The Unknown Marx

Takahisa Oishi

Description

The Unknown Marx is an incisive critique of the way the West has revised and interpreted Marxist theory. Takahisa Oishi argues that Engels’ and Lenin’s summaries of Marx’s system have now been taken by Western societies to represent the sum total of Marx’s philosophy. By returning Marx’s original writings, Oishi reveals the essential limitations of Engels’ and Lenin’s interpretations, and presents a fresh reexamination of the theories of one of the world’s most influential political philosophers.



By departing from Western and Stalinist approaches to Marxism, Oishi attempts to see Marx's writing in the way Marx saw it. In doing so, Oishi gives unique insight into the essence of what we think we know about Marx, evaluating the systematic forms of interpretation which have emerged along with encroaching capitalism. An insightful, highly controversial interpretation of the grand narratives about Marx.
Foreword



Preface



Part One: Marx’s Dialectical Method



Chapter 1: Marx’s Task of History and the Nature of his Critique of Political Economy



Chapter 2: ‘The Materialist Interpretation of History’ and Marx’s Dialectical



Chapter 3: Marx’s Methodological Critique of Proudhonian Dialectics



Chapter 4: Marx’s Methodological Critique of Political Economists



Chapter 5: Marx’s Critique of Ricardian Value Theory



Part Two: Marx’s First Critique of Political Economy



Chapter 6: Defining Capitaist Laws of Structure and Movement



Chapter 7: A Twofold Analysis of the Capitalist Production Process



Chapter 8: Comprehending Capitalist Laws and Conflicts



Chapter 9: Ricardo, Engels and Marx in 1844



Part Three: The Totality of Marx’s System



Chapter 10: Marx’s Concept of ‘Social Property’



Appendix I: The Editing Problems of The German Ideology



Appendix II: An Aspect of Marx’s Critique of Political Economy:

The Cynicism of Political Economy



Index

Sujets

• Political Ideologies
• Political Science
• Communism
• Socialism
• Post-Communism

Informations

• Publié par: Pluto Press
• Date de parution: 20 janvier 2001
• Nombre de lectures: 0
• EAN13: 9781849641067
• Langue: English
• Poids de l'ouvrage: 1 Mo

Extrait

THE UNKNOWN MARX Reconstructing a Unified Perspective

T AKAHISA O ISHI

Foreword by Terrell Carver

P Pluto Press LONDON • STERLING, VIRGINIA in association with Takushoku University, Tokyo

First published 2001 by PLUTO PRESS 345 Archway Road, London N6 5AA and 22883 Quicksilver Drive, Sterling, VA 20166–2012, USA

www.plutobooks.com

Copyright © Takahisa Oishi 2001

The right of Takahisa Oishi to be identified as the author of this work has been asserted by him in accordance with the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988.

British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library

Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data Oishi, Takahisa, 1950– The unknown Marx : reconstructing a unified perspective / Takahisa Oishi; foreword by Terrell Carver. p. cm. ISBN 0–7453–1698–0 — ISBN 0–7453–1697–2 (pbk.) 1. Marx, Karl, 1818–1883. 2. Philosophy, Marxist. 3. Capitalism. 4. Communism. I. Title. HX39.5 .O47 2001 335.4—dc21 00–009581

10 10

09 9

ISBN 0 7453 1698 0 hardback ISBN 0 7453 1697 2 paperback

08 8

07 7

06 6

05 5

04 4

03 3

02 2

01 1

Designed and produced for Pluto Press by Chase Publishing Services, Fortescue, Sidmouth EX10 9QG Typeset from disk by Stanford DTP Services, Northampton Printed in the European Union by TJ International, Padstow

Communism (a) still of a political nature, democratic or despotic; (b) with the abolition of the state, but still essentially incomplete and influenced by private property, i.e. by the estrangement of man. In both forms communism already knows itself as the reintegration or return of man into himself, the supersession of man’s self-estrangement; but sinceit has not yet comprehended the positive essence of private propertyor understood the human nature of need, it is still held captive and contaminated by private property. True,it has understood its concept, but not yet its essence. (EW (Economic and Philosophical Manuscripts), pp. 347; emphasis added.)

Relations of personal dependence (entirely spontaneous at the outset) are the first social forms, in which human productive capacity develops only to a slight extent and at isolated points. Personal independence founded on objective [sachlicher] dependence is the second great form, in which a system of general social metabolism, of universal relations, of all-round needs and universal capacities is formed for the first time.Free individuality, based on the universal development of individualsand on their subordination of their communal, social productivity as their social wealth,is the third stage.The second stage creates the conditions for the third. Patriarchal as well as ancient conditions (feudal, also) thus disintegrate with the development of commerce, of luxury, of money, of exchange value, while modern society arises and grows in the same measure. (G, p. 158; emphasis added.)

But in the same measure as it is understood that labour is the sole source of exchange-value and the active source of use-value, ‘capital’ is likewise conceived by the same economists, in particular by Ricardo . . . , as the regulator of production, the source of wealth and the aim of production, whereas labour is regarded as wage-labour, whose representative and the real instrument is inevitably a pauper . . . , a mere production cost and instrument of production dependent on a minimum wage and forced to drop even below this minimum as soon as the existing quantity of labour is ‘superfluous’ for capital. In this contradiction, political economy merely expressedthe essence of capitalist production or, if you like, of wage labour, of labour alienated for itself, which stands confronted by the wealth it has created as alien wealth, by its own productive power as the productive power of its product, by its enrichment as its own impoverishment and by its social power as the power of society. But this definite, specific, historical form of social labour which is exemplified in capitalist production is proclaimed by these economists as the general, eternal form, as a natural phenomenon, and these relations of production as the absolutely (not historically) necessary, natural and reasonable relations of social labour. (Karl Marx,Theories of Surplus-Value, Part III, London: Lawrence & Wishart (1972), p. 259; emphasis added.)

In Memory of Gillian and Barry Dodd

CONTENTS

Abbreviations Foreword Preface

Part One: Marx’s Dialectical Method

1 Marx’s Task of History and the Nature of his Critique of Political Economy ‘Material Interests’ and ‘French Socialism and Communism’ The two-fold Proof of Private Property The two Aspects of Marx’s Critique of Hegel’sPhilosophy of Right The Nature of Marx’s Critique of Political Economy The Relationship between Marx’s Critique of Political Economy and French Socialism Conclusions

2 ‘The Materialist Interpretation of History’ and Marx’s Dialectical Method The so-called ‘Materialist Interpretation of History’ in ‘I Feuerbach’ Insertions by Marx and Engels The Dissimilarities between Marx and Engels The ‘Materialist Interpretation of History’ and Marx’s Critique of Political Economy Conclusions

3 Marx’s Methodological Critique of Proudhonian Dialectics Proudhon’s Dialectical Method Marx’s Critique of Proudhon’s Dialectics Conclusions

4 Marx’s Methodological Critique of Classical Political Economists Ricardo v. Marx on Method Ricardo v. Marx on the ‘Historical Character’ Ricardo v. Marx on the ‘Intrinsic Connection’

xii xiii xix

3 4 8 9 13

17 18

20

20 23 27

29 31

32 36 39 47

49 50 54 56

x

5

Marx’s Presentation of Economic Categories Conclusions

Marx’s Critique of Ricardian Value Theory Ricardo’s Value Theory Value as a Capitalist Relation Value as a Capitalist Process Conclusions

The Unknown Marx 57 59

Part Two: Marx’s First Critique of Political Economy

6

7

8

9

Defining Capitalist Laws of Structure and Movement The Position of the ‘First Manuscript: Former Part’ Marx’s Analysis of the Structure of Capitalist Society Marx’s Analysis of the Movement of Capitalist Society Value Theory in the ‘First Manuscript’ Conclusions

A Two-fold Analysis of the Capitalist Production Process The Position of the First and Second Manuscripts Logic in the ‘First Manuscript: Latter Part’ Logic in the ‘Second Manuscript’ Conclusions

Comprehending Capitalist Laws and Conflicts The Comprehension of Necessities Conclusions

Ricardo, Engels and Marx in 1844 Marx and Engels on ‘A Critique of Political Economy’ Marx and Engels on Value Conclusions

Part Three: The Totality of Marx’s System

10

Marx’s Concept of ‘Social Property’ Marx v. Engels on Communism Individual, Social and Common Property The Nature of Capital as the Principle of Marx’s System Conclusions

62 64 66 71 74

79 80 82 89 96 99

102 102 106 109 118

120 120 135

136 138 146 149

153 154 158 166 174

Contents Appendices I The Editing Problems ofThe German Ideology A Bibliographical Study of ‘I Feuerbach’ The ‘Small Volume’ The ‘Large Volume’ The Missing Pages ([36] to [39]) The Position of {B} Conclusions II An Aspect of Marx’s Critique of Political Economy: The Cynicism of Political Economy The Meaning of the Cynicism of Political Economy Cynicism and the Theories of Value and of Surplus Value The Causes of Cynicism Marx’s Critique of the Cynicism Conclusions

Notes Index

xi 177 179 179 180 183 186 187 188

189 190 191 192 193 194

196 213

ABBREVIATIONS

AD Friedrich Engels,Anti-Dühring.(MEC 25, pp. 5–309) CAP 1 Karl Marx,Capital, Vol. 1, trans. B. Fowkes. The Penguin Group, London, 1976. CAP 3 Karl Marx,Capital, Vol. 3, trans. D. Fernbach, The Penguin Group, London, 1981. EPM Karl Marx,Economic and Philosophical Manuscripts, 1844. (MEC 3, pp. 229–346) FM:FP First Manuscript, Former Part FM:LP First Manuscript, Latter Part EW Karl Marx,Early Writings, Penguin Books, London, 1975. G Karl Marx,Grundrisse: Foundations of the Critique of Political Economy (Rough Draft), trans. M. Nicolaus, Penguin Books, 1973. GI Karl Marx, ‘I Feuerbach’ inThe German Ideology. (MEC 5, pp. 19–93) MEC* Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels,Collected Works, Lawrence & Wishart, London , 1975, etc. MEGA1* Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels,Historisch-kritische Gesamtausgabe, ed. D. Ryazanov et al., Frankfurt and Berlin, 1927, etc. (incomplete) MEGA2* Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels,Gesamtausgabe, Dietz, Berlin, 1972, etc. (in progress) MEW* Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels,Werke, Dietz, Berlin, 1956, etc. OCPE Friedrich Engels,Outlines of a Critique of Political Economy, 1844. (MEC 3, pp. 418–43) POP Karl Marx,The Poverty of Philosophy, 1847. (MEC 6, pp. 105–212) SEC Proudhon,System of Economic Contradictions, or The Philosophy of Poverty, 1846. SW Karl Marx,Selected Writings, ed. D. McLellan, Oxford, 1977.

* multi-volume collections and volumes are indicated thus: MEC 1, MEW 33, etc.

xii

FOREWORD Terrell Carver Professor of Political Theory, University of Bristol

Marx is not only unknown, he is undead. He lies very unquietly in the grave. The more researchers and scholars stalk him with the wooden stake, the more protean will be his spectres. Experiencing Marx is an activity in the present, and in the present there will be an increasing number of Marxes to be experienced. This is so in the usual way with ‘great authors’, because as we change, so our reading of their texts changes in accord with our concerns; authors who have no contemporary resonance are not read, and cease to be ‘great’. This is also true of Marx in another way, again a way he has in common with other ‘greats’. Which works to read, what order to read them in, their relative hierarchy of importance, what exactly each is about and how they ‘add up’ are questions that will be asked again and again. There is no definitive view for all time, not from the author, nor from his family or friends. Indeed as Paul Thomas has shown in his essay ‘Critical Reception: Marx 1 Then and Now’, early versions of ‘the truth about Marx’ were based on what there was available to read at the time, and since then the amount of Marx in print has multiplied by an astronomical figure. Currently the completeMarx-Engels Gesamtausgabe(MEGA2) is aiming at 130 double volumes, surely one of the largest scholarly projects ever undertaken. Moreover, as Thomas also shows, ‘the truth about Marx’ has never been singular or unquestioned, as orthodoxies, revisions and critiques have abounded since his death in 1883. The first ‘truth about Marx’ is traceable 2 back as far as 1859, to Engels’s earliest reviews. Using a clear and direct logic, Takahisa Oishi ruthlessly blows away some of the most hallowed ‘truths’ about Marx. Oishi’s new book is unusually fresh and timely, and will contribute mightily to the re-evaluation of Marx after the ‘fall of the Wall’. In the nature of the exercise it is unlikely that Oishi will succeed in disposing of these familiar ‘truths’ completely, but it is certain that readers of this remarkable work will experience an intellectual and possibly even physical experience of Pauline proportions. Whether they will continue along the same road as Oishi is another question, but they will certainly feel profoundly shaken. This has to be a productive experience, as even the most hallowed ‘truths’ need to be tested; otherwise we are left with the deadest of

xiii

xivThe Unknown Marx dogmas, as John Stuart Mill – not someone Marx admired, at least as an 3 economist and logician – argued persuasively inOn Liberty(1859). The reader of Oishi’s work will need to be prepared for a very radical and very controversial book. Takahisa Oishi was promoted to Professor of the History of Economic Theories at Takushoku University, Tokyo, in 1993. This is a distinguished appointment following on from his work at that University, where he started as a lecturing assistant in 1981. Prior to that he completed masters’ degrees in economics at Chuo University, Tokyo, and Yokohama National University, Japan. He has published papers in English on Ricardo and Marx in Japanese international journals, and three books on economic history and analysis in Japanese. The Marx–Engels ‘Forscher’ (Researchers) is an active group of academics from universities all over Japan, and he is a respected contributor to their debates and conferences. Oishi positions his revelation of an ‘unknown Marx’ against a backdrop of Soviet Marxist commentary on Marx and Marxism. This in itself will strike most Anglo-American readers as a fairly unusual perspective, at least since the time of the early Cold War in the 1950s. By the 1960s in ‘the West’ most Marxists and anti-Marxists were rather more relaxed about the previous linkage between the ‘Red Terror Doctor’ and the ‘World Communist Threat’ (or ‘Revolution’, depending on your political orientation). What comes across at this juncture from Oishi’s perspective, however, is the extent to which many of the ‘truths’ about Marx after the 1950s were shared by orthodox, even Stalinist, Marxists,andby Western commentators (both pro- and anti-Marx/Marxism). This happened unbeknownst and unacknowl- edged, creating a sanitised tradition of ‘common knowledge’. Again, this is something that Thomas notes in his essay on the reception of Marx by readers and followers. Indeed the idea that Marx had a ‘reception’ is itself productively unsettling, because for those accepting conventional views, ‘the truth about Marx’ justiswhat it is for anyone to receive at any time. That a history of Marx’s ‘reception’ can be written at all implies a mal- leability in the story that for many commentators is frankly unwelcome, or at least for them any major contribution or justifiable revision would be almost unthinkable. Paradoxically as the history of this tradition has come down to us, ‘revisionists’ did not really revise Marx – they were instead said to have created ‘revisionism’, thus leaving the conventional Marx – of the (singular) ‘received wisdom’ – in place. Oishi’s account is useful in providing an ‘outsider’s view’ of the situation, i.e., someone rather outside the conventions of Anglo-American commentary on Marx. What he says, rightly, is that this tradition shares much more with orthodox, even Stalinist accounts, than is generally admitted. Oishi also uses Japanese scholarship, as yet little known in Anglo- American or indeed ‘Western’ circles, notably an edition ofThe German 4 Ideology that is by far the best (theMarx-Engels Gesamtausgabehas not yet managed to produce its own complete edition). Oishi also draws on the