The Widening Gap between the Rich and the Poor in Capitalist Society
5. The Widening Gap between the Rich and the Poor in Capitalist Society
Capital Accumulation and the Impoverishment of the Working Class 1
The capitalist tries his best to extract absolute and relative surplus value and to convert it into capital for the exploitation and oppression of the worker on a larger scale. This process of converting surplus value into capital is called capital accumulation. The analysis of capital accumulation makes us realize why in the old society the capitalist who never labored was getting richer and the toiling worker’s lot was getting worse. It helps us further understand why the expropriation of the expropriator, the extinction of capitalism, and the inevitable triumph of socialism cannot be reversed by any reactionary forces and why the overthrow of the evil capitalist system is the great historical mission of the proletariat.
Capital Accumulation Increases the Exploitation of the Workers Analyze Capitalist Simple Reproduction and Expose the Lie That the Capitalist Supports the Worker
We said earlier that the conversion of surplus value expropriated by the capitalist into capital is capital accumulation. Before we analyze capital accumulation, let us see what would happen if the capitalist spent the expropriated surplus value all on himself instead of converting it to capital. Under this condition, the production of the capitalist could not be expanded. He could only carry on capitalist simple reproduction.
Suppose a capitalist started a plant with 10,000 yuan, of which 8.000 yuan was used to buy the plant building, raw materials, and machine equipment (to simplify the example, suppose this 8.000 yuan of means of production was totally expended in the year with its value transferred to the products) and 2,000 yuan was used to purchase labor power. Further, suppose the rate of surplus value was 100 percent. Then the value of annual products would be equal to 8,000c + 2,000v + 2,000m = 12,000 yuan, of which, 2,000 yuan would be surplus value. If the capitalist spent this 2,000 yuan of surplus value on luxury consumption for himself and his family dependents, the capital in the capitalist’s hands at the beginning of the second year would still be 8,000c + 2,000v = 10,000 yuan. If there were no change in the surplus value, the value of the second year’s products would still be 8,000c + 2,000v + 2,000m = 12,000 yuan. In the course of reproduction, the scale of operation would not have expanded, staying at the original level. This reproduction based on the original scale is called simple reproduction.
What does capitalist simple reproduction explain?
First, we can clearly see who supports whom in the capitalist society If we look at it from one single production process, it looks as if the capitalist supports the worker by advancing his capital as wages. This is how the capitalist puts it. But, if we look at it from the reproduction process, the capitalist’s lie is easily exposed. Wages are only part of the value created by the worker himself in the production process. In the value newly created by the worker is included not only the value for the support of the worker himself and the reproduction of labor power, but also the surplus value for the support of the capitalist and for his extravagant living. Therefore, it is not the capitalist who supports the worker. On the contrary it is the worker who supports the capitalist.
Second, from the process of simple reproduction, we can see that the capital of the capitalist is converted from surplus value. Using our earlier example, this capitalist who started out with 10,000 yuan spent 2,000 yuan on his personal consumption. Thus, after five years, his initial capital would have been completely spent. But, through simple reproduction, after five years he still had 10,000 yuan as capital. This 10,000 yuan was no longer the capital he started out with, but the sum total of his continual extraction of surplus value in five years. Marx said,
“Ignoring all accumulation, the simple continuation of the production process or simple reproduction would, after a longer or shorter period of time, transform any capital into accumulated capital or capitalized surplus value.” 2
Since the capital of the capitalist is converted from surplus value created by the worker, it is entirely reasonable that all means of production expropriated from the capitalist should belong to the proletarian state if the working class has seized political power. This is merely taking back the wealth created by the labor of the ancestors of the working class.
Finally, from the process of simple reproduction, we can also see that capitalist reproduction not only reproduces various commodities, but also reproduces the capitalist production relations. In the process of reproduction, the worker continuously produces the variable capital used for the purchase of labor power. When the production process ends, the worker is still an empty-handed hired laborer, and the capitalist still possesses all the means for the exploitation of the worker.
The Capitalist Expands Reproduction for the Sake of Extracting More Surplus Value
We assumed above that the capitalist spent all the surplus value on his personal consumption. Because of this, reproduction could only be carried on at the original scale. But simple reproduction is not the characteristic of capitalist production.
The characteristic of capitalist production is expanded reproduction.
To carry on expanded reproduction, the capitalist cannot spend all the expropriated surplus value on personal consumption. He must spare part of it for conversion into capital to buy new machines and equipment and to hire additional workers before he can expand the scale of operation and realize expanded reproduction.
Suppose the capitalist started out with 10,000 yuan, of which 8.000 yuan was constant capital and 2,000 yuan was variable capital, and that the rate of surplus value was 100 percent. When the production process was completed, the value of products would be 8,000c + 2,000v + 2,000m = 12,000 yuan. Further, suppose that the capitalist used half of the 2,000 yuan of surplus value for personal consumption and the other half for accumulation to be converted into capital. If the proportion between constant capital and variable capital were kept constant, then from this 1,000 yuan of new capital, 800 yuan would go into constant capital, and 200 yuan into variable capital. In the second year, the total amount of capital would be increased to 11.000 yuan. Its composition would be 8,800c + 2,200v + 2,200m = 13,200 yuan. Compared with the value of the first year’s products of 12,000 yuan, this capitalist realized expanded reproduction.
From capitalist expanded reproduction, we can see that expanded production can be carried out only because part of the surplus value has been converted into capital. If, under the condition of simple reproduction, the capital invested by the capitalist can be seen as converted from surplus value only after a period of time, then under the condition of expanded reproduction, the added capital can be seen as converted from surplus value right from the beginning.
Why does the capitalist not spend all of the surplus value on his personal consumption but instead carry out capital accumulation for expanded reproduction? Some bourgeois economists explained capital accumulation as the virtue of “abstinence” on the part of the capitalist, as if capital accumulation by the capitalist were for the good of society as a whole and involved a restraint of his consumption desire.
Marx exposed the nature of “abstinence.” Marx pointed out that the capitalist possessed “an absolute desire to get rich.” 3 The greed of the capitalist for surplus value is limitless. Surplus value can be increased continuously only if the capitalist continuously accumulates capital, increases the amount of capital, and expands the scale of production. At the same time, capitalist competition also forces him to accumulate capital. Whoever has more capital is in an advantageous position with respect to the addition of equipment, the purchase of raw materials, and the adoption of new techniques. He is also more likely to increase labor productivity and to depress the individual labor time of a commodity below the socially necessary labor time, so as to triumph in the competition. If the reverse were the case, he would fail in the competition and be swallowed up by the bigger capitalist. Competition becomes a source of pressure on every capitalist. The fear of failure and bankruptcy in competition forces the capitalist to engage in capital accumulation to strengthen his competitive power. “Competition transforms the internal law of capitalist production into a coercive external law governing every capitalist. Competition forces the capitalist to maintain his capital by expanding it continuously. And he expands his capital by progressive accumulation.” 4
It can be seen that it is not “abstinence” but greed and fear which motivate the capitalist to convert part of the surplus value extracted from the worker into capital. The more the capitalist exploits, the larger the accumulated capital. The larger the accumulated capital, the more surplus value can be exploited. Therefore, capital accumulation is not only a result of the exploitation of the worker, but also a means by which the capitalist extends and expands his exploitation of the worker.
The Unemployment of Workers Is the Inevitable Result of Capital Accumulation
The Increase in the Organic Composition of Capital Leads to the Expulsion of the Worker by Machines
The process of capital accumulation is not only a process of increasing the total amount of capital. In this process, there is also the change in the composition of capital and the consequent adverse effect on the proletariat.
From the material side, the composition of capital is expressed as the proportion between means of production (plant, machines, equipment, raw materials) and labor power. There is a definite relation between the amount of means of production purchased and the number of workers employed. For example, there is a definite number of spindles a worker can manage using a certain amount of cotton each day. The level of this proportion depends on the technological level of production in society, the characteristics of various production spheres, and the degree of mechanization. It also depends on the technical equipment of various enterprises. Therefore, we can call this proportion the technical composition of capital.
The composition of capital can also be viewed from the value viewpoint. The value of means of production is expressed as constant capital, and the value of labor power is expressed as variable capital. The proportion between constant and variable capital is called the value composition of capital.
There is a close relation between the technical and value composition of capital. In general, the value composition of capital varies with the technical composition of capital. ‘The value composition of capital, which is determined by the technical composition of capital and which reflects its change, is called the organic composition of capital.” 5 The formula for the organic composition of capital is c:v. For example, suppose a capitalist has 10,000 yuan, of which 8,000 yuan is constant capital and 2,000 yuan is variable capital. Then the organic composition of capital is 8,000c : 2,000v, that is, 4:1.
In the course of the development of capitalism, the organic composition of capital is not constant. To extract more surplus value and to gain an upper hand in competition, the capitalist must improve the technical equipment of the enterprise by substituting machines for hand labor or new machines for old machines. Thus, the capitalist must increase his capital in machine equipment. The substitution of machines for labor enables the worker to produce even more products in a given period of time with an even higher consumption of raw materials. The capitalist must also increase his capital for the purchase of more raw materials. Thus, with the continual accumulation of capital, the proportion of constant capital in the total capital constantly increases. On the other hand, the proportion of variable capital gets smaller all the time, leading to an increase in the organic composition of capital.
In general, the precondition for the increase in the organic composition of capital is the increase in individual capital. Capital can be increased in two forms: one is by capital accumulation, that is, an increase in the total amount of capital by the accumulation of individual capital; the other is by capital concentration, that is, the absorption of small capital by big capital through competition or the merger of several companies into a joint-stock corporation so that capital that was once scattered is concentrated into larger capital. Capital accumulation and capital concentration inevitably increase the organic composition of capital.
The increase in organic composition of capital has serious repercussions for the working class. If the organic composition of capital is constant, the accumulation of capital will increase the corresponding demand for labor power. That is, it will correspondingly increase the employment opportunities of the worker. But after the organic composition of capital is increased, the result of capital accumulation is no longer the same. It can increase the total demand for labor power. But this increase will be much smaller than the increase in constant capital. Under certain conditions, the total demand for labor power may even be lower than before. This is because the demand for labor power does not depend on the size of total capital but on the size of variable capital. For example, when the organic composition of capital is 4:1, it means that for every 100 yuan of total capital, 20 yuan can be used for hiring workers. But when the organic composition of capital is increased to 9:1, it means that for every 100 yuan, only 10 yuan is available for hiring workers. Thus, even if the total capital increases from 10,000 yuan to 15,000 yuan, the amount of variable capital decreases from 2,000 yuan to 1,500 yuan. This demonstrates that the increase in the organic composition of capital reduces employment opportunities for the worker. In the capitalist society, the working class creates machines. But when the machines are used by the capitalist, a large number of workers are displaced and unemployed. The adoption of sewing machines by the capitalist led to the unemployment of many sewing workers. The adoption of packing machines led to the unemployment of many packing workers. The adoption of typesetting machines led to the unemployment of many typesetting workers. In the development process of capitalism, with the improvement in techniques and the increase in the organic composition of capital, employment opportunities for the laborers are correspondingly reduced and unemployment increases. This is called the expulsion of workers by machines. Relative Surplus Population Is the Inevitable Outcome of Capital Accumulation
The increase in the organic composition of capital relatively reduces the demand for labor power. But in the course of capital accumulation, the supply of labor power increases absolutely. With the development of capitalist production techniques and the widespread adoption of machines, many labor operations were so simplified that many women and children could join the ranks of hired labor. At the same time, in the course of capital accumulation, a large number of small commodity producers and small capitalists went bankrupt and had to sell their labor power to support themselves. The development of capitalism in the countryside also brought bankruptcy to a large number of peasants who flocked to the city to earn their living. All these factors contributed to an absolute increase in the supply of labor power.
Thus, on the one hand, the demand for labor power was reduced relatively. On the other hand, the supply of labor power increased absolutely. In the end, there always exists in the capitalist society a large body of unemployed, resulting in a relative surplus in population.
The so-called relative surplus population is “surplus” only in relation to the capital demand for it. It does not imply that the population is in absolute surplus such that it can no longer be supported by the means of livelihood produced by society. In fact, there is no such thing as an absolute population surplus because a person not only has a mouth that can consume food grain, but also two hands that can create certain material wealth. Once the laboring masses control their own destiny, they can advance toward the depth and width of production to create ever more means of livelihood for a more diversified life. Only in the capitalist society, where the laborers cannot control their own destiny and the machines created by them are used as capital, are the workers displaced as relative surplus population. Therefore, Marx called the relative surplus population an outcome of “a special law of population under the capitalist mode of production.” He pointed out, “Surplus worker population is an inevitable outcome of accumulation or the development of wealth on the capitalist basis.” 6
There are three basic forms of surplus population in the capitalist society:
First, mobile surplus population. This refers to the unemployed population which has been temporarily displaced in the production process. This kind of unemployment is most common in industrial centers. In time of crises and after new machines and new techniques are adopted, some workers will be displaced. But in time of recovery and when industry further develops, many of these unemployed workers will be absorbed back into factories. Very few workers in capitalist countries can escape from unemployment at one time or another. Most people are employed off and on.
Second, disguised surplus population, that is, surplus population in the countryside. After agricultural production has become capitalist and with the increase in the organic composition of capital, the demand for agricultural workers decreases steadily. Moreover, in agriculture this displacement of labor power is absolute. Unless new land is reclaimed, no additional labor power can be absorbed. Some of the laborers displaced by capitalist agriculture drift to the city. Others still cling to a small piece of land and barely support themselves by intensive cultivation and doing odd jobs. They may not be unemployed in form, but they are actually surplus in agricultural production. This is called disguised surplus population.
Third, static surplus population. These people perform household chores and do odd jobs. Though still belonging to the current labor force, their jobs are not stable. Their jobs often involve long hours and low wages. Their standard of living is depressed below the average level for the working class.
In the capitalist society, in addition to the above three kinds of surplus population, there is a large number of very poor people who depend on welfare and begging for their livelihood. Among them are the aged, the weak, the handicapped, the orphaned, and vagabonds who have lost their labor capacity. They constitute the lowest stratum of the relative surplus population, and their lot is the worst.
Relative surplus population is an inevitable outcome of capital accumulation. At the same time, these people become the lever of capital accumulation, or even a condition for the existence and development of the capitalist mode of production. The capitalist uses the existence of the unemployed workers as a trump card to increase oppression and exploitation of the currently employed. From the mouth of the capitalist, one can often hear such vicious words as, ‘It is more difficult to find a hundred dogs than to find a hundred workers.” Why is the capitalist so ferocious? Because outside the door of the plant there are thousands and thousands of unemployed workers. They are used by the capitalist to threaten the workers inside the plant and to depress their wages. At the same time, capitalism develops amidst competition and chaos and is characterized by sudden contractions and expansions. When production suddenly expands, the capitalist’s demand for labor cannot be met by the natural increase of labor power. The capitalist requires a labor power “reservoir.” Relative surplus population provides such a “reservoir.” In this sense, we call the huge army of unemployed in capitalist society an industrial reserve army. It is required by the existence and development of the capitalist mode of production.
Malthus’s “An Essay on the Principle of Population” Is a Reactionary Fallacy in Defense of Capitalism
In the capitalist society, the widespread existence of a huge army of unemployed is a “good” thing for the capitalist because it is conducive to exploitation. But it is also a shameful thing because it makes the so-called civilized country look very uncivilized. To remedy this situation, some intellectuals in the service of the bourgeoisie racked their brains to produce biased theories for the defense of the capitalist system. In the early nineteenth century, the reactionary An Essay on the Principle of Population cooked up by a vulgar English economist named Malthus was one such biased theory.
Malthus advanced a notorious argument. He said that population increases by the geometric progression (1, 2, 4, 8…), while the means of livelihood increases by the arithmetic progression (1, 2, 3, 4…). He argued that this is the basic reason for surplus population, unemployment, and poverty among the masses. This contention was intended to explain that unemployment and poverty are not the evils of the capitalist system, but a result of the law of Nature. According to Malthus’s theory, wars and plagues are a blessing to human society. In wars and plagues, a large number of people die, thus ameliorating the effects of surplus population and rendering the increase in population more compatible with the increase in the means of livelihood.
Facts are stronger than arguments. Malthus’s reactionary An Essay on the Principle of Population does not hold water. How did the pseudoscience that purported to show the geometric increase of population and the arithmetical increase of the means of livelihood come into being? What really happened was that Malthus took the increase in population in America in one period as the basis for his rate of population increase. He also took the increase in food production for one period in France as the basis for his rate of increase in the means of livelihood. The rapid increase in the American population at that time was not mainly due to the natural multiplication of population, but to other factors such as immigration. As to the food production of France, if it was compared with the increase of population in France and not with the increase of population in America, then it did not lag behind the increase in population, but exceeded the increase in population. In 1760, the population of France was 2.1 million. The average output of food grain per capita was 450 liters. Eighty years later in 1840, the population of France increased to 3.4 million, an increase of 62 percent. But the increase in food production was even faster. In 1840, the average output of food grain per 60 capita was 832 liters, an increase of 85 percent. The data of many other capitalist countries also showed that the increase in population did not exceed the increase in the means of livelihood. On the contrary, the increase in the means of livelihood exceeded the increase in population. But, even so, the laboring people were very poor, and their lot miserable. Malthus’s defense of the evils of the capitalist system by means of the so-called absolute surplus population was a futile effort.
The pernicious influence of Malthus’s An Essay on the Principle of Population was widespread in the old China. Imperialists and Kuomintang reactionaries all along used Malthus’s An Essay on the Principle of Population as a tool to oppose the Chinese people’s revolution. Prior to the liberation, they uttered nonsense like the Chinese people were poor because there were too many of them, and they attempted to blame Nature for the evils of imperialism, feudalism, and bureaucratic capitalism. On the eve of the national liberation, they again talked nonsense, complaining that China had too many people. According to them, the people’s government could not solve the food problem and would not last more than a few months. Chairman Mao sternly refuted this reactionary fallacy. He said, “The large population of China is a good thing. We know how to handle an even larger population. The solution is in production.” “Revolution plus production can solve the food problem.” 7 The experience of socialist China since its establishment has completely vindicated Chairman Mao’s scientific judgment. Under the guidance of Chairman Mao’s revolutionary line, unemployment has been eliminated in China. The socialist economy flourishes, and the people’s standard of living steadily increases. A poor and backward China has established a socialist country on its way to prosperity and growth. The imperialist fallacies went thoroughly bankrupt.
Capital Accumulation Leads to the Impoverishment of the Proletariat
The Polarization between the Rich and the Poor Is a General Law of Capitalist Accumulation
Capital accumulation has entirely different consequences for the bourgeoisie and the proletariat. To the bourgeoisie, the process of capital accumulation is the process of capital addition and concentration and a process of the bourgeoisie’s wealth expansion. To the proletariat, the process of capital accumulation is a process whereby “machines displace workers,” and a process whereby the ranks of the unemployed are swollen, the employed workers are subject to increasing exploitation, and the living conditions of the whole working class worsen steadily. The polarization between the rich and the poor in capitalist society during capital accumulation will not shift according to human will. On one end of society is wealth accumulation; on the other is poverty accumulation. Marx pointed out, “This is an absolute and general law of capitalist accumulation.” 8
The revelation of this law by Marx is very significant. It tells us that the working and living conditions of the proletariat are determined by the capitalist production relations. Under the capitalist system, the development of production will only lead to the impoverishment of the proletariat. This impoverishment is not only relative but also absolute.
The Steadily Declining Share of the Proletariat in the National Income Leads to Relative Impoverishment
National income is the sum total of the newly created value of the whole society in one year. In capitalist society, national income is first divided into the part that goes to the workers’ wages and the part that is plundered by the capitalists as surplus value. In the development of capitalism, what will happen to the income shares that go to the workers and to the capitalists respectively?
National income is wholly created by the laborers and increases steadily in the process of expanded reproduction. Under capitalism, the share of wages received by the proletariat steadily declines, and the share of surplus value received by the bourgeoisie steadily increases. This phenomenon is called the relative impoverishment of the proletariat. According to figures published by the United States government, the share of wages of American workers in the national income was 45.6 percent in 1843, 43.5 percent in 1866, 42.7 percent in 1891, 37 percent in 1938, 33.3 percent in 1945, and 29.7 percent in 1956. From these figures, we can see that with capital accumulation, the income of the workers declined steadily in relative terms, while the wealth expropriated by the bourgeoisie increased steadily. The Steady Deterioration of Labor Conditions and Living Conditions Leads to the Absolute Impoverishment of the Proletariat
In capitalist society, there exists not only the relative impoverishment of the proletariat, but also their absolute impoverishment. This is what Lenin pointed out:
“The impoverishment of the workers is absolute. That is to say, they become poorer and poorer, their lives more miserable, their meals worse, and their stomachs less full. And they have to be crowded into basements and attics.” 9
The major manifestations of the absolute impoverishment of the proletariat are as follows:
First, the existence of a large number of unemployed workers. Unemployment is the constant threat faced by the worker in a capitalist country.
Once he is unemployed, he loses his source of income. His livelihood becomes a serious problem. This is an important indicator of the deterioration of the material living conditions of the proletariat. In the United States, the number of unemployed in 1945 was 1.1 million; in 1955, 2.654 million; in 1968, 2.8 million; and in 1971, it rose to 5 million. In England, the unemployment situation was also very serious. The number of unemployed workers in 1952 was 500,000. By February 1972, it had increased to more than 1.6 million.
Second, the decline of real wages. The lot of the employed workers in a capitalist country is not any better. The wage of the worker is often below the value of labor power, so that it is difficult for the worker to maintain normal livelihood. Sometimes through struggles with the capitalist, the nominal wage may be increased a little. But since widespread inflation exists in the capitalist countries, the increase in the money wage is often behind the increase in prices. In the end, not only is the real wage not increased, it may even decline. For example, according to official United States statistics, from December 1969 to December 1970 the wages of manufacturing workers increased by 2.6 percent. In the same period, the consumer price index rose by 5.5 percent. Therefore, the real wage of the manufacturing workers declined by 2.9 percent. Besides, there are numerous taxes in the capitalist countries which take away a substantial portion of the income of the laboring people. According to official United States statistics: In the thirty years between 1940 and 1970, the amount of taxation increased by sixteen times. The total private debt of the United States (including housing mortgages and consumer credit) was 197.8 billion dollars, averaging $1,133 per capita. At the end of 1970, the total private debt rose to 577.9 billion dollars, averaging $2,832 per capita. In 1970, repayment of debts and payment of interest of the American people amounted to an average of 22.3 percent of their annual incomes. Taxation, repayment of debts, and payment of interest amounted to about half of the annual income of the American people.
Third, poor living conditions. Because of low real wages, the worker in a capitalist country must put up with poor living conditions. Poor living conditions are especially pronounced with respect to housing conditions. Due to the anarchic conditions of production in capitalist society and the blind concentration of industrial production and population, the size of a few cities gets larger and larger, and the housing conditions of the worker steadily deteriorate. Marx pointed out,
“The faster the capital accumulation of an industrial city or a commercial city, the faster the inflow of human material available for exploitation, and the worse the temporary accommodations arranged for them.” 10
Marx and Engels commented several times in their works on the deterioration of the worker’s housing conditions under capitalism and described the extremely poor conditions of the slum areas in big cities such as London. Today, the number of slums in the big cities of the capitalist countries is still increasing. In New York City, the biggest American city, the number of people living in slum areas was 1.664 million in 1950. By 1957, it had increased to 2.572 million. The total population of the United States in 1959 was about 180 million, of which 22 million lived in urban slums with 44 million people living in substandard dwellings.
Pollution hazards such as exhaust fumes, waste materials, and effluents further degrade the worker’s housing conditions and adversely affect his health. The more developed industry is, the more serious the urban pollution is. The rich capitalists can live in their garden villas in the suburbs and leave the working masses behind to suffer. In some big cities of the capitalist countries which have serious air pollution, each inhabitant inhales a large number of poisonous gases. In these cities, the incidence of emphysema, bronchitis, and asthma is very high, and the resulting casualty rate is correspondingly high. In Europe, the United States, and Japan, the number of workers who are dismissed because of emphysema is increasing.
In the United States, as far as medical care conditions are concerned, “the front doors of the hospital are wide open, but there is no entry for the sick who cannot afford to pay.” The registration fee for one visit amounts to one third of the daily wage of a worker with medium income. The operating fee for appendicitis amounts to more than two months’ wages. An ordinary worker’s family must save for several months before they can afford the delivery fee. From 1965 to 1972, the annual increase in hospitalization fees was 12.3 percent on the average. The consulting fee increased by an annual average of 6.1 percent. Many workers go to work even when they are ill because they cannot afford to pay the consulting fee, and they die prematurely as a result.
Fourth, excessive labor intensity and poor laboring conditions. With the development of mechanization and automation in enterprises, not only are workers increasingly converted into appendages of machines, but labor intensity is also greatly increased. One American auto worker complained: “In ancient Greece and the Roman Empire, even the unfortunate sailor could rest beside his oar for a while when the wind was favorable. Now, the worker working beside a conveyer belt cannot even take a breath when the machine parts come rolling one after another.” As a result of the adoption of the “acceleration system” to intensify exploitation and oppression of the worker, some workers in American plants lose their labor capacity after working for eight to ten years. Many more workers cannot adjust to fast work when they reach forty years old. Because of the fast-working pace and the lack of labor protection facilities, accidents at work are numerous. The United States government has to admit that at least 85 percent of American workers work under the constant risk of injury. Every year 3 to 5 percent of American workers die or are injured in industrial accidents. Thus, the advancements in science and technology in the capitalist countries are achieved at the expense of the working class’s steady impoverishment and misery.
It is irrefutable, as demonstrated by the above-mentioned facts, that impoverishment does exist in capitalist society. The bourgeoisie and their agents hidden in the ranks of the proletariat attempt in vain to deny the existence of the proletariat’s impoverishment by pointing to the phenomena of some temporary, local, and partial improvements.
First, we must analyze the question of the impoverishment of the proletariat from the class viewpoint. We must first eliminate those worker aristocrats in the ranks of the proletariat who have been bought by the bourgeoisie. A handful of worker-aristocrats has indeed enjoyed a higher standard of living at the charity of the bourgeoisie. They are no longer members of the workers’ ranks, but renegades of the proletariat.
On the issue of the impoverishment of the proletariat, we must analyze it from an historical and concrete viewpoint. Since the standards of living at different times and in different countries are not the same, it is impermissible to make a simple comparison of the present with the past. In the past, even an emperor could only use oil lamps. Today, most workers in the capitalist countries use electric lights. One cannot say that since the workers have electric lights there is no poverty. Would it not be absurd to claim that the life of a worker today is better than that of an emperor?
On the issue of the impoverishment of the proletariat, we must take an overall viewpoint. The so-called overall viewpoint means that we should not judge the living conditions of the workers on the basis of an individual plant, a special locality, or a specific period. We should judge the living conditions of the working class over a long period of time. In other words, we must look at not only the living conditions of the employed workers, but also at the living conditions of the unemployed and semi-unemployed workers. We must look at not only the living conditions of the working class in the imperialist countries, but also at the living conditions of the working class in the colonies. We must look at not only the living conditions of the working class in times of illusory capitalist prosperity, but also at the working conditions of the working class in times of economic crisis. Then, it is not difficult to tell that while the living conditions of the workers might have improved in individual plants and localities and at some particular times, the conditions of the whole working class are steadily becoming poorer.
The Proletariat Is the Gravedigger of Capitalism
The process of capital accumulation is the process by which the bourgeoisie gets richer and the proletariat gets poorer. It is also a process in which the contradictions between the production relations and productive forces of capitalism are increasingly more acute. In the development process of the capitalist economy, scattered, isolated, and small-scale individual production is transformed into large-scale social production. The development of social production under capitalism consists of two aspects: First, the capitalist plant is different from the small workshop of the individual handicraftsman. In the handicraft workshop, the handicraftsman single-handedly completes the production process. In the capitalist plant, tens, hundreds, or thousands of workers are distributed in various workshops and sections. They complete the manufacture of commodities through division of labor and cooperation under the orders of the capitalist and his agents. Second, social division of labor steadily develops. Production becomes more specialized. The various departments and enterprises in social production are closely associated and dependent on one another. With the development of intra-plant and social division of labor, production is
“Transformed from a series of individual actions into a series of social actions. Products are transformed from individual products into social products.” 11
Lathes, automobiles, cotton fabrics, and leather shoes are products of the joint labor of many workers. Nobody can say, “This is my product.”
Production becomes social in nature. But the means of production and the products from social labor do not belong to society. They belong to the capitalist himself. Thus, contradictions between social production and capitalist private ownership arise. This is the basic contradiction of capitalism. Capitalist private ownership severely restricts the development of largescale social production. Capitalist production relations increasingly restrict the development of productive forces and become fetters to the development of productive forces. Only by demolishing private ownership and establishing socialist collective ownership and by substituting socialist production relations for capitalist relations can this basic contradiction be resolved. Therefore, the extinction of capitalism and the emergence of socialism is an inevitable trend of historical development that cannot be changed by man’s will.
But the historical process in which socialism replaces capitalism cannot be spontaneously realized. The bourgeoisie, which benefits from the capitalist system, will inevitably obstruct the social transformation. To realize this transformation, there must be a social force that crushes the resistance of the bourgeoisie. This social force is the proletariat. The proletariat is the representative of advanced productive forces. It is oppressed and exploited, but it is the most conscious class with the most thoroughly revolutionary nature. Under the education of Marxism, it will surely rise to overthrow the capitalist system. “The contradiction between social production and capitalist possession is expressed as the opposition between the proletariat and the bourgeoisie.” 12 The proletariat matures and grows steadily in the process of capital accumulation.
The process of capital accumulation and expanded reproduction is not only the expanded reproduction of material means of livelihood, but also the expanded reproduction of capitalist production relations. It produces bigger 66 capitalists on the one hand and more hired laborers on the other. Therefore, the process of capital accumulation not only prepares the material conditions for the extinction of capitalism, namely largescale production on a social basis, but also produces the gravedigger of capitalism — the proletariat.
“The bourgeoisie not only has forged weapons for its own destruction, it has also trained people who will use these weapons — modern workers, namely the proletariat.” 13
The proletariat emerged with the appearance of capitalism and strengthened and became conscious in the process of capital accumulation. With the development of capital accumulation, the ranks of the proletariat gradually swell; with largescale social production, organizational discipline is instilled in the proletariat; and with the impoverishment of the proletariat, the contradictions between the proletariat and the bourgeoisie steadily deepen. Experienced in class struggle and armed with Marxism, the proletariat becomes a forward-looking, selfless class richly endowed with revolutionary thoroughness.
In the process of capital accumulation, the great development of social production inevitably reaches a stage when it can no longer be accommodated in the capitalist bombshell. Marx confidently announced: “This bombshell will explode. The knell of capitalist private ownership is about to toll. The expropriator will be expropriated.” 14 Capitalism will surely pass away, and socialism will triumph. This is an historical tendency of capital accumulation.
Major Study References
Marx, Capital. Vol. 1, Part 7.
Marx, “The Impoverishment of the Capitalist Society.”
Chairman Mao, “The Bankruptcy of the Idealist Conception of History.”
Review Problems
- What conclusions can we reach by the analysis of simple reproduction and expanded reproduction?
- What are the reasons for worker unemployment and the impoverishment of the proletariat in capitalist society?
- Why do we say that the proletariat is the gravedigger of capitalism?
14 Footnotes
