the Middle Ages, the attachment of the masses of the people "to the soil was the basis of feudal pressure". The peasants, as serfs or bondmen, were bound to a certain soil and had to provide products or services to the landlord.

Marx described the change to capitalist exploitation in the 24th chapter of the first volume of "Das Kapital" under the keyword original accumulation. Marx defines this as the process that created two special classes: the owners of money, production and food, who exploit them by buying labour power from others, and the wage-dependent workers, who have to sell their labour power to the former. The process was nothing other "than the historical process of divorce between the producer and the means of production." Using England as an example, Marx showed how landlords drove peasants off the land to raise sheep; the state helped the landlords by force and forced the dispossessed peasants into capitalist factories and their discipline. Thus, contrary to the assumption of classical political economy, the process was not primarily based on the thrift and industriousness of individuals. Rather, the process is based on "conquest, subjugation, robbery-murder, in short, violence". Similar processes can be repeated worldwide where the capitalist mode of production is spreading.

Movement of capital, value of labour power, surplus value production

According to Marx, the value of each commodity in capitalism is measured by the average social labour time required to produce it (labour theory of value). Although value appears in the form of money, prices can also be above or below value. In the first volume of Capital, Marx assumes that the price of a commodity corresponds to its value and that when two commodities are exchanged for each other, both are of equal value. Under these assumptions he tries to explain how the growth of value expressed by the general formula of capital movement G-W-G' is possible. The capitalist buys commodities with money in order to make more money, or surplus value, with them. However, if all commodities are exchanged according to labour-value equivalents, surplus-value cannot come exclusively from the sphere of circulation, since only through labour can an increase in value take place. The production of surplus value would therefore also have to be sought in the sphere of production. The capitalist would have to possess a commodity whose "use-value would itself possess the peculiar quality of being the source of value, whose real consumption would therefore itself be the objectification of labour, hence the creation of value. And the money-owner finds such a specific commodity on the market - labour capital or labour-power."

But the use-value of labour-power, to perform concrete labour, is not equal to its exchange-value, the labour necessary to reproduce its labour-power. In a speech to workers, Marx used the following comparison in this regard: "The daily or weekly value of labour-power is quite different from the daily or weekly activity of this power, just as the fodder of which a horse requires is quite different from the time it can carry the rider." The value of labour power, its wage, is determined, like the value of any other commodity, by the average socially necessary labour time for its reproduction. This value ultimately corresponds to the value of the quantity of food that is considered necessary to reproduce labour power. What is considered necessary depends on historical and moral factors. The amount can vary from country to country and change with cultural development. Marx includes in food not only food, clothing or housing, but also the cost of a worker's family and the educational costs of labour power.

By producing a new quantity of commodities, the worker transfers the value of the means of production consumed in the process to the new quantity of commodities. There is no change in value, so that Marx speaks of constant capital (c). The worker also creates a new value, which he transfers to the commodities he produces. Of this new value, he receives only a part as wages. The other part, the surplus value (m), is appropriated by the capitalist. Since the capital spent in labour power thus leads to a change in value, Marx speaks of variable capital (v). The capitalist thus advances capital in the value of c+v, the worker creates a new value in the amount of v+m, or a quantity of commodities that has the value c+v+m, and the capitalist appropriates m. The capitalist's capital and all the surplus value (m) that is created out of it is therefore variable capital (v). The capital employed and all the wealth accumulated from it (accumulation) is therefore based more and more on the unpaid appropriation of foreign labour power in the wage-labour relationship in the course of capitalist production.

The production of surplus value takes place only in the sphere of industrial capital. "Industrial" is not limited to industrial complexes, but must be understood in a broad sense. What is meant is any capital that either runs through the cycle G - W ... P ... W' - G' or the cycle G - W ... P - G'. In the first case, the capitalist buys commodities or labour power and means of production, then he has the workers produce a higher-value quantity of commodities and finally he sells them to realise the surplus value. The second formula concerns the performance of services, such as a transport. Here, no commodity body is produced and the service must be consumed during its performance.

The workers who create value and surplus value are called productive workers by Marx. The unproductive workers, on the other hand, do not create surplus value. These include, for example, workers who do not produce goods for the market, but work for the capitalist in his house as a private cook. Unproductive in this sense are also those workers who work in the sphere of trade and merely exchange money for goods, such as a cashier. Although the cashier's wage is a deduction from surplus value, he can still be exploited by doing extra work.

As stated by Marx, in the simple commodity circulation W-G-W, someone sells a commodity in order to buy another commodity with the money received, which he wants to consume. It is not primarily a matter of value growth and the movement is measured by the need or ends with its satisfaction. In the movement G-W-G', on the other hand, money is both the starting point and the end point. Capital utilisation becomes an end in itself. There is no end immanent in the movement, since every utilised capital appears as a finite sum of money G' and must again become the starting point of a new movement in order to remain capital. The movement is excessive, since it is not related to anything external or to a need that could determine a sufficiency. The capitalist makes this movement his subjective purpose. He gives it consciousness and will and thus becomes "personified capital". The individual capitalist does not act in the first place according to the form determinations of capital because he is greedy. In order to remain a capitalist, he must always have enough money to modernise his enterprise and thus be able to survive in competition.

Mystification of the wage

According to Heinrich, due to the mystification of wages, the common form of consciousness arises that wages do not pay the value of labour power, but the value of labour. Exploitation is thus not so easily recognisable. Marx described the expression value of labour as an imaginary expression, and that abstract labour is the substance of value and the measure of value, but it itself has no value. If one were to ask about its value, according to Heinrich, one would only receive "tawdry tautology" as an answer. Thus, one could only say that the value of 12 hours of labour, for example, corresponds to the value of 12 hours of labour. Marx exposed this as a false pretence. The worker could not sell his labour to the capitalist, since it would have to exist before the sale. If the wage were the value of the labour performed and if the worker did not receive the entire new value, then the laws of commodity exchange would be violated. If the wage were the value of the labour performed and the worker received the whole new value, then the capitalist would not be able to receive surplus value; consequently, a foundation of the capitalist mode of production would be undermined.    

Marx explained the mystification by pointing to several factors. One factor, he said, was that the worker always had to work the whole contracted working day in order to be paid. The capitalist, on the other hand, explains his profit by buying below value or selling above value. Imaginary expressions in which the existing state of affairs is misrepresented thus arise from the relations of production themselves.

Equally mystifying is the fact that the worker changes from one capitalist to another and that he concludes contracts. This leads to the false appearance that the worker is free.

Value added and crisis

An increase in surplus value is achieved by methods of absolute (longer working hours) or relative surplus value increase (increase in labor productivity). The degree of exploitation of labor power or the surplus value rate is determined by the ratio of surplus labor and necessary labor, or in objectified form of surplus value and variable capital (since only living labor, but not the constant capital c employed, is value-creating, and is therefore set equal to 0).

${\displaystyle {\text{Rate of Surplus Value; Degree of Exploitation of Labor Power}}={\frac {\text{Surplus Value (m)}}{\text{Variable Capital (v)}}}={\frac {\text{Surplus Labor }}{\mbox{Necessary labor}}}}$

Capitalists cannot expand labor time arbitrarily because they encounter physical and legal limits. But if the productive power of labor increases in the areas relevant for the production of necessary food, then there is less labor in this food. Then their value decreases and so does the value of labor. Thus, the necessary labor time can be shortened and the surplus labor time can be lengthened. The individual capitalist strives to increase productivity in order to achieve extra surplus value: if he can be the first to increase the productivity of his workers with a new mode of production and thereby produce at lower unit costs than his competitors, then he can sell at the market price and achieve extra surplus value. When the new mode of production has become generalized, the average socially necessary labor time decreases and so does the value of the commodity in question. The means of increasing productive power are cooperation, division of labor and, above all, the use of machinery.

This process tends to lead to crises, since production is expanded and consumption is limited at the same time. When productive power increases, production tends to expand. This is because the use of expensive machinery is often only worthwhile if more is produced than before. Furthermore, the capitalist who is the first to use the innovative mode of production will try to get as much extra surplus value as possible. After all, he wants to use up his machines as quickly as possible before they have to be replaced by new machines. An easy way to sell the larger quantity of goods is to lower the price. This puts pressure on the competition. Those who cannot keep up with it risk their own bankruptcy. If capitalists compete with each other, they must strive for the greatest possible utilization of their capital in order to have money for innovations. They must therefore minimize their costs or the incomes of workers. Likewise, they themselves consume means of production only to a limited extent. They buy them only if they expect to gain value from them and if this expected value is greater than if they were to use their capital elsewhere, e.g. on the capital markets. If production and consumption diverge for a long time, overproduction occurs.

Distribution of added value

The individual capitalist does not simply appropriate surplus value abruptly. The surplus-value mass of society as a whole is redistributed according to the average rate of profit. In the third volume of Capital, Marx concretizes his categories. He distinguishes the concept of surplus value from the concept of profit. The surplus-value concept is a scientific concept by which Marx reveals exploitation and the relation of m and v. The profit term is the term usually used by many, which captures only a relationship between advanced capital and exploited capital. The rate of profit is not m / v, but m / (c + v). It is the quantity that is practically relevant to the capitalist. The rate of profit depends on various factors. These include the ratio of the constant capital employed to the variable part of the capital, the value composition (c / v), and the turnover time of the capital. Both of these variables are variable. If possible, capital flows to where it can be best exploited, i.e. away from industries with initially low profit rates and toward industries with initially high profit rates. There, competition increases, so that prices and profit rates fall again, while in industries with initially low profit rates, competition falls and prices rise. As a result, the individual profit rates converge to a general profit rate. According to this rate, the more a capitalist advances, the greater his profit. It further follows that prices do not usually adequately reflect the value of a commodity.

According to Marx, the capitalist has exploited the worker even if he sells little or no of the goods produced. In that case, surplus value or exploitation would not have materialized for the capitalist.

According to Heinrich, the appropriation of surplus value is not limited to the industrial capitalist who has goods produced or services performed. If he sells below value to a merchant capitalist and the latter resells to realize the value, then the merchant can appropriate some of the surplus value. Some take on the function of the money capitalist and lend money to a capitalist who makes it function; the latter's profit is then divided between entrepreneurial profit and interest, which the money capitalist receives. The functioning capitalist need not own any capital himself. For example, a chairman of the board of a joint-stock company might formally be a wage laborer, but de facto he is allowed to dispose of capital, organizes exploitation, and his payment is based not on the value of the labor power but on the profit made. The interest collector, on the other hand, may himself, but need not necessarily, allow capital to function. He can be a pure money capitalist. This is due to the tendency of capital ownership and capital function to separate from each other. Furthermore, the class of landowners can also appropriate part of the surplus value in the form of a land rent.

Not only private individuals, but also the state could act as a capitalist. In Anti-Dühring, Engels used the concept of the ideal total capitalist. In this function, the state secures certain conditions for the utilization of capital against capitalists and workers. The more the state itself possessed productive forces, the more it became a real capitalist, exploiting its citizens as wage laborers.

Wage regulation

Provided that for the total social capital of a country, the ratio of constant to variable capital c/v remains the same. If accumulation takes place, then more means of production and, to the same extent, more labor are needed. If the capitalists demand more labor, the workers can increase wages. One limit, however, is surplus value. The higher wages increase, the more surplus value decreases and the less capitalists can demand labor power. Another limit is the fact that the ratio c/v does not remain the same in the long run. Capitalists increasingly use machine systems. As a result, c/v rises. Especially when wages are relatively high, it is profitable to use new expensive machines to save labor costs. If productivity increases and production is no longer expanded accordingly, then labor becomes redundant and is released. If there are unemployed, capitalists can lower wages again.

Productivity increases sometimes provide the opportunity to raise the price of labor. Based on the 15th chapter of the first volume of Capital, one can construct a simple example. Let us assume for simplicity that productivity doubles in all industries while labor time and labor intensity remain the same. Then twice as many goods are produced in the same time as before. In the single good there is only half as much labor. Its value and thus the value of labor is halved. Let us assume, for example, that the price of labor power was previously 50 and the surplus value 50. There are now, purely arithmetically, certain possibilities of distribution:

(1) If the capitalist halves the price of labor power, then the worker can buy the same amount of food as before and the capitalist can increase his surplus value.

(2) If the price of labor power and surplus value remain at 50, then the worker can now buy twice as many goods with the same sum as before.

(3) If the capitalist does not halve the wage, but only reduces it a little, then the price of labor power falls nominally, but it rises in real terms and surplus value is higher than before. Thus, the standard of living of the worker could rise and at the same time the degree of exploitation could be increased.  

Consequently, which possibility is realized depends on whether the capitalists or the workers are stronger. It should also be noted that the increase in the productive power of labor is accompanied by a tendency to crisis. In the crisis, many people are laid off, and the capitalists who survive the crisis can use unemployment to depress wages more easily.

Emancipative moment and the abolition of exploitation

Contrary to earlier societies, the capitalist "ravenous hunger for surplus labor" also unfolds civilizing moments. Although capitalists appropriate surplus value, competition forces capitalists to reinvest a large part of surplus value in order to increase the productive power of labor. Necessary labor would be reduced to a minimum. Production becomes increasingly a total social labor process. This would make possible a higher form of society in which work would increasingly be an expression of the free development of human needs.

In Value, Price and Profit, Marx said that in his order to overcome exploitation, it would be necessary to eliminate wage labor altogether, and the dynamics of the capitalist mode of production produce the conditions for a new society. "The centralization of the means of production and the socialization of labor" reach a point "where they become incompatible with their capitalist shell. It is being blown up. The hour of capitalist private property strikes. The expropriateurs are expropriated." Individual property, self-earned, and not based on exploitation of other people's labor power, is restored on the basis of the achievement of the capitalist era, "the cooperation and common ownership of the earth and the means of production produced by labor itself."

Exploitation and alienation

The concept of exploitation also fed into Marx's thinking on alienation and specifically on alienated labor. For Marx, man does not possess a finished being. His thought and action result from the ensemble of concrete social relations in which he is active and lives. Social being determines his consciousness, while human beings themselves create the social relations. Man could therefore only really develop as a human being if he consciously shapes society and himself, instead of being determined by social conditions as if by an alien power.

For Marx and Engels, the key to understanding the problem - and thus to solving it - is how goods, ideas and decisions are produced in a society. In any class society, there is a social division of labor that places individuals in unequal social relations that they enter into in the production of their lives. These manifest themselves not only quantitatively in the extortion of surplus labor, but also have a qualitative effect on how work is done and what is produced, how it is distributed, how relations are produced and reproduced materially and ideologically. The worker does not produce for himself, but the product belongs to the capitalist. The latter also determines the labor process. The social being of the worker, therefore his own conscious activity, becomes an externally determined activity because of the social relations. The worker can influence this only within the scope of the existing conditions. All of this would mean that the human being is alien to the human being. There are contrasts between the classes and, due to competition, also within a class. In capitalism, moreover, a commodity fetish prevails, which reflects a relationship of people, the relationship of working hours to the manufacture of products, as a relationship of things, namely commodity prices. The relationship of people to each other in their common production of life is thus further obscured.

Marx states that in order to abolish these relations, "n association must take the place of the old bourgeois society with its classes and class antagonisms," "wherein the free development of each is the condition for the free development of all," on the basis of a production in which the social means of production are in social possession, that is, "the socialized man, the associated producers, ... rationally regulate their metabolism with nature, bring it under their common control, instead of being dominated by it as by a blind power. carry it out with the least expenditure of energy and under the conditions most worthy and adequate to their human nature.“ Exploitation would be no longer present in this "association of free men," and the social division of labor is more and more abolished; only in "a higher phase of communist society, after the servile subordination of individuals to the division of labor, and thus also the opposition of mental and physical labor, has disappeared ; after labor has become not only the means of life, but itself the first necessity of life; after, with the all-round development of individuals, their productive powers have also grown and all the fountains of cooperative wealth have flowed more fully - only then can the narrow bourgeois legal horizon be completely transcended and society write on its banner. To each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs!"

Exploitation of nature by man

In every form of society, people must transform natural materials according to their needs in order to create use values. Nature and labor are necessary conditions of the material wealth of a society.

Under capitalism, not only are workers exploited, but natural resources are depleted. The "exploitation and waste of the forces of the soil" takes the place of the fields that used to be cultivated rationally over generations. This affected small independent farms and large capitalist farms. Both are subject to the constraints of market prices. The owners and tenants of the large capitalist farms are primarily interested in enriching themselves as much as possible. It is not at all about a sustainable handling of the soil.

It is true that labor and nature become means of capital exploitation, but the capitalist mode of production systematically corrodes the foundations of wealth. Exploitation of man and exploitation of nature go hand in hand. Thus Marx states in the first volume of Capital that every advance in capitalist agriculture is "not only an advance in the art of robbing the worker, but at the same time in the art of robbing the soil, every advance in increasing its fertility for a given period of time is at the same time an advance in ruining the permanent sources of this fertility. Capitalist production develops only the technique and combination of the social process of production, undermining at the same time the springing sources of all wealth: the soil and the worker." In this process, large-scale industry and large-scale agriculture complemented each other. On the one hand, the industrial system spreads in agriculture, underexploiting workers and supplying the means to exhaust the soil; on the other hand, industrialized agriculture frees up more and more labor for large-scale industry.

According to Heinrich, exploitation of man and nature are also linked at the level of consciousness. The mystification of wages forms a basis for the Trinitarian formula. One aspect of this formula is that man perceives the soil in a mystified way. It appears as if the soil is an independent source of value.

Surplus labour and labour theory of value

Exploiters appropriate another's surplus labour, which is the amount of labour exceeding what is necessary for the reproduction of a worker's labour power and basic living conditions. In other terms, this entails the worker being able to maintain living conditions sufficient to be able to continue work. Marx does not attempt to tie this solely to capitalist institutions as he notes how historically, there are accounts of this appropriation of surplus labour in institutions with forced labour, like those based on slavery and feudal societies. However, the difference he emphasizes is the fact that when this appropriation of surplus labour occurs in societies like capitalist ones, it is occurring in institutions having abolished forced labour and resting on free labour. This comes from Marx's labour theory of value which states that the exchange-value of a commodity is proportional to the socially necessary amount of labour time to produce the commodity.

In a capitalist economy, workers are paid according to this value and value is the source of all wealth. Value is determined by a good's particular utility for an actor and if the good results from human activity, it must be understood as a product of concrete labour, qualitatively defined labour. Capitalists are able to purchase labour power from the workers, who can only bring their own labour power in the market. Once capitalists are able to pay the worker less than the value produced by their labour, surplus labour forms and this results in the capitalists' profits. This is what Marx meant by "surplus value", which he saw as "an exact expression for the degree of exploitation of labor-power by capital, or of the laborer by the capitalist". This profit is used to pay for overhead and personal consumption by the capitalist, but was most importantly used to accelerate growth and thus promote a greater system of exploitation.

The degree of exploitation of labour power is dictated by the rate of surplus value as the proportion between surplus value/product and necessary value/product. The surplus value/product is the materialized surplus labour or surplus labour time while the necessary value/product is materialized necessary labour in regard to workers, like the reproduction of the labour power. Marx called the rate of surplus value an "exact expression of the degree of exploitation of labour power by capital". These theories ultimately demonstrate Marx's main issue with capitalism: it was not that capitalism is an institution where the labour exchange is coercive, but that in this institution one class still becomes significantly more rich while the other becomes impoverished.

Critique and rejection

Many capitalist critics have pointed out that Marx assumes that capital owners contribute nothing to the process of production. They suggest that Marx should have allowed for two things; namely, permit a fair profit on the risk of capital investment and allow for the efforts of management be paid their due.

David Ramsay Steele argues that marginal productivity theory renders Marx's theory of exploitation untenable. According to this theoretical framework and assuming competitive market conditions, a worker's compensation is determined by his or her contribution to marginal output. Similarly, owners of machines and real estate are compensated according to the marginal productivity of their capital's contribution to marginal output. However, Steele notes that this does not in any way touch the ethical argument of socialists who acknowledge non-labour contributions to marginal output, but contend that it is illegitimate for a class of passive owners to receive an unearned income from ownership of capital and land.

Meghnad Desai, Baron Desai observed that there is also the prospect of surplus value arising from sources other than labour and a classic given example is winemaking. When grapes are harvested and crushed, labour is used. However, when yeast is added and the grape juice is left to ferment in order to get wine, the value of wine exceeds that of the grapes significantly, yet labour contributes nothing to the extra value. Marx had ignored capital inputs due to placing them all together in constant capital—translating the wear and tear of capital in production in terms of its labour value. Yet examples such as this demonstrated that value and surplus value could come from somewhere other than labour.

The theory has been opposed by Eugen Böhm von Bawerk, among others. In History and Critique of Interest Theories (1884), he argues that capitalists do not exploit their workers, as they actually help employees by providing them with an income well in advance of the revenue from the goods they produced, stating: "Labor cannot increase its share at the expense of capital". In particular, he argues that the theory of exploitation ignores the dimension of time in production. From this criticism, it follows that, according to Böhm-Bawerk, the whole value of a product is not produced by the worker, but that labour can only be paid at the present value of any foreseeable output.

John Roemer studied and criticized Marx's theory by putting forth a model to deal with exploitation in all modes of production, hoping to lay the foundations for an analysis of the laws of motion of socialism. In his works published in the 1980s, Roemer posits a model of exploitation based upon unequal ownership of human (physical labour skills) and non-human property (land and means of production). He states that this model of property rights has great superiority over the conventional surplus labour model of exploitation, therefore rejecting the labour theory of value. In his attempt to put forward a theory of exploitation that also includes feudal, capitalist and socialist modes of production, he defines exploitation in each of the modes in terms of property rights. Roemer rejects the labour theory of value because he sees that exploitation can exist in the absence of employment relations, like in a subsistence economy, therefore backing the model of exploitation that is based on property rights. He tests his theory of exploitation using game theory to construct contingently feasible alternative states where the exploited agents could improve their welfare by withdrawing with their share of society's alienable and inalienable assets. Feudal, capitalist and socialist exploitation all come from the theory of exploitation on the basis of inequitable distribution of property rights. There has been a range of agreement and disagreement from various economists, neo-classical economists favoring the model the most.

Some theorists criticize Roemer for his entire rejection of the labour theory of value and the surplus labour approach to exploitation, for they were the central aspects of Marxist thought in regard to exploitation. Others criticize his commitment to a specifically liberal as opposed to a Marxist account of the wrongs of exploitation.

Other theories

Liberal theory

Part of a series on
Liberalism
History Age of Enlightenment List of liberal theorists (contributions to liberal theory)
Principles Consent of the governed Due process Democracy Economic liberalism Economic globalization Equality Gender Legal Federalism Freedom Economic Market Trade Press Religion Speech Harm principle Internationalism Invisible hand Labor theory of property Laissez-faire Liberty Negative Positive Limited government Market economy Natural monopoly Open society Permissive society Popular sovereignty Property Private Public Rights Civil and political Natural and legal To own property To bear arms Rule of law Secularism Secular humanism Separation of church and state Separation of powers Social contract Social justice Social services Welfare state Whig history
Philosophers Milton Locke Spinoza Montesquieu Voltaire Rousseau Smith Kant Turgot Burke Priestley Paine Beccaria Condorcet Bentham Korais De Gouges Wollstonecraft Staël Say Humboldt Constant Ricardo Guizot List Bastiat Martineau Emerson Tocqueville Mill Spencer Arnold Acton Weber Hobhouse Croce Cassirer Mises Ortega Keynes Collingwood Čapek Hu Hayek Popper Aron Berlin Friedman Rawls Sen Nozick Kymlicka Badawi
Politicians Jefferson Kołłątaj Madison Artigas Bolívar Broglie Lamartine Macaulay Kossuth Deák Cobden Mazzini Juárez Lincoln Gladstone Cavour Sarmiento Mommsen Naoroji Itagaki Levski Kemal Deakin Milyukov Lloyd George Venizelos Ståhlberg Gokhale Rathenau Madero Einaudi King Roosevelt Pearson Ohlin Kennedy Jenkins Balcerowicz Verhofstadt Obama Macron
Organizations Africa Liberal Network Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe Party Arab Liberal Federation Council of Asian Liberals and Democrats European Democratic Party European Liberal Youth International Alliance of Libertarian Parties International Federation of Liberal Youth Liberal International Liberal Network for Latin America Liberal parties Liberal South East European Network
Regional variants Europe Latin America Albania Armenia Australia Austria Belgium Bolivia Brazil Bulgaria Canada Chile China Hong Kong Colombia Costa Rica Croatia Cuba Cyprus Czechia Denmark Ecuador Egypt Estonia Finland France Georgia Germany Greece Venizelism Honduras Hungary India Iran Israel Italy Liberism Japan Latvia Lithuania Luxembourg Mexico Moldova Montenegro Netherlands New Zealand Nicaragua Nigeria North Macedonia Norway Panama Paraguay Peru Philippines Poland Cracovian Portugal Romania Russia Senegal Serbia Slovakia Slovenia South Africa South Korea Spain Sweden Switzerland Taiwan Thailand Tunisia Turkey Ukraine United Kingdom Cobdenism Gladstonian Manchester Whiggism United States Arizona School Classical Jeffersonian Modern Uruguay Venezuela Zimbabwe
Related topics Anti-authoritarianism Anti-communism Bias in American academia Bias in the media Capitalism Democratic Centrism Radical centrism Economic freedom Egalitarianism Empiricism Humanism Individualism Anarchist Land value tax Libertarianism Left Right Pirate Party Progressivism Sexually liberal feminism Utilitarianism
Schools Classical Conservative Cultural Feminist Equity Green Internationalist Muscular National Neoclassical Neo Ordo Radical Religious Christian Catholic Islamic Jewish Secular Social Techno Third Way
Liberalism portal Politics portal
v t e

Many assume that liberalism intrinsically lacks any adequate theory of exploitation because its phenomenon commits itself only to the primacy of personal rights and liberties and to individual choice as the basic explanatory datum. Hillel Steiner provided an argument to refute the claim that liberalism cannot supply an adequate theory of exploitation. He discusses interpersonal transfers and how there are three types: donation, exchange and theft. Exchange is the only of the three that consists of a voluntary bilateral transfer, where the beneficiary receives something at a value greater than zero on the shared scale of value, although at times there can be ambiguity between more complex types of transfer. He describes the three dimensions of transfers as either unilateral/bilateral, voluntary/involuntary and equal/unequal. Despite these types of transfers being able to distinguish the differences in the four types of transfers, it is not enough to provide a differentiating characterization of exploitation. Unlike theft, an exploitative transfer is bilateral and the items are transferred voluntarily at both unequal and greater-than-zero value. The difference between a benefit and exploitation despite their various shared features is a difference between their counterfactual presuppositions, meaning that in an exploitation there is a voluntary bilateral transfer of unequally valued items because the possessors of both items would voluntarily make the transfer if the items to be transferred were of equal value, but in a benefit the possessor of the higher-value item would not voluntarily make the transfer if the items were at equal value. Put simply, the exploitation can be converted to an exchange: both exploiters and exploited would voluntarily become exchangers when benefactors would not.

In an exploitation both transfers are voluntary, but part of one of the two transfers is unnecessary. The circumstances that bring out exploitation are not the same as what brings about exploitative transfers. Exploitative circumstance is due to the factors other than what motivates individuals to engage in nonaltruistic bilateral transfers (exchanges and exploitations) as they are not sufficient circumstances to bring about exploitative transfers.

To further explain the occurrence of exploitative circumstances certain generalizations about social relations must be included to supply generalizations about social institutions. He says that 'if (i) certain things are true of the institutions within which interpersonal transfers occur and (ii) at least some of these transfers are nonaltruistic bilateral ones, then at least some of these transfers are exploitative. Steiner looks at the institutional conditions of exploitation and finds that in general exploitation is considered unjust and to understand why it is necessary to look at the concept of a right, an inviolable domain of practical choice and the way rights are established to form social institutions. Institutional exploitation can be illustrated by schematized forms of exploitation to reach two points:

1. Despite the mode of deprivation in exploitation, it is not the same as the mode involved in a violation of rights and it does result from such violations and the two deprivations may be of the same value.
2. Rights violation (theft) is a bilateral relation, but exploitation is trilateral one. There are at least three persons needed for exploitation.

On a liberal view, exploitation can be described as a quadrilateral relation between four relevantly distinct parties: the state, the exploited, the exploiter and those who suffer rights violations. However, it can be argued that the state's interests with the exploiters action can be viewed as unimpeachable because you cannot imply that the exploiter would ever withhold consent from exploiting due to altruistic concerns. So this trilateral conception of exploitation identifies exploited, exploiters and sufferers of rights violations.

In terms of ridding exploitation, the standard liberal view holds that a regime of laissez-faire is a necessary condition. Natural rights thinkers Henry George and Herbert Spencer reject this view and claim that property rights belong to everyone, i.e. that all land to be valid must belong to everyone. Their argument aims to show that traditional liberalism is mistaken in holding that nonintervention in commerce is the key to non exploitation and they argue it is necessary, but not sufficient.

The classical liberal Adam Smith described the exploitation of labour by businessmen, who work together to extract as much wealth as possible out of their workers, thusly:

What are the common wages of labour, depends everywhere upon the contract usually made between those two parties, whose interests are by no means the same. The workmen desire to get as much, the masters to give as little as possible. The former are disposed to combine in order to raise, the latter in order to lower the wages of labour.

Neoclassical notions

The majority of neoclassical economists only would view exploitation existing as an abstract deduction of the classic school and of Ricardo's theory of surplus-value. However, in some neoclassical economic theories exploitation is defined by the unequal marginal productivity of workers and wages, such that wages are lower. Exploitation is sometimes viewed to occur when a necessary agent of production receives less wages than its marginal product. Neoclassical theorists also identify the need for some type of redistribution of income to the poor, disabled, to the farmers and peasants, or whatever socially alienated group from the social welfare function. However, it is not true that neoclassical economists would accept the marginal productivity theory of just income as a general principle like other theorists do when addressing exploitation. The general neoclassical view sees that all factors can be simultaneously rewarded according to their marginal productivity: this means that factors of production should be awarded according to their marginal productivity as well, Euler's theorem for homogeneous function of the first order proves this:

f(K,L)= f_K(K,L)K+f_L(K,L)L

The production function where K is capital and L is labour. Neoclassical theory requires that f be continuously differentiable in both variables and that there are constant returns to scale. If there are constant returns to scale, there will be perfect equilibrium if both capital and labour are rewarded according to their marginal products, exactly exhausting the total product.

The primary concept is that there is exploitation towards a factor of production, if it receives less than its marginal product. Exploitation can only occur in imperfect capitalism due to imperfect competition, with the neoclassical notion of productivity wages there is little to no exploitation in the economy. This blames monopoly in the product market, monopsony in the labour market and cartellization as the main causes for exploitation of workers.

In developing nations

This article includes a list of references, related reading, or external links, but its sources remain unclear because it lacks inline citations. Please help improve this article by introducing more precise citations. (May 2020) (Learn how and when to remove this message)

Developing nations, commonly called Third World countries, are the focus of much debate over the issue of exploitation, particularly in the context of the global economy.

Critics of foreign companies allege that firms such as Nike and Gap Inc. resort to child labour and sweatshops in developing nations, paying their workers wages far lower than those that prevail in developed nations (where the products are sold). It is argued that this is insufficient to allow workers to attain the local subsistence standard of living if working hours common in the First World are observed, so that working hours much longer than in the first world are necessary. It is also argued that work conditions in these developing world factories are more unsafe and much more unhealthy than in the First World. For example, observers point to cases where employees were unable to escape factories burning down—and thus dying—because of locked doors, a common signal that sweatshop conditions exist, similar to the Triangle Shirtwaist Factory fire of 1911.

Others argue that in the absence of compulsion the only way that corporations are able to secure adequate supplies of labour is to offer wages and benefits superior to preexisting options and that the presence of workers in corporate factories indicates that the factories present options which are seen as better—by the workers themselves—than the other options available to them (see principle of revealed preference).

A common response is that this is disingenuous as the companies are in fact exploiting people by the terms of unequal human standards (applying lower standards to their Third World workers than to their First World ones). Furthermore, the argument goes that if people choose to work for low wages and in unsafe conditions because it is their only alternative to starvation or scavenging from garbage dumps (the "preexisting options"), this cannot be seen as any kind of "free choice" on their part. It also argued that if a company intends to sell its products in the First World, it should pay its workers by First World standards.

Following such a view, some in the United States propose that the American government should mandate that businesses in foreign countries adhere to the same labour, environmental, health and safety standards as the United States before they are allowed to trade with businesses in the United States (this has been advocated by Howard Dean, for example). They believe that such standards would improve the quality of life in less developed nations.

According to others, this would harm the economies of less developed nations by discouraging the United States from investing in them. Milton Friedman was an economist who thought that such a policy would have that effect. According to this argument, the result of ending perceived exploitation would therefore be the corporation pulling back to its developed nation, leaving their former workers out of a job.

Groups who see themselves as fighting against global exploitation also point to secondary effects such as the dumping of government-subsidized corn on developing world markets which forces subsistence farmers off of their lands, sending them into the cities or across borders in order to survive. More generally, some sort of international regulation of transnational corporations is called for, such as the enforcement of the International Labour Organization's labour standards.

The fair trade movement seeks to ensure a more equitable treatment of producers and workers, therefore minimizing exploitation of labour forces in developing countries. The exploitation of labour is not limited to the aforementioned large scale corporate outsourcing, but it can also be found within the inherent structure of local markets in developing countries like Kenya.

Wage labour

Part of a series on
Organized labour
Labour movement Conflict theories Decent work Exploitation of labour Timeline New unionism Proletariat Sectoral collective bargaining Social movement unionism Social democracy Democratic socialism Socialism Communism Syndicalism Union busting Anarcho-syndicalism National-syndicalism Workplace democracy
Labour rights Annual leave Child labour Collective bargaining Diversity, equity, and inclusion Eight-hour day Employment discrimination Employment protection Equal pay Four-day week Freedom of association Legal working age Minimum wage Neurodiversity and labor rights Occupational safety and health Overwork Paid time off Professional abuse Right to rest and leisure Right to sit Sabbatical Sick leave Six-hour day Toxic workplace Unfree labour Workers' right to access the toilet
Trade unions Trade unions by country Trade union federations International comparisons ITUC WFTU
Strike action Chronological list of strikes Hartal General strike Bandh newspapers Green bans Lockouts Overtime bans Pen-down strikes Sitdown strikes Solidarity action Walkouts Whipsaw strikes Wildcat strikes Work-to-rule
Labour parties Australia Barbados Brazil Fiji Georgia Hong Kong Ireland Israel Malta New Caledonia New Zealand Netherlands Norway Portugal Singapore South Korea United Kingdom Sweden
Academic disciplines Critique of work Industrial relations Labour economics Labour history Labour law Post-work society Refusal of work
v t e

Wage labour as institutionalized under today's market economic systems has been criticized, especially by both mainstream socialists and anarcho-syndicalists, utilising the pejorative term wage slavery. They regard the trade of labour as a commodity as a form of economic exploitation rooting partially from capitalism.

As per Noam Chomsky, analysis of the psychological implications of wage slavery goes back to the Enlightenment era. In his 1791 book On the Limits of State Action, liberal thinker Wilhelm von Humboldt posited that "whatever does not spring from a man's free choice, or is only the result of instruction and guidance, does not enter into his very nature; he does not perform it with truly human energies, but merely with mechanical exactness" and so when the labourer works under external control "we may admire what he does, but we despise what he is". Both the Milgram and Stanford experiments have been found useful in the psychological study of wage-based workplace relations.

Additionally, Marxists posit that labour as commodity, which is how they regard wage labour, provides an absolutely fundamental point of attack against capitalism. "It can be persuasively argued", noted one concerned philosopher, "that the conception of the worker's labor as a commodity confirms Marx's stigmatisation of the wage system of private capitalism as 'wage-slavery;' that is, as an instrument of the capitalist's for reducing the worker's condition to that of a slave, if not below it".

See also

Part of a series on
Forced labour and slavery
Contemporary Child Labour Child soldiers Conscription Debt Forced marriage Bride buying Child marriage Wife selling Forced prostitution Human trafficking Involuntary servitude Peonage Penal labour Contemporary Africa 21st-century jihadism Sexual slavery Wage slavery
Historical Antiquity Egypt Babylonia Greece Rome Medieval Europe Ancillae Black Sea slave trade Byzantine Empire Kholop Prague slave trade Serfs History In Russia Emancipation Thrall Genoese slave trade Venetian slave trade Balkan slave trade Muslim world Slavery in the Abbasid Caliphate Slavery in al-Andalus ‎ Baqt Contract of manumission Bukhara slave trade Crimean slave trade Khazar slave trade Khivan slave trade Ottoman Empire Avret Pazarları Barbary Coast slave trade pirates Sack of Baltimore Slave raid of Suðuroy Turkish Abductions Concubinage history Ma malakat aymanukum Avret Pazarları Harem Abbasid harem Ottoman Imperial Harem Safavid imperial harem Qajar harem Jarya/Cariye Odalisque Qiyan Umm al-walad Circassian slave trade Saqaliba Slavery in the Rashidun Caliphate Slavery in the Umayyad Caliphate Slavery in the Abbasid Caliphate Volga Bulgarian slave trade 21st century Atlantic slave trade Bristol Brazil Database Dutch Middle Passage Nantes New France Panyarring Spanish Empire Slave Coast Thirteen colonies Topics and practice Conscription Ghilman Mamluk Devshirme Blackbirding Coolie Corvée labour Field slaves in the United States Treatment House slaves Saqaliba Slave market Slave raiding Child soldiers White slavery Naval Galley slave Impressment Pirates Shanghaiing Slave ship
By country or region Sub-Saharan Africa Contemporary Africa Trans-Saharan slave trade Red Sea slave trade Indian Ocean slave trade Zanzibar slave trade Angola Chad Comoros Ethiopia Mali Mauritania Niger Nigeria Seychelles Somalia Somali slave trade South Africa Sudan Zanzibar North and South America Pre-Columbian America Aztec Americas indigenous U.S. Natives United States Field slaves female Contemporary maps partus prison labour Slave codes Treatment interregional Human trafficking The Bahamas Canada Caribbean Barbados British Virgin Islands Trinidad Code Noir Latin America Brazil Lei Áurea Colombia Cuba Haiti revolt Restavek (Encomienda) Puerto Rico East, Southeast, and South Asia Human trafficking in Southeast Asia Bhutan Brunei China Booi Aha Laogai penal system India Debt bondage Chukri System Indonesia Japan comfort women Korea Kwalliso Malaysia Maldives Slavery in the Mongol Empire Thailand Yankee princess Vietnam Australia and Oceania Australia Human trafficking Blackbirding Slave raiding in Easter Island Human trafficking in Papua New Guinea Blackbirding in Polynesia Europe and North Asia Sex trafficking in Europe United Kingdom Penal Labour Slavery Denmark Dutch Republic Germany in World War II Malta Norway Poland Portugal Romania Russia Spain Sweden North Africa and West Asia Afghanistan Algeria Bahrain Egypt Human trafficking in the Middle East Iran Iraq Jordan Kuwait Lebanon Libya Morocco Oman Palestine Saudi Arabia Syria Tunisia Qatar Yemen United Arab Emirates
Religion Bible Christianity Catholicism Mormonism Islam Judaism Baháʼí Faith
Opposition and resistance Abolitionism U.K. U.S. Brussels Anti-Slavery Conference 1889–90 Temporary Slavery Commission 1926 Slavery Convention Committee of Experts on Slavery Advisory Committee of Experts on Slavery Ad Hoc Committee on Slavery Supplementary Convention on the Abolition of Slavery Abolitionists Anglo-Egyptian Slave Trade Convention Anti-Slavery International Blockade of Africa U.K. U.S. Colonization Liberia Sierra Leone Compensated emancipation Freedman Manumission Freedom suit Slave Power Underground Railroad songs Slave rebellion Slave Trade Acts International law Third Servile War 13th Amendment to the United States Constitution Timeline of abolition of slavery and serfdom Abolition of slave trade in Persian gulf [fa]
Related Common law Indentured servitude Forced labour Fugitive slaves laws convention Great Dismal Swamp maroons List of slaves owners last survivors of American slavery List of slavery-related memorials and museums Slave marriages in the United States Slave narrative films songs Slave name Slave catcher Slave patrol Slave Route Project breeding court cases Washington Jefferson J.Q. Adams Lincoln Emancipation Proclamation 40 acres Freedmen's Bureau Iron bit Emancipation Day
v t e

• Benjamin Tucker
• Capital, Volume I
• Child labour
• Child sexual exploitation
• Contemporary slavery
• Corporate abuse
• Cost the limit of price
• Criticism of capitalism
• Cruelty to animals
• Debt bondage
• Exploitation of natural resources
• Forced prostitution
• Free trade
• Globalization
• Gulag
• Human trafficking
• Indentured servant
• International child abduction
• Labour, class struggle and false consciousness
• Laogai
• Mutualism
• Neocolonialism
• Overexploitation
• Property income
• Prosumerism
• Rate of exploitation
• Sharecropping
• Surplus value
• Sweatshop
• Trafficking of children
• Unearned income
• Unequal exchange
• Unfree labour
• Wage slavery

Notes

1. Another one being the capitalists' alleged theft from workers via surplus-value.
2. This Marxist objection is what motivated Nelson's essay, which claims that labour is not in fact a commodity.

References

1. ^ Dowding, Keith (2011). "Exploitation". Encyclopedia of Power. SAGE Publications. pp. 232–235. ISBN 9781412927482.
2. Horace L. Fairlamb, 'Adam's Smith's Other Hand: A Capitalist Theory of Exploitation', Social Theory and Practice, 1996.
3. Andrew Reeve, Modern Theories of Exploitation"
4. ^ Jon Elster, "Exploring Exploitation", The Journal of Peace Research, Vol. 15, No. 1, pp. 3-17
5. ^ John E. Roemer, 'Should Marxists be Interested in Exploitation', Philosophy & Public Affairs, Vol. 14, No. 1, 1985, pg 30-65
6. John E. Roemer, "Origins of Exploitation and Class: Value Theory of Pre-Capitalist Economy", Econometrica, Vol. 50, No. 1, 1982, pp. 163-192
7. Jon Elster, "Exploring Exploitation", The Journal of Peace Research, Vol. 15, No. 1, pp. 3-17
8. Friedrich Engels (1987), Institut für Marxismus-Leninismus beim ZK der SED (ed.), "Die Entwicklung des Sozialismus von der Utopie zur Wissenschaft", Karl Marx Friedrich Engels Werke (MEW) (in German), vol. 19 (9 ed.), Berlin: Dietz Verlag, p. 209, Diese beiden großen Entdeckungen: die materialistische Geschichtsauffassung und die Enthüllung des Geheimnisses der kapitalistischen Produktion vermittelst des Mehrwerts verdanken wir Marx. Mit ihnen wurde der Sozialismus eine Wissenschaft
9. Michael Heinrich (2018), Kritik der politischen Ökonomie. Eine Einführung. (in German) (14 ed.), Stuttgart: Schmetterling Verlag, p. 94
10. Karl Marx (1962), Institut für Marxismus-Leninismus beim ZK der SED (ed.), "Das Kapital. Kritik der politischen Ökonomie. Erster Band. Buch I: Der Produktionsprozeß des Kapitals.", Karl Marx Friedrich Engels Werke (MEW) (in German), vol. 23, Berlin: Dietz Verlag, p. 16, Zur Vermeidung möglicher Mißverständnisse ein Wort. Die Gestalten von Kapitalist und Grundeigentümer zeichne ich keinesfalls in rosigem Licht. Aber es handelt sich hier um die Personen nur, soweit sie Personifikation ökonomischer Kategorien sind, Träger von bestimmten Klassenverhältnissen und Interessen. Weniger als jeder andere kann mein Standpunkt, der die Entwicklung der ökonomischen Gesellschaftsformation als einen naturgeschichtlichen Prozeß auffasst, den einzelnen verantwortlich machen für Verhältnisse, deren Geschöpf er sozial bleibt, sosehr er sich auch subjektiv über sie erheben mag.
11. Karl Marx (1962), Institut für Marxismus-Leninismus beim ZK der SED (ed.), "Das Kapital. Kritik der politischen Ökonomie. Erster Band. Buch I: Der Produktionsprozeß des Kapitals.", Karl Marx Friedrich Engels Werke (MEW) (in German), vol. 23, Berlin: Dietz Verlag, p. 286, Im großen und ganzen hängt dies aber auch nicht vom guten oder bösen Willen des einzelnen Kapitalisten ab. Die freie Konkurrenz macht die immanenten Gesetze der kapitalistischen Produktion dem einzelnen Kapitalisten gegenüber als äußerliches Zwangsgesetz geltend.
12. Michael Heinrich (2009), Devi Dumbadze/Johannes Geffers/Jan Haut u. a. (ed.), "Kritik bei Marx", Erkenntnis und Kritik. Zeitgenössische Positionen (in German), Bielefeld: transcript Verlag, p. 46, Allerdings muss man sich hier vor zwei häufigen Missverständnissen hüten. Es geht Marx weder darum, die Wahrheit von Freiheit, Gleichheit und Eigentum gegen ihre bürgerliche Verzerrung einzuklagen. Im Gegenteil, dieser Kritikmodus, der Versuch, die bürgerlichen Ideale gegen die schlechte bürgerliche Wirklichkeit auszuspielen, der wird von Marx ebenfalls kritisiert. Es geht Marx aber auch nicht um eine Kritik am Kapitalismus von irgendeinem moralischen Standpunkt aus. Wann immer er im Kapital auf eine solche moralische Kritik zu sprechen kommt, macht er sich darüber lustig.
13. Michael Heinrich (2018), Kritik der politischen Ökonomie. Eine Einführung. (in German) (14 ed.), Stuttgart: Schmetterling Verlag, p. 94
14. Karl Marx (1987), Institut für Marxismus-Leninismus beim ZK der SED (ed.), "Kritik des Gothaer Programms", Karl Marx Friedrich Engels Werke (MEW) (in German), vol. 19 (9 ed.), Berlin: Dietz Verlag, p. 18, Was ist "gerechte" Verteilung? Behaupten die Bourgeois nicht, daß die heutige Verteilung "gerecht" ist? Und ist sie in der Tat nicht die einzige "gerechte" Verteilung auf Grundlage der heutigen Produktionsweise? Werden die ökonomischen Verhältnisse durch Rechtsbegriffe geregelt, oder entspringen nicht umgekehrt die Rechtsverhältnisse den ökonomischen? Haben nicht auch die sozialistischen Sektierer die verschiedenen Vorstellungen über "gerechte" Verteilung?
15. Karl Marx (1987), Institut für Marxismus-Leninismus beim ZK der SED (ed.), "Kritik des Gothaer Programms", Karl Marx Friedrich Engels Werke (MEW) (in German), vol. 19 (9 ed.), Berlin: Dietz Verlag, pp. 18-19, Nehmen wir zunächst das Wort "Arbeitsertrag" im Sinne des Produkts der Arbeit, so ist der genossenschaftliche Arbeitsertrag das gesellschaftliche Gesamtprodukt. Davon ist nun abzuziehen: Erstens: Deckung zum Ersatz der verbrauchten Produktionsmittel. Zweitens: zusätzlicher Teil für Ausdehnung der Produktion. Drittens: Reserve- oder Assekuranzfonds gegen Mißfälle, Störungen durch Naturereignisse etc. Diese Abzüge vom "unverkürzten Arbeitsertrag" sind eine ökonomische Notwendigkeit, und ihre Größe ist zu bestimmen nach vorhandenen Mitteln und Kräften , aber sie sind in keiner Weise aus der Gerechtigkeit kalkulierbar.
16. Karl Marx (1962), Institut für Marxismus-Leninismus beim ZK der SED (ed.), "Das Kapital. Kritik der politischen Ökonomie. Erster Band. Buch I: Der Produktionsprozeß des Kapitals.", Karl Marx Friedrich Engels Werke (MEW) (in German), vol. 23, Berlin: Dietz Verlag, p. 646, Von ihrem eignen anschwellenden und schwellend in Zusatzkapital verwandelten Mehrprodukt strömt ihnen ein größerer Teil in der Form von Zahlungsmitteln zurück, so daß sie den Kreis ihrer Genüsse erweitern, ihren Konsumtionsfonds von Kleidern, Möbeln usw. besser ausstatten und kleine Reservefonds von Geld bilden können. So wenig aber bessere Kleidung, Nahrung, Behandlung und ein größeres Peculium das Abhängigkeitsverhältnis und die Exploitation des Sklaven aufheben, so wenig die des Lohnarbeiters. Steigender Preis der Arbeit infolge der Akkumulation des Kapitals besagt in der Tat nur, daß der Umfang und die Wucht der goldnen Kette, die der Lohnarbeiter sich selbst bereits geschmiedet hat, ihre losere Spannung erlauben.
17. Marx: Das Kapital, MEW 23: 534. „Braucht der Arbeiter alle seine Zeit, um die zur Erhaltung seiner selbst und seiner Race nötigen Lebensmittel zu produzieren, so bleibt ihm keine Zeit, um unentgeltlich für dritte Personen zu arbeiten. Ohne einen gewissen Produktivitätsgrad der Arbeit keine solche disponible Zeit für den Arbeiter, ohne solche überschüssige Zeit keine Mehrarbeit und daher keine Kapitalisten, aber auch keine Sklavenhalter, keine Feudalbarone, in einem Wort keine Großbesitzerklasse.“
18. Marx: Das Kapital, MEW 23: 231. "Nur die Form, worin diese Mehrarbeit dem unmittelbaren Produzenten, dem Arbeiter, abgepreßt wird, unterscheidet die ökonomischen Gesellschaftsformationen, beispielsweise die Gesellschaft der Sklaverei von der der Lohnarbeit."
19. Engels: Der Ursprung der Familie, des Privateigentums und des Staats, MEW 21: 170. „Die Sklaverei ist die erste, der antiken Welt eigentümliche Form der Ausbeutung: ihr folgt die Leibeigenschaft im Mittelalter, die Lohnarbeit in der neueren Zeit. Es sind dies die drei großen Formen der Knechtschaft, wie sie für die drei großen Epochen der Zivilisation charakteristisch sind; offne, und neuerdings verkleidete, Sklaverei geht stets danebenher.“
20. Friedrich Engels (1962), Institut für Marxismus-Leninismus beim ZK der SED (ed.), "Die Arbeiterbewegung in Amerika. Vorwort zur amerikanischen Ausgabe der "Lage der arbeitenden Klasse in England"", Karl Marx Friedrich Engels Werke (MEW) (in German), vol. 21, Berlin: Dietz Verlag, p. 339, Im Mittelalter war keineswegs die Enteignung der Volksmassen vom Boden, sondern vielmehr ihre Aneignung an den Boden die Grundlage des feudalen Drucks. Der Bauer behielt seine Heimstätte, wurde aber als Leibeigner oder Höriger an sie gefesselt und hatte dem Grundherrn Tribut in Arbeit oder in Produkten zu leisten.
21. Marx: Das Kapital, MEW 23: 742
22. Michael Heinrich (2018), Kritik der politischen Ökonomie. Eine Einführung (in German) (14 ed.), Stuttgart: Schmetterling Verlag, pp. 209-210
23. Marx: Das Kapital, MEW 23: 742
24. Michael Heinrich (2018), Kritik der politischen Ökonomie. Eine Einführung (in German) (14 ed.), Stuttgart: Schmetterling Verlag, p. 89
25. Michael Heinrich (2018), Kritik der politischen Ökonomie. Eine Einführung. (in German) (14 ed.), Stuttgart: Schmetterling Verlag, p. 87
26. Marx: Das Kapital, MEW 23: 181
27. Marx: Lohn, Preis, Profit. MEW 16: 133.
28. Karl Marx (1962), Institut für Marxismus-Leninismus beim ZK der SED. (ed.), "Das Kapital. Kritik der politischen Ökonomie. Erster Band. Buch I: Der Produktionsprozeß des Kapitals.", Karl Marx Friedrich Engels Werke (MEW) (in German), vol. 23, Berlin: Dietz Verlag, p. 185, Die zur Produktion der Arbeitskraft notwendige Arbeitszeit löst sich also auf in die zur Produktion dieser Lebensmittel notwendige Arbeitszeit, oder der Wert der Arbeitskraft ist der Wert der zur Erhaltung ihres Besitzers notwendigen Lebensmittel.
29. Karl Marx (1962), Institut für Marxismus-Leninismus beim ZK der SED (ed.), "Das Kapital. Kritik der politischen Ökonomie. Erster Band. Buch I: Der Produktionsprozeß des Kapitals.", Karl Marx Friedrich Engels Werke (MEW) (in German), vol. 23, Berlin: Dietz Verlag, p. 185, Die natürlichen Bedürfnisse selbst, wie Nahrung, Kleidung, Heizung, Wohnung usw., sind verschieden je nach den klimatischen und andren natürlichen Eigentümlichkeiten eines Landes. Andrerseits ist der Umfang sog. notwendiger Bedürfnisse, wie die Art ihrer Befriedigung, selbst ein historisches Produkt und hängt daher großenteils von der Kulturstufe eines Landes, unter andrem auch wesentlich davon ab, unter welchen Bedingungen, und daher mit welchen Gewohnheiten und Lebensansprüchen die Klasse der freien Arbeiter sich gebildet hat. Im Gegensatz zu den andren Waren enthält also die Wertbestimmung der Arbeitskraft ein historisches und moralisches Element. Für ein bestimmtes Land, zu einer bestimmten Periode jedoch, ist der Durchschnitts-Umkreis der notwendigen Lebensmittel gegeben.
30. Michael Heinrich (2018), Kritik der politischen Ökonomie. Eine Einführung. (in German) (14 ed.), Stuttgart: Schmetterling Verlag, pp. 98-100
31. Michael Heinrich (2018), Kritik der politischen Ökonomie. Eine Einführung (in German) (14 ed.), Stuttgart: Schmetterling Verlag, pp. 134-135
32. Michael Heinrich (2018), Kritik der politischen Ökonomie. Eine Einführung (in German) (14 ed.), Stuttgart: Schmetterling Verlag, pp. 120-122
33. Michael Heinrich (2018), Kritik der politischen Ökonomie. Eine Einführung (in German) (14 ed.), Stuttgart: Schmetterling Verlag, p. 133
34. Karl Marx (1962), Institut für Marxismus-Leninismus beim ZK der SED (ed.), "Das Kapital. Kritik der politischen Ökonomie. Erster Band. Buch I: Der Produktionsprozeß des Kapitals", Karl Marx Friedrich Engels Werke (MEW) (in German), vol. 23, Berlin: Dietz Verlag, p. 166, Die Wiederholung oder Erneuerung des Verkaufs, um zu kaufen, findet, wie dieser Prozeß selbst, Maß und Ziel an einem außer ihm liegenden Endzwecke, der Konsumtion, der Befriedigung bestimmter Bedürfnisse. Im Kauf für den Verkauf dagegen sind Anfang und Ende dasselbe, Geld, Tauschwert, und schon dadurch ist die Bewegung endlos.
35. Karl Marx (1962), Institut für Marxismus-Leninismus beim ZK der SED (ed.), "Das Kapital. Kritik der politischen Ökonomie. Erster Band. Buch I: Der Produktionsprozeß des Kapitals", Karl Marx Friedrich Engels Werke (MEW) (in German), vol. 23, Berlin: Dietz Verlag, pp. 167-168, Als bewußter Träger dieser Bewegung wird der Geldbesitzer Kapitalist. Seine Person, oder vielmehr seine Tasche, ist der Ausgangspunkt und der Rückkehrpunkt des Geldes. Der objektive Inhalt jener Zirkulation – die Verwertung des Werts – ist sein subjektiver Zweck, und nur soweit wachsende Aneignung des abstrakten Reichtums das allein treibende Motiv seiner Operationen, funktioniert er als Kapitalist oder personifiziertes, mit Willen und Bewußtsein begabtes Kapital.
36. Michael Heinrich (2018), Kritik der politischen Ökonomie. Eine Einführung (in German) (14 ed.), Stuttgart: Schmetterling Verlag, p. 85
37. Michael Heinrich (2018), Kritik der politischen Ökonomie. Eine Einführung. (in German) (14 ed.), Stuttgart: Schmetterling Verlag, pp. 94-96
38. Marx: Das Kapital, MEW 23: 562. "Die Form des Arbeitslohns löscht jede Spur der Teilung des Arbeitstags in notwendige Arbeit und Mehrarbeit, in bezahlte und unbezahlte Arbeit aus. Alle Arbeit erscheint als bezahlte Arbeit."
39. Michael Heinrich (2018), Kritik der politischen Ökonomie. Eine Einführung (in German) (14 ed.), Stuttgart: Schmetterling Verlag, pp. 94-95
40. Karl Marx (1962), Institut für Marxismus-Leninismus beim ZK der SED (ed.), "Das Kapital. Kritik der politischen Ökonomie. Erster Band. Buch I: Der Produktionsprozeß des Kapitals.", Karl Marx Friedrich Engels Werke (MEW) (in German), vol. 23, Berlin: Dietz Verlag, p. 558, Um als Ware auf dem Markt verkauft zu werden, müßte die Arbeit jedenfalls existieren, bevor sie verkauft wird. Könnte der Arbeiter ihr aber eine selbstständige Existenz geben, so würde er Ware verkaufen und nicht Arbeit. Von diesen Widersprüchen abgesehn, würde ein direkter Austausch von Geld, d. h. vergegenständlichter Arbeit, mit lebendiger Arbeit entweder das Wertgesetz aufheben, welches sich grade erst auf Grundlage der kapitalistischen Produktion frei entwickelt, oder die kapitalistische Produktion selbst aufheben, welche grade auf der Lohnarbeit beruht. {{citation}}: line feed character in |quote= at position 221 (help)
41. Karl Marx (1962), Institut für Marxismus-Leninismus beim ZK der SED (ed.), "Das Kapital. Kritik der politischen Ökonomie. Erster Band. Buch I: Der Produktionsprozeß des Kapitals.", Karl Marx Friedrich Engels Werke (MEW) (in German), vol. 23, Berlin: Dietz Verlag, p. 563, Stellen wir uns auf den Standpunkt des Arbeiters, der für zwölfstündige Arbeit z. B. das Wertprodukt sechsstündiger Arbeit erhält, sage 3 sh., so ist für ihn in der Tat seine zwölfstündige Arbeit das Kaufmittel der 3 sh. Der Wert seiner Arbeitskraft mag variieren mit dem Wert seiner gewohnheitsmäßigen Lebensmittel von 3 auf 4 sh. oder von 3 auf 2 sh., oder bei gleichbleibendem Wert seiner Arbeitskraft mag ihr Preis, infolge wechselnden Verhältnisses von Nachfrage und Angebot, auf 4 sh. steigen oder auf 2 sh. fallen, er gibt stets 12 Arbeitsstunden. Jeder Wechsel in der Größe des Äquivalents, das er erhält, erscheint ihm daher notwendig als Wechsel im Wert oder Preis seiner 12 Arbeitsstunden.
42. Karl Marx (1962), Institut für Marxismus-Leninismus beim ZK der SED (ed.), "Das Kapital. Kritik der politischen Ökonomie. Erster Band. Buch I: Produktionsprozeß des Kapitals.", Karl Marx Friedrich Engels Werke (MEW) (in German), vol. 23, Berlin: Dietz Verlag, p. 564
43. Karl Marx (1962), Institut für Marxismus-Leninismus beim ZK der SED (ed.), "Das Kapital. Kritik der politischen Ökonomie. Erster Band. Buch I: Der Produktionsprozeß des Kapitals.", Karl Marx Friedrich Engels Werke (MEW) (in German), vol. 23, Berlin: Dietz Verlag, p. 559, Im Ausdruck: "Wert der Arbeit" ist der Wertbegriff nicht nur völlig ausgelöscht, sondern in sein Gegenteil verkehrt. Es ist ein imaginärer Ausdruck, wie etwa Wert der Erde. Diese imaginären Ausdrücke entspringen jedoch aus den Produktionsverhältnissen selbst. Sie sind Kategorien für Erscheinungsformen wesentlicher Verhältnisse.
44. Karl Marx (1962), Institut für Marxismus-Leninismus beim ZK der SED (ed.), "Das Kapital. Kritik der politischen Ökonomie. Erster Band. Buch I: Der Produktionsprozeß des Kapitals", Karl Marx Friedrich Engels Werke (MEW) (in German), vol. 23, Berlin: Dietz Verlag, p. 599, Der römische Sklave war durch Ketten, der Lohnarbeiter ist durch unsichtbare Fäden an seinen Eigentümer gebunden. Der Schein seiner Unabängigkeit wird durch den beständigen Wechsel der individuellen Lohnherrn und die fictio juris des Kontrakts aufrechterhalten.
45. Michael Heinrich (2018), Kritik der politischen Ökonomie. Eine Einführung (in German) (14 ed.), Stuttgart: Schmetterling Verlag, pp. 102-104
46. Michael Heinrich (2018), Kritik der politischen Ökonomie. Eine Einführung (in German) (14 ed.), Stuttgart: Schmetterling Verlag, pp. 104-105
47. Michael Heinrich (2018), Kritik der politischen Ökonomie. Eine Einführung (in German) (14 ed.), Stuttgart: Schmetterling Verlag, pp. 140-142
48. Michael Heinrich (2018), Kritik der politischen Ökonomie. Eine Einführung (in German) (14 ed.), Stuttgart: Schmetterling Verlag, pp. 144-146
49. Karl Marx (1964), Institut für Marxismus-Leninismus beim ZK der SED (ed.), "Das Kapital. Kritik der politischen Ökonomie. Dritter Band. Buch III: Der Gesamtprozeß der kapitalistischen Produktion.", Karl Marx Friedrich Engels Werke (MEW) (in German), vol. 25, Berlin: Dietz Verlag, p. 254, Die Gewinnung dieses Mehrwerts bildet den unmittelbaren Produktionsprozeß, der wie gesagt keine andren Schranken als die oben angegebnen hat. Sobald das auspreßbare Quantum Mehrarbeit in Waren vergegenständlicht ist, ist der Mehrwert produziert. Aber mit dieser Produktion des Mehrwerts ist nur der erste Akt des kapitalistischen Produktionsprozesses, der unmittelbare Produktionsprozeß beendet. Nun kommt der zweite Akt des Prozesses. Die gesamte Warenmasse, das Gesamtprodukt, sowohl der Teil, der das konstante und variable Kapital ersetzt, wie der den Mehrwert darstellt, muß verkauft werden. Geschieht das nicht, oder nur zum Teil, oder nur zu Preisen, die unter den Produktionspreisen stehn, so ist der Arbeiter zwar exploitiert, aber seine Exploitation realisiert sich nicht als solche für den Kapitalisten, kann mit gar keiner oder nur teilweiser Realisation des abgepreßten Mehrwerts, ja mit teilweisem oder ganzem Verlust seines Kapitals verbunden sein.
50. Michael Heinrich (2018), Kritik der politischen Ökonomie. Eine Einführung (in German) (14 ed.), Stuttgart: Schmetterling Verlag, pp. 134-135
51. Michael Heinrich (2018), Kritik der politischen Ökonomie. Eine Einführung (in German) (14 ed.), Stuttgart: Schmetterling Verlag, pp. 155-156
52. Michael Heinrich (2018), Kritik der politischen Ökonomie. Eine Einführung (in German) (14 ed.), Stuttgart: Schmetterling Verlag, p. 195
53. Karl Marx (2012), Internationale Marx-Engels-Stiftung Amsterdam (ed.), "Das Kapital. (Ökonomisches Manuskript 1863–1865). Drittes Buch", Marx-Engels-Gesamtwerke (MEGA) II.4.2. Ökonomische Manuskripte 1863–1867. Teil 2 (in German) (2 ed.), De Gruyter Akademie, pp. 458-459, ISBN 978-3-05-005119-2, Die Aktienunternehmungen überhaupt – entwickelt mit dem Creditwesen – haben die Tendenz diese labour of superintendence als Function mehr und mehr zu trennen von dem Besitz des Capital, sei es eigen, oder geborgt, ganz wie mit der Entwicklung der bürgerlichen Gesellschaft die Function des Richters z. B., des Administrators etc sich trennt von dem Grundeigenthum, womit sie in der Feudalzeit verknüpft waren. Indem aber einerseits dem blossen Eigenthümer des Capitals, dem monied Capitalist, der functionirende Capitalist gegenübertritt (und mit dem Creditwesen dieß monied capital selbst einen gesellschaftlichen Charakter annimmt und von andren Personen als seinen unmittelbaren Eigenthümern verborgt wird), andrerseits der blosse Manager, der das Capital unter keinerlei Titel besitzt, weder leihweise noch otherwise, alle realen Functionen versieht, die dem functionirenden Capitalisten als functionirendem zukommen, bleibt nur der Functionär und verschwindet der Capitalist als überflüssige Person aus dem Productionsproceß.
54. Friedrich Engels (1975), Institut für Marxismus-Leninismus beim ZK der SED (ed.), "Herrn Eugen Dühring's Umwälzung der Wissenschaft", Karl Marx Friedrich Engels Werke (MEW) (in German), vol. 20, Berlin: Dietz Verlag, p. 260, Und der moderne Staat ist wieder nur die Organisation, welche sich die bürgerliche Gesellschaft gibt, um die allgemeinen äußern Bedingungen der kapitalistischen Produktionsweise aufrechtzuerhalten gegen Übergriffe, sowohl der Arbeiter wie der einzelnen Kapitalisten. Der moderne Staat, was auch seine Form, ist eine wesentlich kapitalistische Maschine, Staat der Kapitalisten, der ideelle Gesamtkapitalist. Je mehr Produktivkräfte er in sein Eigentum übernimmt, desto mehr wird er wirklicher Gesamtkapitalist, desto mehr Staatsbürger beutet er aus. Die Arbeiter bleiben Lohnarbeiter, Proletarier. Das Kapitalverhältnis wird nicht aufgehoben, es wird vielmehr auf die Spitze getrieben.
55. Karl Marx (1962), Institut für Marxismus-Leninismus beim ZK der SED (ed.), "Das Kapital. Kritik der politischen Ökonomie. Erster Band. Buch I: Der Produktionsprozeß des Kapitals.", Karl Marx Friedrich Engels Werke (MEW) (in German), vol. 23, Berlin: Dietz Verlag, pp. 640-641, Endlich ergibt uns der Gesamtdurchschnitt der Durchschnittszusammensetzungen sämtlicher Produktionszweige die Zusammensetzung des gesellschaftlichen Kapitals eines Landes, und von dieser allein in letzter Instanz ist im folgenden die Rede. Unterstellen wir, daß, nebst sonst gleichbleibenden Umständen, die Zusammensetzung des Kapitals unverändert bleibt, d.h. eine bestimmte Masse Produktionsmittel oder konstantes Kapital stest dieselbe Masse Arbeitskraft erheischt, so wächst offenbar die Nachfrage nach Arbeit und der Subsistenzfonds der Arbeiter verhältnismäßig mit dem Kapital und um so rascher, je rascher das Kapital wächst.
56. Karl Marx (1962), Institut für Marxismus-Leninismus beim ZK der SED (ed.), "Das Kapital. Kritik der politischen Ökonomie. Erster Band. Buch I: Der Produktionsprozeß des Kapitals", Karl Marx Friedrich Engels Werke (MEW) (in German), vol. 23, Berlin: Dietz Verlag, pp. 647-648, Entweder fährt der Preis der Arbeit fort zu steigen, weil seine Erhöhung den Fortschritt der Akkumulation nicht stört; Oder, das ist die andre Seite der Alternative, die Akkumulation erschlafft infolge des steigenden Arbeitspreises, weil der Stachel des Gewinns abstumpft. Die Akkumulation nimmt ab. Aber mit ihrer Abnahme verschwindet die Ursache ihrer Abnahme, nämlich die Disproportion zwischen Kapital und exploitabler Arbeitskraft.
57. Michael Heinrich (2018), Kritik der politischen Ökonomie. Eine Einführung (in German) (14 ed.), Stuttgart: Schmetterling Verlag, pp. 124-125
58. Karl Marx (1962), Institut für Marxismus-Leninismus beim ZK der SED (ed.), "Das Kapital. Kritik der politischen Ökonomie. Erster Band. Buch I: Der Produktionsprozeß des Kapitals.", Karl Marx Friedrich Engels Werke (MEW) (in German), vol. 23, Berlin: Dietz Verlag, pp. 545-546
59. Michael Heinrich (2018), Kritik der politischen Ökonomie. Eine Einführung (in German) (14 ed.), Stuttgart: Schmetterling Verlag, pp. 117-120
60. Karl Marx (1962), Institut für Marxismus-Leninismus beim ZK der SED (ed.), "Das Kapital. Kritik der politischen Ökonomie. Erster Band. Buch I: Der Produktionsprozeß des Kapitals", Karl Marx Friedrich Engels Werke (MEW) (in German), vol. 23, Berlin: Dietz Verlag, p. 545, Der Grad des Falls hängt von dem relativen Gewicht ab, das der Druck des Kapitals von der einen Seite, der Widerstand der Arbeiter von der andern Seite in die Waagschale wirft.
61. Marx: Das Kapital, MEW 25: 827f.
62. Marx: Lohn, Preis, Profit. MEW 16: 152. „ sollte begreifen, daß das gegenwärtige System bei all dem Elend, das es über sie verhängt, zugleich schwanger geht mit den materiellen Bedingungen und den gesellschaftlichen Formen, die für eine ökonomische Umgestaltung der Gesellschaft notwendig sind. Statt des konservativen Mottos: „Ein gerechter Tagelohn für ein gerechtes Tagewerk!“, sollte sie auf ihr Banner die revolutionäre Losung schreiben: „Nieder mit dem Lohnsystem!““
63. Marx: Das Kapital, MEW 23: 791.
64. Marx, Engels: Manifest der kommunistischen Partei, MEW 4; 482.
65. Marx: Das Kapital III, MEW 25, 828.
66. Marx: Das Kapital I, MEW 23, 92
67. Marx: Kritik des Gothaer Programms, MEW 19, 21
68. Marx: Das Kapital, MEW 23: 58. "Die Arbeit ist sein Vater, wie William Petty sagt, und die Erde seine Mutter."
69. Karl Marx (1964), Institut für Marxismus-Leninismus beim ZK der SED (ed.), "Das Kapital. Kritik der politischen Ökonomie. Dritter Band. Buch III: Der Gesamtprozeß der kapitalistischen Produktion", Karl Marx Friedrich Engels Werke (MEW) (in German), vol. 25, Berlin: Dietz Verlag, pp. 820-821, Hier, bei der kleinen Kultur, tritt der Bodenpreis, Form und Resultat des Privateigentums am Boden, als Schranke der Produktion selbst auf. Bei der großen Agrikultur und dem auf kapitalistischer Betriebsweise beruhenden großen Grundeigentum tritt das Eigentum ebenso als Schranke auf, weil es den Pächter in der produktiven Kapitalanlage beschränkt, die in letzter Instanz nicht ihm, sondern dem Grundeigentümer zugut kommt. Bei beiden Formen tritt an die Stelle selbstbewußter rationeller Behandlung des Bodens als des gemeinschaftlichen ewigen Eigentums, der unveräußerlichen Existenz- und Reproduktionsbedingung der Kette sich ablösender Menschengeschlechter, die Exploitation und Vergeudung der Bodenkräfte Bei dem kleinen Eigentum geschieht dies aus Mangel an Mitteln und Wissenschaft zur Anwendung der gesellschaftlichen Produktivkraft der Arbeit. Bei dem großen durch Exploitation dieser Mittel zur möglichst raschen Bereicherung von Pächter und Eigentümer. Bei beiden durch die Abhängigkeit vom Marktpreis.
70. Michael Heinrich (2018), Kritik der politischen Ökonomie. Eine Einführung (in German) (14 ed.), Stuttgart: Schmetterling Verlag, pp. 115-116
71. Marx: Das Kapital, MEW 23: 529f.
72. Michael Heinrich (2018), Kritik der politischen Ökonomie. Eine Einführung (in German) (14 ed.), Stuttgart: Schmetterling Verlag, pp. 184-185
73. Marx, Karl. 1967. Capital: A Critique of Political Economy, vol. 1. New York: International Publishers.
74. Karl Marx, Capital, Vol. 1, as translated in J. Furner, Marx on Capitalism: The Interaction-Recognition-Antinomy Thesis, Brill 2018, p. 233, ISBN 978-90-04-32331-5, which also explains the significance of the difference between this translation of Marx's phrase, and the translation reproduced earlier in this Misplaced Pages entry, which, Furner argues, is wrong.
75. Steele, David Ramsay (September 1999). From Marx to Mises: Post Capitalist Society and the Challenge of Economic Calculation. Open Court. p. 143. ISBN 978-0875484495. One of the fateful consequences of marginal productivity is that it sweeps away such theories as Marx's which see interest as 'unpaid labour'. Under competitive market conditions, a worker tends to be paid what his labour contributes to output, no more and no less. The same goes for an owner of a machine or piece of real estate. The analysis demonstrates the symmetry of all types of inputs: there is as much sense as saying that labour exploits capital, or that electricity exploits roofing tiles. Of course, this does not touch the ethical arguments of socialists who acknowledge that non-labour factors make a determinate contribution to output, analytically separable from labour's contribution, yet still contend that it is illegitimate for anyone to own capital or land and reap the payment for their services. But that is not the position of Marx, nor many other socialists.
76. Desai, Meghnad, Marx's Revenge: The Resurgence of Capitalism and the Death of Statist Socialism, 2002, Verso Books, page 264
77. "Böhm-Bawerk's Critique of the Exploitation Theory of Interest | Mises Daily". Mises.org. 2004-11-26. Retrieved 2015-10-20.
78. Khalid Nadvi, 'Exploitation and Labour Theory Of Value: A Critique of Roemer's Theory of Exploitation and Class', Economic and Political Weekly, Vol. 20, No. 25, 1985, 1479-1494
79. For example, Allen W. Wood, Karl Marx (Routledge 2004) and Nicolas Vrousalis, 'Exploitation, Vulnerability and Social Domination', Philosophy and Public Affairs, Vol. 41, 2013, 131-157
80. Hillel Steiner, 'A Liberal Theory of Exploitation', Ethics, Vol. 94, No. 2, 1984, pp. 225-241
81. Hillel Steiner, 'A Liberal Theory of Exploitation', Ethics, Vol. 94, No. 2, 1984, pp. 229
82. Adam Smith. The Wealth of Nations, Book I, Chapter 8. Marxists Internet Archive.
83. J. Schumpter, The theory of economic development, Harvard University Press, 1949
84. Milan Zafirovski, 'Measuring and Making Sense of Labor Exploitation in Contemporary Society: A Comparative Analysis', Review of Radical Political Economies, 2003, Vol. 35, no. 4, pp. 462-484
85. Hawkins, John (2015-03-25). "An Interview With Milton Friedman | John Hawkins' Right Wing News". Rightwingnews.com. Retrieved 2015-10-20.
86. Martinus van Tilborgh. "How do we find our artists". Villagemarkets.org. Retrieved 2015-10-20.
87. Ellerman 1992 harvnb error: no target: CITEREFEllerman1992 (help).
88. Thompson 1966, p. 599 harvnb error: no target: CITEREFThompson1966 (help).
89. Thompson 1966, p. 912 harvnb error: no target: CITEREFThompson1966 (help).
90. Ostergaard 1997, p. 133 harvnb error: no target: CITEREFOstergaard1997 (help).
91. Lazonick 1990, p. 37 harvnb error: no target: CITEREFLazonick1990 (help).
92. "Wage Slave". Merriam Webster. Retrieved 4 March 2013.
93. "wage slave". Dictionary.com. Retrieved 4 March 2013.
94. Chomsky 1993, p. 19 harvnb error: no target: CITEREFChomsky1993 (help)
95. Thye & Lawler 2006 harvnb error: no target: CITEREFThyeLawler2006 (help).
96. Marx 1990, p. 1006 harvnb error: no target: CITEREFMarx1990 (help): "abour-power, a commodity sold by the worker himself."
97. Nelson 1995, p. 158 harvnb error: no target: CITEREFNelson1995 (help)

External links

• The Communist Manifesto
• Wage Labour and Capital

• Ethically disputed working conditions
• Labour economics
• Marxian economics