| This question <14|14> overall <14|18> Hans: <12|23>. |
| Question 485: Explain carefully to what extent the relations of production are determinate, necessary, and independent of people's wills. |
| [15] Hans: Relations of Production a) to what extent are the relations of production determinate? |
| Instead of “determinate”, Martin in [14] proposes the translation “definite” (as in “the definite article”), “certain”, or “particular”. All these are possible translations of the German word “bestimmt”, but I'd like to know more precisely what any of this means here. Martin thinks “in essence it means concrete.” I am not convinced. What are “concrete” social relations? Those where you get a good whipping when you don't conform? Just kidding. |
| In my view, Marx uses the word “bestimmt” (determinate) to indicate that these relations of production are not arbitrary, but subject to certain laws or to some inner logic. In order to see the significance of this, you need to be aware that according to Marx's understanding, there are “gaps” in the economy: not all economic phenomena are determined by economic laws, but certain economic phenomena are “indeterminate” in the sense that they are not governed by iron economic necessities but perhaps set by the struggle of the contending interests. For instance, in Chapter Ten, Marx argues that the laws of economics only give very partial information about the length of the working day and the level of wages: the working day must be long enough and the wages low enough that the worker produces more value per day than he takes home in wages. But how much more is not determined by iron economic laws, but by the class struggle between workers and capitalists. This is a different outlook than that of neoclassical economics, which claims that wages are set by marginal productivity, i.e., a struggle for higher wages is hopeless because it amounts to a violation of the laws of the economy. |
| I think when Marx says the relations of production are determinate, then he stresses their lawful character: these relations cannot be set arbitrarily by the participants, but they are subject to certain laws. The character of this lawfulness is the subject of the Preface which we are discussing here. |
| Martin suggests that the word “determinate” should be taken in the meaning of deterministic chaotic systems: although the system itself is fully deterministic, the trajectory of the system depens very sensitively on the initial conditions, and since the initial conditions are never known with certainty, the system is really indeterminate. I think Marx means exactly the opposite: although the historical sequence of events may be very different for the different countries, they all end up with very similar relations of production, since these relations are determined by certain economic laws and not the result of historical accidents. |
| b) to what extent are the relations of production necessary? |
| Martin brings here the question whether capitalism is necessary or whether it would be possible to go directly to socialism. I don't think this is the issue here. These relations are necessary because people cannot survive outside them. Marx stresses here that we are social beings, not independent individuals. |
| c) to what extent are the relations of production independent of their wills? |
| Here I agree with Martin, who stresses that the economic structure is not only independent of individual wills, but that it in turn influences what people think and what they desire. Of course, the goal is to overcome this so that individuals in society can have a conscious influence on their social relations. Revolutionaries, who try to build a better society, are doing exactly that. Marx did not mean to imply that this is hopeless, but it is certainly quite difficult. |
|
|
|||||