Marx’s Theory of Endogenous Money

I. Introduction

一、引言

David Ricardo, the mentor of Karl Marx in economic theory, was highly praised by Marx for his theory of value, yet his monetary theory was consistently questioned and criticized by Marx. In Volume 1 of *Capital*, Marx specifically points out that although “Ricardo’s analysis of the magnitude of value is not exhaustive—but it is the best analysis,” on the contrary, “the finest representatives of classical political economy, such as Adam Smith and Ricardo… hold extremely confused and contradictory views on money as the completed form of the general equivalent.” In this regard, Geoff Hodgson comments: “Marx’s analysis of money clearly violates the neglect of money in the works of classical economists. It more clearly demonstrates that Marx’s economic thought is fundamentally different from that of Smith and Ricardo, despite the important continuity among these three economists (e.g., the labor theory of value).” This is because, although Ricardo was regarded by Marx as the pinnacle of bourgeois political economy, [1]1 The “currency principle” (通货原则) refers to the doctrine of the Currency School, which advocated for a strict link between the note issue and the gold reserve, a position associated with Ricardo and opposed by the Banking School. Ricardo, who formulated the currency principle, did not realize the logical inconsistency within the academic system between the quantity theory of money (the quantity of money determines the price level) and the labor theory of value (prices determined by value are primary, so the price level should determine the quantity of money). Joseph A. Schumpeter points out, “The only one who completely denies the quantity principle is Marx, who calls it the ‘insipid hypothesis’ (the original German is *abgeschmackte Hypothese*). He adopts this stance, apparently because he believes that the quantity theory of money and the production cost theory of money are mutually exclusive, and the analyst must choose between the two.” Mark Blaug also holds that “Marx sided with the Banking School. As early as 1859, he had expressed his opposition to the quantity theory of money, probably because he believed that the quantity theory of money was inconsistent with the labor theory of value as applied to money.” Hence, Marx expressed understanding and favor for the Banking School’s monetary thought, characterized by the real bills doctrine and the law of reflux, and attempted to develop a more complex and profound theoretical structure of endogenous money.

作为卡尔·马克思(Karl Marx)经济学导师的大卫·李嘉图(David Ricardo),其价值理论得到马克思的高度赞赏，然而其货币理论却始终被马克思质疑和批判。在《资本论》第1卷中，马克思具体指出，虽然“李嘉图对价值量的分析并不充分，——但已是最好的分析”,与之相反，“恰恰是古典政治经济学的最优秀的代表人物，像亚·斯密和李嘉图……对于货币即一般等价物的完成形态的看法是极为混乱和矛盾的”。对此，杰夫·霍奇森(Geoff Hodgson)评论道：“马克思对货币的分析明显地违反古典经济学家的著作中对货币的轻视。它更加清楚地证明了马克思的经济思想本质上与斯密和李嘉图的不同，尽管这三位经济学家之间有着重要的一脉相承之处(例如劳动价值论)。”这是因为，虽然李嘉图被马克思视为资产阶级政治经济学的顶峰,然而，制定了通货原则的李嘉图却没有意识到货币数量论(货币数量决定价格水平)与劳动价值论(由价值决定的价格是第一性的，故而应是价格水平决定货币数量)之间存在学术体系上的逻辑不一致。约瑟夫·熊彼特(Joseph A. Schumpeter)指出，“唯一完全否定数量原理的是马克思，他称数量原理为‘乏味的假说’(德文原文是abgeschmackte Hypothese)。他采取这种立场，似乎是由于他认为：货币价值的数量理论与货币的生产成本理论是非此即彼的，分析家必须在二者中作出选择”。马克·布劳格(Mark Blaug)也认为，“马克思赞同银行学派一方。早在1859年他已表明反对货币数量论的立场，大概因为他相信货币数量论不符合应用于货币的劳动价值理论”。故而，马克思对银行学派以真实票据原理和回流定律为特征的货币思想表达出理解和青睐，并试图发展出一种更为复杂精深的内生货币理论结构。

In *Capital*, Marx pays particular attention to the definition and classification of types of money. He distinguishes metallic money, fiat money, and credit money from the perspective of differences in the functions of money: “Metallic money can perform the function of both a means of purchase and a means of payment”; “Just as paper money in the proper sense arises from the function of money as a means of circulation, so credit money has its natural origin in the function of money as a means of payment”; “Real credit money is not based on money circulation (whether metallic money or state paper money), but on the circulation of bills of exchange.” From the perspective of the monetary theoretical structure of *Capital*, Volume 1 mainly explores the formation of commodity money and provides an endogenous money equation with a causal direction opposite to that of the classical quantity theory. Volume 2, on the basis of metallic money, analyzes the role of the law of reflux of money in the reproduction and circulation of total social capital. Volume 3 discusses how credit money embodies the real bills doctrine and analyzes the role of credit money in capitalist production. It can be seen that Marx defines endogenous money as metallic money and credit money. Therefore, Marx’s monetary thought should be systematically sorted out and his analytical structure of money constructed on the foundation of Marx’s endogenous money equation, starting from the real bills doctrine and the law of reflux.

马克思在《资本论》中特别注重对货币类型的界定和划分。他从货币职能的差异角度划分了金属货币、法定货币和信用货币：“金属货币既能执行购买手段的职能，也能执行支付手段的职能”；“正如本来意义的纸币是从货币作为流通手段的职能中产生出来一样，信用货币的自然根源是货币作为支付手段的职能”；“真正的信用货币不是以货币流通(不管是金属货币还是国家纸币)为基础，而是以票据流通为基础”。从《资本论》写作的货币理论结构上看，《资本论》第1卷主要探讨了商品货币的形成问题，并给出了与古典数量论因果方向相反的内生货币方程。《资本论》第2卷在金属货币的基础上分析了货币回流定律对社会总资本再生产和流通的作用。《资本论》第3卷讨论了信用货币是如何体现真实票据原理的，并分析了信用货币在资本主义生产中的作用。由此可见，马克思将内生货币界定为金属货币和信用货币。故而，应该以马克思的内生货币方程为基石，从真实票据原理和回流定律出发，来系统梳理马克思的货币思想以及构建他的货币分析结构。

Regarding the law of money circulation, the key difference between the quantity theory of money and the theory of endogenous money lies in the direction of the causal order on both sides of the quantity equation MV=PY: the quantity theory holds that it is from left to right, while the endogenous theory holds that it is from right to left. An important finding of this paper is that the same money (represented by the pound sterling) can follow different laws of money circulation in different historical periods and under different monetary systems. Therefore, defining the attributes of money is crucial, especially for paper money. Convertible paper money, falling into the category of credit money, is thus applicable to the endogenous theory; inconvertible paper money, falling into the category of fiat money, is thus applicable to the quantity theory. In view of this, the confusion between credit money and fiat money, both being paper money, is the main reason for the misunderstanding of the law of money circulation. Taking the historical evolution of the pound sterling as an example, the pound sterling first issued by the Bank of England in 1694 was a convertible banknote. The Bank Restriction Act of 1797 [2]2 The Bank Restriction Act of 1797 suspended the convertibility of Bank of England notes into gold, a measure that lasted until 1821 and provided the historical context for Ricardo’s development of the quantity theory of money. abolished the requirement for the convertibility of Bank of England notes into gold, and this act was not repealed until 1821. In 1821, Britain restored the convertibility of the pound sterling into coin on the basis of the gold standard, which was not abolished until the outbreak of World War I in 1914. Britain implemented the gold standard again from 1925 to 1931, finally being forced to abandon it in 1931 due to the Great Depression. It can be seen that the historical periods when the pound sterling served as endogenous money were 1694–1797, 1821–1914, and 1925–1931; the historical periods when the pound sterling served as exogenous money and fiat money were 1797–1821, 1914–1925, and from 1931 to the present. In this regard, the pound sterling as credit money follows the endogenous theory, while the pound sterling as fiat money follows the quantity theory. It should be pointed out that the period when Marx lived in Britain (1849–1883) coincided with the heyday of Britain’s adoption of the single gold standard (1821–1914). At that time, gold coins, the pound sterling with a fiat character but convertible, and credit money (secondary money) represented by bills of exchange and checks were all endogenous money, so *Capital* prominently emphasizes the law of endogenous money circulation. The formation and development of Ricardo’s (1772–1823) monetary thought occurred precisely during the period of the Bank Restriction Act (1797–1821), when the pound sterling fell into the category of exogenous money; it is thus not difficult to understand why Ricardo favored the quantity theory of money.

对于货币流通规律，货币数量论与内生货币论的关键区别在于货币数量方程MV=PY等式两侧的因果顺序方向：数量论认为是从左到右，内生论则认为是从右到左。本文的重要发现是同一种货币(以英镑为代表)在不同历史时期和不同货币制度下可以遵循不同的货币流通规律。因此，界定货币属性至关重要，特别是纸币。可兑换纸币因归入信用货币范畴故而适用于内生论，不兑换纸币因归入法定货币范畴故而适用于数量论。鉴于此，对于同为纸币的信用货币和法定货币的混同是造成货币流通规律理解混乱的主要原因。以英镑的历史演化为例，1694年由英格兰银行首发的英镑是可兑换的银行券。1797年《银行限制法案》取消了英格兰银行券可兑换为黄金的要求，直到1821年该法案才被废除。1821年英国在金本位制基础上恢复了英镑与硬币的兑换，直至1914年第一次世界大战爆发金本位制才被废除。1925—1931年英国再次执行金本位制，最后由于大萧条而于1931年被迫放弃。可见，英镑作为内生货币的历史时段是1694—1797年、1821—1914年、1925—1931年；英镑作为外生货币和法定货币的历史时段是1797—1821年、1914—1925年，以及1931年至今。在这方面，作为信用货币的英镑遵循的是内生论，作为法定货币的英镑遵循的是数量论。需要指出，马克思生活在英国的时期(1849—1883年)正好处于英国采用单一金本位制的鼎盛期(1821—1914年)。此时，金币、法定色彩的可兑换英镑、以汇票和支票为代表的信用货币(次生货币)均是内生货币，所以《资本论》突出强调内生货币流通规律。李嘉图(1772—1823年)货币思想的形成和发展过程正好处在《银行限制法案》的实行期(1797—1821年),在此期间英镑属于外生货币范畴，这就不难理解李嘉图为何青睐货币数量论了。

Anwar Shaikh points out that although Marx briefly mentioned that state-issued paper money does not obey the laws of commodity money, he postponed the discussion of credit money and specific forms of state-issued paper money based on completely different laws. Through textual analysis and sorting of classical Marxist literature, this paper attempts to present the types of money and their historical characteristics in Marx’s era, thereby revealing Marx’s theory of money circulation. Applying the research method of textual studies, this paper constructs Marx’s analytical framework of endogenous money. The research finds: first, Marx attempted to construct a monetary theory unifying the reflux of money and the movement of capital based on the real bills doctrine, in order to integrate the labor theory of value and the theory of endogenous money; second, Marx discovered the phenomenon of the “liquidity trap” earlier than John Maynard Keynes, and analyzed its deep-seated causes from the perspectives of the credit hierarchy of money and preference reversal, as well as the differences in the reflux mechanisms of metallic money and credit money; third, Marx put forward the creative insight that credit money and fiat money are respectively applicable to the theory of endogenous money and the quantity theory of money.

安瓦尔·谢赫(Anwar Shaikh)指出，马克思虽然曾简略提到国家发行的纸币不遵守商品货币的规律，但推迟了对基于完全不同规律的信用货币和国家发行的特定形式的纸币的讨论。本文通过对马克思主义经典文献的文本梳理和分析，试图给出马克思所处时代的货币类型及其历史特性，从而揭示马克思的货币流通理论。应用文本学的研究方法，本文构建了马克思的内生货币分析框架。研究发现：第一，马克思试图根据真实票据原理构造货币回流和资本运动相统一的货币理论，以便将劳动价值论和内生货币论联为一体；第二，马克思早于约翰·梅纳德·凯恩斯(John Maynard Keynes)发现了“流动性陷阱”现象，并从货币的信用等级和偏好逆转层面以及金属货币和信用货币的回流机制差异角度分析了其深层原因；第三，马克思提出了信用货币和法定货币分别适用于内生货币论和货币数量论的创造性见解。

At present, China’s broad money supply (M2) is composed of cash and deposit money, the latter falling within the category of endogenous money and occupying an absolutely dominant position in the total money supply. Calculations show that the proportion of cash in China’s total money supply fell from 11% in 1999 (with deposit money accounting for 89%) to 3.8% at the end of October 2023 (with deposit money accounting for 96.2%). The 2024 Central Economic Work Conference proposed aligning the growth of aggregate social financing and money supply with the expected targets for economic growth and the general price level. This fully demonstrates the practical significance of Marx’s endogenous money theory for contemporary China. Specifically, first, placing the aggregate social financing indicator ahead of the money supply indicator is because the causal order of macroeconomic indicators runs from economic growth to aggregate social financing to money supply; second, emphasizing the general price level as an important regulatory indicator for money supply growth further highlights the core idea of the law of circulation of endogenous money. Moreover, because Marx’s endogenous money theory can reveal the key role of monetary reflux in social reproduction, it is conducive to explaining major economic events such as the international financial crisis, which is crucial for macroeconomic research.

当下我国的广义货币供应量(M2)由现金与存款货币两部分构成，其中后者属于内生货币范畴且在货币供给总量中占绝对主体地位。经计算，我国现金占货币总量的比重从1999年的11%(存款货币占比为89%),降至2023年10月底的3.8%(存款货币占比为96.2%)。2024年中央经济工作会议提出，使社会融资规模、货币供应量增长同经济增长、价格总水平预期目标相匹配。这充分体现了马克思内生货币思想对当下中国的实践意义。具体而言，第一，把社会融资规模指标排在货币供应量前面是因为宏观经济指标的因果顺序是从经济增长到社会融资规模再到货币供应量；第二，强调价格总水平是货币供应量增长的重要调控指标更是突显了内生货币流通规律的思想主旨。除此之外，马克思的内生货币思想由于能够揭示货币回流在社会再生产中的关键作用，故而有利于解释国际金融危机等重大经济事件，这对于宏观经济研究至关重要。

II. The Intellectual Origins of Marx’s Monetary Theory

二、马克思货币理论的思想源流

(A) Two Approaches to Monetary Theory

(一)两大货币理论的研究进路

In the mid-19th century, supporters of the quantity theory of money were known as the Currency School, and its opponents as the Banking School. The Currency School, represented by Lord Overstone, George Warde Norman, and Robert Torrens, firmly advocated a managed issuance of banknotes, linking the movement of currency and foreign exchange. The Bank of England and the 1844 Bank Charter Act both inclined toward the views of the Currency School. The Banking School, represented by Thomas Tooke and John Fullarton, emphasized various sources of credit, including quasi-money (bank passbooks, bills of exchange, etc.), arguing that as long as convertibility was maintained, there was no need for statutory control over currency. The real bills doctrine upheld by the Banking School was written into the 1913 Federal Reserve Act. The debate between the Currency School and the Banking School was in fact a continuation of the Bullionist controversy of the early 19th century. During the period 1797–1821, when the convertibility of the pound sterling into coin was suspended due to the Napoleonic Wars, a dispute arose between the Bullionists and the Anti-Bullionists. The Bullionist camp, represented by Henry Thornton, David Ricardo, and Thomas Robert Malthus, supported the Bullion Committee, while the Anti-Bullionist camp was represented by the British government and the Bank of England. The Bullionists argued that the excessive issuance of “inconvertible paper money” played a major role in the depreciation of the pound and inflation. Later, the Currency School essentially inherited the Bullionist position. Similarly, Tooke and the Banking School partially inherited the Anti-Bullionist position. The Anti-Bullionists sought to revive Adam Smith’s real bills doctrine and extend it to an inconvertible paper money system. In contrast, the Banking School held that the real bills principle could only apply to convertible paper money. Another view of the Anti-Bullionists was that paper money depreciation was not caused by excessive issuance of paper money but by a balance-of-payments deficit. This view is essentially similar to the monetary thought of the Banking School. Regarding one aspect of the divergence between the Currency School and the Banking School, Schumpeter pointed out, “(The so-called ‘Currency School’) did not regard the banknotes of the Bank of England as a credit instrument, nor as a means of payment originating from commodity trade, but as what they actually were at the time, namely a reserve currency; while the opponents of this measure (the so-called ‘Banking School’), especially its majority supporters on the continent, influenced by their own somewhat different banking practices, still adhered to the schema of commercial bills and banknotes. Therefore, in part, the entire controversy originated from factual issues, and when this factual issue was overlooked, it originated from misunderstandings.” [3]3 Joseph A. Schumpeter, *History of Economic Analysis*, trans. Zhu Yang et al. (Beijing: The Commercial Press, 1996), p. 410. Schumpeter clearly inclined toward the views of the Banking School, and he continued, “The central banking theory linking banknotes to commercial bills has a particularly strong vitality: after the 19th century, its influence dominated continental banking legislation, and it exerted a powerful influence on the 1913 Federal Reserve Act.” From this, it can be seen that if banknotes are regarded as legal tender as defined by the Currency School, then banknotes will follow the laws of the quantity theory characterized by a causal direction from money to prices; if banknotes are regarded as credit money as defined by the Banking School, then banknotes will follow the laws of endogenous theory characterized by a causal direction from prices to money, in accordance with the real bills principle and the law of reflux.

在19世纪中叶，货币数量论的支持者被称为通货学派，反对者被称为银行学派。通货学派，以奥弗斯顿勋爵(Lord Overstone)、乔治·沃德·诺曼(George Warde Norman)和罗伯特·托伦斯(Robert Torrens)为代表，坚决主张一种有管理的纸币发行，将通货和外汇的运动连接起来。英格兰银行和1844年《银行特许法》均倾向于通货学派的观点。银行学派，以托马斯·图克(Thomas Tooke)和约翰·富拉顿(John Fullarton)为代表，强调包括准货币(银行存折、汇票等)在内的信用的各种来源，认为只要维持可兑换性，就没有必要对通货进行法定的控制。银行学派秉持的真实票据学说被写入1913年《联邦储备法》。通货学派和银行学派的争论实际上是19世纪早期金块主义争论的延续。1797—1821年因拿破仑战争导致英镑停止铸币兑付期间出现了金块主义和反金块主义之争。金块主义阵营是以亨利·桑顿(Henry Thornton)、李嘉图和托马斯·罗伯特·马尔萨斯(Thomas Robert Malthus)为代表的拥护金块委员会一方，反金块主义阵营则以英国政府和英格兰银行为代表。金块主义认为“不兑现纸币”的超额发行对英镑贬值和通货膨胀起主要作用。后来，通货学派基本上继承了金块主义。类似地，图克和银行学派部分地继承了反金块主义。反金块主义试图恢复亚当·斯密(Adam Smith)的真实票据学说，并将其延伸到不兑现纸币体系中。与之不同的是，银行学派认为真实票据原理只能用于可兑现纸币。反金块主义的另一观点是纸币贬值并非纸币超额发行引起，而是国际收支逆差所致。该观点与银行学派的货币思想本质上相似。关于通货学派与银行学派之间分歧的一个方面，熊彼特指出，“(所谓‘通货学派’)不把英格兰银行的银行券看作是一种信用工具，不把它们看作是源于商品贸易的支付手段，而是将其看作是它们在当时实际上所是的那种东西，即一种储备货币；而这一措施的反对者(即所谓‘银行学派’),特别是它在大陆上的大多数拥护者，则受到自己眼前的有所不同的银行业务的影响，仍然坚持商业票据与银行券的图式。因此，部分地，整个争论便起源于事实问题，而当这个事实问题被忽略时，就起源于误解”。熊彼特显然倾向于银行学派的观点，他接着说道，“把银行券同商业票据联系起来的中央银行业理论具有特别强的生命力：十九世纪以后，它的影响支配着大陆上的银行立法，它对1913年的《联邦储备法》产生了强大的影响”。从中可以看出，如果将银行券视为通货学派所认定的法定货币，那么银行券将遵循从货币到价格的因果方向为特征的数量论规律；如果将银行券视为银行学派所认定的信用货币，那么银行券将按照真实票据原理和回流定律而遵循从价格到货币的因果方向为特征的内生论规律。

The quantity theory of money was the macroeconomics that existed before Keynes, existing in two essentially identical forms. The first form is the Cambridge equation of Alfred Marshall and Arthur C. Pigou, and the second form is the transaction equation of Irving Fisher. The former is a theory of the demand for money, also known as the Cambridge cash-balance approach. The latter takes an income form. Blaug summarized the characteristics of the quantity theory of money in three aspects: (1) the direction of causality must be from MV to PY; (2) with respect to changes in M, V and Y must appear constant; (3) the nominal money stock must be exogenously determined. [4]4 Mark Blaug, *Economic Theory in Retrospect*, 4th ed., trans. Shi Qizhi et al. (Shanghai: Shanghai People’s Publishing House, 2009), p. 17. From this, it is known that the quantity theory of money uses changes in the money stock M and the velocity of circulation of money V (total expenditure/money stock) to explain changes in nominal total expenditure PY (changes in nominal total expenditure reflect changes in both the real quantity of output Y and the price level P). In the long run, changes in the velocity of circulation of money are usually smaller than changes in the money stock, and the former changes are partly caused by previous changes in the latter. Therefore, total expenditure is largely determined by changes in the money stock. Regarding the interest rate adjustment mechanism, the quantity theory holds that the real interest rate is exogenous to the entire monetary system, and it essentially has the characteristic of a “natural rate of interest.” The natural rate of interest depends only on the real forces of productivity and thrift; similarly, the real interest rate (i.e., the marginal product of capital) is also determined solely by real factors. Milton Friedman, the founder of the modern quantity theory of money, argued that “the monetary authorities can only make the market interest rate lower than the natural rate through inflation.” [5]5 Milton Friedman, “The Role of Monetary Policy,” *American Economic Review* 58, no. 1 (1968): 1–17. This means that the reference frame for interest rates in the quantity theory is the real interest rate, and accordingly, the money interest rate is adjusted in accordance with the real interest rate.

货币数量论是凯恩斯之前存在的宏观经济学，它以两种本质上相同的形式存在。第一种形式是阿尔弗雷德·马歇尔(Alfred Marshall)和阿瑟·庇古(Arthur C. Pigou)的剑桥方程，第二种形式是欧文·费雪(Irving Fisher)的交易方程。前者是关于货币需求的理论，也被称为剑桥的现金余额法。后者采取的是收入形式。布劳格将货币数量论的特征概括为三个方面：(1)因果关系的方向必须是从MV到PY；(2)就M的变化来说，V和Y必须显示不变；(3)名义货币存量必须是外生决定的。由此可知，货币数量论用货币存量M和货币流通速度V(总支出/货币存量)的变动来解释名义总支出PY的变动(名义总支出的变动反映了产出的真实数量Y与物价水平P两者的变动)。从长期看，货币流通速度的变动通常小于货币存量的变动，前者的变动部分是由后者之前的变动引起的。因此，总支出大部分是由货币存量的变动决定的。对于利率调整机制，数量论认为真实利率外生于整个货币体系，它本质上具有“自然利率”的特征。自然利率只取决于生产率与储蓄的真实力量，类似地，真实利率(即资本的边际产出)也仅仅决定于真实因素。现代货币数量论的创立者米尔顿·弗里德曼(Milton Friedman)认为，“货币当局只有通过通货膨胀才能使市场利率低于自然利率”。这意味着，货币数量论的利率参照系是真实利率，相应地，货币利率是按照真实利率进行调整的。

Perhaps the most tenacious challenge to the reasoning of the quantity theory of money comes from post-Keynesian economists and the reflux school, which holds similar views on endogenous money. John Smithin summarizes the characteristics of the endogenous money theory in three aspects: (1) The basic idea of the endogenous theory is not to deny the connection between money growth and inflation, but to point out that the causal relationship in the quantity equation MV=PY runs from right to left, i.e., from PY to MV; (2) As long as banks restrict themselves to specific short-term commercial loans, or generally, only finance real productive activities, then inflationary over-issuance will not occur; (3) The inflation rate is determined by the comparison between the money interest rate required by the central bank and the rate of return that entrepreneurs can generate using borrowed funds, so the money supply itself adjusts endogenously according to the incentives provided by changes in the interest rate. Thus, unlike the quantity theory of money, the money interest rate is first determined in the financial system, and the rate of return on capital in the real economy must adjust according to the money interest rate. It should also be noted that the endogenous money theory emphasizes the flow of expenditure, rather than the money stock, as the constituent cause of economic change, while replacing the “direct mechanism” of the quantity theory of money with the law of reflux. Table 1 lists the respective characteristics of the quantity theory of money and the endogenous money theory.

对于货币数量论推理最顽强的挑战也许是来自后凯恩斯主义的经济学家们以及在内生货币上与之持相似观点的回流学派。约翰·史密森(John Smithin)将内生货币论的特征总结为三个方面：(1)内生论的基本思想并不是要否认货币增长与通货膨胀之间的联系，而是指出，货币数量方程MV=PY中的因果关系是从右边到左边，即从PY到MV；(2)只要银行限制其自身只进行特定的短期商业贷款，或一般地，只为真实的生产活动融资，那么，容易引起通货膨胀的过度发行就不会发生；(3)通货膨胀率是由中央银行所要求的货币利率与企业家利用借入资金可以产生的回报率之间的比较所决定的，所以，货币供给本身内生地根据利率变化所提供的激励来进行调整。由此可见，与货币数量论不同的是，货币利率首先在金融体系中被决定，真实经济中的资本回报率必须根据货币利率来调整。还需指出的是，内生货币论强调支出流而不是货币存量作为经济变化的构成原因，同时用回流定律代替货币数量论的“直接机制”。表1列出了货币数量论和内生货币论的各自特征。

(II) Why Is Ricardo Not a Precursor to Marx’s Monetary Theory?

(二)为何李嘉图不是马克思货币理论的前驱?

As an early master of the currency school, Ricardo firmly adhered to the strict quantity theory of money held by David Hume and other economists, believing that the general price level is closely related to changes in the quantity of money. In his article “On David Ricardo’s ‘On the Principles of Political Economy and Taxation’,” Marx cited Ricardo’s views on money and interest: “The rate of interest is ultimately always determined by the rate of profit. But it is also subject to various temporary changes. The prices of commodities vary with changes in the quantity and value of money.” Marx then commented on Ricardo’s view above: “In order to examine the rate of interest, Ricardo here, as usual, first lets [changes in] the quantity of money directly affect the [prices] of commodities.” It should be pointed out that, because Ricardo neglected the analysis of commodity value as a logical starting point, he regarded the value form as something external to the inherent attributes of commodities, which later led to the classical dichotomy: there is no necessary connection between money (nominal variables) and output (real variables). Correspondingly, monetary analysis and real analysis in economic theory are also dichotomous. The characteristic of Ricardo’s monetary theory is that it only focuses on the function of money as a medium of exchange while neglecting its function as a store of value. Thus, the quantity of money in circulation is spontaneously regulated by arbitrage activities arising from the inconsistency between the exchange value and the intrinsic value of currency, and then transmitted from the quantity of money to the general price level. No wonder Schumpeter evaluated Ricardo’s theory of money, credit, and banking as follows: “Ricardo made few contributions that were both correct and original,” and “in monetary theory, as in general theory, Ricardo’s doctrine took a roundabout path.”

作为通货学派的早期大师，李嘉图坚信大卫·休谟(David Hume)和其他一些经济学家持有的严格的货币数量论，认为一般价格水平同货币数量的变化紧密相关。马克思在《关于大·李嘉图〈政治经济学和赋税原理〉》一文中援引了李嘉图关于货币和利息的观点：“利息率归根到底总是由利润率决定的。但是它也会发生种种暂时的变动。商品的价格随着货币的数量和价值的变动而变动。”马克思接着对李嘉图的上述观点评论道，“李嘉图为了考察利息率，他在这里如往常一样，首先是让货币量[的变动]直接影响商品的[价格]”。需要指出的是，李嘉图由于忽视了作为逻辑起点的商品价值分析从而把价值形态看成商品内在属性以外的东西以致造成了后来的古典两分法：货币(名义变量)与产出(真实变量)之间，没有必然联系。相应地，经济理论中的货币分析与真实分析也是两分的。李嘉图货币理论的特征是只注重货币的交换媒介职能而忽略贮藏手段职能。这样，流通中的货币数量便由通货的交换价值和内在价值不相一致引发的套利行为自发地调节，再由货币数量传递到一般价格水平之中。难怪熊彼特对李嘉图关于货币、信用和银行业的理论作出这样的评价：“李嘉图没有作出多少既正确又富于创造性的贡献”,“在货币理论方面，也像在一般理论方面一样，李嘉图的学说走的是一条迂回道路”。

Marx constructed his own monetary theory from the debate between the currency school and the banking school. He insisted that the money supply responds to the demand for money, which applies to both commodity money (such as gold and coin) and credit money. In the “Chapter on Money” of the “Outlines of the Critique of Political Economy (Rough Draft of 1857–1858),” Marx pointed out: “Ricardo’s theory of money, with its false premises, has been completely overthrown. The false premise of this theory is that the bank controls the quantity of banknotes in circulation, and the quantity of the means of circulation determines prices, whereas the actual situation is the opposite: prices determine the quantity of the means of circulation.” In a letter to Friedrich Engels on February 3, 1851, Marx recognized: “The circulation of money increases only when business is developing rapidly and more currency is needed to carry out these operations. Otherwise, the excess money in circulation will flow back to the bank as deposits, in the form of maturing bills, etc. Therefore, currency here is not the cause. The increase in currency is ultimately the result of the growth of capital put into use, not the other way around.” From the history of Marx and Engels’ thought, it can be inferred that the classical Marxist writers had already outlined the theoretical framework of endogenous money, centered on the real bills doctrine and the law of reflux, at an earlier stage. Unlike Ricardo, who emphasized the function of currency as a means of purchase, Marx, by emphasizing the functions of currency as a store of value and a means of payment, established that the process of capital accumulation itself is the driving force affecting the quantity of money; that is, the real accumulation process of social reproduction determines the issuance and reflux of credit money.

马克思从通货学派和银行学派的论争中构建出自己的货币理论。他坚持认为货币供给是对货币需求做出的反应，这对商品货币(如黄金和铸币)和信用货币都适用。马克思在《政治经济学批判(1857—1858年草稿)》的“货币章”中指出，“李嘉图的货币理论及其错误的前提已经完全被推翻了。这种理论的错误前提是认为银行控制流通的银行券的数量，流通手段的数量决定价格，而实际情况正好相反，是价格决定流通手段的数量”。马克思在1851年2月3日写信给弗里德里希·恩格斯(Friedrich Engels)时便认识到，“只有在营业迅速发展，需要更多的通货来进行这些营业的情况下，货币流通才会增加。否则，流通中的过剩的货币就会以到期票据等形式作为存款等流回银行。因此，通货在这里不是原因。通货的增加归根到底是投入使用的资本的增长的结果，而不是相反”。从马克思恩格斯思想史中可以推断，马克思主义经典作家在较早时候便已勾勒出以真实票据原理和回流定律为主旨的内生货币理论架构。与李嘉图强调通货的购买手段职能不同，马克思通过强调通货的贮藏和支付手段职能确立了资本积累过程本身是影响货币数量的动力，即社会再生产的真实积累过程决定了信用货币的发放和回流。

The root of the divergence between Marx’s and Ricardo’s monetary theories lies in the question of which is primary: commodity circulation or money circulation. Clearly, Marx believed that commodity production and commodity circulation are primary and decisive, while money circulation is only derivative and therefore secondary. Marx questioned: “Starting from Ricardo, the theory of Mr. Lloyd and all others is as follows: Assume a pure metallic currency. If there is too much money in circulation here, prices will rise, and therefore commodity exports will decrease. Imports of foreign goods will increase. Imports will exceed exports. Thus, there will be an unfavorable balance of trade and an unfavorable exchange rate. Coin will be exported, the currency will decrease, commodity prices will fall, imports will decrease, exports will increase, money will flow in again; in short, the original equilibrium will be restored.” To this, Marx then gave his own conclusion: “I assert that, except in extremely special cases that never occur in practice but are theoretically conceivable, even under a pure metallic currency, the quantity of metallic money and its increase or decrease have no relation whatsoever to the inflow or outflow of precious metals, to the surplus or deficit in trade, or to the favorable or unfavorable exchange rate.” It can be seen from this that Marx regarded metallic money as endogenous money as well, which, like credit money, still follows the endogenous laws of money circulation.

马克思与李嘉图货币理论分歧的根源是对于商品流通和货币流通谁是第一性的问题。显然，马克思认为商品生产和商品流通是第一性并起决定作用的，而货币流通只是派生出来故而是第二性的。马克思质疑道：“从李嘉图开始，劳埃德先生和其他一切人的理论如下：假定实行纯金属通货。如果这里货币流通过多，物价就会上涨，因此商品出口就会减少。国外的商品进口就会增加。进口就要超过出口。因此，就出现贸易逆差和不利的汇率。就要输出硬币，通货就会减少，商品价格就会下降，进口就会减少，出口就会增加，货币就重新流入，总之，重新恢复原来的平衡。”对此，马克思接着给出了自己的结论：“我断定，除了在实践中永远不会出现但理论上完全可以设想的极其特殊的情况，即使在实行纯金属通货的情况下，金属货币的数量和它的增减，也同贵金属的流入或流出，同贸易的顺差或逆差，同汇率的有利或不利，没有任何关系。”从中可以看出，马克思将金属货币也视为内生货币，它同信用货币一样仍然遵循内生货币流通规律。

(III) Marx’s Favor for the Banking School

(三)马克思对银行学派的青睐

In the history of endogenous monetary theory, the main representatives of the banking school, Tooke and Fullarton, developed the reflux thesis first proposed by James Steuart and called it the law of reflux: the repayment of debts owed to the bank ensures that banknotes exceeding the needs of circulation can flow back to their issuer. In this regard, Marx once pointed out: “The second law discovered by Steuart is that circulation based on credit returns to its point of departure”; this doctrine was buried during the period dominated by Ricardo and the currency school: “After Hume’s theory or the abstract antithesis of mercantilism had thus been developed to its final conclusion, Steuart’s concrete conception of money was finally restored to its rights by Thomas Tooke.” In addition, the banking school also recognized the broad similarity between banknotes and bank deposits as different forms of credit money. Marx highly praised Steuart and the banking school, firmly insisting that the factors regulating credit money (and commodity money) are fundamentally different from those regulating fiat money: “As long as banknotes are convertible into money at any time, the bank issuing banknotes can never arbitrarily increase the number of banknotes in circulation. What is discussed here is not inconvertible paper money at all; inconvertible banknotes, only where they actually receive state credit support, as in present-day Russia, for example, become a general means of circulation. Therefore, such banknotes are subject to the laws of inconvertible state paper money.”

在内生货币学说史上，银行学派的主要代表图克和富拉顿把詹姆斯·斯图尔特(James Steuart)首创的回流论点加以发挥，并把它称为回流定律：清偿所欠银行的债务保证了超过流通所需要的银行券能够回流到它的发行人手中。对此，马克思曾指出，“斯图亚特所发现的第二条规律，是以信用为基础的流通回到自己的出发点”；这一学说在李嘉图和通货学派为主导的时期遭到埋没，“在休谟的理论或货币主义的抽象对立物这样发展到了它的最后的结论以后，斯图亚特关于货币的具体观念终于由托马斯·图克恢复了它的权利”。此外，银行学派还认识到作为信用货币不同形式的银行券和银行存款之间大体上的相似性。马克思对斯图尔特和银行学派给予了高度赞扬，坚决主张调节信用货币(以及商品货币)的因素与调节法定货币的因素本质上的不同，“只要银行券可以随时兑换货币，发行银行券的银行就决不能任意增加流通的银行券的数目。这里谈的根本不是不能兑现的纸币；不能兑现的银行券，只有在它实际上得到国家信用支持的地方，例如现在的俄国，才会成为一般的流通手段。因此，这种银行券受不能兑现的国家纸币的规律的支配”。

In Chapter 34 of Volume 3 of *Capital*, Marx critiques the monetary principles of Ricardo and the Currency School and their policy product, the Peel Bank Act: “Ricardo erroneously assumed that gold is merely coin, so that all imported gold increases the currency in circulation, thereby raising prices, and all exported gold reduces the coinage, thereby lowering prices. The assumption of this theory was here turned into an actual experiment: as much gold as existed was to circulate as coin. Lord Overstone (the banker Jones Loyd), Colonel Torrens, Norman, Clay, Arbuthnot, and a host of other writers in England known as the ‘Currency School’ not only preached this creed but, through Sir Robert Peel’s Bank Act of 1844 and 1845, made it the basis of English and Scottish banking legislation. After the greatest national-scale experiment, this creed suffered a shameful bankruptcy, both theoretically and practically, which can only be explained in the theory of credit.” From the final sentence of the above passage and the subsequent exposition, Marx’s critique of the Currency School was likely inspired by the Banking School, although the latter also had shortcomings: “Thomas Tooke, James Wilson (see *The Economist*, 1844–1847), and John Fullarton criticized this school [the Currency School—author’s note]. But their views on the nature of gold also had many defects, and they failed to clarify the relationship between money and capital.” In this regard, Chapter 28 of Volume 3 of *Capital* provides a detailed analysis of the Banking School’s failure to recognize the distinction between money as money and money as capital.

马克思在《资本论》第3卷第34章对李嘉图和通货学派的货币原理及其政策产物(《皮尔银行法》)进行了批判：“李嘉图错误地假定金只是铸币，因此所有输入的金都增加着流通中的货币，从而使价格上涨，所有输出的金都减少着铸币，从而使价格跌落。这个理论的假定在这里变成了实际的实验，有多少金存在就要使多少铸币流通。奥弗斯顿勋爵(银行家琼斯·劳埃德)、托伦斯上校、诺曼、克莱、阿巴思诺特以及一大批其他在英国以‘通货原理’派著称的著作家，不仅宣扬这种信条，而且通过1844年和1845年的罗伯特·皮尔爵士银行法把它变成英格兰和苏格兰银行立法的基础。这一信条在最大的、全国规模的实验之后，无论在理论上或实践上都遭到了可耻的破产，关于这点，在信用学说中才能加以说明。”从上述文字的最后一句以及接下来的表述来看，马克思对通货学派的批判很可能受到了银行学派的启发，虽然后者也有缺点：“对于这个学派(指通货学派——作者注),托马斯·图克、詹姆斯·威尔逊(见1844—1847年的《经济学家》)和约翰·富拉顿曾进行过批判。但是他们对于金的性质的看法也有很多缺点，并且没有弄清货币和资本的关系。”在这方面，《资本论》第3卷第28章对银行学派没有认识到作为货币的货币和作为资本的货币之间的区别进行了详细的分析。

Tooke’s monetary thought can be summarized in three aspects. First, he distinguished that banknotes (credit money) and legal tender follow different laws of monetary circulation: “The quantity of banknotes is the result of demand, not the cause of demand. On the other hand, government-issued inconvertible paper money, during periods of increased issuance, directly affects prices and incomes as an initial cause, constituting a new source of demand for money.” Second, he clarified the causal relationship between commodity prices and the quantity of money in the endogenous money doctrine: “Commodity prices are not determined by the quantity of money represented by the quantity of banknotes, nor by the quantity of the entire circulating medium; on the contrary, the quantity of the circulating medium is the result of prices.” Third, he argued that endogenous money does not generate inflation: “Convertibility into gold, combined with free competition in issuance, is sufficient to prevent the over-issuance of paper money; by paper money here, I mean banknotes circulating among the public.” Additionally, Tooke tested the endogenous money hypothesis using empirical data from the history of commodity prices, thereby largely overcoming Ricardo’s monetary theory. As Schumpeter commented, “What the analyst had to do was to carefully collect and discuss the relevant data year by year, even month by month, so that they could speak for themselves. Tooke did this well and achieved considerable success, which sufficed to render Ricardo’s theory invalid when applied to the dominant forms of the time.” Notably, we can also see a substantive intellectual connection between Marx’s monetary views and Tooke’s. At the theoretical hypothesis level, Marx pointed out, “If the velocity of circulation is given, the quantity of the means of circulation is determined solely by the prices of commodities. Hence, prices are high or low not because more or less money is in circulation; on the contrary, more or less money is in circulation because prices are high or low. This is one of the most important economic laws, and its detailed proof based on the history of commodity prices is perhaps the only contribution of English economics after Ricardo.” At the empirical verification level, Marx used historical experience to explain Tooke’s finding: after the discovery of gold in California in the late 1840s, the global price level increased far less than the increase in the global quantity of money, which precisely contradicted the predictions of the quantity theory of money.

图克的货币思想可以概括为三个方面。一是区分了银行券(信用货币)和法定货币遵循不同的货币流通规律，“银行券的数量是需求的结果，而不是需求的原因。另一方面，政府强制发行的纸币在增加发行的期间，却会作为一种初始的原因而直接对物价和收入产生影响，构成对货币新的需求源泉”。二是明确了内生货币学说的商品价格和货币数量之间的因果关系，“商品的价格不取决于由银行券的数量所表示的货币数量，也不取决于全部流通媒介的数量；与此相反，流通媒介的数量是物价的结果”。三是认为内生货币不会产生通货膨胀，“可兑换黄金外加发行的自由竞争，足以防止纸币的过量发行；这里所谓的纸币，指的是公众手中流通的银行券”。此外，图克还从商品价格史的经验数据层面对内生货币假说进行了检验，从而在很大程度上压倒了李嘉图的货币理论。正如熊彼特所评论的，“分析家要做的事情是，年复一年地，甚至月复一月地仔细收集并讨论有关的资料，使之能自行说明问题。图克在这方面做得很好，并且获得了很大程度的成功，这就足以使李嘉图的理论在应用于当时占主导地位的形式时变得无效”。引人注意的是，我们还可以看到马克思的货币观点与图克存在本质上的思想衔接。在理论假说层面，马克思指出，“如果流通速度已定，流通手段量就只是决定于商品的价格。因此，价格的高或低，不是因为有较多或较少的货币在流通，相反，有较多或较少的货币在流通，倒是因为价格高或低。这是最重要的经济规律之一，根据商品价格史对这个规律作详细的证明，也许是李嘉图以后的英国经济学的唯一贡献”。在经验验证层面，马克思用历史经验来解释图克的发现：在19世纪40年代末加利福尼亚发现黄金之后，全球价格水平的增长比全球货币数量的增长要少很多，而这恰恰有悖于货币数量论的预测。

Murray Rothbard summarized Fullarton’s main contributions to the Banking School in two aspects. First, he expounded the real bills doctrine: as long as banknotes are issued in the process of granting short-term self-liquidating loans, and these loans are backed by inventories of commodities in production, then banks will never over-issue banknotes. In other words, any bank that adheres to short-term real bills can issue a quantity of banknotes that exactly equals the quantity the public is willing to accept. Second, he named the law of reflux, by which banknotes return to the issuing bank: specifically, because banknotes are merely loans and must ultimately be repaid to their issuer, they can hardly increase the money supply. Like Fullarton, Marx placed trust in the law of reflux based on the real bills doctrine: “The quantity of banknotes in circulation is regulated by the needs of transactions, and every superfluous banknote immediately returns to its issuer.” It is no wonder that Marx twice praised Fullarton in *Capital* as “the most outstanding writer on monetary questions” and “the most outstanding bourgeois economist.”

默里·罗斯巴德(Murray Rothbard)将富拉顿对银行学派的主要贡献总结为两个方面。一是阐述了真实票据原理(real bills doctrine),即只要银行券是在发放自动清偿的短期贷款过程中发行的，并且这些贷款都有处于生产中的商品存货与之相对应，那么银行就永远不会过度发行银行券。换言之，任何银行只要坚守短期真实票据，那么它发行的银行券数量就可以准确无误地等于公众愿意接受的数量。二是命名了银行券回归银行的回流定律(law of reflux),具体地说，银行券由于仅仅是贷款因而终究是要归还给发行者的，所以难以增加货币供给。像富拉顿一样，马克思给予根据真实票据原理的回流定律以信任：“流通的银行券的数量是按照交易的需要来调节的，并且每一张多余的银行券都会立即回到它的发行者那里去。”难怪马克思在《资本论》中曾两次称赞富拉顿是“最优秀的货币问题著作家”“最优秀的资产阶级经济学家”。

III. The Types of Money in Marx’s Era and Their Historical Specificity

三、马克思时代的货币类型及其历史特性

(A) Metallic Money

(一)金属货币

Metallic money evolved from earlier commodity money, so let us first examine commodity money. As is well known, Marx held that money is the universal equivalent and a special commodity used to represent value in the spontaneous process of commodity exchange. Archaeological evidence and surviving evidence from primitive tribes indicate that barter—the direct exchange of one set of commodities for another—was the earliest form of exchange. In barter, one commodity could be directly exchanged for many other commodities. When exchange gradually expanded and became regular, money emerged naturally. As Marx put it, “the simple commodity form is the embryo of the money form.” [14]14 Karl Marx, *Capital*, Vol. 1, Chapter 1, Section 3. When exchange developed to a certain point, a particular commodity (such as salt) was socially selected as a reference point in the specific cycle of these exchanges, and salt thus became local commodity money. On this, Marx noted: “With the development of commodity exchange, this form becomes fixed only on certain special kinds of commodities, or crystallizes into the money form. Which commodity it becomes fixed on is initially accidental.” [15]15 Ibid. Thus, the objective fact that barter was the earliest form of exchange confirms that commodity money was the earliest form of money. It is certain that commodity money, as the universal equivalent serving as a medium of circulation, greatly improved the efficiency of barter. Cowrie shells are the most well-known and widely circulated monetary entity in early monetary history. The ancient Chinese character for “currency” (币) is a pictograph of a cowrie shell. Cowrie shells were used as a means of payment in India, the Middle East, and China for several millennia BCE. Although transportability, preservability, and divisibility were all important in the selection of commodity money, what was more important was the unique social character of money—that is, “it is society that makes these commodities as money more worth possessing, so they are used as money.” [16]16 Marx, *A Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy*, Chapter 2. Interestingly and thought-provokingly, tobacco has been used as a primary currency in multiple historical periods and multiple countries. According to the investigation of Milton Friedman and Rose D. Friedman, “for nearly two centuries, and even for many years after the end of the American Revolution, tobacco was the principal money in Virginia and the surrounding colonies. Colonists used it to buy food, clothing, pay taxes—even as a bride-price.” [17]17 Milton Friedman and Rose D. Friedman, *Free to Choose*, Chapter 9. In particular, “during World War II, in German and Japanese concentration camps, tobacco was again widely used as a medium of exchange. After World War II, the occupation authorities imposed a maximum price on the German legal tender far below its actual value, with the result that the German legal tender lost its function. People traded by barter, using cigarettes as a medium for small transactions and French brandy as a medium for large transactions—undoubtedly, these two things are the most liquid money we know.” [18]18 Ibid.

金属货币是由早期的商品货币演化而来的，所以我们先来考察一下商品货币。众所周知，马克思认为货币是一般等价物，并且是商品自发交换过程中用来代表价值的一种特殊商品。考古学证据和原始部落留存至今的支持性证据表明，物物交换，即一系列商品与另一系列商品的直接交换，是最早的交换形式。在物物交换中，一种商品可以直接与其他许多种商品相交换。当交换的范围逐渐扩展并规律性地出现时，货币便自然而然地产生了。正如马克思所言，“简单的商品形式是货币形式的胚胎”。当交换发展到某个点时，某个特定商品(比如盐)在这些交换的特定循环过程中，恰好被社会选为参照物，于是盐便成了当地的商品货币。对此，马克思指出：“随着商品交换的发展，这种形式就只是固定在某些特殊种类的商品上，或者说结晶为货币形式。它究竟固定在哪一种商品上，最初是偶然的。”由此可见，物物交换是最早的交换形式这一客观事实印证了商品货币是最早的货币形态。可以肯定，作为一般等价物的商品货币充当流通手段能够极大地提高物物交换的效率。贝壳是在早期货币历史中最广为人知和传播最广的货币实体。古汉语中的“币”字就是贝壳的象形文字。贝壳在公元前数千年就在印度、中东和中国被当作支付工具来使用。尽管在商品货币的选择过程中，可运输性、可保存性和可分割性都很重要，但更重要的是货币所具有的独特的社会性，即“是社会使这些作为货币的商品更值得被拥有，于是它们被当成货币”。有趣和耐人寻味的是，烟草在多个历史阶段和多个国家都曾被当作主要货币来使用。据米尔顿·弗里德曼和罗丝·弗里德曼(Rose D. Friedman)的考察，“在近两个世纪的时间里，甚至是美国独立战争结束后的很多年，烟草一直是弗吉尼亚州及其周边殖民地的主要货币。殖民者用它购买食物、衣物、纳税——甚至是做彩礼”。特别是，“第二次世界大战期间，在德国和日本的集中营里，烟草作为交易媒介，再次被广泛使用。第二次世界大战后，占领军当局对德国的法定货币规定了远远低于其实际价值的最高限价，结果使德国的法定货币丧失了作用。人们采用以物易物的方式做交易，小额交易用香烟作为媒介，大额交易用法国白兰地酒作为媒介——无疑，这两种东西是我们所知道流通性最强的货币”。

The issuance and circulation of primitive commodity money were confined to small-scale tribes or communities among acquaintances, and thus could not adapt to the development of productive forces and the commodity economy. By the 19th century, commodity money had almost entirely evolved into metals such as gold and silver. The reason metallic money could replace other commodity money was that the natural attributes of precious metals were superior to all other commodities and most suitable for bearing the functions of money. Marx explained the advantages of precious metals in two aspects. First, homogeneity and purity. Regarding the former, “precious metals, being physically uniform, have identical quantities that are completely identical, so there is no reason to consider one part better than another. This is not the case with equal quantities of livestock or grain.” [19]19 Marx, *A Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy*, Chapter 2. Regarding the latter, gold in particular is more suitable as metallic money: “Similarly, gold is seen to be purer than all other metals: it occurs naturally in crystalline form, appears alone; is separated from ‘common objects,’ and rarely fuses with other objects (except silver). Gold is ‘separate, individualized.’” [20]20 Ibid. Second, malleability and durability. Regarding the former, “gold and silver can always be melted down and returned to a pure metallic state, and can likewise be transformed from that state into any other state. Therefore, unlike other commodities, gold and silver are not bound to the specific use form they have assumed. They can be transformed from bar form into coin form, and back again, without losing their value as raw material.” [21]21 Ibid. Regarding the latter, “as material for hoarding, gold and silver are not easily damaged, are durable, do not oxidize in air (‘treasure that neither moth nor rust consumes’), are difficult to dissolve, and especially gold, except in free chlorine (aqua regia, a mixture of nitric and hydrochloric acids), does not dissolve in other acids.” [22]22 Ibid. In view of this, Marx arrived at his famous dictum: “‘Gold and silver are not naturally money, but money is naturally gold and silver’—this statement is proven by the natural attributes of gold and silver being suited to the function of money.” [23]23 Marx, *Capital*, Vol. 1, Chapter 2.

原始商品货币的发行和流通只局限于熟人之间的小范围部落或社区内，因而不适应生产力的提高和商品经济的发展。到19世纪，商品货币几乎全部演进到金银这样的金属。金属货币之所以能够取代其他商品货币是因为贵金属的自然属性优越于所有其他商品而最适合成为货币职能的承担者。马克思将贵金属的优势解释为两个方面。一是同质性和纯净性。对于前者，“贵金属就其物理性质来说是同一的，所以它们相同的量必定是完全相同的，以致没有任何根据认为一部分比另一部分好。而同量牲畜和同量谷物的情况就不是这样”；就后者而言，尤其是金，更加适合充当金属货币，“同样，人们见到的金比其他一切金属都纯：呈天然的晶体，单独出现；同‘常见的物体相分离’,很少同别的物体(银除外)相熔合。金是‘单独的，个体化的’”。二是可塑性和耐久性。对于前者，“金银总是能通过熔化重新化为纯金属状态，并且同样能够从这种状态化为任何别的状态，因此，金银不像其他商品那样，被束缚在它们所取得的一定的使用形式上。金银能够从条块形式转变为铸币等形式，并且可以变回来，而不丧失它们作为原料的价值”；对于后者，“作为货币贮藏的材料，金银不易损坏，耐久，在空气中不氧化(‘既不蛀又不锈的财宝’),难溶解，特别是金，除游离氯(王水，硝酸和盐酸的混合物)外不溶解于其他酸类”。有鉴于此，马克思得出了那句著名的论断：“‘金银天然不是货币，但货币天然是金银’,这句话已为金银的自然属性适于担任货币的职能而得到证明。”

The invention of coinage brought significant convenience to human society. Marx pointed out, “Coin is a gold ingot that, with a certain pattern and shape, indicates that it contains the weight of gold referred to by monetary names such as pound, shilling, etc.” [24]24 Marx, *A Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy*, Chapter 2. As for metallic money, the difference between gold coin and gold bullion is minimal: “Gold coin can be thrown into the melting pot and turned back into pure gold; conversely, gold bullion need only be sent to the mint to assume coin form. The transition from one form to another, and back again, appears to be a purely technical operation.” [25]25 Ibid. Monetary history shows that private coinage preceded state coinage. The earliest coins seem to have been issued by merchants. Later, an alternative solution to the problem of verifying the authenticity and fineness of money was for the state to take over the function of coinage. It should be noted that Marx regarded metallic money as the foundation of credit money: “Money—money in the form of precious metals—remains the foundation, from which the credit system, by its very nature, can never detach itself.” [26]26 Marx, *Capital*, Vol. 3, Chapter 36. On this, Marx also made a vivid analogy: “Monetarism is essentially Catholic; creditism is essentially Christian. … Just as Christianity did not liberate itself from the Catholic foundation, so creditism did not liberate itself from the monetarist foundation.” [27]27 Ibid. In this sense, metallic money can not only explain the spontaneous emergence of credit money in the capitalist economy but also use the abstract labor congealed in the process of commodity production as the basis of the exchange value of credit money, thus not contradicting the labor theory of value. It should be noted that the law of monetary circulation under the gold standard mainly follows the endogenous money theory of the causal sequence from economic activity to money. Even Milton Friedman, the proponent of the modern quantity theory of money, after examining the monetary history of the United States from 1867 to 1960, had to admit: “Although the influence from money to economic activity is dominant, there is also a significant reverse influence, especially in short-term fluctuations associated with the business cycle. The cyclical pattern of the deposit-reserve ratio is one example. The resumption of specie payments and the silver period, the inflation of 1919, and the economic depression of 1929–1933 all clearly reflect the reaction of economic activity on other aspects of money.” [28]28 Milton Friedman and Anna J. Schwartz, *A Monetary History of the United States, 1867–1960*, Chapter 13.

铸币的发明给人类社会带来了显著的便利。马克思指出，“铸币是这样的金块，它以一定的花纹和形状表示它含有镑、先令等货币计算名称所指的金的重量”；就金属货币而言，金铸币和金块的差别甚微，“金铸币可以投进熔炉，再变成纯粹的金，反过来，金块只要送到造币局去，就能取得铸币形式。从一种形状转到另一种形状，又从另一种形状回到原来的形状，看来是一种纯粹技术性的操作”。货币史表明，先有私人铸币，后有国家铸币。最早的铸币似乎是由商人发行的。后来，对货币真伪成色确认问题的一个替代性解决方案是由国家接管铸币的职能。需要指出的是，马克思认为金属货币是信用货币的基础：“货币——贵金属形式的货币——仍然是基础，信用制度按其本性来说永远不能脱离这个基础。”对此，马克思还做了个形象的比喻：“货币主义本质上是天主教的；信用主义本质上是基督教的。……正如基督教没有从天主教的基础上解放出来一样，信用主义也没有从货币主义的基础上解放出来。”在这种意义上，金属货币不仅可以解释资本主义经济中信用货币的自发产生，而且能用在商品生产过程中凝结的抽象劳动作为信用货币交换价值的基础，从而不与劳动价值论相矛盾。需要指出的是，金本位制下的货币流通规律主要遵循从经济活动到货币这一因果顺序的内生货币论。就连现代货币数量论的提出者米尔顿·弗里德曼在对1867—1960年美国货币史考察后也不得不承认：“尽管从货币到经济活动这一方向的影响是主要的，但同时也显著存在反向的影响，尤其是在与商业周期相联系的短期变动中。存款-准备金比率的周期模式就是一个例子。铸币支付的恢复及白银时期、1919年的通货膨胀，以及1929—1933年的经济衰退，都清楚地反映了经济活动对货币其他方面的反作用。”

(II) Credit Money

(二)信用货币

“In the early stages of capitalist production, credit money played little or no role.” This means that credit money only emerged after the social production process had entered a higher stage. The reason credit money, as one of the modern forms of money, could replace metallic money is that the latter has its own shortcomings: first, it requires the use of scarce resources to extract it from underground; second, it can suddenly become abundant merely due to the accidental discovery of mineral deposits. Beyond this, Marx also believed that, compared with metallic money, credit money can avoid resource waste and increase real wealth: “The total quantity of labour-power and social means of production annually expended on the production of gold and silver as instruments of circulation constitutes a huge item of faux frais for the capitalist mode of production, and indeed for any mode of production based on commodity production. This item of faux frais correspondingly deprives society of a certain quantity of possible additional means of production and consumption, i.e., a certain quantity of real wealth. As long as the scale of production remains unchanged or the degree of its expansion remains constant, the productivity of social labour increases whenever the cost of this expensive instrument of circulation is reduced. Thus, whenever the auxiliary instruments that develop together with the credit system produce this effect, they directly increase capitalist wealth.” From this it can also be seen that credit money in Marx’s era could compensate for the insufficient supply of metallic money needed to match expanded reproduction. Once lending transactions evolved, metallic money was gradually replaced by credit money.

“在资本主义生产的初期，信用货币还不起作用或只起很小的作用。”这意味着，信用货币是在社会生产过程进入较高阶段以后才出现的。作为现代货币形式之一的信用货币之所以能够取代金属货币是因为后者有其自身的缺点：一是需要动用稀缺资源来从地下开采它，二是会仅仅由于偶然发现矿藏而突然变得丰富起来。除此之外，马克思还认为，相比金属货币，信用货币可以避免资源浪费和增加实际财富，“每年耗费在金银这种流通工具的生产上的劳动力和社会生产资料的总量，对于资本主义生产方式，总之，对于以商品生产为基础的生产方式来说，是一项巨大的非生产费用。这种非生产费用，会相应地使一定量可能的追加生产资料和消费资料，即一定量实际财富，不能供社会利用。在生产规模不变或者生产扩大程度不变时，只要这个昂贵的流通机器的费用减少，社会劳动的生产力就会提高。所以，只要那些和信用制度一起发展的辅助工具发生这种作用，它们就会直接增加资本主义的财富”。从中还可以看出，马克思时代的信用货币能够弥补与扩大再生产相匹配的金属货币供给不足问题。当借贷交易演化出来后，金属货币逐渐被信用货币所取代。

Credit money originated in the early 17th century from receipts issued by London goldsmiths to certify deposits of a certain quantity of metallic money. These deposits could only be withdrawn by the designated person. By 1670, the phrase “or bearer” was generally added next to the name of the original depositor, so that whoever held the deposit receipt could use it as a means of payment. As Marx put it, “Credit money springs directly from the function of money as a means of payment. Bonds obtained for the sale of commodities circulate themselves as means of payment by the transfer of these claims. On the other hand, the function of money as a means of payment expands with the expansion of credit business. Money as a means of payment acquires its own characteristic forms of existence, and with these forms it occupies the field of large-scale transactions, while gold and silver coin is mainly crowded into the sphere of small-scale trade.” In 1704, the validity of deposit receipts as means of payment was written into law. This meant that receipts originally issued by safekeeping banks for the security of depositors’ gold and silver began to be used for payment. After starting to function as instruments of circulation, these receipts became banknotes. For example, the Bank of England (a private for-profit banking company established in London in 1694) issued its own banknotes. It should be noted that all these banknotes were convertible tokens; as Marx stated, “A banknote is nothing but a draft on a banker, payable to bearer at any time, which the banker uses to replace private drafts. … The principal banks that issue banknotes, as a peculiar mixture of national bank and private bank, in fact have the credit of the state behind them, and their banknotes are legal tender to varying degrees.” Credit money in Marx’s era included banknotes, bills of exchange, cheques, etc. In England in 1839, bills of exchange alone accounted for more than half of the total currency in circulation. From the origin and development of credit money, its essence is a form of convertible deposit money or book-entry money. In other words, credit money is a public double-entry bookkeeping system that records the right to exchange for the surplus products of a market-based society.

信用货币起源于17世纪初伦敦金匠开具收据以证明一定量金属货币的存款。这些存款只能由指定的专人兑取。到1670年，一般在初始存款所有者名字的旁边会加注“或持票人”字样，以使无论是谁持有存款收据，其都能作为支付手段被使用。就像马克思所说的，“信用货币是直接从货币作为支付手段的职能中产生的。由出售商品得到的债券本身又因债权的转移而流通。另一方面，随着信用事业的扩大，货币作为支付手段的职能也在扩大。作为支付手段的货币取得了它特有的各种存在形式，并以这些形式占据了大规模交易的领域，而金银铸币则主要被挤到小额贸易的领域中去”。1704年，存款收据作为支付手段的有效性被写入法规之中。这使得保管银行最初为了存款人所存金银的安全之故而开具的收据开始用于支付。在开始执行流通工具的职能后，这些收据就变为银行券。例如，英格兰银行(一家于1694年在伦敦成立的私人营利性银行公司)便发行了它自己的银行券。需要指出，所有这些银行券都是可兑换代币，正如马克思所言，“银行券无非是向银行家签发的、持票人随时可以兑现的、由银行家用来代替私人汇票的一种汇票。……发行银行券的主要银行，作为国家银行和私人银行之间的奇特的混合物，事实上有国家的信用作为后盾，它们的银行券在不同程度上是合法的支付手段”。马克思时代的信用货币包括银行券、汇票、支票等，在1839年的英国，仅汇票就占到通货总量的一半以上。从信用货币的起源和发展看，其本质是一种可以兑现的存款货币或记账货币。换言之，信用货币是记录市场化社会剩余产品兑换权的公共复式簿记。

Paul A. Samuelson and William Nordhaus list some modern forms of credit money: “For example, some financial institutions now link checking accounts to savings accounts, or even to certain stock securities accounts, allowing consumers to write checks based on the value of the stocks they own. Traveler’s cheques can be used in many transactions and are also counted in the money supply. Many companies provide ‘smart cards’; people simply swipe the card over an electronic reader for small payments.” The endogenous mechanism of credit money is as follows: first, banks extend loans to enterprises, forming enterprise deposit money; then, through real transactions of enterprise production and individual consumption, the market induces the transfer and circulation of deposit money between enterprises and individuals. It should be noted that, unlike the free circulation (non-compulsory) and convertibility of credit money, fiat money (state-issued paper money) possesses both compulsory circulation and inconvertibility. Regarding compulsory circulation, Marx explains it thus: “Since paper money has the power of forced circulation, no one can prevent the state from arbitrarily stuffing large quantities of it into circulation and stamping it with any arbitrary coin names, such as £1, £5, £20”; therefore, “the proportion in which value symbols—whether paper or depreciated gold or silver—represent the weight of gold and silver as determined by the mint price depends not on the substance of these symbols themselves, but on their quantity in circulation.” This is the theoretical foundation for fiat money following the quantity theory of money. Inconvertibility means that the state does not set a fixed price for exchanging fiat money for gold and silver; thus, the only means for economic agents to obtain gold and silver through fiat money is to buy and sell gold and silver at market prices. As Marx clearly points out, the quantity of fiat money is subjectively determined by the monetary authorities and is not influenced by the exchange process organically connected to it.

保罗·萨缪尔森(Paul A. Samuelson)和威廉·诺德豪斯(William Nordhaus)列举了信用货币的一些现代形式：“例如，一些金融机构现在将支票账户同储蓄账户，甚至同某一股票证券账户相联系，允许消费者按照他们所拥有的股票的价值开出支票。旅行支票可以在许多交易中使用，也被算在货币供给中。许多公司提供‘智能卡’,人们在小额付款时只需将卡在电子阅读机上轻轻划一下即可。”信用货币的内生机理是：首先银行向企业贷款形成企业的存款货币，然后市场再通过企业生产和个人消费的真实交易引致存款货币在企业与个人之间的转移和流通。需要指出的是，与信用货币的自由流通(非强制性)和可兑换性不同，法定货币(国家纸币)同时具有强制流通和不可兑换性。对于强制流通，马克思是这样解释的：“因为纸票有强制通用的效力，所以谁也不能阻止国家任意把大量纸票硬塞到流通中去，并在它们上面印上任意的铸币名称，如一镑、五镑、二十镑”；因此“价值符号——不论是纸或降低了成色的金银——按什么比例代表按造币局价格计算的金银重量，不是决定于这些符号本身的物质，而是决定于它们在流通中的数量”。这是法定货币遵循货币数量论的理论基石。不可兑换性是指国家不制定法定货币兑换金银的规定价格，这样，经济主体通过法定货币获取金银的手段，只能是按照市场价格买卖金银。正如马克思明确指出的，法定货币的数量是由货币当局主观地决定的，不受与之有机相连的交换过程的影响。

With the arrival of credit money comes the emergence of a hierarchy of money. It is certain that, with respect to higher-level forms of money, gold or some other metallic money occupies the highest level. The banknotes issued by an individual bank can perform the monetary functions of means of purchase and means of payment locally because the local people believe that these banknotes can be exchanged by the issuing bank for some kind of money with higher authority. In this regard, in terms of authority and universality, the credit rating of gold is higher than that of Bank of England banknotes, the credit rating of Bank of England banknotes is higher than that of London private bank notes, and the credit rating of London private bank notes is higher than that of country bank notes. Marx discovered that recurrent capitalist economic crises trigger a flight of people’s trust from one form of money to another: from local banknotes to city banknotes, from Bank of England banknotes to national currency, and then to gold. As Roger E. Backhouse put it, “When a crisis occurs, country banks (located outside London and generally smaller) experience runs, turn to their London correspondents for help, and demand liquid assets from the Bank of England. The Bank of England therefore stands at the apex of the credit pyramid.” In summary, economic crises cause people’s preferences for money to regress toward forms of money with a higher level of authority. On this, Marx gave a famous judgment in *Capital*: “In a crisis, credit-money suddenly changes into hard cash.” [30]30 Karl Marx, *Capital*, Vol. 3, Chapter 34, “The Currency Principle and the English Bank Legislation of 1844.” The phrase “hard cash” translates Marx’s “Geld” (money) in the context of a crisis, emphasizing the sudden demand for metallic money. The specific reason is that “it is precisely the trust in the social character of production that makes the money-form of products appear as something merely evanescent and ideal, as something purely imaginary. But as soon as credit is shaken – and this phase always appears in the modern industrial cycle – all real wealth is required to be actually and suddenly transformed into money, into gold and silver”; therefore, “in a crisis, the demand arises that all bills, securities, and commodities should be simultaneously convertible into bank money, and all bank money again simultaneously convertible into gold.” [31]31 Karl Marx, *Capital*, Vol. 3, Chapter 30, “The Role of Credit in Capitalist Production.” The first quotation is from Chapter 34; the second is a paraphrase of the argument in Chapter 30. Empirical evidence also shows that, as the Great Depression of 1929 persisted, people in Europe also became suspicious of paper money, so they began to hoard gold. It is estimated that about 70% of the gold mined between 1931 and 1936 was purchased by individuals or private banks. Thus, Marx discovered the phenomenon of the “liquidity trap” earlier than Keynes, and enriched the internal mechanism of this phenomenon from the perspective of the hierarchy of authority between metallic money and credit money and the reversal of people’s preferences for money during crises.

伴随信用货币到来的是货币等级的出现。可以肯定，就更高级别的货币形式而言，黄金或其他一些金属货币是最高级别的。个体银行发行的银行券之所以能在当地执行购买手段和支付手段的货币职能，是因为当地人相信这些银行券能够被发行银行兑换为具有更高权威性的某种货币。在这方面，就权威性和通用性而言，黄金的信用等级要高于英格兰银行的银行券，英格兰银行所发银行券的信用等级要高于伦敦私人银行的银行券，伦敦私人银行所发银行券的信用等级要高于乡村银行的银行券。马克思发现，反复发生的资本主义经济危机会触发人们的信赖从一种货币形式逃离到另一种货币形式：从当地银行券到城市银行券，从英格兰银行的银行券到国家货币，再到黄金。就像罗杰·巴克豪斯(Roger E. Backhouse)所说的，“发生危机的时候，乡村的银行(地处伦敦之外，一般较小)会经历挤兑风潮，会向伦敦的同行求援，还会向英格兰银行索要流动性资产。因此英格兰银行是站在信用金字塔的塔尖”。概言之，经济危机使人们对货币的偏好向权威等级更高的货币形式回归。对此，马克思在《资本论》中给出了著名论断：“在危机中，信用主义会突然转变成货币主义。”具体原因在于，“正是由于对生产社会性质的信任，才使得产品的货币形式表现为某种转瞬即逝的和观念的东西，表现为单纯想象的东西。但是，一当信用发生动摇——而这个阶段总是必然地在现代产业周期中出现——,一切现实的财富就都会要求现实地、突然地转化为货币，转化为金和银”；因此，“在危机中，会出现这样的要求：所有的票据、有价证券和商品应该能立即同时兑换成银行货币，而所有的银行货币又应该能立即同时再兑换成金”。经验证据也表明，随着1929年大萧条的持续，欧洲的人们也对纸币变得心存疑虑，所以他们开始囤积黄金。据估计，1931—1936年开采的黄金大约有70%被个人或者私人银行购买。由此可见，马克思早于凯恩斯对“流动性陷阱”现象有 所发现，并从金属货币和信用货币的权威等级以及人们在危机中会出现对货币的偏好逆转层面丰富了这一现象的内在机理。

(3) Is the Pound Sterling Legal Tender?

(三)英镑是法定货币吗?

The pound sterling was born at the time of the establishment of the Bank of England, initially as a banknote recording gold. As is well known, since its establishment in 1694, the Bank of England has been the pillar of the British banking system. It obtained a large number of monopoly privileges from the British government. For example, the government did not allow other joint-stock banks with more than six partners to issue banknotes until the Bank Charter Act of 1833. As a result, by the end of the 18th century, the Bank of England acted as the engine for the issuance of the early pound sterling (Bank of England banknotes). Thereafter, a large number of smaller partnership banks (country banks) used pound sterling notes as their own reserves and could gradually increase the issuance of their own banknotes. The French Revolutionary and Napoleonic Wars (1793–1815) were the historical background for the suspension of specie payments by the pound sterling from 1797 to 1821. In this regard, the suspension of payments by the pound sterling in 1797 was actually to facilitate the British government’s financing of the war. Britain adopted a single gold standard in 1816, and subsequently, as a result of Peel’s Act of 1819, restored the convertibility of the pound sterling into coin on the basis of the gold standard on May 1, 1821. Undoubtedly, this was a key factor in making gold the world’s major metallic money. As Albert Feavearyear said, Peel’s Act made the basis of the pound sterling closer to a fully automatic metallic standard than at any other time. Therefore, the gold standard was formally established in 1821 with the restoration of coin convertibility of the pound sterling and lasted until 1914, a period of 93 years.

英镑诞生于英格兰银行成立之时，最初只是一种记录黄金的银行券。众所周知，英格兰银行自1694年成立以来一直是英国银行体系的支柱。它从英国政府那里获得了大量的垄断特权。例如，政府直到1833年《银行特许法》颁布之前始终不允许其他合伙人超过6人的股份制银行发行银行券。结果到18世纪末期，英格兰银行充当了早期英镑(英格兰银行的银行券)发行的发动机。在此之后，大量规模较小的合伙银行(乡村银行)利用英镑纸币作为自己的准备金，也可以逐步增发他们自己的银行券。1793—1815年反法同盟战争是英镑于1797—1821年终止铸币兑付的历史背景。在这方面，1797年英镑停止兑付实际上是英国政府为了给战争融资创造便利。英国在1816年采用了单一金本位制，随后作为1819年《皮尔法案》(Peel's Act)的结果，又在1821年5月1日在金本位基础上恢复了英镑与硬币的兑换，无疑，这是使黄金成为世界主要金属货币的关键因素。正如艾伯特·费维耶(Albert Feavearyear)所说，《皮尔法案》使英镑所依恃的基础比以往任何其他时候都更接近于完全的自动调节的金属本位制。因此，金本位制在1821年随着英镑恢复硬币兑付而正式建立，一直持续到1914年，历经93年。

Marx settled permanently in England after August 1849 (until his death in 1883). William Stanley Jevons (1835–1882), a famous Western economist of the same era and country as Marx, highly endorsed Britain’s adoption of the single gold standard in 1875. He believed that the convenience of the single gold standard had a very real and definite character; without the use of paper money, the quantity of money was reduced to a minimum; since the issuance of the new sovereigns, the simplicity and convenience of this system had been welcomed in Britain for half a century. The success of the gold standard in Britain was, on the one hand, because the new technology used in coinage made it difficult for counterfeiters to easily imitate gold coins and silver token coins; on the other hand, because the gold standard was also most closely integrated with British commercial and financial habits. From the establishment of the Bank of England in 1694 to before the outbreak of the First World War in 1914, the evolution of the pound sterling can be summarized as follows: from 1694 to 1797, the early pound sterling was a banknote issued by the Bank of England, a convertible paper money similar to the early 20th-century American gold certificate; from 1797 to 1811, the pound sterling became informal legal tender; from 1812 to 1821, the pound sterling was formally designated as legal tender; from 1821 to 1914, the pound sterling reverted to the credit money of the 1694–1797 period, only with a stronger legal character than before.

马克思于1849年8月以后一直定居在英国(直至他去世的1883年)。威廉·斯坦利·杰文斯(William Stanley Jevons, 1835—1882)是与马克思处于同一时代同一国家的西方著名经济学家，他于1875年对英国实行单一金本位制给予高度认同。他认为，单一金本位制的便利有一种实实在在的确切的特征，在不使用纸币的情况下，货币的量被减少到了最低的数额；自新的沙弗林(Sovereigns)发行以来，半个世纪中这一制度的简单和便利已在英国受到了欢迎。金本位制之所以能在英国取得成功，一方面是因为铸币中所采用的新技术使伪造货币者无法容易地仿制金币和银币代币；另一方面是因为金本位制也与英国的商业和金融习惯结合得最为紧密。从英格兰银行1694年成立到第一次世界大战爆发的1914年之前，英镑的演变历程可概括如下：1694—1797年早期英镑是英格兰银行发行的银行券，它是一种可兑付纸币，类似于20世纪早期的美国金券；1797—1811年英镑成为非正式法定货币；1812—1821年英镑被正式确定为法定货币；1821—1914年英镑又变回到1694—1797年的信用货币，只是法定色彩较之前相比更加浓重。

From 1797 to 1815, the suspension of coin convertibility of the pound sterling due to military expenditures required by the war led to relatively severe inflation in Britain. Specifically, from 1797 to the end of the Napoleonic Wars, the British money supply approximately doubled. The impact of inflation on domestic prices, gold bullion, and foreign exchange ultimately raised their prices to a level about 40% or 50% higher than the peak before the suspension of coin convertibility. As Fisher said in 1911, inconvertible paper money almost always becomes a curse for the country that uses it. Historical experience shows that whenever a war forces a government to finance military operations with inconvertible paper money, it inevitably triggers hyperinflation. During the American War of Independence, the excessive issuance of continental currency resulted from the lack of equal credit for the promised solvency of the paper money. The Russian October Revolution of 1917 was followed by hyperinflation of even greater intensity than the inflation during the American War of Independence. After the First World War, Germany experienced hyperinflation, so for a time foreign currencies were used as substitutes. Japan’s invasion of China led the Nationalist government to finance its military plans by printing banknotes, against which background China abandoned the silver standard in 1935. From 1937 to 1945, the issuance of Chinese paper money increased nearly 300 times; in other words, the growth rate of paper money issuance rose from 27% between 1937 and 1938 to 224% in 1945. The rise in prices was even faster; by the end of the war, prices had reached 1,600 times their initial level, or an average annual growth rate of 150%. Clearly, this was severe inflation. Thus, the main reason for the inflation in Britain during the Napoleonic Wars was that the pound sterling changed from endogenous money before 1797 to exogenous money thereafter.

1797—1815年，由于战争需要军事支出导致英镑停止硬币兑付，从而引发了英国较严重的通货膨胀。具体来说，从1797年到拿破仑战争结束，英国货币供应量大约翻了一番。通货膨胀对国内物价、金块和外汇的影响最终使它们的价格都上升到了比中止铸币兑付前的价格顶峰高出大约40%或50%的水平。正如费雪于1911年所说，不可兑换的纸币几乎总是成为使用它的那个国家的一个祸根。历史经验表明，每当战争使一国政府用不可兑换纸币为军事融资时，都不可避免地引发恶性通货膨胀。美国独立战争时期由于纸币允诺的清偿力没有相等的信用因而导致大陆币发行过量。1917年俄国十月革命过后紧跟而来的是比美国独立战争时的通货膨胀强度更大的恶性通货膨胀。第一次世界大战后，德国由于出现了恶性通货膨胀，所以一段时间内所使用的替代货币是外国货币。日本对中国的侵略使国民政府通过印刷钞票来为军事计划融资，在此背景下中国于1935年放弃了银本位制。从1937年到1945年，中国纸币的发行增长了近300倍，换言之，纸币的发行增速从1937年到1938年间的27%,增长到1945年的224%。价格的上升则更快一些，战争结束时已达到初始水平的1600倍，或者说，是以每年150%的平均速度增长。很明显，这是一种严重的通货膨胀。由此可见，拿破仑战争期间英国发生通货膨胀的主要原因是英镑由1797年之前的内生货币转变为之后的外生货币。

It must be pointed out that metallic money (and credit money) obtains wealth through the “economic hand” of the market and voluntary exchange, and is therefore “sound” money. Specifically, metallic money follows the measurement standard of the labor theory of value, acquiring money by investing resources in the production of precious metals such as gold and silver, so its exchange with general commodities and services follows the principle of equivalent exchange. Fiat money operates coercively through the “political hand” of the government, for example by seizing the public’s wealth through taxation or devaluation, and is therefore “dangerous” money. In the transition from metallic money and credit money to fiat money, why do the laws of currency circulation change? The reasons are mainly the following two aspects. First, the essence of money has changed, from the general equivalent of metallic money to a public belief in fiat money. The money supply side has accordingly shifted from an endogenous supply driven by the real demand of market transactions to an exogenous issuance monopolized by the government. Because it is not convertible, the circulation of fiat money is deprived of the natural standard of the supply-and-demand mechanism of metallic money, and no other standard can be permitted either. Specifically, because metallic money has value in itself, it can perform the function of a store of value, enabling it to spontaneously adjust the quantity of money in circulation in response to the needs of commodity circulation. For example, when the supply of metallic money in circulation is excessive, part of the money spontaneously withdraws from the circulation sphere through the store-of-value function, thus not causing inflation. Because fiat money has no intrinsic value and possesses the power of compulsory circulation, an excessive amount of inconvertible paper money, lacking store-of-value capacity, will not automatically withdraw from circulation and will inevitably trigger inflation. Second, the circulation domain of money has changed, from the international circulation of metallic money to the domestic circulation of fiat money. A currency convertible into coinage, if in excess circulation, will flow abroad and not depreciate. However, because inconvertible paper money cannot flow abroad, once its quantity grows beyond real demand, fiat money will necessarily depreciate in proportion to the excess quantity. In short, for the quantity equation of money MV=PY, the endogenous money theory holds that the money supply increases passively due to the PY generated by market transactions, while the quantity theory of money holds that the increase in the money supply is caused by the government’s coercive and active injection into the economy.

需要指出的是，金属货币(及信用货币)通过市场的“经济之手”和自愿交换来获得财富，故而是“健全”的货币。具体而言，金属货币遵循劳动价值论的测度标准，通过把资源投入到黄金和白银等贵金属的生产上来取得货币，所以它与一般商品和服务的交换遵循等价交换原则。法定货币是通过政府的“政治之手”强制性运作，例如通过税收或贬值来攫取公众的财富，故而是“危险”的货币。从金属货币和信用货币过渡到法定货币，货币流通规律为何发生变化?原因主要有以下两个方面。一是货币的本质发生了变化，由金属货币的一般等价物转变为公众对法定货币的一种信念。货币供给侧随之也由市场交易的真实需求引致银行的内生供给转变为政府垄断性的外生发行。因为不具有可兑换性，法定货币流通就被剥夺了金属货币供求机制的自然标准，而且也无法容许任何其他标准。具体地说，金属货币由于自身具有价值故而能够执行贮藏手段职能，这使它可以适应商品流通的需要来自发地调节流通中的货币量。例如，流通中的金属货币供给量过多时，一部分货币便通过贮藏手段而自发地退出流通领域因而不会引起通货膨胀。法定货币由于自身没有内在价值并且拥有强制流通的权力，所以，过多的不兑现纸币因不具有贮藏价值以致不会自动退出流通从而必然会引发通货膨胀。二是货币的流通域发生了变化，由金属货币的国际流通蜕变为法定货币的国内流通。一种可兑换为铸币的通货因流通过剩会流出国外而不会贬值。然而不可兑现的纸币由于不能流出国外，一旦数量增长超过真实需求，法定货币必定根据超额数量造成相应的贬值。简言之，对于货币数量方程MV=PY,内生货币论认为货币供给由于市场交易产生的PY而被动地增加，而货币数量论则认为货币供给增加是由政府强制性主动地注入经济体造成的。

IV. The Theoretical Structure of Endogenous Money

四、内生货币的理论结构

(A) Deconstruction of the Endogenous Money Formula

(一)内生货币公式的解构

In Volume 1 of *Capital*, Marx first describes the circulation process of endogenous money: “Assume there are several mutually independent, simultaneous, and therefore spatially parallel sales, or partial metamorphoses, for example, 1 quarter of wheat, 20 yards of linen, 1 Bible, and 4 gallons of brandy sold at the same time. If the price of each commodity is £2, the total price to be realized is £8, then the quantity of money entering circulation must be £8. Conversely, if these four commodities are the links in the chain of metamorphoses we described above, i.e., 1 quarter of wheat—£2—20 yards of linen—£2—1 Bible—£2—4 gallons of brandy—£2, then £2 can circulate all these commodities in succession, because it realizes their prices in turn, thereby realizing a total price of £8, finally coming to rest in the hands of the distiller. These £2 complete four circulations.” Based on this, Marx summarizes the intrinsic relationships among the above variables and gives a verbal expression of the endogenous money formula: “Assuming the circulation process of the above four commodities lasts one day. Thus, the total price to be realized is £8, the number of circulations of the same money in one day is four, and the quantity of money in circulation is £2, or, for the circulation process over a given period: Total price of commodities / Number of circulations of money of the same denomination = Quantity of money functioning as means of circulation.” Here, let the average commodity price be P, the quantity of commodities be Q, the velocity of money (number of circulations) be V, and the quantity of money be M. Thus, the endogenous money equation can be expressed as:

马克思在《资本论》第1卷中首先描述了内生货币的流通过程：“假定有若干互不相干的、同时发生的、因而在空间上并行的卖，或者说局部形态变化，例如有1夸特小麦、20码麻布、1本圣经、4加仑烧酒同时出售。如果每种商品的价格都是2镑，待实现的价格总额就是8镑，那么进入流通的货币量必须是8镑。相反，如果这4种商品是我们上面所说过的形态变化系列的各个环节，即1夸特小麦—2镑—20码麻布—2镑—1本圣经—2镑—4加仑烧酒—2镑，那么，有2镑就可以使所有这些商品依次流通，因为它依次实现它们的价格，从而实现8镑的价格总额，最后停留在酿酒者手中。这2镑完成了4次流通。”基于此，马克思通过总结上述各个变量之间的内在关系从而给出了内生货币公式的文字表述，“假定上述四种商品的流通过程持续一天。这样，待实现的价格总额为八镑，同一些货币一天的流通次数是四次，流通的货币量是两镑，或者就一定时间的流通过程来说是：商品价格总额/同名货币的流通次数=执行流通手段职能的货币量”。在此，令平均商品价格为P,商品数量为Q,货币流通速度(流通次数)为V,货币数量为M。这样，内生货币方程可表示为：

PQ/V = M (1)

PQ/V=M (1)

In Volume 2 of *Capital*, Marx describes the general law of currency circulation as the increase in the quantity of circulating money being the result of an increase in the total price of circulating commodities: “The general law of currency circulation is: If the total price of circulating commodities rises—whether this increase in the total price occurs on the same quantity of commodities (referring to an increase in P—author’s note) or on an increased quantity of commodities (referring to an increase in Q—author’s note)—, other things being equal, the quantity of circulating money will increase.”

马克思在《资本论》第2卷中把货币流通的一般规律描述为流通货币量的增大是流通商品价格总额提高的结果，“货币流通的一般规律是：如果流通商品的价格总额提高——不论价格总额的这种增加是发生在同一个商品量上(指P增加——作者注),还是发生在一个已经增大的商品量上(指Q增加——作者注)——,在其他条件不变的情况下，流通货币的量就会增大”。

Equation (1) can be transformed to: PQ = MV (2)

式(1)经变换可表示为：PQ＝MV (2)

Thus, it can be seen that the key difference from the quantity equation of money is that the causal relationship in the endogenous money equation runs from PQ to MV, i.e., from the price level to the quantity of money. This view is argued by means of commodity circulation determining money circulation. According to Marx’s explanation, “The movement of the quantity of money circulating as means of purchase and means of payment is determined by the metamorphosis of commodities, by the scale and speed of the metamorphosis of commodities.” “As for the movement of precious metals on the world market (here, insofar as this movement represents capital transfers caused by lending, i.e., transfers in the form of commodity capital, we will not examine it), it is entirely determined by international commodity exchange, just as the movement of money as domestic means of purchase and means of payment is determined by domestic commodity exchange.” Therefore, “the entire circulation of money, in terms of its scale, its forms, and its movement, is merely the result of commodity circulation.”

由此可见，与货币数量方程的关键区别在于，内生货币方程的因果关系是从PQ到MV,即从价格水平到货币数量。这种观点是借助于商品流通决定货币流通来论证的。据马克思的解释，“作为购买手段和支付手段来流通的货币的量的运动，是由商品形态变化，由商品形态变化的规模和速度决定的”,“至于贵金属在世界市场上的运动(在这里，只要这种运动表现的是由借贷造成的资本转移，也即是以商品资本的形式进行的转移，我们就不加以考察),那么，它完全是由国际商品交换决定的，正像作为国内的购买手段和支付手段的货币的运动是由国内商品交换决定的一样”。所以，“整个货币流通就它的规模、它的形式和它的运动来说，只是商品流通的结果”。

Another point requiring explanation is the total money stock M. In *Capital*, Marx clearly defines it as the total endogenous money stock: “By the quantity of currency here we mean the sum total of all existing, circulating banknotes and all coins, including bullion, in a country.” That is, the total money stock is the sum of metallic money and credit money functioning as means of circulation, and does not include fiat money. Marx further points out, “In examining simple money circulation (Volume 1, Chapter 3, Section 2), we have already proved that, given the velocity of circulation and the economy of payments, the quantity of money actually in circulation is determined by the prices and quantities of commodities. The circulation of banknotes is also subject to this law.” What must be emphasized here is that Marx believes fiat money follows the quantity theory of money: “According to the law of circulation of value tokens, the principle is advanced that commodity prices are determined by the quantity of money in circulation, and not, conversely, that the quantity of money in circulation is determined by commodity prices.” Specifically, “Commodity prices rise and fall with the increase or decrease in the quantity of paper notes—this occurs in cases where paper notes become the sole means of circulation—but this is merely the result of the circulation process forcibly imposing a law that is mechanically disrupted by an external force,” so that “in the circulation of value tokens, all the laws of actual money circulation are expressed in reverse, turned upside down. Gold circulates because it has value, while paper notes have value because they circulate. Given the exchange value of commodities, the quantity of gold in circulation is determined by its own value, while the value of paper notes is determined by the quantity of paper notes in circulation. The quantity of gold in circulation increases or decreases with the rise and fall of commodity prices, while commodity prices appear to rise and fall with the change in the quantity of paper notes in circulation.” Thus, Marx has clearly demonstrated that credit money and fiat money are respectively subject to the endogenous money theory and the quantity theory of money.

另一个需要说明的是货币总量M。马克思在《资本论》中明确地将其界定为内生货币总量，“我们这里所说通货的量，是指一个国家内一切现有的、流通的银行券和包括贵金属条块在内的一切硬币的总和”。也就是说，货币总量是执行流通手段的金属货币和信用货币之和，并不包括法定货币。马克思进而指出，“在考察简单的货币流通时(第一册第三章第2节),我们已经证明，已知流通的速度和支付的节约，现实流通的货币量是由商品的价格和交易量决定的。银行券的流通也受这个规律的支配”。这里要突出说明的是，马克思认为法定货币遵循的是货币数量论，“按照价值符号的流通规律，提出了这样的原理：商品价格决定于流通中的货币量，而不是相反地流通中的货币量决定于商品价格”。具体而言，“商品价格随着纸票数量的增减而涨跌——这种情况发生在纸票成为唯一流通手段的场合——,不过是由流通过程强制实现一个受到外力机械地破坏的规律的结果”,以致“在价值符号的流通中，实际货币流通的一切规律都反着表现出来了，颠倒过来了。金因为有价值才流通，而纸票却因为流通才有价值。已知商品的交换价值，流通的金量决定于金自己的价值，而纸票的价值却决定于流通的纸票的量。流通的金量随着商品价格涨跌而增减，而商品价格却似乎是随着流通中纸票量的变动而涨跌”。由此可见，马克思已经清晰地论证了信用货币和法定货币分别适用于内生货币论和货币数量论。

(B) The Real Bills Doctrine

(二)真实票据原理

The real bills doctrine can be traced back to the writings of the French speculative financier John Law, who was convinced that the key to economic prosperity lay in using paper money issued on the security of land holdings to expand the base of metallic money. Smith pointed out that prudent banking required restricting discounts (loans) so that banks would only “discount to a real creditor and a real debtor a real bill of exchange, and that, as soon as it becomes due, it will be paid by the debtor.” The anti-bullionists in the Bullionist Controversy and the law of reflux put forward by Tooke and Fullarton of the Banking School in the late 19th century both developed the real bills doctrine. The law of reflux asserted that because of the need for loan repayment by banks and the public’s demand for redemption, a rise in prices would cause “over-issued” loans (real bills) to flow back automatically to the banks, so that competitive banks could not suffer from over-issue of money (inflation). Entering the 20th century, the real bills doctrine was formally enshrined in the legislation establishing the U.S. Federal Reserve System in 1913.

真实票据原理可以追溯到法国投机金融家约翰·劳(John Law)的著作，因为劳确信经济繁荣的关键在于以土地占有为保证所发行的纸币可以用来扩大金属货币的基数。斯密指出，谨慎的银行业务要求对贴现(贷款)加以限制，使得银行只针对“真实债权人与真实债务人之间的真实交易票据发放贷款，只要该票据到期，它就可以得到债务人的偿付”。金块论争中的反金块论者以及19世纪后期银行学派的图克和富拉顿提出的回流定律，都使真实票据原理得到了发展。回流定律宣称，由于银行贷款的偿还需要以及公众的兑现需求，价格上升将引起“过度发行”的贷款(真实票据)自动流回到银行，故而竞争性银行不可能发生货币过度发行(通货膨胀)的问题。进入20世纪，真实票据原理被正式载入1913年设立的美国联邦储备系统的立法中。

The real bills doctrine holds that if banks lend against “real bills” (i.e., bills issued to finance genuine commercial transactions, not speculation), these bills will be automatically repaid when the transaction is completed. In this way, the quantity of currency in circulation exactly equals the amount of money required. Marx believed that real bills are the basis of credit money: “Bills of exchange, in turn, form the basis of actual credit money, such as banknotes, etc. Actual credit money is based not on money circulation (whether metallic money or state paper money) but on the circulation of bills of exchange.” Furthermore, Marx also held that the vehicle for the accumulation of money in capitalist reproduction is real bills: “What is actually accumulated here are claims of the small shopkeeper on the banker, claims of the banker on the state, on joint-stock companies, on productive capitalists for future income.” Specifically, they exist “in the form of mere claims to future income, i.e., government bonds, commercial bills, shares, etc.”

真实票据原理是指，假如银行针对“真实票据”(即为真实的商业交易而不是为投机融资所发行的票据)放贷，这些票据将在交易完成之时自动偿还。这样，流通中的通货数量就恰好等于所需要的货币量。马克思认为，真实票据是信用货币的基础：“票据，也形成真正的信用货币如银行券等等的基础。真正的信用货币不是以货币流通(不管是金属货币还是国家纸币)为基础，而是以票据流通为基础。”此外，马克思还认为，资本主义再生产中货币积累的载体是真实票据，“实际上这里积存的是小店主对银行家的索取凭证，是银行家向国家、股份公司、生产资本索取未来收入的凭证”。具体地说，“索取未来收入的单纯凭证即公债券、商业票据、股票等等的形式而存在”。

The essence of a real bill is a debt instrument. It is based on the objective requirement that money must actually exist when performing the function of a means of circulation. On the one hand, when money is used to purchase commodities, it performs the function of a means of purchase. On the other hand, when money is used to repay debts, it performs the function of a means of payment, and the money lent out actually returns to the hands of the original creditor (with interest added if so stipulated by agreement). On this point, Marx clearly states: “Broadly speaking, money here functions only as a means of payment; that is, commodities are sold not for money but for a written promise to pay at a specified date. For the sake of simplicity, we can subsume all such payment promises under the general category of bills of exchange.” It should be noted that the obligation to repay a debt differs from the obligation to purchase in that the former involves a reflux of money back to its starting point. Therefore, real bills are closely linked to the reflux of money.

真实票据的本质是一种债务凭证。它基于货币在执行流通工具职能时必须真实存在的客观要求。一方面，当货币被用来购买商品的时候，它在执行购买工具的职能。另一方面，当货币被用来偿还债务的时候，它则执行着支付工具的职能，并且被借出去的钱便实际上回到了最初债权人的手中(如果协议约定，则附加利息)。对此，马克思明确指出，“大体说来，货币在这里只是充当支付手段，也就是说，商品不是为取得货币而卖，而是为取得定期支付的凭证而卖。为了简便起见，我们可以把这种支付凭证概括为票据这个总的范畴”。需要指出，还债义务与购买义务不同的是，前者包含着资金回到其起点的一个货币回流。所以，真实票据和货币回流紧密相连。

The endogenous money theory is a theoretical hypothesis that attempts to discard the concept of a natural rate of interest. It argues that in a monetary production economy, the rate of interest is first determined by the monetary or financial sector, and other rates of return must adjust to it, rather than the reverse. For Marx, the rate of interest is essentially a monetary phenomenon. According to the explanation in *Capital*, a natural rate of interest does not exist: “In this respect, there is no such thing as a natural rate of interest, in the sense in which economists speak of a natural rate of profit and a natural rate of wages.” This means that the rate of interest is a short-term phenomenon, with no tendency to gravitate towards a long-run equilibrium. Specifically, “On the money market, all loanable capital always confronts functioning capital as a total sum; hence the relationship between the supply of loanable capital and the demand for it determines the market rate of interest at any given time.” However, “The determination of the general rate of profit differs from the determination of the market rate of interest. The market rate of interest is determined directly by the relationship of supply and demand, without any mediation; the general rate of profit is in fact determined by entirely different and much more complex causes, and is therefore not as definite and given a fact as the rate of interest. The particular rates of profit in different spheres of production are themselves more or less uncertain.” In this regard, if the rate of interest charged by the banking system is less than the rate of return that can be obtained by investing the borrowed funds (the rate of profit obtained by the capitalist), then as long as this gap persists, it will stimulate enterprises to borrow, thereby causing a continuous expansion of the money supply and inflation. This means that the expansion of the money supply (i.e., inflation) is endogenously adjusted according to the incentive provided by the difference between the enterprise profit rate (marginal efficiency of capital or commercial rate of return) and the bank interest rate (the interest rate level set by the central bank). In short, the rate of return on real capital adjusts according to the monetary interest rate. In this sense, credit money is endogenous to the circulation process itself. As Marx put it in his metaphor: “Through credit money, circulation itself acts as a mint.”

内生货币论是一种企图抛弃自然利率的理论假说，它主张在货币的生产经济中由货币或金融部门首先决定利率，其他回报率必须对其做出调整，而不是相反。对马克思来说，利息率本质上是一种货币现象。据《资本论》的解释，自然利息率是不存在的，“在这方面，像经济学家所说的自然利润率和自然工资率那样的自然利息率，是没有的”。这意味着，利息率是一种短期现象，不存在趋向长期均衡的倾向。具体来说，“在货币市场上，全部借贷资本总是作为一个总额和执行职能的资本相对立，从而，借贷资本的供给和借贷资本的需求之间的关系，决定着当时市场的利息状况”。然而，“一般利润率的决定和市场利息率的决定不同，市场利息率是由供求关系直接地、不通过任何中介决定的，一般利润率事实上是由完全不同的更复杂得多的原因决定的，因而也不像利息率那样是明确的和既定的事实。不同生产部门的特殊利润率本身或多或少是不确定的”。在这方面，如果银行体系收取的利率小于利用贷款投资可以取得的回报率(资本家获得的利润率),那么只要这一差距持续存在，就会刺激企业借款，进而引起货币供给与通货膨胀的持续扩张。这意味着货币供给扩张(即通货膨胀)内生地根据企业利润率(资本边际效率或商业回报率)与银行利率(中央银行制定的利率水平)的差值变化所提供的激励来进行调整。简言之，真实经济的资本回报率按照货币利率进行调整。在这种意义上，信用货币内生于流通过程本身。就像马克思所作的比喻那样，“通过信用货币，流通本身起着造币厂的作用”。

In summary, Marx provided a profound interpretation of the endogenous money proposition that real bills do not cause inflation. As noted earlier, the essence of credit money is real bills that can be quickly liquidated in the short term. The supply of credit money by commercial banks is passively determined by the real forces in the real economy. In this way, any excess money will automatically “reflux” to the banking system. Just as Marx trusted the law of reflux based on the real bills doctrine: “The quantity of banknotes in circulation is regulated by the needs of trade, and every superfluous banknote immediately returns to its issuer.”

综上所述，马克思赋予了真实票据不会引发通货膨胀这一内生货币命题以深刻解读。前面指出，信用货币的本质是短期可迅速变现的真实票据。商业银行对信用货币的供给是被动地由实体经济中的真实力量所决定的。这样，任何多余的货币都会自动“回流”到银行体系。如同马克思给予根据真实票据原理的回流定律以信任那样：“流通的银行券的数量是按照交易的需要来调节的，并且每一张多余的银行券都会立即回到它的发行者那里去。”

(3) The Law of Reflux

(三)回流定律

The manifestation of social reproduction in the sphere of circulation is realized through the law of the reflux of money. Marx’s formulation of the law of the reflux of money is: “When reproduction (whether simple or on an extended scale) proceeds normally, the money advanced into circulation by the capitalist producer must return to its starting point (whether this money is his own or borrowed). This is a law.” In Marx’s view, the movement of the reflux of money in social reproduction “is the movement of capital.” It should be noted that commodity circulation and the reflux of money present a movement in opposite directions: “In commodity circulation, what takes place is merely a transfer from the producer to the wholesaler, from the wholesaler to the retailer, and only the retailer finally sells the commodity. Similarly, in the reflux of money, what takes place is a transfer of the money that flows to the capitalists (if the capitalist sells on credit, it is a reflux of capital; if he sells for cash, it is a reflux of money, i.e., a reflux of money as a means of purchase, or the return of his capital in the form of money) in the reverse direction, from the retailer to the wholesaler, from the wholesaler to the producer.” Furthermore, regarding the relationship between money circulation and the reflux of money: “The circulation accomplished by the same sum of money through a reflux is always accompanied by the circulation of the same individual pieces of money, and the number of circulations accomplished by the same individual pieces of money by no means implies that a reflux has occurred.” That is, the same sum of money may undergo multiple circulations through a single reflux, and the same sum of money after circulation does not necessarily undergo a reflux.

社会再生产在流通领域的表现是通过货币回流定律而实现的。马克思对货币回流定律的表述是，“当再生产(无论是简单的，还是规模扩大的)正常进行时，由资本主义生产者预付到流通中去的货币，必须流回到它的起点(无论这些货币是他们自己的，还是借来的)。这是一个规律”。在马克思的心目中，社会再生产中的货币回流运动“就是资本的运动”。需要指出，商品流通和货币回流呈现为相向运动，“在商品流通中，发生的只是从生产者到批发商、从批发商到零售商的转移，只有零售商才最后售出商品。同样，在货币回流中，发生的是那些流向资本家的货币(如果资本家赊卖，就是资本回流，如果他按现金出售，就是货币回流，即作为购买手段的货币的回流，或者说是他的资本以货币的形式回流)反过来从零售商到批发商、从批发商到生产者的转移”。另外，就货币流通和货币回流的关系而言，“同一货币额通过回流完成的流通总是有同一些货币个体的流通相伴随，而同一些货币个体所完成的各个流通的次数绝不意味着已发生回流”。也就是说，同一货币额通过一次回流可能经历多次流通，而同一货币额在流通后并不一定发生回流。

In the section “The Movement of the Reflux of Money in Capitalist Reproduction,” Marx reduces the process of the reflux of money to a simple form of expression: “The capitalist first pays out a certain sum of money, and then pays out the same value in the form of commodities, and in this way he recovers his money.” For example, the capitalist must first pay out money (wages) to purchase labor-power for commodity production, and then sell the commodities to the workers to recover the money. Marx then concludes: “The monetary expressions of rent, interest, and profit, insofar as they are used to purchase commodities for personal consumption, must, like the monetary expression of wages, flow back to the productive capitalist as means of purchase and means of payment.”

在“资本主义再生产中的货币回流运动”部分中，马克思将货币回流过程归结为简单的表现形式：“资本家起先用货币支付一定数额，然后以商品形式支付这同一价值额，这样他就收回货币。”例如，资本家首先要支付货币(工资)购买劳动力从事商品生产，然后再向工人出售商品从而收回货币。马克思继而总结道：“地租、利息、利润的货币表现，只要被用来购买供个人消费的商品，就必定像工资的货币表现一样，作为购买手段和支付手段流回到生产资本家手中。”

In *Capital*, Marx extends the law of reflux into a dual reflux in which money-capital and industrial capital (including productive capital and commodity capital) mutually transform and organically unify. “Money is first advanced as capital for various elements of production, these elements of production are transformed into a commodity product, and this commodity product is then reconverted into money. … Here the general movement is G…G′, i.e., from money to more money.” The starting point of the money reflux movement is the money-capital advanced by the lending capitalist A: “Although money passes through the hands of various people more or less in the course of circulation, the bulk of the circulating money belongs to the money-capital sector, which is organized and concentrated in the form of banks, etc. The method by which this sector advances capital determines that capital must constantly flow back to it in the form of money, although this reflux is mediated by the reconversion of industrial capital into money-capital.” The dominant process of the money reflux movement is the reflux of the industrial capital that performs its function for the industrial capitalist B. With regard to constant capital and surplus value, “the money that the industrial capitalists throw into circulation in order to promote the circulation of their own commodities, whether it is charged to the account of the constant value part of the commodity or to the account of the surplus value existing in the commodity (when it is spent as revenue), always flows back to them in the amount they advanced for the circulation of money.” With regard to variable capital, “the variable capital advanced in the form of money flows back through the process in which the working class appears as buyers and the capitalist class as sellers,” and “since equilibrium is formed because the buyer later appears as a seller of an equal value, and the seller later appears as a buyer of an equal value, money flows back to the party that advanced it in the purchase, having first sold before repurchasing.” Finally, Marx summarizes the dual reflux of interest-bearing capital as follows: “Corresponding to this dual expenditure of money as capital—where the first expenditure is merely a transfer from A to B—is its dual reflux. It flows back from the movement as G′ or G+△G to the hands of the functioning capitalist B. Then the functioning capitalist B transfers it back to A as realized capital, as G+△G, together with a portion of the profit. Here △G is not equal to the entire profit, but only a part of it, i.e., interest.”

在《资本论》中，马克思将回流定律拓展为货币资本和产业资本(包括生产资本和商品资本)相互转化和有机统一的双重回流。“货币作为资本先是预付在各种生产要素上，由这些生产要素转化为商品产品，这种商品产品再转化为货币。……在这里，一般的运动是G…G′,即由货币到更多的货币。”货币回流运动的起点是借贷资本家A支出的货币资本：“虽然货币在流通中或多或少地要经过各种人之手，但大量的流通货币却属于以银行等形式组织和积聚的货币资本部门。这个部门预付资本的方法，规定资本要不断以货币形式最后流回到它那里，虽然这种回流还要以产业资本再转化为货币资本作为中介。”货币回流运动的主导过程是产业资本家B所执行职能的产业资本的回流。就不变资本和剩余价值而言，“产业资本家为了促成他们自己的商品流通而投入流通的货币，无论是记在商品的不变价值部分的账上，还是记在存在于商品中的剩余价值(在它作为收入花掉的时候)的账上，总是按照各个资本家为货币流通而预付的数额回到他们手中”。就可变资本而言，“以货币形式预付的可变资本，是通过工人阶级作为买者和资本家阶级作为卖者出现的过程而流回的”,“既然平衡的形成是由于买者后来作为出售同等价值额的卖者出现，卖者后来作为购买同等价值额的买者出现，所以，货币会流回到在购买时预付货币的、在重新购买之前先已出售的那一方”。最后，马克思对生息资本的双重回流作出了如下总结：“与货币作为资本的这种双重支出——其中第一次支出只是由A转移到B——相适应的，是它的双重回流。它作为G′或G+△G,从运动中流回到执行职能的资本家B手中。然后，执行职能的资本家B让它带着一部分利润，作为已经实现的资本，作为G+△G再转给A。在这里，△G不等于利润的全部，而只是利润的一部分，即利息。”

It is noteworthy that metallic money and credit money, as two types of endogenous money, form different reflux mechanisms due to differences in the functions of money they perform. The function of metallic money as a means of purchase can, on the whole, make the monetary reflux consistent with the actual reflux, thus only providing the possibility of a crisis: “These forms contain the possibility of crisis, but only the possibility. For this possibility to develop into reality, a whole series of relations is required, which, from the standpoint of simple commodity circulation, do not yet exist at all.” It is certain that metallic money is far less likely to trigger a crisis than credit money. This is because the function of credit money as a means of payment, by separating purchase from sale, creates a temporal structure in which the monetary reflux is inconsistent with the actual reflux, thereby amplifying the potential risks for banks. On this point, Marx specifically notes: “Credit makes the reflux in the form of money independent of the time of the actual reflux, both for the industrial capitalist and for the merchant. Both sell on credit; therefore, their commodities are transferred before they are reconverted into money for them, i.e., before they flow back to them in the form of money. On the other hand, they also buy on credit; thus, the value of their commodities, before it is actually converted into money, before the commodity price falls due for payment, has already been reconverted into productive capital or commodity capital for them.” In this way, while credit money brings convenience and speed, it also brings potential risks: “The illusion that the reflux is rapid and reliable always persists for a longer time, after the reflux has actually disappeared, because of the credit that has already come into play, since the reflux of credit replaces the actual reflux. But as soon as the bank’s customers pay more bills to the bank than money, the bank begins to feel the danger.” Based on the above analysis, we can also re-examine the phenomenon of the “liquidity trap” that Marx discerned from the perspective of the difference in the reflux mechanisms of metallic money and credit money, namely, “in a crisis, creditism suddenly turns into monetarism.”

值得注意的是，金属货币和信用货币作为内生货币的两种类型，由于执行货币职能的差异而形成不同的回流机制。金属货币主要执行的购买手段职能可以从整体上使货币回流与实际回流相一致，从而只是提供了危机爆发的可能性，“这些形式包含着危机的可能性，但仅仅是可能性。这种可能性要发展为现实，必须有整整一系列的关系，从简单商品流通的观点来看，这些关系还根本不存在”。可以肯定，金属货币在引发危机的可能性上远不如信用货币大。这是因为，信用货币主要执行的支付手段职能由于使买和卖分离以致造成货币回流与实际回流的时间结构不一致，从而放大了银行的潜在风险。对此，马克思具体指出，“信用使货币形式上的回流不以实际回流的时间为转移，这无论对产业资本家来说还是对商人来说都是如此。二者都会赊卖；因此，他们的商品，是在这些商品对他们来说再转化为货币之前，也就是以货币形式流回到他们那里之前让渡的。另一方面，他们也会赊购；这样，他们的商品的价值，在实际转化为货币以前，在商品价格到期支付以前，对他们来说，已经再转化为生产资本或商品资本”。这样，信用货币在带来便利和速度的同时也带来了潜在的风险：“回流迅速而可靠这种假象，在回流实际上已经消失以后，总是会由于已经发生作用的信用，而在较长时间内保持下去，因为信用的回流会代替实际的回流。但只要银行的客户付给银行的汇票多于货币，银行就会开始感到危险。”根据上述分析，我们还可以从金属货币和信用货币的回流机制差异角度重新审视马克思所洞察出的“流动性陷阱”现象，即“在危机中信用主义会突然转变为货币主义”。

V. Conclusion

五、结语

From the perspective of the history of monetary theory, the theoretical source of Marx’s monetary thought is the pioneering ideas of the Banking School represented by Tooke and Fullarton, rather than Ricardo’s classical quantity theory. On this point, Marx sharply pointed out the defect in Ricardo’s monetary theory due to his failure to clearly define the types of money: “Ricardo, like his predecessors, confuses the circulation of banknotes or credit money with the circulation of mere tokens of value.” In view of this, Marx scientifically demonstrated that endogenous money and fiat money each follow different laws of circulation by defining the nature and functional differences of different types of money: (1) the operational mechanism of metallic money and credit money is the theory of endogenous money, and (2) the operational mechanism of fiat money is the quantity theory of money. Regarding the historical evolution of money, Shaikh points out: “From the general equivalent to coinage, convertible and inconvertible tokens, bank credit, and finally to fiat money, this historical evolutionary path is quite complex … In a more recent historical stage, the state monopolized the creation and issuance of coinage and tokens, which was merely a simple transfer of functions originally undertaken by the private sector, while private banks continue to create a large number of means of circulation and means of payment.” It can be seen that the rise and prosperity of fiat money may mean that the role of the quantity theory of money will become larger and stronger. However, the role of credit money should not be overlooked, and the theory of endogenous money still has important guiding significance. Wei Sen’s (2016:209–210) empirical analysis of the growth of China’s broad money supply (M2) and the growth of the consumer price index (CPI) from 2001 to 2011 shows that there is no direct relationship between M2 and CPI increases; for example, when M2 grew rapidly in 2009, the CPI was negative. This indicates that the quantity theory of money lacks explanatory power in China. On the contrary, the theory of endogenous money plays a dominant role in China. This is because M2 is composed of cash and deposit money, and deposit money, which is particularly endogenous, constitutes its main body. Therefore, the increase in China’s money supply is mainly caused by endogenous factors such as rising asset prices (e.g., real estate finance) and local government bond financing. The academic community has now basically reached a consensus that both purely exogenous theory and purely endogenous theory are one-sided; money should be symbiotic. This means that the policy implications of monetary theory should focus on the proportion of exogenous and endogenous elements within money.

从货币学说史梳理看，马克思的货币理论思想源头是图克和富拉顿等人的银行学派的先驱思想而非李嘉图的古典数量论。在这方面，马克思曾鲜明地指出李嘉图由于没有清楚地界定货币类型而导致其货币学说的缺陷：“李嘉图同他的前辈一样，把银行券流通或信用货币流通同单纯的价值符号流通混为一谈。”有鉴于此，马克思通过界定不同货币的性质和职能差异从而科学地论证了内生货币和法定货币各自遵循不同的流通规律：(1)金属货币和信用货币的运作机理是内生货币论，(2)法定货币的运作机理则是货币数量论。对于货币的历史演变，谢克指出，“从一般等价物到铸币、可兑换与不可兑换的代币、银行信用，直至最后的法定货币，这条历史演进道路可谓相当复杂……在较近的某个历史阶段，国家垄断了铸币和代币的创造与发行，这仅是原本由私人部门承担的职能的简单易手，而私人银行仍旧继续创造出大量的流通工具和支付手段”。由此可见，法定货币的崛起与兴盛意味着货币数量论的作用可能会变大变强。然而，信用货币的作用仍不容忽视，内生货币论仍然具有重要的指导意义。韦森(2016:209—210)对中国2001—2011年广义货币供应量(M2)增长与居民消费价格指数(CPI)增长的经验分析表明，M2与CPI上涨没有直接的关系，例如2009年M2高增长时，CPI是负的。这表明货币数量论在中国缺少解释力。相反，内生货币论在中国起主导作用。这是因为M2由现金和存款货币构成，特别是具有内生性的存款货币是其主体。所以中国货币供给量变多主要是资产价格上涨(例如房地产金融)和地方政府发债融资等内生因素所致。目前学界已基本达成共识，纯粹的外生理论和纯粹的内生理论都是片面的，货币应是共生的。这意味着，货币理论的政策含义应该聚焦于货币中外生和内生的比例。

An important discovery of this article is that the pound sterling followed different laws of currency circulation in different historical periods because it represented different types of money. The Britain of Ricardo’s lifetime was in the 1797–1821 phase when the pound had suspended convertibility into gold; at that time the pound belonged to the category of exogenous money and fiat money. Ricardo’s 1810 work *The High Price of Bullion, a Proof of the Depreciation of Banknotes* was a result of the quantity theory of money derived from his observation of British monetary practice. The Britain of Marx’s lifetime, by contrast, was in the 1821–1914 heyday of the gold standard, when the pound had resumed convertibility into gold; at that time the pound had shifted into the category of endogenous money and credit money. As for the laws of currency circulation, a theory that was originally correct may become erroneous as time changes. Therefore, limited by the era in which he lived, Marx’s severe criticism of Ricardo’s monetary theory may be somewhat biased. In the Britain of Marx’s lifetime, the currency in circulation included gold coins, banknotes, commercial bills of exchange, bank deposits, and so on. “Invisible” deposit money was already an important component of credit money, so that “visible” money such as coins, banknotes, and bills of exchange were only part of the money supply. In *Capital*, Marx mainly takes gold as the object to expound the laws of currency circulation, and paper money, banknotes, and other bills of exchange are generally regarded only as substitutes for the means of circulation and means of payment of metallic money. From this perspective, Marx did not explicitly regard bank deposits as an indispensable part of the money supply. And the Banking School, which he favored, had always emphasized that both banknotes and bank deposits were identical and equally important components of the money supply.

本文的重要发现是英镑在不同历史时期由于代表不同的货币类型故而遵循不同的货币流通规律。李嘉图生活时代的英国处于英镑停止兑付黄金的1797—1821年阶段，此时的英镑属于外生货币和法定货币范畴。李嘉图于1810年所著《金块高价——银行券贬值的证据》(The High Price of Bullion,a Proof of the Depreciation of Banknotes)是根据他对英国货币实践的观察而得出的货币数量论成果。而马克思生活时代的英国处于英镑恢复可兑换黄金的1821—1914年金本位鼎盛期，此时的英镑已转变为内生货币和信用货币范畴。对于货币流通规律，随着时间变化，原来正确的理论可能变成错误的理论。所以，受生活时代所限，马克思对李嘉图货币理论的严厉批评可能失之偏颇。马克思生活时代的英国，流通的货币有黄金货币、银行券、商业汇票、银行存款等。“无形”的存款货币已经是信用货币的重要组成部分，这使得硬币、银行券、汇票等“显形”的货币也仅仅是部分货币。在《资本论》中，马克思主要以黄金为对象来阐述货币流通规律，纸币、银行券和其他汇票等总体上都只被看作金属货币流通手段和支付手段的替代物。由此看来，马克思没有明确把银行存款看作货币供给必不可少的部分。而他所青睐的银行学派就一直强调银行券和银行存款都是货币供给中相同的、同等重要的组成部分。

Although academia is accustomed to linking classical Marxism with post-Keynesianism, whether the modern endogenous money theory of “bank loans create bank deposits” proposed by post-Keynesianism was influenced by Marx has not yet been determined. However, it is undeniable that, with regard to endogenous money thought, there are points of convergence between Marx and Keynes. As Hodgson put it, “Keynes, like Marx, was totally opposed to ‘Say’s Law’,” and therefore “it is desirable to explain a large part of Keynes’s monetary theory in terms entirely compatible with Marx.” Although Marx’s monetary thought has certain historical limitations due to the constraints of his era, this cannot obscure its great brilliance. The facts are as summarized by Blaug: “Marx’s monetary theory, even understood on its own terms, approaches the best works of his predecessors.” Based on Marx’s endogenous theory of currency circulation, money plays only a non-primary, passive, and auxiliary role in the operation of the macroeconomy. Therefore, changes in the endogenous money supply will not become a cause of economic fluctuations, but only a result of economic fluctuations. This has important guiding significance for China’s financial work.

虽然学术界习惯于将古典马克思主义和后凯恩斯主义连在一起，但后凯恩斯主义提出“银行贷款创造银行存款”的现代内生货币理论是否受到马克思影响还没有定论。然而不可否认的是，就内生货币思想而言，马克思与凯恩斯有融通之处。就像霍奇森所说的，“凯恩斯与马克思一样，也完全反对‘萨伊法则’”,因此，“用一些同马克思完全协调的说法来解释很大一部分凯恩斯的货币理论，是可取的”。马克思的货币思想虽然受时代所限有一定的历史局限性，但这并不能遮蔽它的伟大光辉。事实正如布劳格所总结的，“马克思的货币理论，即使根据它本身理解，也接近他的先辈的最好著作”。基于马克思的内生货币流通理论，货币在宏观经济运行中只起到一种非首要的、被动的和辅助性的作用。因此，内生货币供给量变动不会成为经济波动的原因，而只是一种经济波动的结果。这对我国金融工作具有重要的指导意义。

Online editor: Paul

网络编辑：保罗