A Contemporary Interpretation of the Identity of Marx’s Primitive Accumulation of Capital and Capital Accumulation

I. Statement of the Problem

一、问题的提出

Foreign scholarly research on the problem of primitive accumulation mainly includes two different viewpoints: the “termination thesis” and the “continuity thesis.” For instance, Robert Brenner and Ellen Meiksins Wood do not endorse the commercialized interpretive paradigm of classical political economy and deny that capitalism is the natural result of commercial development. They emphasize that, as a specific socio-historical form, capitalism originates from the process of reshaping relations of production. Among this, primitive accumulation, through violent expropriation, eliminates the property relations of feudal society and establishes an important prerequisite for the formation of the capitalist mode of production.[n] Consequently, once capitalism is born, primitive accumulation becomes a historically completed accumulation. Massimo De Angelis argues that Marx’s expression “so-called primitive accumulation… this process is called ‘primitive’ because it forms the prehistory of capital and the mode of production corresponding to it” further confirms that “primitive,” as an adjective, corresponds to the temporal dimension of “the past.” Paul Zarembka points out that where the capitalist mode of production has been established, primitive accumulation has long ceased to exist. In short, the “termination thesis” insists that primitive accumulation is a precondition for the emergence of capitalism; Marx’s theory of primitive accumulation of capital belongs purely to historical investigation, detached from the actual development of contemporary capitalism, and has become a terminated history.

国外学者关于原始积累问题的相关研究，主要包括“终结论”和“持续论”两种不同的观点。如罗伯特·布伦纳(Robert Brenner)和埃伦·伍德(Ellen Meiksins Wood)等人不赞同古典政治经济学的商业化解读范式，否认资本主义是商业活动自然发展的结果。他们强调，作为一种特殊的社会历史形态，资本主义源于生产关系的重塑过程。其中，原始积累通过暴力剥夺的方式，消灭了封建社会的产权关系，为资本主义生产方式的确立奠定了重要前提②。于是，资本主义诞生以后，原始积累就会成为历史意义上的或者说已经完成的积累。马西莫·德·安杰利斯(Massimo De Angelis)认为，马克思关于“所谓原始积累……这个过程所以表现为‘原始的’,因为它形成资本及与之相适应的生产方式的前史”这一表达，更加能够印证“原始”作为形容词，对应着“过去”的时间维度。保罗·扎雷巴卡(Paul Zarembka)指出，在建立了资本主义生产方式的地方，原始积累早已不复存在。总之，“终结论”的观点坚持认为，原始积累是资本主义产生的前置条件，马克思的资本原始积累理论属于纯粹的历史考证，脱离了当下资本主义的现实发展，已经成为终结的历史。

At the beginning of the 21st century, after David Harvey proposed the concept of accumulation by dispossession, the “continuity thesis” of primitive accumulation began to spark heated debate. Harvey’s accumulation by dispossession refers to the expropriation of wealth accomplished through state power and the credit system. At the macro level, it is mainly manifested in policy measures such as the new enclosure movement of comprehensive privatization and the establishment of new imperialism based on a “center-periphery” relationship; in microeconomic activities, it relies on fraud, stock speculation, financial product innovation, and other means to amass large amounts of wealth. Although Harvey emphasizes the contemporary continuation of primitive accumulation, arguing that “all the features of what Marx called primitive accumulation” are still “powerfully present” to this day, and some of its mechanisms “after fine-tuning, play an even greater role than before,”[n] his analysis differs from Marx in the following essential respects: First, accumulation by dispossession involves categories of economic crime such as fraud, plunder, and theft. Harvey’s conceptual definition from an illegal perspective is imbued with reformist overtones and has an obvious class-apologetic character. In contrast, Marx’s relevant exposition on primitive accumulation of capital, after excluding the initial disorder and chaos, mostly proceeds under the guidance of the government and the institutional framework of laws and regulations. Therefore, Marx’s critique of the capitalist system from the perspective of legality has greater theoretical persuasiveness and practical explanatory power. Second, compared with the production of surplus value, Harvey places more emphasis on the distribution of surplus value. He discusses accumulation by dispossession from the sphere of circulation and treats it as a non-productive activity, thereby neglecting the productive accumulation of capital. In contrast, Marx’s primitive accumulation is both a precondition for the emergence of the capitalist mode of production and an important guarantee for the continuation of that mode of production. It is both productive accumulation and non-productive accumulation, emphasizing the dual role of primitive accumulation activities in the processes of production and circulation.

21世纪初，大卫·哈维(David Harvey)提出剥夺性积累的概念以后，原始积累“持续论”的观点开始引发热议。哈维的剥夺性积累是指通过国家权力及信贷体系完成的财富剥夺。在宏观层面主要表现为全面私有化的新圈地运动，以及基于“中心-外围”关系建立新帝国主义等政策措施；在微观经济活动中则依靠诈骗、股票投机、金融产品创新等多种方式聚敛大量财富。哈维虽然强调了原始积累的当代延续，认为“马克思所说的资本原始积累的全部特征”迄今为止仍然“强有力地存在”,其中的一些机制“在经过微调之后甚至发挥着比过去更大的作用”(4)。但是，他的分析与马克思存在如下本质区别：一是剥夺性积累涉及欺诈、掠夺、盗窃等经济违法犯罪的范畴，哈维从非法角度的概念界定充斥着改良主义的意味，具有明显的阶级辩护性。反观马克思关于资本原始积累的相关论述，在排除了最初的无序和混乱之后，大部分过程均服从于政府的主导和法律法规的制度框架。因此，马克思从合法性角度对资本主义制度展开批判，更有理论说服力和现实解释力。二是相比于剩余价值的生产来说，哈维更加重视剩余价值的分配问题。他从流通领域出发探讨剥夺性积累，并将其作为非生产性活动，从而忽视了资本的生产性积累。与之形成对照的是，马克思的原始积累既是资本主义生产方式产生的前提条件，又是资本主义生产方式得以存续的重要保证。它既是生产性积累又是非生产性积累，强调资本原始积累活动在生产与流通过程中的双重作用。

Currently, relevant research in domestic and foreign academic circles on the continuity of primitive accumulation of capital has failed to fully reveal the scientific connotation and overall significance of Marx’s theory of primitive accumulation, nor has it adequately explained its internal connection with capital accumulation. This article, starting from the standpoint of the “continuity thesis” of primitive accumulation, deeply explores the identity of Marx’s primitive accumulation of capital and capital accumulation and its contemporary value, based on three dimensions: theoretical critique, practical analysis, and future assessment. The core viewpoints are as follows: First, the title of Chapter 24 of Volume 1 of *Capital* uses “so-called primitive accumulation,” indicating that Marx neither agrees with Smith’s notion of previous accumulation nor firmly refutes his idyllic and beautiful false description of the process of previous accumulation. Second, the term “primitive” is not a concept reflecting the temporal dimension; it emphasizes the initial stage of a certain process, containing the true meaning of barbarism, brutality, or disorder. Third, as the historical precondition and condition for the existence of capitalism, primitive accumulation of capital runs through the entire process of the emergence, development, and extinction of the capitalist mode of production. From the perspective of the separation of the means of production from the direct producers, there is no essential difference between primitive accumulation of capital and capital accumulation; the two have an identity. Fourth, primitive accumulation of capital and capital accumulation are both components of capitalist accumulation. As the process of capitalist accumulation continues and the mechanism of capitalist expropriation undergoes deep adjustment, the internal contradictions of the capitalist mode of production become increasingly acute, and the systemic crisis of capitalism will eventually erupt on a large scale. Fifth, socialism’s victory over capitalism and the transcendence of public ownership of the means of production over private ownership are the inevitable trends of the development and evolution of human society. Only in this way can the direct combination of the direct producers and the means of production be ensured, fundamentally eliminating their separation from each other.

目前，国内外学界关于资本原始积累持续性的相关研究，未能充分展现马克思原始积累理论的科学内涵与整体意蕴，未能更好地说明其与资本积累之间的内在关联。本文从原始积累“持续论”的立场出发，分别基于理论批判、现实分析、未来研判等三重维度，深入探讨了马克思关于资本原始积累与资本积累的同一性及其当代价值。核心观点如下：一是《资本论》第1卷第24章标题使用的“所谓原始积累”,说明马克思既不赞同斯密预先积累的说法，又坚决驳斥了他对预先积累过程田园诗一般美好的虚假描述。二是“原始”一词不是反映时间维度的概念，它重在强调某一过程的初始阶段，其中包含了野蛮、粗暴或无序的真实意蕴。三是作为资本主义确立的历史前提与存在条件，资本原始积累始终贯穿于资本主义生产方式产生、发展与消亡的全过程。从生产资料与劳动者相互分离的视角来看，资本的原始积累与资本积累之间没有本质的区别，二者具有同一性。四是资本原始积累与资本积累同属于资本主义积累的组成部分，随着资本主义积累过程的不断进行以及资本主义剥夺机制的深入调整，资本主义生产方式的内在矛盾日益激化，资本主义的系统性危机终将大规模爆发。五是社会主义战胜资本主义，生产资料公有制超越私有制是人类社会发展和演化的必然趋势。唯其如此，才能确保劳动者与生产资料的直接结合，从根本上杜绝二者间的相互分离。

II. Primitive Accumulation of Capital Originates from Marx’s Critique and Transcendence of the Theory of Previous Accumulation

二、资本原始积累源于马克思对预先积累理论的批判与超越

Marx points out that capital accumulation must presuppose the production of surplus value, and the normal conduct of surplus-value production, in turn, cannot be separated from capitalist production, which “presupposes that the commodity producer possesses relatively large amounts of capital and labor-power.” Therefore, “the whole movement seems to turn in a vicious circle,” and to break out of this circle, one can only assume that before capitalist accumulation appears, there is a “primitive” accumulation. It is noteworthy that when Marx defines primitive accumulation at this point, besides using the word “assume,” he also appends the following sentence in parentheses: “namely, what Adam Smith calls ‘previous accumulation.’”[n] Such a direct expression fully indicates that Marx’s theory of primitive accumulation of capital originates from Smith and is a critique and transcendence of the classical economic theory of previous accumulation.

马克思指出，资本积累必须以生产剩余价值为前提，而剩余价值生产的正常进行，又离不开“以商品生产者握有较大量的资本和劳动力为前提”的资本主义生产。因此，“这整个运动好像是在一个恶性循环中兜圈子”,为了脱离开这个循环，就只能假定在资本主义积累出现以前，“有一种‘原始’积累”。值得注意的是，马克思此时为原始积累所下的定义，除了使用“假定”一词以外， 同时还用小括号附加了如下一句话：即“亚当·斯密所称的‘预先积累’”(5)。如此直白的表达充分说明，马克思的资本原始积累理论源于斯密，是对古典经济学预先积累理论的批判与超越。

(A) The Defects of Smith’s Theory of Previous Accumulation

(一)斯密预先积累理论的缺陷

The theory of previous accumulation originates from Smith’s preliminary exploration of the laws of socio-economic development. His *The Wealth of Nations* elaborates on the important role and growth mechanism of previous accumulation from two levels: First, from the perspective of individual economic behavior, Smith believes that previous accumulation arises before the establishment of the capitalist division of labor and is the material guarantee for individuals to satisfy their own livelihood and production. He points out that in primitive societies without division of labor and lacking exchange, people could satisfy their own needs through various types of labor, so there was no need to store up stock in advance. However, in modern civilized societies where division of labor is widespread, constrained by the limitations of specialized single labor, people can only rely on commodities produced by others to satisfy their own livelihood needs; “the means of purchase is his own product, or, the price of his own product.” Therefore, possessing a stock of accumulated wealth in advance helps to complete one’s own production activities before exchanging commodities with others. When the quantity of stored stock is fixed, the less used for livelihood consumption, the more invested in the production process. Conversely, the more used for livelihood consumption, the less invested in production. If the scale of production continues to expand, it can not only increase individual labor output but also effectively increase the reserve of surplus products. Therefore, Smith strongly advocates the virtues of industry and frugality and regards them as key factors determining an individual’s degree of wealth or poverty.

预先积累理论来源于斯密对社会经济发展规律的初步探索。他的《国富论》从两个层面阐述了预先积累的重要作用与增长机制：首先，基于个体经济行为的角度，斯密认为预先积累产生于资本主义社会分工确立之前，是个人用于满足自身生活与生产的物质保障。他指出，在没有分工缺少交换的原始社会，人们可以通过多种劳动满足自身需要，故而无需提前储备资财。但是，在普遍存在分工的现代文明社会，受制于专门化单一劳动的局限，人们只能依靠他人生产的商品满足自身生活所需，“购买的手段即是他自己的产物，或者说，他自己产物的价格”。因此，事先拥有一笔积累起来的财富，有助于与他人进行商品交换前完成自己的生产活动。当资财储蓄的数量一定时，用于生活消费的越少，投入在生产过程的就越多。反之，生活消费的越多，生产中的投入就越少。如果生产规模持续扩大，不仅可以提高个人的劳动产出，还能够有效增加剩余产品的储备。因此，斯密极力推崇勤劳与节俭的美德，并将其视为决定个人贫富程度的关键因素。

Second, with regard to the degree of macroeconomic development, Smith believed that previous accumulation could vigorously promote the specialization of the division of labor and continuously raise the level of labor productivity. He pointed out, “The more abundant the stock previously accumulated, the more finely the division of labor can be proportionally extended.” That is to say, because of the act of previously accumulating wealth, the degree of refinement of the division of labor will continuously increase. Furthermore, under the influence of this refined division of labor, workers are permanently bound to a fixed production link. As their work skills become increasingly proficient, various simple, convenient, and efficient labor tools are invented. Consequently, the quantity of products produced per unit of time continuously increases, and the level of labor productivity is greatly improved. “It is not only the quantity of industry that increases with the increase of the stock employed in carrying it on, but the same quantity of industry produces a much greater quantity of work.” (7) Therefore, as the material prerequisite for the refined division of labor, previous accumulation is both a necessary condition for raising labor productivity and a direct result of its increase. In sum, Smith both affirmed the important role of previous accumulation in a country’s economic development and analyzed the actual operational process of capitalist production. With his argumentative logic of “previous accumulation—division of labor—labor productivity,” he depicted an illusory picture of the rapid development of various capitalist industries, the general prosperity of different groups of people, and a harmonious and peaceful society as a whole.

其次，就宏观经济的发展程度而言，斯密认为预先积累能够大力推动生产分工的专门化，并持续促进劳动生产力水平的提高。他指出，“预蓄的资财愈丰裕，分工就能按比例地愈细密”。也就是说，由于存在预先积累财富的行为，分工的细密化程度将不断提高。进而，受细密化劳动分工的影响，劳动者被长期束缚在某一固定的生产环节。随着他们的工作技能越来越熟练，各种操作简易、高效便捷的劳动工具被发明出来。于是，单位时间内生产的产品数量不断增加，劳动生产力水平大幅度改进。“不仅产业的数量随着举办产业的资财的增加而增加，而且，由于资财增加的结果，同量产业所能生产的产品亦会大增。”(7)因此，作为细密化分工的物质前提，预先积累既是提高劳动生产力的必要条件，又是劳动生产力提高的直接结果。总之，斯密既肯定了预先积累对一国经济发展的重要作用，又剖析了资本主义生产的现实运行过程。他以“预先积累—分工—劳动生产力”的论证逻辑，刻画了资本主义各行各业快速发展，不同的人群普遍富裕以及整个社会一派祥和的虚幻图景。

In summary, Smith employed a non-historical and static analytical method to portray the process of capitalist accumulation as an idyllic and beautiful scene, bearing an obvious character of class apology. For example, his “theory of virtue” regarding industriousness or thrift is a typical ideological strategy, distorting the real reasons why capitalists live in wealth and luxury while workers remain poor and destitute for long periods, and covering up the essence of the bourgeoisie exploiting the surplus value of the working class. For another example, through the analysis of individual economic behavior, he first defines previous accumulation as the saving of stock before the establishment of the division of labor, and then, through macro-level discussion, emphasizes the continuous influence of previous accumulation on the division of labor and labor productivity. Clearly, the above conceptual definition of previous accumulation contains a binary opposition and confuses the historical starting point of the capitalist mode of production with its operational result. For yet another example, Smith attributes all the output of economic activity solely to the amount of stock, believing that capitalist production and the corresponding division of labor are general laws of human economic and social development. He evades the social history of the emergence of wage labor, obscures the basic fact of inequality in capitalist relations of production, and ignores the deep-rooted origins of the private ownership of the means of production under capitalism. In short, it is precisely because Smith and his successors were unable to resolve their own series of theoretical dilemmas that classical economics ultimately went bankrupt and disintegrated.

综上，斯密运用非历史的和静态的分析方法，将资本主义积累过程描绘成田园牧歌般的美好景象，具有明显的阶级辩护性色彩。例如，他的勤劳或节俭“美德论”属于典型的意识形态策略，歪曲了资本家生活富裕奢靡而工人长期贫穷困顿的真正原因，掩盖了资产阶级剥削工人阶级剩余价值的实质。再如，他通过个体经济行为的分析，首先将预先积累定义为分工确立之前的资财储蓄，继而通过宏观层面的探讨，强调了预先积累对分工与劳动生产力的持续影响。显然，上述有关预先积累的概念界定存在二元对立，并且混淆了资本主义生产方式的历史起点与运行结果。又如，斯密将经济活动的产出全部归结于资财的多寡，认为资本主义生产和与之相适应的劳动分工是人类经济社会发展的一般规律，回避了雇佣劳动产生的社会历史，遮蔽了资本主义生产关系不平等的基本事实，忽略了资本主义生产资料私有制的深层根源。总之，正是由于斯密及其继承者无法破解自身的系列理论困境，古典经济学最终走向破产与瓦解的境地。

(II) The Breakthrough of Marx’s Theory of Primitive Accumulation of Capital

(二)马克思资本原始积累理论的突破

By examining the historical process of the emergence and development of capitalism, Marx criticized the defects of Smith’s theory of previous accumulation and achieved the replacement and transcendence of the theory of primitive accumulation of capital.

马克思通过考察资本主义产生和发展的历史过程，批判了斯密预先积累理论的缺陷，实现了资本原始积累理论的替代与超越。

First, Marx criticized the brutality of the methods or means of previous accumulation, exposing the violent expropriation of direct producers by the ruling class. He pointed out that in the history of the development of capitalism, previous accumulation was never a calm, gentle, idyllic, and beautiful picture; the real situation was exactly the opposite of Smith’s subjective conjecture: “conquest, enslavement, robbery, murder, in short, force, plays the greatest role.” He took England from the end of the 15th century to the 19th century as an example to illustrate: with the successive implementation of laws and policies such as the Enclosure Acts, the Game Laws, and the Reformation, state lands, common lands, church estates, etc., were massively stolen and turned into private property. At the same time, the colonial system abroad also provided strong庇护 for the brutal acts of plundering the wealth and population of other countries or regions. It was precisely under the drive of this system that a large quantity of means of production and labor power flowed into the capitalist metropolitan countries led by England and France, and were rapidly transformed into industrial capital. In short, the historical facts of primitive accumulation vividly interpret that “force itself is an economic power.”

一是马克思批判了预先积累方法或手段的残酷性，揭露了统治阶级对直接生产者的暴力剥夺。他指出，在资本主义的发展史上，预先积累从来不是平静的、温和的、田园诗般的美好图景，真实情况与斯密的主观臆断恰好相反，“征服、奴役、劫掠、杀戮，总之，暴力起着巨大的作用”。他以15世纪末到19世纪的英国为例说明：随着圈地法案、《狩猎法》、宗教改革等法令政策的相继推行，国有土地、公有地、教会地产等被大规模窃取为私人地产。与此同时，海外殖民制度也为掠夺其他国家或地区的财富和人口的残暴行径提供了强有力的庇护。正是在这一制度的驱使下，大量生产资料和劳动力涌入了以英、法为首的资本主义宗主国，并迅速转化为产业资本。总之，原始积累的历史事实生动地诠释了“暴力本身就是一种经济力”。

Second, Marx traced the social and historical roots of the emergence of wage labor, pointing out the particularity of the capitalist division of labor. He believed that wage labor was formed through a formal transformation of the state of servitude of the laborer, that is, from servitude under feudal privileges to servitude under capitalist production. Among these, primitive accumulation, using various means of direct or indirect violence, on the one hand, liberated the producers from the status of serfs and the bonds of guilds, granting them a certain degree of personal freedom; on the other hand, it deprived the producers of all the means of production on which they might have relied for a livelihood, thereby turning them into human individuals without any life security. Consequently, out of consideration for making a living, the laborers had to sell their labor power as a commodity. It can be seen that under capitalist conditions, the producer becoming a wage laborer is not a natural choice of economic rationality, nor is the combination of means of production and labor power within the factory an inevitable result of the development of production. The capitalist division of labor described by Smith using the example of the pin factory is not determined by the degree of accumulation of things, but is constrained by the capitalist private ownership of the means of production and depends on the specific mode of combination of the means of production and labor power.

二是马克思追溯了雇佣劳动产生的社会历史根源，指明了资本主义分工的特殊性。他认为，雇佣劳动形成于劳动者奴役状态在形式上的转变，即从封建特权的奴役转变为资本主义生产的奴役。其中，原始积累利用直接暴力或间接暴力等多种手段，一方面，将生产者从农奴地位和行会束缚中解放出来，让他们拥有了一定意义上的人身自由；另一方面，剥夺了生产者有可能赖以为生的全部生产资料，从而成为没有任何生活保障的人类个体。于是，出于谋生的考虑，劳动者不得不将自己的劳动力作为商品出卖。可见，在资本主义条件下，生产者成为雇佣工人不是经济理性的自然选择，生产资料与劳动力在工厂内部的结合也不是生产发展的必然结果。斯密以扣钉制造业为例所描述的资本主义劳动分工，并非由物的积累程度所决定，而是受制于资本主义生产资料私有制，取决于生产资料与劳动力相互结合的方式。

Third, Marx constructed a concept of capital that transcended classical political economy, using the methods and principles of historical materialism. He pointed out that at the phenomenal level of economic operation, capital often takes the form of things, including means of subsistence and means of production such as machinery and equipment. However, if they are merely “the property of the direct producer,” these means of production and means of subsistence are nothing but ordinary, common things. “They become capital only under conditions that also serve as means of exploiting and dominating the worker.” (10) Therefore, at the essential level, “capital is not a thing, but a social relation between persons which is mediated through things” (11). Capital originates in the embryonic period of capitalist relations of production, takes root in the process of the production and reproduction of these relations, and continuously realizes its self-accumulation in the cycle of production, circulation, distribution, and consumption. Thus, Marx constructed a category of capital that integrates both the general and the particular in history, establishing capital as the core concept for critiquing the capitalist mode of production.

三是马克思以历史唯物主义的方法和原则，构建了超越古典政治经济学的资本概念。他指出，在经济运行的现象层面，资本往往采取生活资料以及包括机器设备在内的生产资料等物的存在形态。但是，如果仅仅“作为直接生产者的财产”,这些生产资料和生活资料只不过是平平常常、普普通通的物，“只有在同时还充当剥削和统治工人的手段的条件下”(10),它们才能成为资本。因此，在本质层面上，“资本不是一种物，而是一种以物为中介的人和人之间的社会关系”(11),资本发端于资本主义生产关系的萌芽时期，扎根于资本主义生产关系的生产与再生产过程，并在生产、流通、分配、消费的循环中不断实现自我积累。于是，马克思构建了集历史一般与特殊于一体的资本范畴，为批判资本主义生产方式确立了资本这一核心概念。

III. The Goals and Tasks of the Identity of Primitive Accumulation of Capital and Capital Accumulation

三、资本原始积累与资本积累同一的目标任务

The separation of the laborer from the means of production is both the historical starting point for the generation of capitalist relations of production and the fundamental guarantee for the smooth progress of capitalist reproduction and the continuation of the capitalist system. Examining the goals and tasks of achieving and maintaining the mutual separation of the laborer and the means of production, there is no essential difference between primitive accumulation of capital and capital accumulation; the two share the characteristic of identity. Among these, primitive accumulation of capital, mainly through direct or indirect violent expropriation, forces the laborers to lose the land on which they have long relied for a livelihood, basic tools of production, and relatively crude living facilities, turning them into the bottom of society, displaced and without means of living. At the same time, a large quantity of expropriated means of production rapidly concentrates in the hands of the capitalists. On the basis of the capitalist private ownership of the means of production, wage labor emerges, and capitalist relations of production sprout. With the intensification of capital accumulation, the scale of production expands, the organic composition of capital rises, and the role of the relative surplus population becomes increasingly significant, further solidifying the separation of the laborer from the means of production and ensuring the continuation of the capitalist system.

劳动者与生产资料的分离，既是资本主义生产关系生成的历史起点，又是资本主义再生产顺利进行和资本主义制度得以持续的根本保障。从实现并维持劳动者与生产资料相互分离的目标和任务予以考察，资本的原始积累与资本积累之间没有本质的区别，二者具有同一性的特点。其中，资本原始积累主要通过直接或间接的暴力剥夺，迫使劳动者失去了长期赖以为生的土地、基本的生产工具以及相对简陋的生活设施，成为流离失所生活无着的社会底层。与此同时，大量被剥夺的生产资料向资本家手中迅速聚集，在资本主义生产资料私有制的基础上产生了雇佣劳动，萌发了资本主义生产关系。随着资本积累的加剧，生产的规模扩大，资本有机构成提高，相对过剩人口的作用日益显著，进一步固化了劳动者与生产资料的分离，确保了资本主义制度的延续。

(I) Primitive Accumulation Achieves the Separation of the Laborer from the Means of Production through Violent Expropriation

(一)原始积累通过暴力剥夺实现了劳动者与生产资料的分离

Marx pointed out that through the mechanism of direct violence and indirect violence, primitive accumulation of capital completed the process of separating the labourer from the means of production, creating important preconditions for the establishment of the capitalist mode of production. In the 14th and 15th centuries, during the initial stage of the emergence and germination of capitalist relations of production, primitive accumulation more often took the form of direct violence such as theft, plunder, and expulsion, wantonly depriving rural residents of their land, stealing state land and church land, encroaching on common land, etc., and the peasants gradually lost their most basic means of production and means of subsistence. After the 16th century, bourgeois governments also employed direct violent methods such as “whipping, branding, and torture”[4]4 Karl Marx, *Capital*, vol. 1, chapter 27, “The Expropriation of the Agricultural Population from the Land.” to continue promoting the separation of the labourer from the means of production. For example, the Enclosure Acts, while legalising the violent acts of the dispossessors, also accelerated the speed of the separation of the labourer from the means of production. The peasants left the land on which they had long depended for a living; they either relied on household handicrafts to maintain their livelihood or chose to beg and wander to survive. Thus, the traditional self-sufficient way of life was suppressed, and numerous decrees punishing “idlers and vagabonds” emerged one after another. Ultimately, these handicraftsmen and wandering beggars were all “driven onto the narrow path leading to the labour market.”

马克思指出，通过直接暴力与间接暴力的作用机制，资本原始积累完成了劳动者与生产资料的分离过程，为资本主义生产方式的确立创造了重要的前提条件。在14-15世纪，资本主义生产关系产生与萌芽的初期阶段，原始积累更多采取盗抢、劫掠、驱逐等直接暴力的形式，大肆剥夺农村居民的土地、窃取国有土地和教会土地、侵占公有土地等，农民逐渐丧失了最基本的生产资料和生活资料。16世纪以后，资产阶级政府还在运用“鞭打、烙印、酷刑”(12)等直接暴力的方法，继续推行劳动者与生产资料的分离。如圈地法案令剥夺者的暴力行为合法化的同时，也加快了劳动者与生产资料相互分离的速度。农民离开了长期赖以为生的土地，他们或者依靠家庭手工业维持生计，或者选择流浪乞讨的方式苟活。于是，自给自足的传统生活方式遭到遏制，诸多惩戒“游懒者”的法令层出不穷。最终，这些手工业者以及四处行乞的流民纷纷被“赶到通往劳动市场的狭路上去”。

In addition to “extra-economic, direct violence,” primitive accumulation of capital also adopted various forms of indirect violence. For instance, the British rulers used the constraints of the Corn Laws to continuously raise the price of grain. Consequently, those who had originally refused to participate in wage labour, or had only provided wage labour briefly, were forced to cede their labour time to capital in order to obtain the means of subsistence necessary to support themselves and their families, thereby submitting to the rule of wage labour. Another example: the capitalist class discovered that if land could be freely converted into their private property and means of production, immigrants would have no need to sell their labour power for a living. This logic of “resisting the influx of capital” is precisely “the secret of colonial prosperity” or “the chronic disease of the colonies.” Accordingly, they proposed the following countermeasures: first, to raise the price of land in the colonies, forcing those overseas immigrants, before they could earn enough money to purchase basic means of production such as land and become independent peasants, “to engage in wage labour for a relatively long period.” Second, to continuously and massively import poor populations from other European countries, constantly expanding the scale of the labour market. This practice fundamentally improved the situation of labour shortage in the colonies, effectively alleviated the problem of excessively high wages, and enhanced the wage workers’ “relations of subordination and feelings of subordination” to the capitalists.

除了“超经济的直接的暴力”以外，资本的原始积累还采取了多种方式的间接暴力。如英国统治者利用谷物法的约束不断抬高谷物的价格。于是，那些原本拒绝参与雇佣劳动，或者只是短暂提供雇佣劳动的人口，为了获取养活自己和家庭所必不可少的生活资料，不得不向资本出让自己的劳动时间，进而屈服于雇佣劳动的统治。再如，资本家阶级发现，如果可以自由地将土地转化为自己的私有财产和生产资料，移民们就没有必要以出卖劳动力为生。这一“反抗资本迁入”的逻辑恰恰是“殖民地繁荣的秘密”或“殖民地的痼疾”。他们据此提出了如下应对之策：一是抬高殖民地的土地价格，迫使那些海外移民在赚取足够的货币用于购买土地等基本的生产资料，变身为独立的农民之前，“必须从事较长时期的雇佣劳动”。二是，从欧洲其他国家持续和大量地输入贫困人口，不断扩充劳动力市场的规模。这一做法从根本上改善了殖民地劳动力供不应求的局面，有效缓解了工资过高的现状，增进了雇佣工人对资本家的“从属关系和从属感情”。

Under the combined effect of direct violence and indirect violence, the labourers who had lost their means of production were gradually incorporated into the capitalist social division of labour, forced to accept the constraints of wage labour, and compelled to submit to the domination of capital. In fact, the transformation of independent producers into wage workers is merely the superficial manifestation of capitalist relations of production; behind it lies a major shift in the mechanism of wealth production and distribution under the conditions of capitalist private ownership of the means of production. Specifically, before primitive accumulation of capital occurred, the labourer simultaneously possessed both ownership and management rights over the means of production; they could engage in production activities through the direct combination of themselves and the means of production, and the situation of their separation had not yet arisen. Once the small-scale private ownership of the means of production “based on the labour of the producer himself” came to an end, the capitalist private ownership of the means of production that replaced it clearly declared that the labourer’s conditions of production and the final results of production were all the property of the capitalist. The capitalist mechanism of wealth production and distribution underwent a fundamental change, and the contradictions and conflicts between capitalists and labourers, as well as within the capitalist class itself, would become more acute and irreconcilable with the deepening of the process of capital accumulation.

在直接暴力与间接暴力的共同作用下，失去了生产资料的劳动者逐渐被纳入资本主义的社会分工体系，被迫接受雇佣劳动的约束，不得不服从资本的支配。事实上，独立生产者转变为雇佣工人只是资本主义生产关系的直观表现，背后则隐含着资本主义生产资料私有制条件下财富生产与分配机制的重大转变。具体而言，资本原始积累出现之前，劳动者同时拥有生产资料的所有权和经营权，他们可以通过与生产资料的直接结合从事生产活动，二者彼此分离的情况尚未发生。一旦“以生产者自己的劳动为基础”的生产资料小私有制宣告结束，取而代之的资本主义生产资料私有制则明确宣告，劳动者的生产条件以及最终生产结果都是属于资本家的财产。资本主义的财富生产与分配机制发生了根本性的变化，资本家与劳动者之间以及资本家阶级内部的矛盾冲突，将随着资本积累进程的深入而变得更加激化且不可调和。

(II) Capital accumulation uses the relative surplus population to solidify the separation of the labourer from the means of production

(二)资本积累利用相对过剩人口固化了劳动者与生产资料的分离

The analysis above shows that from the very beginning of the emergence of capitalist relations of production, primitive accumulation, through means of direct and indirect violence, broke the identity of the labourer’s ownership of the means of production, providing the necessary supply of capital and labour power for capitalist production. However, once capitalist private ownership of the means of production was firmly established, the continuous progress of capitalist production and reproduction still required a steady supply of capital and labour power; consequently, the separation of the labourer from the means of production became permanent. The reasons are as follows: because capital accumulation leads to a continuous increase in the organic composition of capital, variable capital, as the sole determinant of the demand for labour power, will inevitably decline with the growth of total capital, even “decrease at an increasing rate,” resulting in a relative insufficiency of capital’s demand for labour power. At the same time, the supply of labour power under capitalism is increasing absolutely. In addition to the fact that employed workers may at any time be freed from their jobs and become unemployed or semi-unemployed, the addition of bankrupt handicraftsmen, capitalists, and landowners also invisibly increases the quantity of labour supply. Furthermore, the incorporation of large numbers of women and children into the capitalist production process likewise “proportionally produces a relative surplus population, i.e., one that exceeds the average needs of capital’s valorisation.”

上文的分析表明，资本主义生产关系产生伊始，原始积累通过直接暴力和间接暴力的手段，打破了劳动者与生产资料所有权的同一性，为资本主义生产提供了资本与劳动力的必要供给。但是，当生产资料的资本主义私有制站稳脚跟以后，资本主义生产和再生产的连续进行，仍然需要资本与劳动力源源不断的供给，于是，劳动者与生产资料的分离就会永久化。原因如下：由于资本积累导致资本有机构成不断提高，可变资本作为劳动力需求的唯一决定因素，必将随着总资本的增长而递减，甚至“以递增的速度减少”,从而出现资本对劳动力需求相对不足的情况。与此同时，资本主义的劳动力供给却在绝对增加。除了在业工人随时可能被游离出劳动岗位，成为失业或半失业的人口以外，一些破产的手工业者、资本家和土地所有者的加入，无形中也扩大了劳动者的供给数量。另外，大量妇女和儿童被纳入资本主义的生产过程，同样“成比例地生产出相对的，即超过资本增殖的平均需要的”过剩人口。

Marx believed that the relative surplus population is not only an inevitable product of capitalist accumulation but also the fundamental guarantee for the maintenance and development of the capitalist mode of production. Because of the existence of a large relative surplus population, competition among labourers for employment becomes more intense, the profit-seeking nature of capital is maximally satisfied, and the degree of exploitation of workers is increasingly aggravated. For example, the capitalist’s use of labour power gradually exceeds “the limits permitted by its normal endurance and healthy development,” directly equating to the “plundering” of labour power. Thus, “on top of the barbarities of slavery, serfdom, etc., is added the civilised barbarity of overwork.” Another example: the labour income of unemployed or semi-unemployed workers is insufficient to support their families; they either wander the streets, or age and die prematurely, or even fall into “the mire of pauperism requiring relief.” These phenomena further exacerbate the overwork of employed workers. In summary, the specific population law of capitalism shows that all the disposable time of the worker and the product of their labour are “absolutely subordinate to capital,” thus completely losing the conditions for engaging in independent labour, and the separation of the labourer from the means of production is solidified.

马克思认为，相对过剩人口不仅是资本主义积累的必然产物，更是资本主义生产方式得以维系与发展的根本保证。由于大量相对过剩人口的存在，劳动者的就业竞争更加激烈，资本的逐利本性获得了最大化满足，工人的受剥削程度日益加重。如，资本家对劳动力的使用渐渐超出了“它的正常耐力和健康发展所容许的限度”,直接与“劫掠”劳动力划上了等号。于是，“在奴隶制、农奴制等等野蛮暴行之上，再加上过度劳动的文明暴行”。又如，失业或半失业工人的劳动收入不足以养家糊口，他们或者流浪街头，或者过早衰老死亡，甚至陷入“需要救济的赤贫的泥潭里”。这些现象又进一步加剧了在业工人的过度劳动。综上，资本主义特有的人口规律表明，工人的全部可供支配的时间与他们的劳动所得“绝对地从属于资本”,从而完全丧失了从事独立劳动的条件，劳动者与生产资料的分离被固化。

The continuous progress of contemporary capitalist production still faces the serious problem of the relative surplus population, and the separation of the labourer from the means of production exhibits persistence and normalisation. First, the production and distribution of social wealth are incorporated into capital accumulation; due to the absolute possession of the means of production and social wealth, capital’s domination over labour is further strengthened. This is mainly manifested in: the price of the commodity labour power is dominated by capital, the total quantity of commodities produced in the labour process is determined by capital, and the final labour products of the labourer are all owned by capital. Second, the ever-renewing level of science and technology enhances capital’s ability to displace the employed population and deepens the expropriation of labour. For example, the widespread application of information technology and artificial intelligence provides more favourable tool conditions for capital to create a relative surplus population; not only can women and some minors enter the job market at any time, but some elderly people also participate in the wage labour process through flexible employment. Thus, the more capitalism develops, the tighter the worker’s dependence on capital, the more solidified the separation of the subjective and objective conditions of labour, the more thorough the labourer’s loss of the means of production, the stronger their power to unite and resist capital, and the deeper the degree to which “the concentration of the means of production and the socialisation of labour” become “incompatible with their capitalist integument.”

当代资本主义生产的不断进行，仍然面临着相对过剩人口问题的严重困扰，劳动者与生产资料的分离呈现持续性与常态化。一是社会财富的生产与分配被纳入资本积累，由于对生产资料与社会财富的绝对占有，资本对劳动的统治权更加强化。主要表现为：劳动力商品的价格由资本主导、劳动过程中生产的商品总量由资本决定以及劳动者的最终劳动产品全部由资本所有等。二是日新月异不断更新的科学技术水平，增强了资本排挤就业人口的能力，深化了对劳动的剥夺。如信息技术与人工智能的广泛应用，为资本制造相对过剩人口提供了更为有利的工具条件，不仅妇女和一些未成年人可以随时进入就业岗位，部分老龄人口也以灵活就业的方式参与到雇佣劳动过程。由此，资本主义越发展，工人对资本的依附越紧密，劳动的主观条件与客观条件的分离越固化，劳动者丧失生产资料的程度越彻底，他们联合起来反抗资本的力量就越强大，“生产资料的集中和劳动的社会化”同“它们的资本主义外壳不能相容”的程度就越深。

IV. The Historical Tendency of the Identity of Primitive Accumulation of Capital and Capital Accumulation

四、资本原始积累与资本积累同一的历史趋势

Marx held that primitive accumulation of capital and capital accumulation both belong to the category of capitalist accumulation. Taking primitive accumulation of capital as his logical starting point, he focused primarily on examining the general law and developmental trends of capital accumulation, and made an in-depth study of the future direction of the capitalist mode of production. Marx pointed out that with the development and deepening of capitalist accumulation, the profit-driven nature of capital is fully revealed, and the internal contradictions of capitalist private ownership of the means of production become increasingly explicit and intense. On the one hand, the degree of exploitation of wage workers by capitalists intensifies daily, and the opposition between labor and capital gradually becomes irreconcilable; on the other hand, the speed of capital concentration accelerates, its scale expands sharply, and conflicts of interest among different capital owners grow more severe. In short, because the contradictions between labor and capital and within capital itself are very acute, systemic crises of capitalism occur frequently, and these factors become a real force accelerating the demise of capitalism.

马克思认为，资本的原始积累与资本积累同属于资本主义积累的范畴。他主要以资本的原始积累为逻辑起点，重点考察了资本积累的一般规律与发展趋势，深入研判了资本主义生产方式的未来走向。马克思指出，随着资本主义积累的发展与深化，资本的逐利本性一览无余地展现出来，资本主义生产资料私有制的内在矛盾越来越显性化和激烈化。一方面，资本家对雇佣工人的剥削程度日益加重，劳动与资本之间的对立渐呈不可调和之势；另一方面，资本集中的速度不断加快，规模急剧扩大，不同资本所有者之间的利益冲突愈加严重。总之，由于劳动与资本之间以及资本内部的矛盾十分尖锐，资本主义的系统性危机频繁发生，这些因素成为加速资本主义灭亡的现实力量。

(I) The Contradiction between Labor and Capital Continues to Intensify

(一)劳动与资本之间的矛盾不断加剧

In the development of contemporary capitalism, as emerging digital technology replaces traditional machine production and becomes the latest means for capital to maximize profits, the relative or absolute quantity of variable capital gradually decreases, and the degree of capital’s exploitation of surplus value continuously increases, further confirming and reinforcing the law of relative surplus population. First, the capitalist application of digital technology exacerbates the oversupply of labor. For example, some low-skilled and unskilled workers are displaced by intelligent machines; they either directly exit the labor process and become part of the unemployment tide, or are forced to accept lower wages and fall into semi-unemployment. These gig workers, whose employment status is extremely unstable, swell the ranks of the industrial reserve army. Second, digital technology raises the rate of surplus value by dominating the capitalist labor process. For instance, digital platforms break the temporal and spatial boundaries of labor, on the one hand expanding the workplace and on the other hand extending workers’ working hours; again, capital achieves the digitalization and intellectualization of labor process supervision, maximizing labor intensity and work efficiency. In short, a large number of capitalist production activities relying on digital technology encroach on more of workers’ freedom and leisure, deepening the degree of exploitation of employed workers.

在当代资本主义的发展过程中，由于新兴数字技术取代传统的机器生产，一跃成为资本牟取利益最大化的最新手段，导致可变资本的相对量或绝对量逐渐减少，资本对剩余价值的剥削程度不断提高，进一步印证并强化了相对过剩人口规律。一是数字技术的资本主义应用加剧了劳动人口供过于求的局面。如一些低技能和无技能的劳动者被智能机器所排挤，他们或者直接游离出劳动过程成为失业大潮中的一员，或者不得不接受更低的薪酬待遇沦落为半失业人口。这些就业状态极其不稳定的零工群体，壮大了产业后备军的队伍。二是数字技术通过统治资本主义的劳动过程提高了剩余价值率。如数字平台打破了劳动的时空界限，一方面拓展了工作场域，另一方面延长了工人的劳动时间；再如，资本实现了劳动过程监督的数字化和智能化，最大限度地提高了劳动强度与工作效率。总之，大量依靠数字技术的资本主义生产活动，侵占了劳动者更多的自由与闲暇，加深了对在业工人的剥削程度。

It is undeniable that the contemporary process of capital accumulation is often accompanied by war, military conflict, or social hotspots. This kind of “war capitalism”[5]5 The term “war capitalism” (战争资本主义) refers to the use of military force, colonialism, and state-backed violence to facilitate capital accumulation, a concept developed by historians such as Sven Beckert to describe the violent origins of modern capitalism. is extremely similar to the primitive accumulation of capital, which is notorious for direct or indirect violence. The existence of a large number of immigrants expands the supply of cheap labor, while also intensifying the exploitation of employed workers and seriously damaging workers’ rights and interests. For example, after World War I, 80% of California’s agricultural labor force consisted of immigrants; in the thirty years after World War II, France absorbed up to 3.9 million immigrants, nearly twice the pre-war number.[6]6 These figures are cited from historical demographic studies of immigration patterns in the United States and France during the 20th century. These immigrants have high job mobility and low wages. Their arrival both lowers the overall wages of workers and squeezes the job opportunities of domestic workers; some employees in labor-intensive industries even end up on the streets begging for a living. In addition, capitalist countries have long favored skilled immigrants or capital immigrants, which has invisibly deprived local high-tech workers and the middle class of their jobs. Since the 21st century, in the face of refugee or immigration issues, developed capitalist countries have not only failed to increase unemployment subsidies but have used huge military expenditures as a pretext to substantially increase total taxes, reduce social welfare, and exploit right-wing populist forces to stir up nationalist sentiment, attempting to shift the focus of labor-capital conflict onto the immigrant population.

不可否认的是，当代的资本主义积累过程时常与战争、军事冲突或社会热点相依相伴，这类“战争资本主义”(24)与以直接暴力或间接暴力著称的资本的原始积累行为极为相似。大量外来移民的存在，扩充了廉价劳动力的供给，同时也加重了对在业工人的压榨，严重损害了劳动者的权益。如第一次世界大战后，美国加州农业劳动力人口的80%由外来移民构成;二战后的三十年间，法国吸纳的移民人口高达390万人，几乎是战前移民数量的两倍(26)。这些外来人口的工作流动性高，工资收入较低。他们的到来，既降低了工人的整体薪酬，又挤占了国内劳动者的工作机会，劳动密集型产业的一些从业人员甚至流落街头靠行乞为生。另外，资本主义国家长期以来对技术移民或资本移民青睐有加，无形中剥夺了当地高技术劳工和中产阶层的工作岗位。21世纪以来，面对难民或移民问题，发达资本主义国家不仅没有提高失业人口补贴，反而以巨额军费开支为借口，大幅增加税收总额，缩减社会福利，并利用右翼民粹势力煽动民族主义情绪，试图将劳资冲突的焦点转移到外来人口身上。

In summary, the deepening of the capitalist accumulation process and the widespread application of digital technology have verified and reinforced the law of relative surplus population. The social problems such as war conflicts, military frictions, or local hotspots that frequently appear in contemporary capitalist countries are both a contemporary continuation of the direct and indirect violent means of the primitive accumulation of capital period and a direct result of the objective operation of the law of capitalist accumulation. In recent years, under the multiple impacts of economic, social, and political crises such as the subprime mortgage crisis and the European debt crisis, the unemployed population in developed capitalist countries has grown rapidly, national income has sharply decreased, debt burdens have risen swiftly, social security gaps have widened continuously, and the living conditions of wage workers have become increasingly difficult. Including the Occupy Wall Street movement in the United States, the Yellow Vest movement in France, and the Indignados movement in Spain, large-scale and sustained new social movements have frequently erupted, indicating that workers’ class consciousness is awakening, the intention of workers to unite and resist capital is very clear, and the main force for overthrowing the capitalist system is developing and growing.

综上，资本主义积累过程的不断深入以及数字技术的广泛应用，验证并强化了相对过剩人口规律。当下资本主义国家频频出现的战争冲突、军事摩擦或局部热点等社会问题，既属于资本原始积累时期直接暴力与间接暴力手段的当代延续，同时也是资本主义积累规律客观作用的直接结果。近些年，受到次贷危机、欧债危机等经济、社会和政治危机的多重影响，各发达资本主义国家的失业人口快速增长，国民收入急剧减少，债务负担迅速攀升，社会保障缺口不断拉大，雇佣工人的生存处境愈发艰难。包括美国的占领华尔街运动、法国的黄马甲运动、西班牙的愤怒者运动等在内，大规模和持续性的新社会运动频繁爆发，说明工人的阶级意识正在觉醒，劳动者联合起来反抗资本的意图十分明显，推翻资本主义制度的主体力量正在发展和壮大。

(II) Conflicts within Capital Continue to Erupt

(二)资本内部的冲突持续爆发

The contradiction between the socialization of production and capitalist private ownership of the means of production exists both between labor and capital and within capital itself. In different periods of capitalist development, the opposition and conflict between capitals have promoted the process of socialization of production to varying degrees. For example, in the stage of large-scale industry, commercial credit and bank credit expanded rapidly, intensifying the expropriation of capital, leading to a high concentration of industrial capital, and bringing the capitalist world close to “the most comprehensive socialization of production.” The latest practice of contemporary capitalist development shows that the degree of socialization of production has reached a historical high. For instance, technology giants represented by Google, Amazon, Facebook, etc., use multiple means such as monopolizing data elements, talent resources, and digital infrastructure to dominate the artificial intelligence industry with great value growth potential and monopolize the economic power of capitalism. In addition, the rise of digital capital has also, to some extent, deprived traditional industries of development opportunities and curbed their vitality and dynamism. In short, the expansion of capital in the production sphere has led to an imbalance in the allocation of resources among different capitals, and the basic contradiction of capitalism has become increasingly acute.

生产社会化与生产资料资本主义私有制之间的矛盾，既存在于劳动与资本之间，也存在于资本内部。在资本主义发展的不同时期，资本之间的对立与冲突不同程度地促进了生产社会化进程。如大工业阶段，商业信用与银行信用迅速扩张，加剧了资本的剥夺，导致工业资本高度集中，资本主义世界接近了“最全面的生产社会化”。当代资本主义发展的最新实践表明，生产社会化程度已经达到了历史新高。如以谷歌、亚马逊、脸书等为代表的科技巨头，利用垄断数据要素、人才资源及数字基础设施等多种手段，主导了极具价值增长潜力的人工智能产业，垄断了资本主义的经济权力。另外，数字资本的兴起，也在一定程度上剥夺了传统产业的发展机会，遏制了他们的生机与活力。总之，资本在生产领域的扩张，导致了不同资本之间的资源配置失衡，资本主义的基本矛盾愈发尖锐。

Since the 1990s, with the continuous expansion of the space for capital expropriation, conflicts within capital have spread from the production sphere to the non-production sphere. Driven by the wave of financial derivative innovation, productive capital has transformed into speculative financial capital. Using multiple forces such as debt leverage or market fluctuations, it has extracted large amounts of capital premium income, created serious economic bubbles, and plundered huge amounts of social wealth. Among these, highly correlated collateralized debt obligations (CDOs) and credit default swaps (CDSs) have played a very important role. For example, during the 2008 subprime mortgage crisis, financial capital conducted large-scale leveraged transactions on CDOs and CDSs, repeatedly shorting the bond market and encroaching on counterparty funds, ultimately causing the near-collapse of the U.S. financial system and a crisis in the real estate market; another example is that the Greek debt crisis and Europe’s long-term economic recession are directly related to U.S. hedge funds manipulating the CDS trading market to seek huge profits. It must be emphasized that, unlike capital expropriation in the production sphere, capital’s expropriation behavior in the non-production sphere not only creates no value but, due to its high returns and short cycles, attracts a large amount of industrial capital to participate in financial speculation, further intensifying the opposition between financial capital and industrial capital and strengthening the basic contradiction of capitalism.

20世纪90年代以来，随着资本剥夺空间的不断拓展，资本内部的冲突由生产领域扩散到非生产领域。在金融衍生品创新大潮的推波助澜之下，生产资本纷纷转化为具有投机性的金融资本，它们利用债务杠杆或市场波动等多方力量，攫取了大量资本溢价收入，制造了严重的经济泡沫，掠夺了巨额的社会财富。其中，具有高关联度的债务担保证券(CDO)和信用违约互换(CDS)充当了非常重要的角色。如，2008年次贷危机期间，金融资本对CDO与CDS进行大规模的杠杆交易，反复做空债券市场，侵占对手盘资金，最终致使美国金融体系几近崩溃，房地产市场出现危机；又如，希腊债务危机的发生以及欧洲长期的经济衰退，均与美国对冲基金操纵CDS交易市场谋求巨额收益直接相关。需要强调的是，与生产领域的资本剥夺不同，资本在非生产领域的剥夺行为不仅不创造任何价值，反而因其收益高和周期短的特点，吸引了大量产业资本参与金融投机，进一步加剧了金融资本与产业资本的对立，强化了资本主义的基本矛盾。

Against the backdrop of a sustained global economic recession and the gradual deepening of the systemic crisis of capitalism, the contradictions within capital and between different spheres of capital within a single country have further spread to relations between states. In order to escape the shadow of the capitalist crisis as early as possible and to shift or mitigate the various losses arising from it, the developed capitalist countries have accelerated their pace of manipulating and plundering developing countries, repeatedly provoking discontent among the governments and populations of backward countries. The political, economic, military and diplomatic relations between the two sides have become increasingly tense, even giving rise to hot-spot phenomena such as open confrontation, local conflicts or the escalation of war. In addition, competition among the developed capitalist countries over technology, products, energy, resources and markets has become increasingly fierce, and the contradictions between them have grown ever sharper. For example, the EU countries, represented by Germany, have continuously resisted the entry of American new-energy vehicles into the European market by raising taxes on foreign investors, reducing policy subsidies for products, and raising quality standards, thereby deepening the trade conflict between the United States and the European Union. Another example is the recent departure of Britain from the European Union and the differences shown by all parties on issues such as accepting refugees, employment, race and religion, which have fully exposed the very sharp antagonisms within the European Union. In short, the contradictions among the countries of the world are likewise governed by the hegemony of capital, reflect the general law of capitalist accumulation, and confirm the historical tendency of capitalist accumulation. This is also the combined result of primitive accumulation of capital and capital accumulation.

在全球经济持续衰退、资本主义系统性危机逐渐深化的时代背景下，一国范围内不同领域的资本及其内部的矛盾，进一步扩散到国家与国家之间。为了尽早走出资本主义危机的阴影，转嫁或减轻由此带来的各种损失，发达资本主义国家加快了操纵和掠夺发展中国家的步伐，一再引发落后国家政府与民众的不满情绪，双方的政治、经济、军事和外交关系日益紧张，甚至出现公开对抗、局地冲突或战争升级等热点现象。另外，各发达资本主义国家围绕着技术、产品、能源、资源和市场等方面的竞争越来越激烈，它们之间的矛盾也变得越来越尖锐。如以德国为代表的欧盟国家通过对外来投资者增税、缩减产品的政策性补贴、提高质量标准等手段，不断抵制美国新能源汽车进入欧洲市场，加深了美国与欧盟的贸易冲突；又如，近些年来的英国脱离欧盟事件以及各方在接收难民、用工就业、种族和宗教等问题上表现出来的分歧，充分暴露了欧盟内部非常尖锐的对立。总之，世界各国之间的矛盾同样受制于资本霸权的主导，反映了资本主义积累的一般规律，证实了资本主义积累的历史趋势，这也是资本原始积累与资本积累共同作用的结果。

V. Conclusion

五、结 语

The primitive accumulation of capital is not a concluded historical process; it possesses the characteristic of continuity, always existing throughout the entire process of the emergence and development of the capitalist mode of production, and there is no essential distinction between it and capital accumulation. Both are important components of capitalist accumulation, and their identity is mainly manifested in the following aspects: First, the identity of goals and tasks. The separation of the subjective and objective conditions of labor is both the historical starting point of the capitalist mode of production and an important guarantee for the continued existence of the capitalist system. Therefore, promoting and maintaining the loss of ownership of the means of production by the working people is the same goal and task facing both primitive accumulation of capital and capital accumulation. Second, the identity of historical results. With the gradual deepening of the process of capitalist accumulation, the antagonism between labor and capital continues to deepen, the conflicts within capital become increasingly acute, the contradiction between the capitalist private ownership of the means of production and the socialization of production grows ever more intense, and the demise of capitalism and its replacement by socialism have been tested by both logic and history.

资本的原始积累并非已经终结的历史，它具有持续性的特点，始终存在于资本主义生产方式产生与发展的全过程，与资本积累之间没有本质的区别。二者同属于资本主义积累的重要组成部分，它们的同一性主要表现为：一是目标任务的同一性。劳动主观条件与客观条件的分离，既是资本主义生产方式的历史起点，又是资本主义制度得以存续的重要保证。因此，促使并保持劳动者丧失生产资料的所有权，是摆在资本的原始积累与资本积累面前的同一目标任务。二是历史结果的同一性。随着资本主义积累进程的逐渐深入，劳动与资本的对立不断加深，资本内部的冲突日益激化，生产资料资本主义私有制与生产社会化的矛盾愈加激烈，资本主义的灭亡与社会主义的替代经受了逻辑与历史的检验。

Because the separation of the working people from the means of production is sustained and solidified, the contradiction between the capitalist private ownership of the means of production and the socialization of production becomes increasingly irreconcilable, providing theoretical necessity and practical feasibility for the ultimate replacement by socialist public ownership of the means of production. This article, premised on upholding and improving the basic socialist economic system, offers the following realistic reflections: First, unswervingly uphold the dominant position of socialist public ownership of the means of production. The entire people become the masters of the means of production, eliminating the class antagonism between the propertied and the propertyless, the exploiters and the exploited. This is a prominent manifestation of the socialist nature and also the fundamental way to liberate and develop the productive forces. Second, ensure that the leading role of the state-owned economy is inviolable. Because it concerns the state’s basic industries, infrastructure and other highly socialized production and business activities, as well as matters of national welfare and people’s livelihood, national security and the economic lifeline, it plays a positive role in promoting other forms of public ownership. Third, maintain the systematicity and integrity of the basic socialist economic system. The dominant position of public ownership and the leading role of the state-owned economy cannot be separated from the development of the non-public economy. Only through the organic combination of the socialist system and the market economy can the maximization of workers’ rights and interests be achieved, thereby promoting China’s high-quality development.

由于劳动者与生产资料相互分离的持续与固化，生产资料的资本主义私有制与生产社会化的矛盾日益变得不可调和，为社会主义生产资料公有制的最终替代提供了理论上的必要性与实践上的可行性。本文以坚持和完善社会主义基本经济制度为前提，现实反思如下：一是，毫不动摇地坚持生产资料社会主义公有制的主体地位。全体国民成为生产资料的主人，铲除了有产者与无产者、剥削者与被剥削者的阶级对立，这是社会主义性质的突出体现，也是解放和发展生产力的根本出路。二是，保证国有经济的主导作用不容侵犯。因其关涉国家的基础产业、基础设施和其他高度社会化的生产经营活动以及事关国计民生、国家安全和经济命脉，对其它公有制形式具有积极的促进作用。三是，维护社会主义基本经济制度的体系性与完整性。公有制的主体地位与国有经济的主导作用离不开非公有制经济的发展。只有通过社会主义制度与市场经济的有机结合，才能实现劳动者权益的最大化，进而推动我国经济的高质量发展。

Online editor: Paul

网络编辑：保罗