A Note on the Theory of Capitalist Economic Development in Rosa Luxemburg

Cosimo Perrota

A Note on the Theory of Capitalist

Economic Development in Rosa

Luxemburg

Annales Universitatis Mariae Curie-Skłodowska. Sectio H, Oeconomia 21, 23-30

1987

U N I V E R S I T A T I S M A R I A E C U R I E - S K Ł O D O W S K A L U B L I N — P O L O N I A

VOL. X X I, 2 SECTIO H 1987

Dipartim ento di Science Storiche e Sociali University di Lecce

C o s i m o P E R R O T T A

A Note on the Theory of Capitalist Economic Development in Rosa Luxemburg

U w agi na tem at teorii rozwoju gospodarki kapitalistycznej w poglądach Róży Luksemburg

Замечания к теории развития капиталистической экономики во взглядах Розы Люксембург

It is w ell kn ow n th a t Rosa L u x em b u rg w rote T he A ccu m ula tion

of Capital because she w as convinced th a t th e re w as a serious lack

in M a rx ’s analy sis of cap italist developm ent \ In th e second book of

Capital, M arx b u ilt up some schem es of ’’enlarg ed rep ro d u c tio n ”, th a t

is th e re a l cap italist produ ctio n in w hich su rplus increases in ev ery cycle 2. T he new ly pro d u ced w e a lth (surplus) increases because su rplus itself is no t g e n erally consum ed, b u t in v ested in new m achin ery . T h e re ­ fore w h a t M arx calls co n sta n t capital (m eans of production) grow s fa s te r and fa ste r in rela tio n to th e v ariab le cap ital (w orkers and th e ir consum ption). T his in tu r n leads to a fu rth e r in crease of th e final pro ­ duct.

A p p a re n tly in M a rx ’s schem es th e re w as not th e problem of th e so called ’’re a liz a tio n ” , th a t is of th e conversion of su rp lu s (new ly p ro ­ duced w ealth) into m oney, an d a fte rw a rd s of m oney into new m achin ­ ery. M arx im plies th a t som ehow th is realizatio n happens, and his schem es of en larg ed rep ro d u ctio n h in t a t a w ay of capitalist g row th w hich has no lim its on th e p u re ly economic level.

A p a rt from th e law of th e ten d e n c y of th e ra te of pro fit to fall,

1 R. L u x e m b u r g : Die A kku m u lation des Kapitals, Italian transl.: Torino, Einaudi, i960, chs. VII, VIII, IX.

24 Cosimo Perrotta

w h ich is only a ten d en cy, it seem s th a t for M arx th e re w ere no m e­ ch an ical (economical) obstacles for capitalism to develop indefinitely. So th a t H ilferd in g could w rite, joking a bit, th a t fo rtu n a te ly only a few people used to re a d th e second book of C apital, otherw ise socialdem o- c ra ts w ould be convinced th a t capitalism w ill not com e to an end.

Now, th e s ta rtin g point of Rosa L u xem b u rg is precisely th e ’’re a li­ zation pro blem ” 3. She asked herself: who w ill b u y th e su rp lu s p ro ­ duct? If no one w ould b u y it, capitalists w ould n o t m ake profits, and th e n w ould not b u y new m achinery. E nlarged rep rod uctio n w ould stop im m ed iately . Thus,, th e re m u st be some buyers. B ut who?

It is not w orkers, Rosa says, because th ey receive only w h at th ey n eed fo r th e ir su rv iv al. B ut, above all, su rp lu s by definition exceeds in v estm e n ts (in w h ich w ages are included); so, according to L uxem burg, even if w ages could increase along w ith p rod uctivity , th e y certain ly can no t increase p ro p o rtio n ally to the increase of p ro d u c tiv ity 4. O th e r­ w ise cap italists w ould in v est for w orkers, not for th e ir own profits; w hich is nonsense. E xploitation, L uxem bu rg concludes, is th e b ulk of ca p italist developm ent, and it req u ires th a t w o rkers cannot ’’rea liz e ” th e surplus.

On th e o th er h an d , cap italists cannot realize it e it h e r 5. We can im agine th a t th e y b u y and sell each o th er th e su rp lu s prod uct of ev e ry field of production, b u t in th is w ay, L u x em b u rg says, th e re w ill be no profits in gen eral. If some capitalist does gain in this exchange, it is only because a n o th e r capitalist loses th e sam e am ount, and th e fin al g en eral sum w ould alw ays be zero.

In tech n ical term s, L u x e m b u rg ’s arg u m en ts ap p ear ju st a trick. In fact cap italists do b u y and sell each o th er th e ir su rplus and some w o rk e rs do bu y p a rt of th e surplus, because production cycles are dif­ fe re n t in tim e from one sector to a n o th er an d because credit allows b u y e rs to p ay w ith w e a lth w hich does not y e t exist b u t w hich is going to be produced. In an econom y w hich is stead ily expanding, th e surplus of a previous cycle can be bought w ith th e advances of th e bigger su r­ plu s of th e follow ing cycle; or th e surplus ju st pro d uced by a p a rticu la r sector of prod uctio n can be bought w ith th e su rp lu s alread y realized in a n o th e r sector.

B u t th e basic sense of R osa’s problem is sound: she could not con­ ceive a developm ent in w hich th e n a tu ra l o u tle t of production, th a t is consum ption, is so rad ic ally denied th a t all th e su rp lu s is m ade di­

8 L u x e m b u r g , op. czt., ch. XXV. * Ibid., VII, p. 114— 16; VIII, p. 125; etc. 5 Ibidem.

re c tly of m ean s of production*. T hus she p u ts th e problem : is it pos­ sible th a t c ap italism develops w ith o u t in creasing consum ption? H er co r­ rec t an sw er is: no.

T h ere is, Rosa says, a th ir d c ateg o ry w h ich can be th o u g h t of as being th e b u y e r of th e su rp lu s. It is th e so-called m iddle class. The crow ds of professionals, clients, civil serv ants, se rv a n ts an d so on w hich grow stead ily along w ith ca p italist d e v e lo p m e n t7.

In fact M arx, in th re e or fo u r passages of h is enorm ous production, says or h in ts th a t th e in creasin g su rp lu s is absorb ed by these catego­ ries 8. B ut th is opinion — w hich w as n ev er developed b y M arx — fo­ reshadow ed a k in d of cap italism in w hich th e v e ry basis of cap italist production becom es m ore an d m ore narro w , both econom ically a n d socially. P ro fits w ould be pro du ced b y an in creasin g ly dim inishing p e r­ centage of su rp lu s, w hile a grow ing p a rt of su rp lu s w ould be consum ed u np ro d u ctiv ely . Sim ple p rec a p ita list rep ro d u c tio n w ould be resto re d an d w ould replace en la rg ed ca p italist repro du ctio n .

This o u tle t is n o t only c o n tra ry to th e w hole M arxian conception of cap italism a n d of cap italist ethics, b u t is even c o n tra ry to th e M arxian forecast th a t th e tw o m ain classes of cap italism w ould g rad u a lly abso rb th e o th ers (concept of p ro le taria n iz atio n ) 9.

W h at is m ore, L u x em b u rg ob jected p erfe c tly , on th e logical level, th a t, according to M a rx ’s definition, th e m iddle classes are only paid by rev e n u e s n o t by capital. T h at is th e y a re p aid b y th a t p a rt of s u r­ plus — a lre a d y realized — w h ich form s th e rev en u e of capitalists an d th e w ages of w o rk ers. T his m ean s th a t, in o rd e r to p ay th e services of th e m iddle classes an d to m ake th ese classes consum e, su rp lu s m u st have a lre ad y been r e a liz e d 10. T he m id dle classes’ consum ption, th en , cannot be th e solution of th e realizatio n problem .

L u x e m b u rg ’s solution of th e p ro b lem is w ell know n 11. F o r her, s u r­ plus p ro d u ct can only be sold to ’’th ir d people”, th a t is producers w ho a re in itia lly o u t of th e ca p italist econom ic system , like peasan ts a n d h a n d c ra ftsm e n : p rec a p ita list p roducers. B ut, th e m ore these th ird people

6 Luxem burg often criticizes M arx’s definition of capitalism as a system of production for production: ibid., p. 302—7, etc. See also p. 251, 285, 305, 324—5, 474— 5.

7 Ibid., VII, p. 116—7, etc.

8 S ee M a r x : Theorien ueber den M ehrw ert, Ital. transl.: vol. II, Roma, E di-tori Riuniti, 1973, ch. 18, B, 1, p. 620; vol. Ill, Torino, Einaudi, 1958, ch. 30, p. 569, 577.

9 See M a r x - E n g e l s : Manifest der kommunistischen Partei, Ital. transl.: Roma, Editori Riun., 1973, p. 36— 40.

10 L u x e m b u r g : op. cit., VII, p. 117—8.

11 See, above all, ch. XX V I and also the follow ing one.

26 Cosimo Perrotta

exchange w ith capitalism a n d buy its products, the m ore they get involved w ith capitalism ; and finally th e y w ill be subject to the ca­ p ita list re la tio n of explo itatio n . Now, as soon as they get into capitalist p roduction (p ro letarianization), these old p recap italist prod ucers can no longer be th e th ird people w ho solve th e realization problem of capita­ lism.

Thus, th e c a p italist system is tim e and again forced to enlarge its field by try in g to find ev ery tim e o th er new buyers of its products in th e rem ain ig p rec a p ita list regions of th e w orld. This explains, Rosa says, colonialism and im perialism . A nd since w orld is lim ited, also ca­ pitalism w ill soon come to an end.

The m ain objection w hich has been p u t forw ard to L u x em b u rg ’s solution of th e realization problem came from B ucharin and, a fte r him, from Sw eezy an d N a p o le o n i12. These au th o rs m aintain th a t, w hen ca ­ pitalism sells a p a rt of its prod u ct outside, in order to get rid of th e su r­ plus p ro d u ct w hich is in excess, it m ust receive in exchange oth er com­ m odities, so th a t th e excess rem ains th e same. ’’L u x em b u rg ’s solution” of th e realizatio n problem , th en , should not be a solution.

But, from th e th ir d p a rt of h er bock 13, w e can u n d e rsta n d th a t Rosa im plies th a t th e ex p o rt of th e su rp lus to p recapitalist economies hap­ pens m ain ly in th e form of in stallations, equipm ents, sale on credit or loans, th a t is as in v estm en ts m ore th a n as a proper exchange. As fa r as th e p rec a p ita list lab o u rers w ith in th e cap italist econom y are con­ cerned, such as peasants and craftsm en, th e y do give th e ir commodies in ex change for th e capitalist comm odities, b u t this is precisely th e w ay cap italism absorbs th em and tu rn s them into w age-earners. This hap­ pens, as M arx e x p la in s 14, th ro u g h — first — th e monopsonic control of th e ir production; a fterw ard s, th ro u g h th e ir form al subm ission (ex­ pro p riatio n of th e ir m eans of production); finally, th ro u g h th e ir real subm ission (technological tran sfo rm atio n of production, w hich is a fun­ ction of ca p ital developm ent).

So, th a t objection does not focus Rosa’s problem . As we know, Rosa w as asto n ish ed w h en she received a g en eral flood of criticism s. She

12 N. B u c h a r i n : Der Imperialismus und die Akkumula tion des Kapitals, Ital. transl.: Barii, Laterza, 1973, p. 41—2; Paul Sw eezy, The Theory of Capitalist Develo pm ent, Ital. transl.: Torino, Boringhieri, 1970, p. 241—2; Claudio Napoleoni, „Introduzione” to L. C olletti — C. Napoleoni, II futuro del capitalismo. C-ollo o sviluppo?, Bari, Laterza, 1970.

18 On the historical conditions of accum ulation (chs. 25—32).

14 S ee M arx: Das Kapital, b. I, ch. 24, on the original accum ulation, and Das Kapital. Erstes Buch. Sechstes Kapitel, unpublished, Ital. transl.: Firenze, La N u- ova Italia, 1969, p. 51—72.

had thou gh t h e r th esis w as so ev id ent th a t possibly it w ould hav e been criticised as b a n a l15.

But, am ong all th e arg u m e n ts w hich diverged from L u x e m b u rg ’s view , only th re e I th in k deserve to be called a n aly tical on th e econom ic level. M oreover, two of th em (those of Boudin and of T ugan-B aranow ski) had been p u t fo rw ard before L u x e m b u rg ’s book and had been a lre a d y criticised in h e r book. To begin w ith, O tto B au er objected to L u x em b u rg th a t surp lu s is ab sorbed from tim e to tim e b y increasing population. B ut Rosa w as p e rfe c tly rig h t w hen she laug hed a t th is a r g u m e n t18. In fact, in m odern ca p italist accum ulation, based on th e constan t g ro w th of p ro d uctivity, increase in su rp lu s is m u ch fa ste r th a n in crease in population.

Boudin h ad p a rtly explain ed th e ab sorption of su rp lu s th ro u g h th e w aste of th e a rm y in d u stry (and so did m any M arx ists in th e last th re e decades). B ut L u x em b u rg w as still rig h t w hen she objected th a t w aste cannot grew p ro p o rtio n ally to th e s u r p lu s 17. O therw ise th e cap italist logic itself w ould be denied. It is w o rth noting th a t B oudin’s a rg u m e n t of w aste is s tric tly sim ilar to M a rx ’s th esis on th e increasing u n p ro d u c ­ tive consum ption of th e m iddle classes, on th e one hand, and to S w eezy’s and B a ra n ’s th esis of th e w aste caused by m onopoly capital, on th e other.

The sam e an sw er given by L u x em b u rg to Boudin holds also against th e th ird arg u m en t: th a t p u t fo rw ard by T u g a n -B a ra n o w sk i18. T ugan im agined th e logical possibility for capitalism to develop even if th e w hole su rplu s is in v ested ev ery tim e in m achinery.

Increase in m ac h in ery w ill produce techn ical progress, an d th e n a constant in crease in p rodu ctiv ity. This, in tu rn , w ill m ake few e r and few er w o rk ers able to produce w h a t th e w hole society needs fo r its consum ption. We can even im agine, T ugan says paradoxically, th a t at th e v ery end of th is process a single w o rk e r is able to p u t in m otion th e enorm ous am oun t of m ach in ery w hich is sufficien t to produce th e consum ption goods fo r th e w hole society.

This w ould m ean th a t th e w hole society, except one person, w o u ld be m ade of u n p ro d u ctiv e consum ers. A lth o u gh logically correct, th is view is, of course, re a lly absurd.

15 L u x e m b u r g : Antikritik. Die Akku m u lation des K apita ls, p. 465. 16 Ibid., p. 569.

17 L u x e m b u r g : Die Akku m u lation etc., op. cit., p. 301 footnote.

18 M. T u g a n - B a r a n o w s k i : Theoretische Grundlagen des Marxismus, ch. IX, Ital. transl. in Colletti-N apoleoni, op. cit., p. 303—332. Luxem burg: Die A kku m u lation etc., op. cit., p. 298—305.

28 Cosimo Perrotta

It is significant th a t th e m ore consequ ential th in k ers, M arx T u g an - -B aran o w sk i an d Boudin, w ere forced in th e end to reso rt to a grow ing p a ra sitism in th e c ap italist society, due to th e d ifficulty in seeing how su rp lu s can be em ployed p rod u ctively . L u xem b urg, who w as a no less c o nsequ en tial th in k e r, chose th e opposite w ay: an e n tirely p ro d u ctiv e em p lo y m en t of th e surp lu s. B ut th is w ay led d irectly to economic d e­ te rm in ism a n d to th e now discred ited th e o ry of a necessary b reakd ow n of capitalism .

W e can see n ow adays th a t n e ith e r th e fo rm er th re e n o r L u x e m b u rg w e re rig h t, because capitalism w as th e n u n d e rta k in g a new u nsuspected w a y of em ploying surplu s, n o t in o rd er to re s tra in produ ctiv ity , b u t in o rd e r to increase it fu rth e r. This is th e w ay of increasing v a ria b le c a p ita l along w ith, and even fa ste r th an , th e increase of con stant cap ­ ital.

T his increase of v aria b le cap ital does n o t happ en th ro u g h a p ro ­ p o rtio n al increase in th e n u m b er of w orkers; it happens th ro u g h th e in crease of w o rk e rs’ consum ption in ord er to increase th e ir skill, an d th e n th e ir prod u ctiv ity .

W e know th a t from th e en d of th e last c e n tu ry up to now th e re has been a trem en d o u s increase in th e re a l w ages of w orkers, b oth as d ire c t cap ab ility of b uying an d as in d ire ct w ages (consum ption of public se r­ vices). A t th e sam e tim e, skilled people have increased enorm ously, b o th as in d ep en d en t lab o u re rs (professionals, skilled new artisan s, in ­ te lle c tu a l labo urers) a n d as d ep en d en t lab o u re rs (civil servants, tec h n i­ cians in th e factories). R esearch an d education have grow n stead ily a t an even fa ste r rate . A ll th is show s a k in d of developm ent schem e w h ich is th e opposite to L u x e m b u rg ’s and is som ehow com patible w ith M a rx ’s schem es of th e second book of Capital.

T his schem e is based on th e assum ption th a t increase in education a n d skill req u ires a p ro p o rtio n al increase in w o rk ers’ consum ption, and is due to it — on th e one hand, and causes a p roportional increase in p ro d u ctiv ity , on th e o ther. So, th e increase in w o rk ers’ consum ption sho u ld be considered as pro d u ctiv e consum ption, th a t is as a n in v est­ m e n t w h ich deplaces a grow ing p a rt of th e su rp lu s from th e in v estm en t in co n stan t cap ital to th e in v estm e n t in v a ria b le capital. T his is w h at in g en e ra l is m ain tained , in no n -M arx ian term s, by th e scholars who s tu d y ’’h u m an c a p ita l” a n d th e economics of education.

T his schem e solves b o th th e realizatio n problem , of Rosa L uxem ­ burg, a n d th e problem of a n o n -p ara sitic consum ption of surplu s, posed by M arx. In fact, only th is so lu tio n allow s capitalism to em ploy th e g row ing su rp lu s p ro d u ctiv ely a n d a t th e sam e tim e to increase pro­ d u ctiv ity .

No one of th e classic M arx ist th in k e rs h a d m anag ed to foresee th is k in d of cap italist developm ent, and th is can be explained. D urin g th e last p a rt of th e n in te e n th c e n tu ry and th e first decades of th e tw e n ­ tie th a g re a t revo lu tion h ap p en ed in cap italist labour. The tra d itio n a l skilled catego ries of lab o u rers slow ly d isappear, m echanization of p ro ­ duction increases, facto ry w o rk becom es m ore an d m ore m echanical an d e le m en ta ry . T he division of lab o u r is p ushed to th e ex tre m e con­ sequences.

All th /s a p p e ar to be th e opposite of a grow ing skill in labo u r due to an increasing consum ption by w orkers. In fact lab o u r u ndergoes an increasing p olarization. A t one pole, h ig h ly skilled labo urers, w hose increased p ercen tag e seem s not y e t significant for th e w hole labou rin g population. A t th e other, a grow ing m ass of e le m en ta ry w orkers.

The so-called m iddle class, w hich grow s a t a social level, seem s still not to affect th e s tru c tu re of c a p italist production. We h a d to w a it for th e p re se n t decades, a fte r th e fifties, to u n d e rsta n d th a t m ean ­ w hile th re e phenom ena w ere grow ing fa ste r an d faste r u n d e r th e su rface of T ayloristic production: m ass scholarization on th e m edium an d h ig h level; h ig h er m ass consum ption; increase of skill in production. M ore­ over, w h ilst m an y sociologists noticed th ese phenom ena, v e ry few peo­ ple g rasp ed th e idea th a t th e re w as a stro n g linkage betw een th em , an d th a t it w as p recisely th is linkage w h ich w as going to su b v e rt th e w hole s tru c tu re of cap italist production. The linkage app eared c le a rly only w ith th e beginning of th e decline of th e T ayloristic w ay of p ro ­ duction.

*

* *

One la st com m ent can be m ade about im perialism in Rosa L u x e m ­ bu rg . Since she w ro te h e r book, and especially since th e fifties u p to now, m any M arx ists have seen in L u x e m b u rg ’s th o u g h t th e th eo re tic al ex p la n a tio n of p rese n t c a p italist economic im perialism . B ut th is view has no basis.

The k in d of ca p italist expansion th a t Rosa dep icted w as foun ded on th e n ecessity of enlarging th e original economic space of cap italism u n d e r th e sam e conditions as before. ’’T h ird people”, in this schem e, w o uld be changed in to exploited w orkers, id en tical to th e w o rk e rs w ho w ere a lre a d y exploited in c e n tra l areas. No d ifference itf m en tio ­ n e d by L u x e m b u rg b etw een c e n tra l are a s an d w o rk ers a n d p e rip h e ra l a re a s an d w o rkers. T hus, p recisely th e m ain phen om ena of c a p italist im p erialism , th a t is th e creatio n of tw o levels, developed a n d u n d e r ­ developed areas, w as n eglected b y L u x e m b u rg ’s th eo ry .

30 Cosimo Perrotta

S T R E S Z C Z E N I E

Teoria akum ulacji Róży Luksemburg jest próbą poprawienia teorii reprodukcji Karola Marksa. R. Luksemburg na czoło w ysuw a problem realizacji, który jej zdaniem nie może być rozwiązany przy założeniu istnienia wyłącznie klasy ka­ pitalistów i robotników. Twierdzi, że realizacja w ym aga istnienia klas pośrednich, które są poza system em kapitalistycznym , jak chłopi, rzem ieślnicy. Z czasem klasy te „wchodzą” w produkcję kapitalistyczną, co wymaga szukania nowych nabywców produktów w przedkapitalistycznych rejonach świata. Tym wyjaśnia kolonializm i imperializm. Uważa, że „wciąganie” tych krajów w orbitę stosunków kapitalis­ tycznych czyni problem realizacji niem ożliw ym do rozwiązania, co oznacza nie­ unikniony upadek kapitalizmu.

Obecnie widzim y, że Róża Luksemburg nie m iała racji. Kapitalizm podjął no­ w y sposób wykorzystania nadwyżek, czego nie przewidywano wcześniej. Jest to proporcjonalne a nawet szybsze powiększenie kapitału zm iennego w stosunku do rosnącego kapitału stałego. N ie dzieje się to poprzez wzrost liczby robotników a dzięki wzrostowi ich konsumpcji, co zapewnia wzrost umiejętności a prz.ez to w ydajności pracy.

Od końca ubiegłego wieku do czasów obecnych ogromnie wzrosły płace bez­ pośrednie robotników, usługi społeczne (płace pośrednie), kwalifikacje. Ostatecznie kapitalizm w ykorzystał rosnące nadw yżki w ydajnie, a jednocześnie wzmógł w y­ dajność. Р Е З Ю М Е Теория накопления Розы Люксембург — это попытка внести корректы в теорию воспроизводства Карла Маркса. На первое место Р. Люксембург выдвигает проблему реализации, которую, по её мнению, нельзя решить при предпосылке существования лишь классов капиталистов и пролетариев. Она утверж дала, что реализация требует сущ е­ ствования некапиталистической среды (промежуточных классов) — крестян, ремесленников. Со временем и эта среда „входит” в капиталистическое про­ изводство, отсюда — необходимость поиска новых покупателей продуктов в до­ капиталистических районах мира. Так объясняет Р. Люксембург капитализм и империализм. Она считала, что „вовлечение” этих стран в орбиту капитали­ стических отношений приводит к невозможности решить проблему реализации, что, в свою очередь, приведет к неизбежному краху капитализма. В настоящее время мы видим, что Роза Люксембург была не права. Капи­ тализм нашел новый способ использования излишков, чего не предвидела Р. Люксембург. Этот способ заключается в пропорциональном, даж е в более быстром увеличении переменного капитала по отношению к растущему посто­ янному капиталу. В результате растет не число рабочих, а их потребление, что приводит к росту их умений и, в конце концов, к производительности труда. С конца прошлого века до настоящего времени огромно возросла прямая заработная плата рабочих, расширился круг социальных услуг (косвенная за­ работная плата), выросли квалификации. В конечном итоге капитализм не толь­ ко эфф ективно использовал растущ ие излишки, но повысил производительность.