Marx’s Exposition on the Relationship of Private Property

Although Notebook II of Marx’s *Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844* is only a fragment of the original notes, it nonetheless conveys Marx’s important views on the relationship of private property, possessing significant academic value for the critique of political economy and the understanding of capitalist relations of production.

马克思《1844年经济学哲学手稿》笔记本II虽然只是原来笔记的一个片段，但是依然传递出马克思对于私有财产关系的重要观点，对于政治经济学批判以及资本主义生产关系的理解，具有重要的学术价值。

The relationship of private property manifested as capital and labor

表现为资本与劳动的私有财产关系

The content of Notebook II, apart from Marx’s commentary on relevant national economists, can be divided into the following three aspects with respect to the exposition on private property.

笔记本II的内容，除了马克思对相关国民经济学家的评述以外，就私有财产的论述而言，总体上可以划分为以下三个方面。

First, the normal relationship of private property: the control of capital and the survival of the worker. In Notebook II, Marx first elaborates on the state of existence of the worker in a world controlled by capital. First, man exists only as a worker, not as a human being. “Man is nothing but a worker.” [1]1 Karl Marx, *Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844* (Moscow: Progress Publishers, 1959), Notebook II, p. 1. [Translator’s note: The English translation follows the standard MECW edition; the Chinese text here is a paraphrase.] The worker can exist only as a need of capital after being controlled by capital, but not as a human being. Second, without the control of capital, the worker will be abandoned by the whole of society. When the worker is no longer controlled by capital, that is, when the worker is abandoned by capital, “they are ghosts who exist outside the domain of national economy.” [2]2 Ibid. Third, the content of wages is merely to sustain the worker’s subsistence needs during the period of labor, and is limited only to the extent that the worker’s offspring are not allowed to die out. Without wages, the worker has even less possibility of becoming a human being, and has no place even for his existence as a human being. In short, the worker in the capitalist world is always an inhuman existence.

第一，私有财产的正常关系：资本的控制与工人的生存。在笔记本II中，马克思首先阐述的是在资本控制的世界中工人的生存状态。其一，人只是作为工人的存在，而非人的存在。“人只不过是工人”。工人只有被资本控制之后，才能作为资本的需要而存在，但不是作为人存在。其二，没有资本的控制，工人将被整个社会遗弃。当工人不受资本控制之时，也就是工人被资本抛弃之时，“他们是一些在国民经济学领域之外的幽灵”。其三，工资的内容只是维持工人在劳动期间的生活需要，并且只限于保持工人后代不致死绝的程度。而没有工资，工人将更加没有成为人的可能，甚至没有他作为人的生存之所。总之，工人在资本主义世界中，总是一种非人的存在。

Second, the fixed link of private property: the struggle between the landowner and the capitalist. The relationship of private property implicitly contains two aspects: the relationship of private property as labor and the relationship of private property as capital, as well as the mutual relationship between these two manifestations. The former, as labor, is the production of activity that is entirely alien to itself, to man and to nature, and hence to consciousness and the expression of life; it is the abstract existence of man as mere labor. The latter, as capital, is the production of the object of human activity; all natural and social determinations of the object disappear, private property loses its natural and social particularities, and the same capital remains identical in completely different natural and social existences.

第二，私有财产的固定环节：土地所有者和资本家的斗争。私有财产的关系潜在地包含了两个方面：作为劳动的私有财产关系和作为资本的私有财产关系，以及这两种表现的相互关系。前者作为劳动，是对自身、对人和自然界因而也对意识和生命表现来说，完全是异己的人的活动生产，是作为单纯的劳动的人的抽象存在；后者作为资本，是对人的活动对象的生产，对象的一切自然的和社会的规定性都消失了，私有财产丧失了自己的自然的和社会的特质，同一个资本在各种完全不同的自然和社会的存在中始终是同一的。

In this sense, the important distinction between capital and landed property, the distinction between profit and rent, becomes an inherent link in the formation and generation of the opposition between capital and labor. The landowner flaunts the aristocratic origin of his property, regarding the capitalist as a cunning, treacherous, greedy scoundrel who betrays society and sells out its interests; the capitalist flaunts his status as a modern son, regarding the landowner as a crude, immoral fool who employs serfdom. In the actual process of development, the victory of the capitalist over the landowner necessarily arises; this victory is “capital’s discovery and promotion of human labor, instead of dead things, as the source of wealth.” [3]3 Ibid.

在这个意义上作为重要的资本与土地的差别，利润和地租的差别，成为资本和劳动之间的对立形成和产生的一个固有环节。土地所有者炫耀自己财产的贵族来源，视资本家为背离社会和出卖社会利益的、狡黠诡诈的贪财恶棍；资本家炫耀自己的现代嫡子身份，视土地所有者为运用农奴制的粗野、不道德的蠢人。而在现实的发展进程中，必然产生出资本家对土地所有者的胜利，这种胜利是“资本发现并促使人的劳动代替死的物而成为财富的源泉”。

Third, the necessary process of private property: the triple relationship of capital and labor. The necessary process of the movement of private property is the three stages contained in capital and labor. The first stage is the stage of identity between capital and labor: direct identity and indirect identity. Direct identity is an identity where capital and labor have not yet truly been distinguished; indirect identity means that although the two have been clearly distinguished, capital and labor are in a relationship of mutual promotion and mutual impetus, representing the historically advancing force of advanced productive forces. From the second stage onward, the two begin to exhibit a genuine opposition, clearly expressing forces of mutual exclusion and a state of conflict. The third stage sees the two manifesting an indirect but deeper opposition. The analysis of this stage embodies Marx’s inheritance of the essence of Hegelian dialectics; the third stage is the simple synthesis of the thesis and antithesis of the first two stages—unity at a higher stage. In the third stage, capital and labor still appear in the form of opposition, namely, self-opposition within each. Capital opposes capital; the capitalist, from being the owner of capital, becomes controlled by capital, thereby transforming into labor. Conversely, when the worker becomes capital, a commodity, the worker also becomes capital. “Capital = accumulated labor = labor.” [4]4 Ibid. Capital opposes itself as its own opposite, labor; labor opposes itself from within as its own opposite, capital.

第三，私有财产的必然过程：资本与劳动的三重关系。私有财产运动的必然过程是资本与劳动所包含的三个阶段。第一阶段，资本与劳动的同一阶段：直接的同一与间接的同一。直接的同一是资本与劳动还没有真正区分开的一种同一；间接的同一是指二者虽然有了明确的区分，但是资本与劳动之间是一种相互促进、相互推动的关系，代表着先进生产力的历史前进力量。从第二阶段开始，两者开始出现真正的对立，明确地表达着相互排斥的力量和冲突的状态。第三个阶段，二者表现为一种间接的、但是更深刻的对立。这一阶段的分析体现了马克思对黑格尔辩证法精髓的继承，第三个阶段是前两阶段正反题之后的简单合题——在更高阶段的统一，第三个阶段中资本与劳动仍然是以对立的方式出现的，即各自内部的自我对立。资本同资本对立，资本家从资本的拥有者变成受资本控制者，从而转化为劳动。反之亦然，在工人成为资本、商品的时候，工人也就成了资本。“资本=积累的劳动=劳动” 。资本在自身对立为自身的对立面劳动，劳动从自身内部对立为自己的对立面资本。

Thus, the relationship between capital and labor undergoes three stages: identity—simple opposition—internal opposition, corresponding respectively to the embryonic, early, and mature periods of capitalism. In mature capitalist social relations, the relationship between capital and labor is: from external opposition concealed within internal opposition. This concealment is even manifested in the form of eliminating external opposition; the transformation of the worker into the capitalist is beautified as the realization of individual ideals.

可见，资本与劳动的关系经历了三个阶段：同一—简单对立—内在对立，分别对应资本主义萌芽、早期、成熟时期。在成熟的资本主义社会关系中，资本与劳动的关系是：由外在的对立隐藏到内在的对立中，这种隐秘性甚至以消除外在对立的方式体现，从工人向资本家的转化被美化为个人理想的实现。

The essence of the opposition between capital and labor

资本与劳动对立的本质

Continuing to think along the questions raised by Marx, in capitalist relations of production, what is the essence of the opposition between capital and labor as the profound opposition within the relationship of private property? In the *Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844*, Marx points out, “Capital is accumulated labor,” [5]5 Karl Marx, *Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844*, Notebook I, p. 1. and “is the power of command over labor and its products.” [6]6 Ibid. Labor appears as the subject term explaining capital, indicating the initial unity of capital and labor and the possibility of their identity. The reason opposition between capital and labor arises in the second and third stages lies in the character of labor. Labor is the unity of abstract labor and concrete labor. When referring to a particular labor of a particular person, the aspect of concrete labor is emphasized; when referring to the social function of labor, the aspect of abstract labor is emphasized. When capital appears as the opposite of labor, the labor that explains capital is the aspect of abstract labor, while the labor opposed to capital is the aspect of concrete labor. That is to say, the opposition between capital and labor in the second and third stages is actually the opposition between the abstract labor represented by capital and the concrete labor of the worker—that is, the opposition between abstract labor and concrete labor. When any concrete labor can be purchased at any time and any place, accumulated labor acquires the general form of all concrete labor, namely, abstract labor. Capital, precisely in this form of abstract labor, purchases all concrete labor and simultaneously acquires in substance the power of command over the worker, labor, and the product of labor, ultimately becoming, in the sharp opposition with concrete labor, the power of one part of people over another. “Capital is the power of command over the labor products of others.” [7]7 Ibid. “The capitalist possesses this power not because of his personal or human characteristics, but solely because he is the owner of capital. His power is the irresistible purchasing power of his capital.” [8]8 Ibid.

沿着马克思所提出的问题继续思考，资本主义生产关系中，作为私有财产关系深刻对立的资本与劳动，其对立的本质又是什么呢？马克思在《1844年经济学哲学手稿》中指出，“资本是积蓄的劳动”，“是对劳动及其产品的支配权力。”劳动作为资本的解释主词出现，表明资本与劳动的最初的统一关系及其同一的可能性。而第二三阶段之所以会出现资本与劳动的对立，其原因在于劳动的特性。劳动是抽象劳动和具体劳动的统一，当指称某人的某种劳动的时候是强调具体劳动的一面，而当指称劳动所具有的社会作用的时候强调的是抽象劳动的一面。当资本作为劳动的对立面出现的时候，解释资本的劳动，是抽象劳动的一面，而与资本对立的劳动是具体劳动的一面。也就是说，第二三阶段中资本与劳动的对立实际上是资本所代表的抽象劳动与劳动者的具体劳动之间的对立，也就是抽象劳动与具体劳动的对立。当能够在任意时间任意地点购买任何具体劳动的时候，积累起来的劳动就具有了所有具体劳动的一般形式，即抽象劳动。资本正是以这种抽象劳动的方式，购买一切具体劳动，并同时实质上具有了对劳动者、劳动以及劳动产品的支配力量，最终在与具体劳动的尖锐对立中成为一部分人对另一部分人的支配的权力。“资本，即对他人劳动产品的私有权。”“资本家拥有这种权力并不是由于他的个人的或人的特性，而只是由于他是资本的所有者。他的权力就是他的资本的那种不可抗拒的购买的权力。”

In this domination of concrete labor by abstract labor, the worker’s relationship to his own labor product, to his own labor, to his species-being, and to other people all undergo change. First, the more labor products the worker produces, the greater the power of command from the owner of capital. Second, the worker’s concrete labor is subject to the compulsory determination of capital as the representative of abstract labor; the worker’s labor is no longer the free, conscious activity of labor itself. Third, labor is no longer the activity required by man’s essential nature, the activity of man’s species-being that distinguishes him from other animals, but is reduced to a means of maintaining man’s physical survival. People earn abstract labor to sustain existence. Fourth, the domination of concrete labor by abstract labor is precisely manifested as a relationship of domination and rule of one part of people over another; people evaluate others according to the mode of abstract labor. In short, the opposition between capital and labor is the opposition between abstract labor and concrete labor, and the sharp result of this opposition is alienated labor.

在这种抽象劳动对具体劳动的支配中，劳动者同自己的劳动产品、自己的劳动、自己的类本质，以及自己与他人的关系，均发生了变化。第一，劳动者生产的劳动产品越多，来自资本所有者的支配权力就越大。第二，劳动者的具体劳动受来自抽象劳动代表的资本的强制规定，劳动者的劳动不再是劳动自身的自由自觉的活动。第三，劳动不再是人的本质需要的活动，人区别于其他动物的类本质的活动，而是降低为维持人肉体生存的手段。人们以赚取抽象劳动来维持生存。第四，抽象劳动对具体劳动的支配，正是体现为一部分人对于另一部分人的支配与统治关系，人们按照抽象劳动的方式来评价他人。质言之，资本与劳动的对立是抽象劳动与具体劳动的对立，其尖锐对立的结果是异化劳动。

The sublation of the opposition between capital and labor

资本与劳动对立的扬弃

Thus, the sharp opposition between abstract labor and concrete labor produces a relationship of domination and rule of one part of people over another, causing the worker to exist in the form of alienated labor in actual labor. One important way to sublate this mode of existence is the elimination of this opposition, that is, the excessively separated abstract labor re-integrating with concrete labor and coexisting with it.

如此，抽象劳动和具体劳动的尖锐对立，产生的一部分人对于另一部分人的支配与统治关系，使得劳动者在现实劳动中以异化劳动的形式存在。对这种存在方式扬弃的重要方式之一，就是这种对立的消弭，也就是过分脱离的抽象劳动重新与具体劳动相融合、共同存在。

From the perspective of the worker, when abstract labour returns to concrete labour, and when the worker participates in the process of capital’s value creation and value sharing, it can be seen from Marx’s four determinations of alienated labour that the worker’s relationship with the product of his labour, with his own concrete labour, with the species-being of humanity, and with other people all undergo change during his labour process. First, the more products the worker produces, the more the worker, as a value sharer, also shares in the fruits brought by more products; the product of labour is not always opposed to the worker but bears a certain positive correlation with him. Second, because the worker’s labour ultimately brings him a certain value, this gives the worker a certain sense of identification with labour that is still largely determined by capital, and he carries out labour activities to a certain extent voluntarily rather than entirely under compulsion. Third, in this partially voluntary labour, the nature of labour as a need of the human essence also partially returns to the worker himself; labour is not merely a means of survival but also provides people with a certain satisfaction of the need for essential creation. Fourth, in this kind of labour that participates in the attributes of the human essence, people’s relations with others also involve essential interaction between people; it is not solely a relationship of domination and subordination, control and being controlled; equality, freedom, and respect are integrated to a certain degree.

从劳动者的角度来看，当抽象劳动向具体劳动回归之后，当劳动者参与到资本的价值创造和价值分享的过程中时，从马克思对异化劳动的四重规定中可以看出，劳动者在他劳动的过程中，与他所生产的劳动产品、与他自身的具体劳动、与人的类本质以及与他人的关系均发生了变化。第一，劳动者生产的产品越多，劳动者作为价值分享者同时也分享着更多产品带来的成果，劳动产品不总是与劳动者相对立，而是与劳动者有一定的正相关关系。第二，由于劳动者的劳动最终为劳动者带来了一定的价值，使得这种劳动者对很大程度仍然是资本决定的劳动具有了一定的认同感，并在一定程度上自愿而非全部强制地进行劳动活动。第三，在这种部分的自愿劳动中，劳动作为人本质需要的性质也部分地回到劳动者本身，劳动不仅仅是一种单纯的生存手段，同时给予人们一定的本质创造需要的满足。第四，在这样的参与了人本质属性的劳动中，人们对待他人的关系也参与了人与人之间本质性的互动，不单单是支配与被支配、控制与被控制的关系，平等自由尊重，得到一定程度的融入。

In sum, the capital owner and the worker are the concretization of the capital-labour relation. Achieving a mitigation of the contradictory relation between abstract labour and concrete labour by means of the return of abstract labour to concrete labour is a dissolution of the foundation on which alienated labour is formed, and thus an attempt to sublate alienated labour. But, as Marx’s explanation of distribution according to work [9]9 “Distribution according to work” (按劳分配) refers to the principle, discussed by Marx in the Critique of the Gotha Programme, of distributing consumption goods in proportion to the labour contributed, which he regarded as a transitional form still bearing the “birthmarks” of capitalist society within the lower phase of communist society. shows, this attempt remains a historical mode specific to a particular period; the sublation of private property must ultimately be completed through the establishment of the communist form of society, and only when people fully appropriate their labour and their relations of production can they achieve the true emancipation of humanity.

总之，资本所有者与劳动者是资本与劳动关系的具体化，以抽象劳动向具体劳动回归的方式达到抽象劳动与具体劳动之间矛盾关系的缓和，是对异化劳动形成基础的消解，从而是对异化劳动扬弃的尝试。但正如马克思对按劳分配的解释一样，这种尝试仍然是特定时期的一种历史的方式，对私有财产的扬弃最终还是要通过建立社会的共产主义形态得以完成，人只有在全面占有其劳动及其生产关系之后，才能实现真正的人的解放。

Online editor: Paul

网络编辑：保罗