Capital (marxism)

Karl Marx understood capital essentially as a process as a value that can be utilized. Value can only grow when wage laborers are exploited . It appears in various forms and takes on a quasi-religious character by becoming a fetish . Only under certain historical conditions does it seize and dominate economic activity. In its development it brings out elements of its own negation that make a communist society possible.

For Marxists , Marx's concept is an important point of reference. The value analysis of the neoclassical , based on the marginal principle , did not pursue Marx's analysis any further. Since then, Marx's approach has not played a significant role in modern economics . The dynamics of capital emphasized by Marx found attention in business cycle theory , such as in Schumpeter's theory of economic development .

Value as a social validity relationship

Marx first developed the concept of value in his main work Das Kapital in the first volume as part of his commodity analysis. He dedicates himself to the commodity as an element of the social wealth that the capitalist mode of production generates. He does not simply examine a relatively randomly found commodity, but rather analyzes the commodity as a social form of the labor product. According to Marx, a commodity is a product of human labor that is useful, has been produced for another and is acquired through exchange. It has a use value and an abstract value that appears in exchange value .

The abstract value consists in abstract work. In his analysis of the commodity, Marx does not want to prove that work forms the substance of value, but rather to reconstruct the special social character of work that appears in this form from the commodity form.

If the commodity has use value and exchange value, then, according to Marx, there must also be different kinds of work. Concrete work is the expenditure of human labor in a certain form and produces a certain type of object. This is how tailoring creates skirts. Concrete work can be sensed. If two products of labor are exchanged with one another, they are equated with one another as things of value. This abstracts from physical differences: from the use values, from the material properties on which the usefulness is based, and from the concrete work. In this regard, they are only considered work products. This work can only be abstract work, that is, the expenditure of human labor with abstraction from its concrete form; it forms the common social substance of the commodities which belong to them as things of value. Marx also characterizes abstract work physiologically or as the expenditure of the brain, nerves, muscles, etc. While the commodity is trivial as a commodity, the property of being of value appears as something eerie. One cannot look at a commodity in isolation in order to find its value in it; To be a thing of value is not a material natural property of an individual commodity, but something purely social: since the substance of value is something social, a commodity must be related to other goods in order to be able to appear as a thing of value. Value or abstract work expresses a societal validity relationship: in a society based on the division of labor, which consists of individual private producers who exchange their work products with one another, it only becomes clear in exchange whether a product is socially "meaningful" or whether a specific work is part in the overall social work.

Those who exchange abstract by doing something. They do not have to be aware of the fact that they equate their work with one another by equating their work products as objects of value in exchange. In contrast to an abstraction, which is essentially accomplished through thinking, one can speak of a real abstraction here.

To produce something is not enough to create value: it takes exchange. However, the value is not set arbitrarily in exchange. The extent to which a specific work is considered value-creating or abstract work depends on whether it corresponds to normal production conditions. If a certain individual works for a long time, that does not have to mean that the commodity is very valuable; The decisive factor is the average social working time that is necessary for the production of the goods. The demand for society as a whole must also be taken into account: if too much of a commodity is produced, it looks as if every producer of this commodity has used more than the socially necessary working time. After all, complicated work is considered more valuable than simple work. The former is, for example, higher-skilled work. Simple work is work that the average worker is capable of. What is considered to be complicated and what is considered simple is historically changeable and can vary from country to country. Reading is now considered easy work, but it wasn't always like that.

When Marx speaks of a commodity, he means a commodity that is an average specimen of its kind. It's not about unique items, such as B. Art objects for which a collector's price is paid. It should also be noted that there may be things that have a price, but are worthless in the narrow sense of the word, such as B. pristine soil. Starting from Marx's approach, one has to explain the exchange value of such things differently.

The monetary form of value

In the context of his value form analysis, Marx wants to show that value as a social phenomenon requires a corresponding value form. A form is needed in which every commodity can express its value and assert it in general. According to Marx, this requires a commodity that has become firmly anchored in this role through habit: gold. This becomes a money commodity.

In his study of the exchange of goods, Marx points out that although money requires individuals to act, individuals in their capacity as owners of goods are subject to the nature of the goods, which requires a general equivalent. Everyone would like to raise his commodity, which for him is no use value, to the general equivalent for which any other commodity can be exchanged. That way he could get the goods he wanted. If everyone did that, there would be no general equivalent. The fact that they relate their goods to a particular commodity, which they make the general equivalent form, asserts itself, according to Marx, without the knowledge of the commodity owner. You act instinctively.

Marx distinguishes between different money functions. Money serves as a measure of value. For this, money does not have to be physically present next to the goods, it is enough if money is present in an ideal way. In the first volume of Das Kapital , Marx assumes that prices express value appropriately. Furthermore, money serves as a means of circulation. As such, it mediates the exchange of goods. Someone sells a commodity, which for him has no use value, for money in order to buy another commodity that he would like to consume; the money remains constantly in circulation. For this it is sufficient if, instead of money, stamps are used that represent money.

Real money is the unity of value and means of circulation. It is only as this unit that money is the independent value structure. It materially embodies the abstract wealth of a society and can be transformed into any use value, so that it represents the material wealth.

Only money as money has further characteristics in which money becomes an end in itself. Money can be withdrawn from circulation in order to be held as treasure. Every commodity producer needs a treasure, for example to be able to buy goods before he has sold his goods. Money can also serve as a means of payment. In this role, it does not simply mediate the exchange. Someone buys something, goes into debt with the seller, and pays later. Money is now used to complete the purchase. Someone buys and sells something to pay off their debts. This order is opposite to the movement W - G - W. The purpose of the process is to get money. Finally, money can fulfill all three functions as world money: it can serve as a means of circulation or as a means of payment or it can also be used to transfer wealth from one country to another.

The general formula of capital movement

Easy circulation of goods and capital movement

Money does not always serve as capital. Marx distinguishes the simple circulation of money and commodities C - M - C from the general formula of the movement of capital M - C - M '. The first formula expresses that someone sells a commodity that is not a use value for him and then buys a commodity that he wants to consume. This movement is not intended to increase the value. Money is being spent. The movement finds its measure in the need and its end with its satisfaction.

The formula G - W - G ', on the other hand, expresses that someone has money, buys goods and then sells goods for more money. The value should grow. Here money is the starting and ending point. Capital utilization becomes an end in itself. The movement has no immanent end. Every G 'is finite and must be advanced again in order to remain capital. The movement is immoderate because it is not related to an external need that indicates enough. Capital is therefore essentially value in motion and not money that is used for consumption or for building treasures . Marx calls the difference between G 'and G surplus value .

One must not confuse the concept of surplus value with the concept of profit, which Marx only explains in the third volume. The former is more general than the concept of profit, and profit as such has special characteristics.

A capitalist is someone who makes the movement of capital his subjective end. The fact that he constantly wants to utilize his capital does not have to be due to the fact that he is mentally ill or morally deficient; he must strive for the greatest possible exploitation so that he can invest in his company in order to be able to survive in the long term in the competition. Insofar as the capitalist follows the logic of exploitation, capital is the automatic subject: it is actually lifeless, but the determining subject of movement.

The capital ratio

Capital requires capitalists to exploit wage laborers . In the first volume, Marx assumes that only value equivalents are exchanged in the circulation of money and commodities. With this assumption he wants to explain the growth in value, which is expressed in M ​​- W - M '. Exchange is necessary for exchange value, but the mere exchange of money for commodities does not create any new value, but can at most redistribute value in violation of the premise. If someone sells below value or buys someone above value, the total value does not change. The trading capital is therefore excluded to explain the realization alone. The same applies to interest-bearing capital. According to Marx, the capitalist must use a commodity that creates more value than it costs: labor.

On the labor markets, doubly free workers and owners of money or production or food confront each other. The worker may sell his labor or conclude and terminate contracts, but he is free from means of subsistence and must therefore sell his labor to someone in order to earn a living. When Marx speaks of the capital relation, he often means this class relation on which the capitalist mode of production is based. Because of the importance of the productive basis, Marx first examines the production of surplus value in the first volume.

The value of labor

The worker does not receive all of the value he creates, but the value of the labor power. This value is equal to the amount of food that is considered necessary for an average worker to reproduce. The term food is to be understood in a broad sense: it does not only mean food, clothing and home, but can also include other things. It is not only about what is necessary to maintain an individual, but also what is necessary to maintain a working class family, because the class as such must be able to reproduce; education costs for the next generation are also included. What is considered necessary depends on historical and moral factors. This can vary from country to country and over time. The scope also depends on what the respective working class claims to be necessary. The wage or price of the labor can in principle also be above or below the value. The price can indicate not only the value but also a momentary surplus or shortage of manpower and fall or rise accordingly. But the value of labor only changes when the amount of necessary food or its value changes.

The connection between capital, money and value

Michael Heinrich (* 1957) emphasizes the monetary character of Marx's theory of capital. According to Marx, there can be no capital without money. In the exploitation process M - W - M ', money is a prerequisite and result of a movement. The value must take the form of money, because only in this way can the identity of the value with itself be determined.

According to Heinrich, Marx did not develop the connection between the simple circulation of goods C - C - C and the capital movement C - C - C ' in Das Kapital , because he probably wanted to popularize its representation. Heinrich therefore tries to reconstruct the necessary connection between the two movements on the basis of Marx's preliminary work. It becomes clear that money in turn needs capital in a certain sense.

It should be noted that Marx did not want C - G - W to be understood historically. It is not a historical phase of a market economy that preceded the capitalist economy. It's about the relationship between goods and money in capitalism. Prima facie, however, the capitalist mode of production appears as a simple circulation of commodities.

Money occurs in C - G - W, but the movement is dependent. It is not certain that goods and money will constantly be exchanged for one another and that money will permanently remain the independent form of value. According to the act W - G, money could be withdrawn from further circulation and held as treasure. It would be useless outside of circulation. Furthermore, money could disappear in the second act G - W, in that the commodity is consumed and the value thus disappears. It is not permanently certain that the value will become independent, so that the value cannot be adequately determined in the context of simple circulation. Only when value moves from M - M - M does money remain an independent value structure in the long term. Since the value can only change with regard to its quantity and thus the movement M - M - M is not merely formal, the movement must take the form M - M - M '. Only under capitalist conditions can value pervade the whole economy and endure. In this respect, value must appear as capital, and Marx's theory of value needs capital theory.

Forms of capital

Industrial capital

Marx describes the cycle of industrial capital with the formula G - W ... P ... W '- G'. First the capitalist buys commodities, namely labor and means of production. This first phase of circulation of money and goods is interrupted by the production process P. The worker creates a new, higher value quantity of goods W '. Finally, the new goods are exchanged for G 'in the second circulation phase. The capital advanced has thus been realized as capital.

In the production process, the worker transfers the value of the means of production used up to the new quantity of goods. Marx therefore speaks of constant capital 1 c. The worker also creates a new value. Since there is a change in value here, Marx calls the capital invested in wages variable capital v. The worker receives part or v of the new value as wages. The capitalist appropriates the other part as surplus value m. The capitalist thus buys goods to the value of c + v, the worker transfers c and creates a new value of v + m; The capitalist sells the new quantity of goods in the amount of c + v + m, pays the worker v and appropriates m.

Instead of producing a body of goods, the workers can also perform services such as B. a transport, the transmission of information or the service of the schoolmaster. In contrast to the body of goods, the service must be consumed while it is being performed. In this case the cycle would be G - W ... P - G '. Marx calls workers who create value or surplus value productive workers.

Capital does not have to exist in the form of large factory complexes to be industrial capital. Industrial capital is capital that goes through the above cycle, taking various forms. It is advanced as money capital to buy goods; In the production process, labor and means of production become productive capital that creates surplus value, and finally capital returns to the form of money as commodity capital W '. The specific feature of industrial capital is that it is the only type of capital that can generate surplus value, while other types of capital can only appropriate surplus value. By appropriating surplus value, the industrial capitalist exploits the worker. The yardstick for this is the rate of added value m / v. This can be increased by increasing the absolute or the relative surplus value .

Once used, the capital can be advanced again and thus begin a new cycle. The capitalist can use the surplus value for his individual consumption (simple reproduction ) or as an investment for accumulation ( reproduction on an extended scale ). Not only has capital thus reproduced itself, but the class relationship is also reproduced: the capitalist always comes out of the cycle as capitalist and the worker always as worker.

With regard to productive capital, Marx distinguishes not only constant from variable capital , but also fixed capital from circulating capital . While the first distinction emphasizes different roles in the creation of value, the second distinction makes the different modes of circulation of value clear. Not every means of production is completely used up in a production period. In the case of a production plant, often only part of the plant's value is given away and the remainder remains with the capitalist. Such productive capital is fixed capital. It flows completely back to the capitalist over several periods and only then has to be replaced. Until then, the returns will be collected in an amortization fund. The means of production consumed in a period, such as B. Energy or used material, and the variable capital usually have to be advanced again after a period. They form the circulating capital.

Trading capital

The trading capital, conceptually understood, only takes over the buying and selling of goods. The workers of the commercial capitalist are unproductive workers. They create no value or added value. You take care of the change of form for money and goods, such as the cashier. For the capitalist their wages are costs which reduce surplus value. Yet such workers can be exploited by doing extra work. For example, they could earn their wages in 5 hours and work for the capitalist in the remaining hours of their working day.      

The industrial capitalist sells his goods below value to the commercial capitalist, and the latter sells the goods at their value. Both share the added value. The former thereby saves pure circulation costs for unproductive workers and shortens the time that its capital spends in circulation, the so-called cycle time.

Such pure circulation costs are to be separated from circulation costs for productive work. The latter are necessary to be able to use the goods in question and increase the exchange value of the goods. An example of this is a transport. Such work extends the time that capital spends in the production process, the so-called production time.

With commodity trading capital, Marx describes money with which goods are bought by industrial capitalists and goods that have yet to be sold. The expression money trading capital, on the other hand, means capital that is tied up in certain circulation costs. This applies to the technical handling of all financial transactions arising from industrial and commercial capital, stocks of money, collecting, paying, accounting and the use of money stocks for the purchase and payment of open invoices.

Interest-bearing capital

In contrast to industrial and commercial capital, in the case of interest-bearing capital, money itself becomes a commodity. The price of this commodity is interest. In addition to its use value as a generally valid equivalent form, money therefore also has the use value to generate profit. It's possible capital. In order to be realized as capital, it must be lent and function as industrial capital. With the expansion of the capitalist mode of production, the type of lending changes. A large part of the credit is now used to make the debtor richer.

The formula of interest-bearing capital is G - G - W - G '- G' '. The money capitalist lends his own capital to a capitalist who makes it function. The latter achieves a gross profit. The money capitalist appropriates part of this as interest, the other part the functioning capitalist receives as entrepreneurial profit. A person can be both a money capitalist and a functioning capitalist. It is also possible that someone is just a money capitalist or just a functioning capitalist. So one doesn't have to have capital to be a capitalist. A chairman of the board of directors of a stock corporation, for example, cannot hold shares in the company and can formally be a wage worker; but he has value, uses it as capital and organizes exploitation; His payment is not based on the value of his labor, but on the profit made. The movement of interest-bearing capital is mediated by historically changeable institutions, namely banks and capital markets.

Fictional capital

If real money circulates, Marx speaks of real capital . In the case of securities, shares and loans, however, there are promises to pay or certain capital claims - fictitious capital . Both types differ in the specific way in which their value is determined. The 'value' (stock exchange price) of papers, stocks and bonds no longer correlates with the amount originally paid for these claims. The so-called "value" by which such claims are traded depends, in the case of fixed-income securities, on whether their interest rate is above or below the market rate. Share prices depend on profit expectations: if profit expectations rise, the price in question increases; if expectations fall or if profit is uncertain, then the price falls. Today, not only simple claims are traded on the capital markets, but also claims based on other claims, such as B. Derivatives. So new forms of fictitious capital can always arise.

Capital composition

In the first volume of Das Kapital, in Chapter 23, Marx distinguishes three different concepts of the composition of capital. The concept of value composition covers the ratio of constant capital to variable capital . The concept of technical composition does not concern the value level, but focuses on the material aspect, that is, on the ratio of the amount of means of production used to the amount of concrete work involved. The term organic composition denotes the composition of values, insofar as this changes because the technical composition changes.

These three definitions are only found in the French translation of the first volume and Engels took them over into the third edition of the German edition; in earlier works Marx had chosen other definitions.

In the first edition of the first capital volume from 1867 there is no definition of the concept of value composition at the beginning of the chapter "The general law of capitalist accumulation". There Marx only speaks of the organic value composition. This denotes the ratio of c to v and expresses above all it is based on the fact that the technical conditions of production change: "In the progress of accumulation a great revolution takes place in the relation between the mass of the means of production and the mass of the labor-power that moves them. This revolution is reflected again in the changing composition of the capital-value from constant." and variable component, or in the changing proportion of its value components converted into means of production and labor. I call this composition the organic composition of capital. "

Accordingly, in a manuscript on which the third volume of Das Kapital is based, Marx uses the concept of organic composition to describe the ratio of constant to variable capital, which can, however, be based on two different factors: both on technical conditions and on the relationship between the mass of the means of production and the mass of labor power as well as pure changes in value. “By the organic composition of capital we understand the ratio of its passive and its active components, of constant capital and variable capital. With this organic composition two proportions come into consideration which are not of equal importance, although under certain circumstances they can produce the same effect. "After a discussion of how the factors might work, he determines the concept of organic Composition includes "the proportion in which, viewed in terms of percentages, the total capitals invested in different spheres of production are divided into constant and variable capital; they consist of one or the other."

The total capital and its individual capitals

Capital does not exist as a single capital. Marx wrote in Grundrisse that there can only be capital if there are several individual capitals; capital determines itself in that several individual capitals compete with one another. The inner nature thus appears as an outer necessity.

In Das Kapital , Marx deals with the structure of total social capital and individual capital in all three volumes on the corresponding levels of abstraction. The first volume is devoted to the immediate production process. First, Marx looks at individual capital and abstracts from its relationship to other capitals; thus he treats surplus value production and capital formation or accumulation . Only in the 23rd chapter does Marx examine the structure of total capital. He looks at the individual capitals in such a way that they differ from each other only in terms of their size and their composition (the ratio of constant to variable capital c / v). The total capital is represented as the mere sum of individual capitals. It becomes clear, however, that the development of total capital has an effect on individual capitals, as in the first two sections of Chapter 23, where Marx describes the consequences of accumulation if the composition of capital remains the same or changed.

In the second volume of Das Kapital , Marx devotes himself to the process of circulation and emphasizes the systematic character of capital. The individual capitals are connected with one another, as capitalists exchange their products through money. On the one hand, every cycle of capital requires that the capitalist concerned can buy the means of production and his workers food; On the other hand, the goods that emerge from one cycle must become part of the other cycles as food or means of production. The individual capitals thus form the total social capital. In order for total capital to be able to reproduce itself easily, the components of the social product must have certain quantitative relationships and value relations to one another. As many means of production must be produced as have been consumed, and the food produced must be sufficient to cover the consumption of the workers and the private consumption of the capitalists. In addition, the means of production and food must be affordable. Accumulation requires that more means of production and food be produced than have been consumed. In order for the total capital to accumulate, its partial capital must accumulate. Whether an individual capital can accumulate depends on other individual capital. It must be able to procure more production or foodstuffs on the market and also be able to sell more goods.

In the third volume, Marx can assume that production and circulation form a unit and can turn to the overall process. Starting from the concept of surplus value, he developed the concept of profit for individual capital . According to this point of view, the individual capitals that generate profit form the total capital by competing with one another and forming an average rate of profit. This is not about total competition; Competition is understood as a mechanism that leads to socialization: the competing individual capitals become components of the same kind in total social capital. It is true that the general rate of profit arises only when the individual capitals compete with one another, but it presents itself to the individual capitalist as a prerequisite and influences how his capital develops.

The formula G - W - G 'is concretized in the second capital volume as a cycle of capital G - W ... P ... W' - G '. The total social capital as such is always partly in the form of money and commodity capital in circulation and partly in the form of productive capital in the production process. When Marx developed the concept of average profit, he assumed that every individual capital must go through the cycle. In the course of the social division of labor, however, forms of capital specialize, so that in addition to industrial capital, there is commodity and money trading capital . Industrial and commercial capital flow into the process in which the individual rates of profit equalize to form a general rate of profit , the latter not producing any surplus value. Only on this basis does Marx theoretically develop money as potential capital and treat interest-bearing capital .

The general rate of profit and the redistribution of surplus value

A capitalist does not simply appropriate surplus value directly . As the individual capitals compete with one another, the individual rates of profit tend to equalize each other to form a general or average rate of profit . If it is possible, capital will flow to where the liquidation conditions are better. It is withdrawn from sectors with poorer exploitation conditions, so that competitive pressure there decreases and prices can rise; it flows into sectors with better recycling conditions, which increases competitive pressure and reduces prices. The result is an average profit. This is calculated from the cost price of the commodity (costs of constant and variable capital ) multiplied by the general rate of profit.

In the first and second volumes of Das Kapital , Marx assumed that goods should be exchanged according to their values. The general rate of profit developed by Marx in Volume Three, however, implies two things: on the one hand, it is the case that prices typically do not adequately express the value of a commodity; on the other hand, it follows that the total mass of surplus-value is redistributed between the capitalists. Every capitalist gets a profit, the size of which depends on how much capital the capitalist in question has used.

Marx criticized David Ricardo (1772–1823) for failing to understand the relationship between values, production prices and the general rate of profit. He himself wanted to use a procedure to clarify how values ​​can be converted into production prices, and failed. This transformation problem is still very controversial today.

The credit system

In Das Kapital , Marx only deals with the credit system in the third volume, which was published posthumously by Friedrich Engels (1820–1895). Marx's studies in this regard are very immature. On the basis of the manuscripts, however, it can be reconstructed that the credit system is fundamental to capital realization in several respects.

The credit system forms the essential basis for the mechanism that balances individual rates of profit. It enables relatively large amounts of capital to be bundled and mediates the transfer of capital between the industries.

The credit system also plays a crucial role in realizing the added value of society. As the industrial capitalists advance capital and return capital to them through sales, resources are created which are collected in funds, such as funds for accumulation . Until these funds are used for their purpose, they can be lent as interest-bearing capital ; likewise a capitalist could borrow capital before his accumulation fund is sufficiently filled from his own profits to invest earlier. If one looks at the total social production, then it can be put simply that the capitalists of a country advance a total of constant and variable capital in one year and produce a total added value. Additional funds are required to buy this additional product. The capitalists either hold a treasure or they take out loans. The fact that they hold a treasure would contradict the logic of exploitation, which requires that the available value be exploited as much as possible; If the capitalists follow this logic, then they buy the surplus product by means of credit.

It enables the individual capitalist to overcome the limits of his own profit and to raise additional funds through banks and capital markets. This makes it easier for him to invest in new means of production that can increase workers' productivity. In this sense, total social capital can also accelerate its accumulation. Thus the credit system becomes an important crisis factor or one of the main levers of overproduction and overspeculation in trade.

Capital theory as the destruction of appearances: fetish and mystification of capitalist relationships

Marx's theory of capital tries to expose and explain the superficial appearance of capitalist conditions. Marx starts out from appearances, penetrates into the basic structures of the capitalist mode of production and ultimately wants to show that these structures generate appearances or common everyday forms of thought.

In his analysis of commodities, Marx established the fetish character of commodities . It is true that value appears to be a property of a thing, but value cannot be grasped in the individual commodity; therefore Marx called the objectivity something eerie or even something fantastic. According to Marx, value is basically a social relationship that is mediated through things. The fantastic value object is based on the form of the commodity itself. The social character of human labor is transferred to things and presents itself to people as the property of the products; on this basis, the false awareness arises that in every social context it must apply that every work product takes on the form of a commodity. The social connection that the atomized private producers enter into by exchanging their products takes on a life of its own: whether a product has value and how great the value is depends on the development of the market. The individual is dependent on this development and submits to it, since he alone cannot completely predict or control it.

The commodity fetish continues in the money fetish . It appears as if the monetary commodity has a special property and because of this property all commodities should express their value in it. A social relationship is hidden behind money: because people behave as owners of goods, this requires a generally valid form of value and by relating their goods to such a form, the goods in question become money. The fact that a social relationship is objectified applies even more to money than to goods. While a commodity is a commodity and an object of value, money is immediately considered an object of value. In addition to the individual commodities, money appears as value in general, as if in the animal kingdom there were next to the individual animals a special individual who appears as the "incarnation of the entire animal kingdom".

Although capital is the product of human labor, it is fetishized: it seems to have powers of its own that actually belong to man. The capital fetish pervades production, trade and interest-bearing capital. In production, because of the cooperation and the division of labor under the command of capital, as well as technical progress, it appears that it is not the productive power of labor but the productive power of capital that is increased. In the case of commercial capital, it appears as if capital utilization could take place alongside and independently of the industrial sphere; the more the trading capitalist reduces the pure costs of circulation, the smaller this deduction from surplus value. The capital fetish reaches its peak in interest-bearing capital. By dividing the ownership of capital and the function of capital, it appears that capital and not human labor creates surplus value. The money capitalist as such remains outside the production process and only confronts the functioning capitalist directly; the entrepreneur's profit appears to have been achieved independently of the ownership of capital and occurs as a result of the production process, for the owner of capital was paid with interest; the functioning capitalist, for his part, appears as a special worker who takes on the overall direction and supervision; To the money capitalist, the process is as it is expressed in the formula G - G '. "The social relationship is perfect as the relationship of a thing, money, to itself. [...] It becomes just as much a property of money to create value, to generate interest, as that of a pear tree to bear pears."

The individual consciousness is mystified by the form of wages . Accordingly, it is not the value of the labor that is paid, but the value of the work done. This makes exploitation less visible. Not only the relationship of exploitation, but also the surplus value is mystified. Marx distinguishes the concept of surplus value from the concept of profit. The former is the term used in his scientific analysis to uncover a social relationship or exploitation . In the rate of surplus value m / v, the surplus value m is set in relation to the variable capital v. The concept of profit, on the other hand, encompasses a relationship between advanced capital and realized capital, that is, between G in the amount c + v and G 'in the amount c + v + m. The surplus value m is set in relation to the total sum G advanced. While it is clear to the capitalist that profit arises by using labor and means of production, he believes that both c and v add value. According to Marx, however, it is the case that the value of the consumed means of production c is transferred and that the worker creates a new value of v + m. The view that both c and v are value-creating is aided by the mystification of wages. The concept of profit thus mystifies consciousness: in the imagination the actual facts are turned into the opposite and the increase in value appears as the fruit of capital.

The mystifications and fetishisms are related and culminate in the trinitarian formula . The production factors land, labor and capital appear as independent sources of value: accordingly, labor generates the value of wages, capital generates profit, and land generates rent. If all work is naturally considered to be wage labor, it stands to reason that the land naturally takes the form of private property and the means of production take the form of capital. Regardless of the forms that are specific to a social context, those who have the relevant "source of value" can appropriate a part of the social product of value in order to earn an income. The social conditions are thus reified and earth as well Capital come to life.

By gaining experience and analyzing the situation, one can break through the forms of thought. By behaving according to social forms, individuals reproduce these forms. In this way they create a social context that becomes independent. The individual alone cannot escape the practical constraints without perishing in the economic sense. In this regard, things do indeed gain material power over people.

Historicity of Capital

According to Marx, it applies to every form of society that people have to transform natural substances according to their needs in order to create use values. Nature and human labor are therefore necessary conditions for the material wealth of a society. They are therefore also necessary for there to be commodities and capital. The characteristics of the capitalist mode of production are not, however, superhistorical ones.

Even in prehistoric societies there were people who used a sum of value profitably. That was more about interest-bearing and trading capital. The fact that production and trade are predominantly profit-oriented, on the other hand, is primarily a phenomenon of modern times.

Capitalistically operated production implies the production of goods. For Marx, the commodity is the usual form in which social wealth is presented in capitalism. However, it is not a matter of history that every work product is a commodity. In early medieval societies, for example, many people produced primarily for their own use or for taxes to the landlord and hardly to exchange their products in a market.

The existence of commodity production and circulation, as well as the use of money, do not require that most of a society's labor products be commodities. The double free worker was still needed. Only then do most of the labor products take on the form of a commodity. Marx called the process that produced the doubly free worker primitive accumulation . He sketched this using the example of England. Feudal lords ousted peasants from the country to farm sheep. The state helped with laws to accustom dispossessed to the discipline of the factory. Something similar can happen again when the capitalist mode of production expands.

Tendencies of capital

In "Das Kapital" Marx wanted to capture the laws of motion inherent in the capitalist mode of production as purely as possible. He admitted that various factors can modify the way laws work. For example, he conceded that the law of the fall in the rate of profit only acts as a tendency, as various circumstances can weaken the effect. In the 24th chapter of the first volume, Marx tried to summarize where the capitalist mode of production tends.

• Accumulation / concentration (in the Marxian sense): surplus value is converted or accumulated into capital. The capital of society as a whole grows as its parts grow. When the individual capitalist accumulates, ceteris paribus, he concentrates more means of production and workers under his command. In addition, it will be easier for part of a capital to split off and become independent. More capital is created that can be centralized.
• Centralization (in the Marxian sense): individual capitals merge into one larger capital (cf. corporate concentration ). It does not matter whether the individual capitals form a stock company "peacefully" or z. B. a hostile takeover takes place. Competition and the credit system are the main drivers. The larger capitals have means of production that allow higher productivity. They beat the smaller capitals in price. The latter look for niches in which little capital is required for normal operations. However, there is increasing competitive pressure. Some others buy up and some go under. In the competitive struggle, the credit system becomes a weapon, with the help of which the individual capitalist can accumulate more and more quickly than with his own resources.
• Growth of the credit system: If the total social capital accumulates, the respective credit amounts, which are used to realize the total social value added, also increase (see credit system ).
• Separation of capital ownership and capital application
• Increase in the productivity of labor: capitalists strive for extra added value . To do this, they are changing the way their workers work together, the division of labor, and are relying primarily on automated machine systems. If, thanks to machinery, wage costs can be reduced, so that the increase in prices that has arisen through the purchase of the machines can be overcompensated, then production can be cheaper. The capitalist who is the first to introduce such an innovation can produce cheaper than his competitors and sell at market price. He thus achieves extra added value. This disappears when the innovation has generalized.
• Technological progress: In order to increase productive power, scientists deal with the production process and develop innovative technologies.
• Possible increase in standard of living: You can construct an abstract calculation example. If the productive power doubled suddenly in all branches and if working time and intensity remained the same, there would be twice as many goods as before and each commodity would only be worth half as much. If the workers are organized enough, they can maintain the nominal wage or at least ensure that it is not halved. In both cases the workers could buy more goods than before; real wages would have risen.
• Crisis : Production and consumption are systematically separated. The increase in productive power tends to expand production. The use of new machines often only pays off when more is produced than before; furthermore, the innovative capitalist wants to achieve as much extra value as possible. He offers below market price in order to sell the larger quantity of goods more easily. That puts its competitors under pressure. Even if a capitalist owns normal means of production, he tries to produce as much as possible so that the means of production give up their value on the products before they become obsolete. In contrast to the expansion of production, wages or consumption of the working masses as well as investments in the means of production are systematically limited: the capitalist must maximize his profit and therefore minimize his costs or labor costs; he only buys means of production when he expects that it will bring a profit and that this hoped-for profit will be greater than if he used his capital, for example, as interest-bearing capital. If production and consumption move apart long enough, overproduction and overaccumulation occur. There is then too much capital that cannot or can hardly be used: goods are not sold, means of production and labor become superfluous, many companies go bankrupt and many become unemployed. Thanks to the credit system, capital can move more flexibly, accumulate faster and invest in innovative modes of production. The credit system thus becomes a main lever in the crisis.
• Increase in the composition of capital c / v: Industrial capitalists put an increasingly automated machine systems and the amount of human labor decreases. As a result, they use more constant capital c and less variable capital v.
• Rate of profit case : The increase in the productive power of labor allows the production of relative surplus value or an increase in the rate of surplus value m / v. In addition, the capital composition increases c / v. As a result, the general rate of profit must fall. Various factors can counteract this: increased exploitation, cheaper means of production, a mass of available cheap labor, foreign trade and an increase in share capital.
• Expansion of the world market
• Destruction of nature and the workers: although nature and human labor are conditions of capital, they are systematically undermined as a means of the self-sustaining exploitation of capital. Capital strives to lower costs or wages or occupational safety measures and to extend working hours. Organized workers or the state have to do something about this in order to be able to sustain the working class in the long term. Likewise, capital tends to exhaust natural resources such as B. soil fertility in the case of capitalist agriculture.
• Socialism: The production and circulation of goods require a social division of labor. The capitalist mode of production increases this and means of production arise that can only be used collectively. The development of the credit system enables capitalists to pool and dispose of society's financial resources. Its development partially nullifies the status of capital as private property. Capital associations are formed, such as B. Public companies. In this way, undertakings that previously only the state government could carry out can become social undertakings.

Differences to neoclassical approaches

Representatives of the neoclassical do not explain the value of a commodity by means of abstract work , but rely on the marginal principle . This derives supply and demand and thus the value of marginal utility and marginal productivity; It is therefore mostly spoken of a “subjective theory of value”, since personal expected values ​​for utility and productivity flow into supply and demand decisions.

Marx's conception of the role of money differs from that of neoclassics. According to this there is money because market players weigh up rationally and use money to be able to exchange products more easily and to calculate with them. According to Carl Menger , money was created without agreement or state coercion; individuals willing to barter would have recognized that it was expedient for their purposes to use highly salable goods; by habit these have become money. Marx, on the other hand, emphasizes a structural aspect in his value form analysis: without money there can be no capitalist mode of production. Value or abstract work requires its own value structure in order to materialize; Without money, the individual producers cannot enter into social contacts as producers of goods. From this perspective it seems inappropriate to abstract from money as if money were neutral and acted as a kind of “veil” that hovers over the real economic sphere. With his conception of money, Marx tries to contradict Say's law . Neoclassics sometimes use it as a premise to justify that crises do not arise in a market economy that is free from external disturbances; Marx, on the other hand, notes that with money there is a possibility of crisis. The simple exchange of product for product is over with one act. The money-mediated circulation of commodities C - M - W, on the other hand, breaks down into the exchange act C - G and the exchange act G - W. It can be interrupted by someone selling their goods and not spending the money, but holding it as a value.

Neoclassics assume that the market is in equilibrium or that the market is tending towards equilibrium. Walras' pure "political economy" is paradigmatic. He tries to use an ideal model to explain how prices are formed; Effective supply and effective demand tend to equalize, so that a steady state is established. According to neoclassical approaches, crises can only arise when external factors disrupt the market mechanism, e.g. B. State intervention or unions that enforce high wages. Marx's approach focuses on the dynamics of capital and its laws of motion. It must be used endlessly and immeasurably. The tendency towards crisis is immanent in its development (see tendencies of capital ). Production and consumption are determined in opposite directions. If they diverge long enough, overproduction or overaccumulation occurs.

Another difference is with regard to the perception of what people do business for. According to Carl Menger and William Stanley Jevons (1835-1882), any human economy primarily serves to ensure that people satisfy their needs or maximize their pleasure. Marx, on the other hand, did not want to uncover superhistorical economic laws in " Das Kapital ", but rather to explore the specifics of the capitalist mode of production. According to Marx, in the capitalist mode of production the utilization of capital comes first and is an end in itself. In contrast to earlier modes of exploitation, capitalist exploitation is primarily aimed at exchange value and strives for the greatest possible exploitation of labor.

Horror metaphor

Marx not only tried to conceptualize capital, but often resorted to metaphors. The Wehrwolf metaphor appears in the chapter on the working day in Das Kapital . Capital has a "military wolf hunger for overtime" which threatens the reproduction of labor and prematurely exhausts labor.

Vampire metaphors are very often found in Marx's works. In the capital , the vampire metaphor place three times in explicit form and all three events are in the chapter on working. Capital or the capitalist as personified capital strives for a maximum extension of the working day. Capital is "dead labor, which is only vampire-like animated by sucking in living work and the more it lives the more it sucks in." Following its "vampire thirst for living working blood" it wants to extend the working day into the night. At the end of the chapter, Marx goes back to a quote from Engels' The English Ten Hours Bill and speaks of the capitalist as a sucker who does not let go of the worker, "while a muscle, a tendon, a drop of blood is still to be exploited".

Even before Marx, the vampire metaphor was used to exercise social criticism, as in the case of Jean-Jacques Rousseau (1712–1778), who used it to criticize the belief in certain justified authorities. Pierre-Joseph Proudhon (1809–1865) used them to depict conditions of exploitation. According to Mark Neocleous, Marx's vampire metaphor must be viewed in the context of the critique of political economy in order to be able to understand it appropriately. The vampire metaphor is not a mere stylistic device, but must be seen in connection with the fact that Marx problematized the relationship between the dead and the living in capitalism. Capital as dead labor wants to rule over living labor, feed on it and exhaust it so much that labor dries up. In this regard, the vampire metaphor fits the concept of alienation and the concept of the commodity fetish , according to which dead things come to life and rule over the living.

Reception and criticism

Joseph Alois Schumpeter (1883–1950) equated his concept of capital with Marx's concept of capital in one respect. Capital is an instrument of rule of the entrepreneur with which he rules over the goods to be bought. However, he rejected Marx's theory of exploitation and used the marginal utility approach to criticize the labor theory of value , which he relativized. Schumpeter also pointed out similarities with regard to the concept of surplus value and at the same time criticized Marx's approaches. According to Marx, constant capital does not create any surplus value. The same in Schumpeter's theory of economic development is the proposition that in an economy that is in complete equilibrium, the interest rate is zero. However, Schumpeter only accepted one kind of surplus value in the Marxian sense, namely the surplus value that appears as entrepreneurial profit and interest on capital. The economic historian and Schumpeter student Eduard März (1908–1987) thinks that Marx's concept of capital is only verbally similar to that of Schumpeter: surplus value in the Marxian sense arises from production, whereas surplus value in Schumpeter's sense arises from circulation.

Schumpeter valued Marx's conceptual contributions to capital theory. Marx improved David Ricardo's (1772–1823) concepts of fixed and circulating capital through the concepts of constant and variable capital. Likewise, Marx's concept of the organic structure of capital is more precise than Ricardo's ideas. In his business cycle theory, Schumpeter praised a basic idea of ​​Marx, according to which the economy develops out of itself. According to März, Schumpeter's basic idea can already be found in Marx's theory of relative surplus value , that the capitalist mode of production tends, out of its inherent dynamics, to technical innovations that allow the innovator a temporary monopoly and corresponding profits.

Michael Heinrich criticizes fundamental categories of capital theory. Marx characterizes the value substance of abstract labor partly physiologically and sometimes understands the value of the value in such a way that it is only determined by the normal technical conditions of production; This contradicts how Marx characterizes the substance of value, the magnitude of value and the objectivity as special social constructs of a commodity-producing society. This ambivalence allows corresponding naturalistic interpretations. Furthermore, Heinrich considers Marx's assumption that the socially generally valid form of value must be linked to a monetary commodity such as gold as unfounded and empirically outdated. Marx wanted to grasp the capitalist mode of production in its ideal average; since the Bretton Woods system no longer applies, money is no longer tied to gold. Heinrich also sees methodological deficiencies. Marx analyzed the forms of value, but did not develop the form of money strictly dialectically from the general form of value; he popularizes and thus blurs the distinction between the value form analysis, in which forms are conceptually developed, and the treatment of the exchange process, in which he examines the actions of the goods owners. Likewise, in Das Kapital , Marx failed to develop theoretically how the money form and the capital form or how the simple circulation of commodities and the movement of capital are related to one another. This allows the interpretation that Marx abstractly described a historical phase or a pre-capitalist society of commodity producers with the simple circulation of goods C - M - W.

Heinrich considers the concept of the technical capital composition to be too unclear, since heterogeneous quantities of goods cannot be compared with it. The concept of the organic composition of capital loses its distinctiveness if it is applied to the level of total social capital. Technical changes and changes in value cannot be clearly separated there.

literature

• Werner Becker : The Achilles heel of Marxism, the contradiction between capital and labor . Hoffmann and Campe, Hamburg 1974, ISBN 3-455-09156-3 .

See also

Criticism of Marxism

Individual evidence

1. ^ Karl Marx: The capital. Critique of Political Economy. First volume. Book I: The Production Process of Capital . In: Institute for Marxism-Leninism at the Central Committee of the SED (Ed.): Karl Marx Friedrich Engels Works (MEW) . tape 23 . Dietz Verlag, Berlin 1962, p. 49 : “The wealth of the societies in which the capitalist mode of production prevails appears as an“ immense collection of commodities ”, the individual commodity as its elementary form. Our investigation therefore begins with the analysis of the goods. "
2. ↑ ^{a b} Michael Heinrich: The science of value. The Marxian Critique of Political Economy between Scientific Revolution and Classical Tradition . Westphalian steam boat, Münster 2020, p. 203 .
3. ^ Karl Marx: The capital. Critique of Political Economy. First volume. Book I: The Production Process of Capital . In: Institute for Marxism-Leninism at the Central Committee of the SED (Ed.): Karl Marx Friedrich Engels Works (MEW) . tape 23 . Dietz Verlag, Berlin 1962, p. 55 : “A thing can be use-value without being of value. It is so when its human benefit is not mediated through work. So air, virgin soil, natural meadows, wild wood, etc. A thing can be useful and the product of human labor without being a commodity. Those who satisfy their own needs through their product create use value, but not goods. In order to produce a commodity, he must not only produce use value, but use value for other, social use value. {And not just for others. The medieval peasant produced the grain of interest for the feudal lord and the tithe grain for the priest. But neither a grain of interest nor a grain of tithe became a commodity because they were produced for others. In order to become a commodity, the product must be transferred to the other for whom it serves as use value.} Finally, nothing can be worth without being an object of use. If it is useless, the work it contains is also useless, does not count as work and therefore has no value. "
4. ^ Karl Marx: The capital. Critique of Political Economy. First volume. Book I: The Production Process of Capital . In: Institute for Marxism-Leninism at the Central Committee of the SED (Ed.): Karl Marx Friedrich Engels Works (MEW) . tape 23 . Dietz Verlag, Berlin 1962, p. 75 : “The value of a commodity is expressed independently through its representation as“ exchange value ”. If at the beginning of this chapter it was said in the usual manner: The commodity is use value and exchange value, then that was, to be precise, wrong. The goods are value in use or objects of use and "value". It presents itself as this double what it is as soon as its value has its own form different from its natural form, that of exchange value, and it never has this form considered in isolation, but always only in relation to value or exchange with a second one, various goods. However, once you know this, that way of speaking does no harm, but serves as a shortcut. "
5. ↑ ^{a b} Michael Heinrich: Critique of the political economy. An introduction . 14th edition. Butterfly Verlag, Stuttgart 2018, p. 46 .
6. ↑ Michael Heinrich: Critique of the political economy. An introduction . 14th edition. Butterfly Verlag, Stuttgart 2018, p. 47 .
7. ↑ Michael Heinrich: Critique of the political economy. An introduction . 14th edition. Butterfly Verlag, Stuttgart 2018, p. 47-48 .
8. ↑ ^{a b} Karl Marx: Das Kapital. Critique of Political Economy. First volume. Book I: The Production Process of Capital . In: Institute for Marxism-Leninism at the Central Committee of the SED (Ed.): Karl Marx Friedrich Engels Works (MEW) . tape 23 . Dietz Verlag, Berlin 1962, p. 52 : “If one disregards the use value of the commodity, only one property remains for them, that of labor products. However, the work product is already transformed in our hands. If we abstract from its use value, we also abstract from the physical components and forms that make it use value. It is no longer a table or a house or thread or anything useful. All of its sensual properties are extinguished. It is no longer the product of carpentry or construction or spinning or any other particular productive work. With the useful character of the work products, the useful character of the works represented in them disappears, so the various concrete forms of these works also disappear, they no longer differ, but are all reduced to the same human work, abstract human work. Let us now consider the residual of the labor products. There is nothing left of them but the same ghostly objectivity, a mere jelly of indiscriminate human labor; H. the expenditure of human labor without regard to the form of its expenditure. These things only show that human labor is expended in their production, human labor is accumulated. As crystals of this common social substance they are values ​​- commodity values. "
9. ^ Karl Marx: The capital. Critique of Political Economy. First volume. Book I: The Production Process of Capital . In: Institute for Marxism-Leninism at the Central Committee of the SED (Ed.): Karl Marx Friedrich Engels Works (MEW) . tape 23 . Dietz Verlag, Berlin 1962, p. 61 : “All work is on the one hand the expenditure of human labor in the physiological sense, and in this property of equal human or abstract human labor it forms the value of the goods. All work, on the other hand, is the expenditure of human labor in a specially targeted form, and in this property of concrete useful work it produces use values. "
10. ^ Karl Marx: The capital. Critique of Political Economy. First volume. Book I: The Production Process of Capital . In: Institute for Marxism-Leninism at the Central Committee of the SED (Ed.): Karl Marx Friedrich Engels Works (MEW) . tape 23 . Dietz Verlag, Berlin 1962, p. 62 : “The objectivity of goods differs from Wittib Hurtig in that you don't know where to get them. In the complete opposite of the sensual, coarse objectivity of the commodity, no atom of natural substance is included in their objectivity. One can therefore turn and turn an individual commodity however one wants, it remains incomprehensible as a valuable thing. If, however, we remember that commodities are only valuable insofar as they are expressions of the same social unit, human labor, that their objectivity is therefore purely social, then it goes without saying that they only appear in the social relationship of goods to goods can. "
11. ↑ Michael Heinrich: Critique of the political economy. An introduction . 14th edition. Butterfly Verlag, Stuttgart 2018, p. 48-49 .
12. ↑ Michael Heinrich: Critique of the political economy. An introduction . 14th edition. Butterfly Verlag, Stuttgart 2018, p. 47-49 .
13. ↑ Michael Heinrich: Critique of the political economy. An introduction . 14th edition. Butterfly Verlag, Stuttgart 2018, p. 53-54 .
14. ↑ Michael Heinrich: Critique of the political economy. An introduction . 14th edition. Butterfly Verlag, Stuttgart 2018, p. 49 .
15. ↑ Michael Heinrich: Critique of the political economy. An introduction . 14th edition. Butterfly Verlag, Stuttgart 2018, p. 49-50 .
16. ↑ Michael Heinrich: Critique of the political economy. An introduction . 14th edition. Butterfly Verlag, Stuttgart 2018, p. 50 .
17. ^ Karl Marx: The capital. Critique of Political Economy. First volume. Book I: The Production Process of Capital . In: Institute for Marxism-Leninism at the Central Committee of the SED (Ed.): Karl Marx Friedrich Engels Works (MEW) . tape 23 . Dietz Verlag, Berlin 1962, p. 54 : "The individual goods are generally considered to be the average of their kind."
18. ↑ ^{a b} Michael Heinrich: Critique of the political economy. An introduction . 14th edition. Butterfly Verlag, Stuttgart 2018, p. 40 .
19. ↑ Michael Heinrich: Critique of the political economy. An introduction . 14th edition. Butterfly Verlag, Stuttgart 2018, p. 59 .
20. ↑ ^{a b} Michael Heinrich: Critique of the political economy. An introduction . 14th edition. Butterfly Verlag, Stuttgart 2018, p. 60 .
21. ↑ Michael Heinrich: Critique of the political economy. An introduction . 14th edition. Butterfly Verlag, Stuttgart 2018, p. 61-62 .
22. ↑ Michael Heinrich: Critique of the political economy. An introduction . 14th edition. Butterfly Verlag, Stuttgart 2018, p. 62-63 .
23. ↑ ^{a b} Michael Heinrich: Critique of the political economy. An introduction . 14th edition. Butterfly Verlag, Stuttgart 2018, p. 65-66 .
24. ↑ ^{a b c} Michael Heinrich: Critique of the political economy. An introduction . 14th edition. Butterfly Verlag, Stuttgart 2018, p. 66 .
25. ↑ Michael Heinrich: Critique of the political economy. An introduction . 14th edition. Butterfly Verlag, Stuttgart 2018, p. 66-67 .
26. ↑ ^{a b c d} Michael Heinrich: Critique of the political economy. An introduction . 14th edition. Butterfly Verlag, Stuttgart 2018, p. 67 .
27. ↑ ^{a b} Michael Heinrich: Critique of the political economy. An introduction . 14th edition. Butterfly Verlag, Stuttgart 2018, p. 83 .
28. ^ Karl Marx: The capital. Critique of Political Economy. First volume. Book I: The Production Process of Capital . In: Institute for Marxism-Leninism at the Central Committee of the SED (Ed.): Karl Marx Friedrich Engels Works (MEW) . tape 23 . Dietz Verlag, Berlin 1962, p. 166 : “And viewed quantitatively, £ 110 are [= G ', d. V.] a limited sum of value such as £ 100. [= G, d. V.]. If the £ 110 when money was spent, they fell out of their role. They stopped being capital. Removed from circulation, they petrify into treasure [...] "
29. ^ Karl Marx: The capital. Critique of Political Economy. First volume. Book I: The Production Process of Capital . In: Institute for Marxism-Leninism at the Central Committee of the SED (Ed.): Karl Marx Friedrich Engels Works (MEW) . tape 23 . Dietz Verlag, Berlin 1962, p. 167 : “The simple circulation of commodities - the sale for the purchase - serves as a means for an end purpose lying outside the circulation, the appropriation of use values, the satisfaction of needs. The circulation of money as capital, on the other hand, is an end in itself, for the valorization of value only exists within this constantly renewed movement. The movement of capital is therefore immoderate. "
30. ↑ Michael Heinrich: Critique of the political economy. An introduction . 14th edition. Butterfly Verlag, Stuttgart 2018, p. 84 and pp. 140-143 .
31. ↑ Michael Heinrich: Critique of the political economy. An introduction . 14th edition. Butterfly Verlag, Stuttgart 2018, p. 84-85 .
32. ↑ Michael Heinrich: Critique of the political economy. An introduction . 14th edition. Butterfly Verlag, Stuttgart 2018, p. 86 .
33. ↑ ^{a b} Michael Heinrich: Critique of the political economy. An introduction . 14th edition. Butterfly Verlag, Stuttgart 2018, p. 87 .
34. ^ Karl Marx: The capital. Critique of Political Economy. First volume. Book I: The Production Process of Capital . In: Institute for Marxism-Leninism at the Central Committee of the SED (Ed.): Karl Marx Friedrich Engels Works (MEW) . tape 23 . Dietz Verlag, Berlin 1962, p. 179 : “What is true of trading capital is even more true of usury capital. In trading capital, the extremes, the money that is thrown on the market and the increased money that is withdrawn from the market, are at least mediated through buying and selling, through the movement of circulation. In usury capital, the form G - W - G 'is abbreviated to the unmediated extremes G - G', money that is exchanged for more money, a form that contradicts the nature of money and is therefore inexplicable from the point of view of the exchange of goods. "
35. ↑ Michael Heinrich: Critique of the political economy. An introduction . 14th edition. Butterfly Verlag, Stuttgart 2018, p. 87-88 .
36. ↑ Michael Heinrich: Critique of the political economy. An introduction . 14th edition. Butterfly Verlag, Stuttgart 2018, p. 88 .
37. ↑ Michael Heinrich: Critique of the political economy. An introduction . 14th edition. Butterfly Verlag, Stuttgart 2018, p. 92-93 .
38. ↑ ^{a b} Michael Heinrich: Critique of the political economy. An introduction . 14th edition. Butterfly Verlag, Stuttgart 2018, p. 90 .
39. ↑ ^{a b} Michael Heinrich: Critique of the political economy. An introduction . 14th edition. Butterfly Verlag, Stuttgart 2018, p. 91 .
40. ↑ Michael Heinrich: The science of value. The Marxian Critique of Political Economy between Scientific Revolution and Classical Tradition . 8th edition. Westphalian steam boat, Münster 2020, p. 252-253 .
41. ^ Karl Marx: The capital. Critique of Political Economy. First volume. Book I: The Production Process of Capital . In: Institute for Marxism-Leninism at the Central Committee of the SED (Ed.): Karl Marx Friedrich Engels Works (MEW) . tape 23 . Dietz Verlag, Berlin 1962, p. 169 : “As the overarching subject of such a process [= self-evaluation, i.e. V.], in which it soon assumes the form of money and the form of commodities, then sheds them off, but maintains and extends itself in this change, value above all requires an independent form, whereby its identity with itself is established. And it only has this form in money. "
42. ↑ Michael Heinrich: The science of value. The Marxian Critique of Political Economy between Scientific Revolution and Classical Tradition . 8th edition. Westphalian steam boat, Münster 2020, p. 257 .
43. ↑ Michael Heinrich: The science of value. The Marxian Critique of Political Economy between Scientific Revolution and Classical Tradition . 8th edition. Westphalian steam boat, Münster 2020, p. 254 .
44. ↑ Michael Heinrich: The science of value. The Marxian Critique of Political Economy between Scientific Revolution and Classical Tradition . 8th edition. Westphalian steam boat, Münster 2020, p. 254-255 .
45. ↑ ^{a b c d} Michael Heinrich: The science of value. The Marxian Critique of Political Economy between Scientific Revolution and Classical Tradition . 8th edition. Westphalian steam boat, Münster 2020, p. 255 .
46. ↑ ^{a b c} Michael Heinrich: The science of value. The Marxian Critique of Political Economy between Scientific Revolution and Classical Tradition . 8th edition. Westphalian steam boat, Münster 2020, p. 256 .
47. ↑ Michael Heinrich: Critique of the political economy. An introduction . 14th edition. Butterfly Verlag, Stuttgart 2018, p. 131-132 .
48. ↑ Michael Heinrich: Critique of the political economy. An introduction . 14th edition. Butterfly Verlag, Stuttgart 2018, p. 99-100 .
49. ^ Karl Marx: The capital. Critique of Political Economy. Second volume. Book II: The Circulation Process of Capital. In: Institute for Marxism-Leninism at the Central Committee of the SED (Ed.): Karl Marx Friedrich Engels Works (MEW) . tape 24 . Dietz Verlag, Berlin 1963, p. 60 .
50. ^ Karl Marx: The capital. Critique of Political Economy. First volume. Book I: The Production Process of Capital . In: Institute for Marxism-Leninism at the Central Committee of the SED (Ed.): Karl Marx Friedrich Engels Works (MEW) . tape 23 . Dietz Verlag, Berlin 1962, p. 532 .
51. ↑ Michael Heinrich: Critique of the political economy. An introduction . 14th edition. Butterfly Verlag, Stuttgart 2018, p. 134 .
52. ↑ Michael Heinrich: Critique of the political economy. An introduction . 14th edition. Butterfly Verlag, Stuttgart 2018, p. 120-122 .
53. ↑ ^{a b} Michael Heinrich: Critique of the political economy. An introduction . 14th edition. Butterfly Verlag, Stuttgart 2018, p. 133-134 .
54. ^ Karl Marx: The capital. Critique of Political Economy. First volume. Book I: The Production Process of Capital . In: Institute for Marxism-Leninism at the Central Committee of the SED (Ed.): Karl Marx Friedrich Engels Works (MEW) . tape 23 . Dietz Verlag, Berlin 1962, p. 617–618 : "A part of the surplus value is consumed by the capitalist as revenue, another part is used or accumulated as capital."
55. ↑ Michael Heinrich: Critique of the political economy. An introduction . 14th edition. Butterfly Verlag, Stuttgart 2018, p. 135-136 .
56. ↑ ^{a b c} Michael Heinrich: Critique of the political economy. An introduction . 14th edition. Butterfly Verlag, Stuttgart 2018, p. 133-134 .
57. ↑ Michael Heinrich: Critique of the political economy. An introduction . 14th edition. Butterfly Verlag, Stuttgart 2018, p. 134-135 .
58. ↑ ^{a b} Michael Heinrich: Critique of the political economy. An introduction . 14th edition. Butterfly Verlag, Stuttgart 2018, p. 132-133 .
59. ^ Karl Marx: The capital. Critique of Political Economy. Third volume. Book III: The Overall Process of Capitalist Production . In: Institute for Marxism-Leninism at the Central Committee of the SED (Ed.): Karl Marx Friedrich Engels Works (MEW) . tape 25 . Dietz Verlag, Berlin 1964, p. 278 .
60. ^ Karl Marx: The capital. Critique of Political Economy. Third volume. Book III: The Overall Process of Capitalist Production . In: Institute for Marxism-Leninism at the Central Committee of the SED (Ed.): Karl Marx Friedrich Engels Works (MEW) . tape 25 . Dietz Verlag, Berlin 1964, p. 327-328 .
61. ↑ Michael Heinrich: Critique of the political economy. An introduction . 3. Edition. Butterfly, Stuttgart 2005, ISBN 3-89657-593-7 , p. 154-156 .
62. ↑ MEW 25, Section 5, Chapter 21 “Interest-bearing capital”.
63. ↑ Michael Heinrich: Critique of the political economy. An introduction . 14th edition. Butterfly Verlag, Stuttgart 2018, p. 154-155 .
64. ↑ Michael Heinrich: Critique of the political economy. An introduction . 14th edition. Butterfly Verlag, Stuttgart 2018, p. 155-156 .
65. ↑ Michael Heinrich: Critique of the political economy. An introduction . 14th edition. Butterfly Verlag, Stuttgart 2018, p. 195 .
66. ↑ Michael Heinrich: Critique of the political economy. An introduction . 14th edition. Butterfly Verlag, Stuttgart 2018, p. 158 .
67. ↑ Michael Heinrich: Critique of the political economy. An introduction . 3. Edition. Butterfly, Stuttgart 2005, ISBN 3-89657-593-7 , p. 163 .
68. ↑ ^{a b} Michael Heinrich: Critique of the political economy. An introduction . 14th edition. Butterfly Verlag, Stuttgart 2018, p. 162-164 .
69. ↑ Michael Heinrich: Critique of the political economy. An introduction . 14th edition. Butterfly Verlag, Stuttgart 2018, p. 164 .
70. ^ Karl Marx: The capital. Critique of Political Economy. First volume. Book I: The Production Process of Capital . In: Institute for Marxism-Leninism at the Central Committee of the SED (Ed.): Karl Marx Friedrich Engels Works (MEW) . tape 23 . Dietz Verlag, Berlin 1962, p. 640 : “The composition of capital is to be understood in two senses. In terms of value, it is determined by the ratio in which it is divided into constant capital, or the value of the means of production, and variable capital, or the value of labor-power, the total sum of wages. On the side of matter as it functions in the production process, every capital is divided into means of production and living labor-power; this composition is determined by the ratio between the mass of the means of production employed, on the one hand, and the amount of labor required for their use, on the other. I call the first the composition of value, the second the technical composition of capital. There is a close correlation between the two. To express this, I call the value composition of capital, insofar as it is determined by its technical composition and reflects its changes: the organic composition of capital. Whenever the composition of capital is briefly mentioned, its organic composition is always to be understood. "
71. ↑ ^{a b} Michael Heinrich: The science of value. The Marxian Critique of Political Economy between Scientific Revolution and Classical Tradition . 8th edition. Westphalian steam boat, Münster 2020, p. 318-319 .
72. ↑ Michael Heinrich: The science of value. The Marxian Critique of Political Economy between Scientific Revolution and Classical Tradition . 8th edition. Westphalian steam boat, Münster 2020, p. 318 .
73. ^ Karl Marx: The capital. Critique of Political Economy. First volume. Book I: The Production Process of Capital . 1st edition. Otto Meissner, Hamburg 1867, p. 608 ( deutschestextarchiv.de ).
74. ^ Karl Marx: The capital. (Economic manuscript 1863-1865). Third book. The Formations of the Overall Process . In: International Marx-Engels Foundation Amsterdam (ed.): Marx-Engels-Gesamtwerke (MEGA) II.4.2. Economic manuscripts 1863–1867. Part 2 . 2nd Edition. De Gruyter Academy, 2012, p. 217 .
75. ^ Karl Marx: The capital. (Economic manuscript 1863-1865). Third book. The Formations of the Overall Process . In: International Marx-Engels Foundation Amsterdam (ed.): Marx-Engels-Gesamtwerke (MEGA) II.4.2. Economic manuscripts 1863–1867. Part 2 . 2nd Edition. De Gruyter Academy, 2012, p. 221 .
76. ^ Karl Marx: Grundrisse der political economy . In: Institute for Marxism-Leninism at the Central Committee of the SED (Ed.): Karl Marx Friedrich Engels Works (MEW) . tape 42 . Dietz Verlag, Berlin 1983, p. 327 : “In competition, this inner tendency of capital appears as a compulsion that is inflicted on it by foreign capital and that drives it forward through the correct proportion with constant marche, marche! Free competition [...] has never been developed by economists [...] It has only been understood negatively: ie as the negation of monopolies, corporations, legal regulations, etc. As the negation of feudal production. But it must also be something for itself, since only 0 is an empty negation, abstraction from a barrier that z. B. in the form of monopoly, natural monopoly, etc. is immediately resurrected. Conceptually, competition is nothing but the inner nature of capital, its essential determination, appearing and realized as an interaction of the many capitals on one another, the inner tendency as an external necessity. (Capital exists and can only exist as many capitals, and its self-determination appears from this as an interaction of the same. "
77. ↑ ^{a b c d} Michael Heinrich: The science of value. The Marxian Critique of Political Economy between Scientific Revolution and Classical Tradition . 8th edition. Westphalian steam boat, Münster 2020, p. 193 .
78. ^ Karl Marx: The capital. Critique of Political Economy. First volume. Book I: The Production Process of Capital . In: Institute for Marxism-Leninism at the Central Committee of the SED (Ed.): Karl Marx Friedrich Engels Works (MEW) . tape 23 . Dietz Verlag, Berlin 1962, p. 653 : “Every individual capital is a greater or lesser concentration of the means of production with corresponding command over a greater or lesser army of workers. [...] The growth of social capital takes place in the growth of many individual capitals. "
79. ↑ Michael Heinrich: The science of value. The Marxian Critique of Political Economy between Scientific Revolution and Classical Tradition . 8th edition. Westphalian steam boat, Münster 2020, p. 193-194 .
80. ↑ ^{a b} Michael Heinrich: Critique of the political economy. An introduction . 14th edition. Butterfly Verlag, Stuttgart 2018, p. 137 .
81. ^ Karl Marx: The capital. Critique of Political Economy. Second volume. Book II: The Circulation Process of Capital . In: Institute for Marxism-Leninism at the Central Committee of the SED (Ed.): Karl Marx Friedrich Engels Works (MEW) . tape 24 . Dietz Verlag, Berlin 1963, p. 353–354 : "The cycles of individual capitals, however, intertwine, presuppose and condition one another, and it is precisely in this intertwining that they form the movement of total social capital."
82. ↑ Michael Heinrich: Critique of the political economy. An introduction . 14th edition. Butterfly Verlag, Stuttgart 2018, p. 139 .
83. ↑ ^{a b c d} Michael Heinrich: The science of value. The Marxian Critique of Political Economy between Scientific Revolution and Classical Tradition . 8th edition. Westphalian steam boat, Münster 2020, p. 194 .
84. ^ Karl Marx: The capital. Critique of Political Economy. Third volume. Book III: The Overall Process of Capitalist Production . In: Institute for Marxism-Leninism at the Central Committee of the SED (Ed.): Karl Marx Friedrich Engels Works (MEW) . tape 23 . Dietz Verlag, Berlin 1964, p. 205 : "In this form, capital becomes conscious of itself as a social power in which every capitalist shares in proportion to his share in the total social capital."
85. ↑ Michael Heinrich: The science of value. The Marxian Critique of Political Economy between Scientific Revolution and Classical Tradition . 8th edition. Westphalian steam boat, Münster 2020, p. 285 .
86. ↑ Michael Heinrich: The science of value. The Marxian Critique of Political Economy between Scientific Revolution and Classical Tradition . 8th edition. Westphalian steam boat, Münster 2020, p. 285-286 .
87. ↑ ^{a b} Michael Heinrich: The science of value. The Marxian Critique of Political Economy between Scientific Revolution and Classical Tradition . 8th edition. Westphalian steam boat, Münster 2020, p. 286 .
88. ↑ ^{a b} Michael Heinrich: Critique of the political economy. An introduction . 14th edition. Butterfly Verlag, Stuttgart 2018, p. 144-145 .
89. ↑ Michael Heinrich: Critique of the political economy. An introduction . 14th edition. Butterfly Verlag, Stuttgart 2018, p. 145 .
90. ↑ Michael Heinrich: The science of value. The Marxian Critique of Political Economy between Scientific Revolution and Classical Tradition . 8th edition. Westphalian steam boat, Münster 2020, p. 268 .
91. ↑ Michael Heinrich: Critique of the political economy. An introduction . 14th edition. Butterfly Verlag, Stuttgart 2018, p. 145-146 .
92. ↑ ^{a b} Michael Heinrich: The science of value. The Marxian Critique of Political Economy between Scientific Revolution and Classical Tradition . 8th edition. Westphalian steam boat, Münster 2020, p. 267-268 .
93. ↑ Michael Heinrich: The science of value. The Marxian Critique of Political Economy between Scientific Revolution and Classical Tradition . 8th edition. Westphalian steam boat, Münster 2020, p. 284-285 .
94. ^ Karl Marx: The capital. (Economic manuscript 1863-1865). Third book. In: International Marx-Engels Foundation Amsterdam (ed.): Marx-Engels-Gesamtwerke (MEGA) II.4.2. Economic manuscripts 1863–1867. Part 2. 2nd edition. De Gruyter Academy, 2012, p. 661 : “We have seen that the average profit of the individual capitalist, of particular capital, is determined not by the surplus labor which it exploits, but by the quantity of social surplus labor which the total capital exploits, of which the particular capital only as a proportional part this total capital draws its dividend. This "social" character of capital is only conveyed and realized through the development of the credit and banking system. "
95. ↑ Michael Heinrich: The science of value. The Marxian Critique of Political Economy between Scientific Revolution and Classical Tradition . 8th edition. Westphalian steam boat, Münster 2020, p. 293 and pp. 299-300 .
96. ↑ Michael Heinrich: The science of value. The Marxian Critique of Political Economy between Scientific Revolution and Classical Tradition . 8th edition. Westphalian steam boat, Münster 2020, p. 300-301 .
97. ↑ ^{a b} Michael Heinrich: Critique of the political economy. An introduction . 14th edition. Butterfly Verlag, Stuttgart 2018, p. 165 .
98. ↑ ^{a b c d} Michael Heinrich: Critique of the political economy. An introduction . 14th edition. Butterfly Verlag, Stuttgart 2018, p. 166 .
99. ↑ Michael Heinrich: Critique of the political economy. An introduction . 14th edition. Butterfly Verlag, Stuttgart 2018, p. 167-168 .
100. ^ Karl Marx: The capital. (Economic manuscript 1863-1865). Third book. In: International Marx-Engels Foundation Amsterdam (ed.): Marx-Engels-Gesamtwerke (MEGA) II.4.2. Economic manuscripts 1863–1867. Part 2. 2nd edition. De Gruyter Academy, 2012, p. 505 : “If the credit system appears as the main lever of overproduction and overtrade and overspeculation in trade, it is only because the reproduction process, which is by its nature elastic, is here forced to the outermost limit and is forced to do so because a large part of social capital is used by its non-owners, who therefore risk quite differently than the owner who anxiously considers the limits of his private capital, as far as he himself functions. All that emerges is that the exploitation of the same, based on the opposing character of capitalist production, allows the real, free development of the productive forces only to a certain point, that is, in fact forms an immanent fetter, barrier, which is constantly broken through by the credit system becomes. The credit system therefore accelerates the material development of the productive forces and the establishment of the world market, which to a certain extent - to be established as the material bases of the new mode of production - is the historical task of the capitalist mode of production. At the same time it accelerates the crises, the violent outbreaks of this contradiction and therefore the elements of the dissolution of the old mode of production. "
101. ↑ Michael Heinrich: The science of value. The Marxian Critique of Political Economy between Scientific Revolution and Classical Tradition . 8th edition. Westphalian steam boat, Münster 2020, p. 306 .
102. ↑ Michael Heinrich: Critique of the political economy. An introduction . 14th edition. Butterfly Verlag, Stuttgart 2018, p. 51–52 and p. 70 .
103. ↑ Michael Heinrich: Critique of the political economy. An introduction . 14th edition. Butterfly Verlag, Stuttgart 2018, p. 71 .
104. ↑ Michael Heinrich: Critique of the political economy. An introduction . 14th edition. Butterfly Verlag, Stuttgart 2018, p. 71-72 .
105. ↑ ^{a b} Michael Heinrich: Critique of the political economy. An introduction . 14th edition. Butterfly Verlag, Stuttgart 2018, p. 73 .
106. ↑ Michael Heinrich: Critique of the political economy. An introduction . 14th edition. Butterfly Verlag, Stuttgart 2018, p. 75 .
107. ↑ Michael Heinrich: Critique of the political economy. An introduction . 14th edition. Butterfly Verlag, Stuttgart 2018, p. 75-76 .
108. ^ Karl Marx: The capital. Critique of Political Economy. First volume. Book I: The Production Process of Capital . 1st edition. Otto Meissner, Hamburg 1867, p. 27 ( deutschestextarchiv.de ): “In Form III, which is the second form and is therefore included in it, the canvas, on the other hand, appears as the generic form of the equivalent for all other commodities. It is as if beside and apart from lions, tigers, hares, and all other real animals, which grouped together form the different sexes, species, subspecies, families, etc. of the animal kingdom, the animal also existed, the individual incarnation of the whole animal kingdom. Such an individual, which in itself comprehends all actually existing kinds of the same thing, is a universal, like animal, god, etc. As the canvas therefore became an individual equivalent, because another commodity referred to it as the manifestation of value, so it becomes as the manifestation of value common to all commodities, the general equivalent, general body of value, general material of abstract human labor. The particular work materialized in it is therefore now regarded as a general form of realization of human work, as general work. "
109. ↑ Michael Heinrich: Critique of the political economy. An introduction . 14th edition. Butterfly Verlag, Stuttgart 2018, p. 109-110 .
110. ↑ Michael Heinrich: Critique of the political economy. An introduction . 14th edition. Butterfly Verlag, Stuttgart 2018, p. 132-133 .
111. ^ Karl Marx: The capital. Critique of Political Economy. Third volume. Book III: The Overall Process of Capitalist Production . In: Institute for Marxism-Leninism at the Central Committee of the SED (Ed.): Karl Marx Friedrich Engels Works (MEW) . tape 25 . Dietz Verlag, Berlin 1964, p. 404 : “In interest-bearing capital the capital relation reaches its most external and most fetish-like form. We have G-G ', money making more money, self-utilizing value without the process that mediates the two extremes. In merchant capital, M - W - M ', at least the general form of the capitalist movement is present, although it only persists in the sphere of circulation, and profit therefore appears as a mere alienation profit; but at least it presents itself as a product of a social relationship, not as a product of a mere thing. "
112. ↑ Michael Heinrich: Critique of the political economy. An introduction . 14th edition. Butterfly Verlag, Stuttgart 2018, p. 157-158 .
113. ^ Karl Marx: The capital. Critique of Political Economy. Third volume. Book III: The Overall Process of Capitalist Production . In: Institute for Marxism-Leninism at the Central Committee of the SED (Ed.): Karl Marx Friedrich Engels Works (MEW) . tape 25 . Dietz Verlag, Berlin 1964, p. 405 .
114. ↑ Michael Heinrich: Critique of the political economy. An introduction . 14th edition. Butterfly Verlag, Stuttgart 2018, p. 94-96 .
115. ↑ ^{a b c} Michael Heinrich: Critique of the political economy. An introduction . 14th edition. Butterfly Verlag, Stuttgart 2018, p. 141-142 .
116. ↑ ^{a b c} Michael Heinrich: The science of value. The Marxian Critique of Political Economy between Scientific Revolution and Classical Tradition . 8th edition. Westphalian steam boat, Münster 2020, p. 308 .
117. ^ Karl Marx: The capital. Critique of Political Economy. Third volume. Book III: The Overall Process of Capitalist Production . In: Institute for Marxism-Leninism at the Central Committee of the SED (Ed.): Karl Marx Friedrich Engels Works (MEW) . tape 25 . Dietz Verlag, Berlin 1964, p. 838 : “In capital - profit, or even better capital - interest, land - rent, labor - wages, in this economic trinity as the connection of the components of value and wealth in general with its sources is the mystification of the capitalist mode of production, reification of social relations, the direct coalescence of material production relations with their historical-social determinateness is completed: the enchanted, inverted and upside-down world, where Monsieur le Capital and Madame Ia Terre haunt their spirits as social characters and at the same time as mere things . "
118. ↑ ^{a b c d} Michael Heinrich: Critique of the political economy. An introduction . 14th edition. Butterfly Verlag, Stuttgart 2018, p. 185 .
119. ^ Karl Marx: The capital. Critique of Political Economy. First volume. Book I: The Production Process of Capital . In: Institute for Marxism-Leninism at the Central Committee of the SED (Ed.): Karl Marx Friedrich Engels Works (MEW) . tape 23 . Dietz Verlag, Berlin 1962, p. 57–58 : “The use values ​​of rock, canvas, etc., in short the commodity bodies, are connections between two elements, natural material and work. If one subtracts the total sum of all the various useful works that are stuck in the skirt, canvas, etc., a material substrate always remains that is naturally present without human intervention. Man can only proceed in his production like nature itself, ie only change the forms of the substances. Even more. In this work of formation itself he is constantly supported by natural forces. So work is not the only source of the use values ​​it produces, of material wealth. "
120. ↑ Michael Heinrich: Critique of the political economy. An introduction . 14th edition. Butterfly Verlag, Stuttgart 2018, p. 15-16 .
121. ^ Karl Marx: The capital. Critique of Political Economy. First volume. Book I: The Production Process of Capital . In: Institute for Marxism-Leninism at the Central Committee of the SED (Ed.): Karl Marx Friedrich Engels Works (MEW) . tape 23 . Dietz Verlag, Berlin 1962, p. 49 : "The wealth of the societies in which the capitalist mode of production prevails appears as an" immense collection of goods ", the individual goods as its elementary form."
122. ↑ Michael Heinrich: Critique of the political economy. An introduction . 14th edition. Butterfly Verlag, Stuttgart 2018, p. 37 .
123. ^ Karl Marx: The capital. Critique of Political Economy. First volume. Book I: The Production Process of Capital . In: Institute for Marxism-Leninism at the Central Committee of the SED (Ed.): Karl Marx Friedrich Engels Works (MEW) . tape 23 . Dietz Verlag, Berlin 1962, p. 184 : "His [= of the capital, d. V.] historical conditions of existence are by no means there with the circulation of goods and money. It only arises where the owner of production and foodstuffs finds the free worker as the seller of his labor in the market, and this one historical condition encompasses a world history. Capital therefore heralds an epoch of the social production process from the outset. "
124. ↑ Michael Heinrich: Critique of the political economy. An introduction . 14th edition. Butterfly Verlag, Stuttgart 2018, p. 209-210 .
125. ↑ Michael Heinrich: Critique of the political economy. An introduction . 14th edition. Butterfly Verlag, Stuttgart 2018, p. 89 .
126. ^ Karl Marx: The capital. Critique of Political Economy. First volume. Book I: The Production Process of Capital . In: Institute for Marxism-Leninism at the Central Committee of the SED (Ed.): Karl Marx Friedrich Engels Works (MEW) . tape 23 . Dietz Verlag, Berlin 1962, p. 12 : “The physicist observes natural processes either where they appear in the most concise form and at least clouded by disruptive influences, or, where possible, he makes experiments under conditions that ensure the pure process of the process. What I have to research in this work is the capitalist mode of production and the corresponding production and traffic relations. [...] In and of itself, it is not a question of the higher or lower degree of development of the social antagonisms that arise from the natural laws of capitalist production. It is a matter of these laws themselves, of these tendencies, which act and assert themselves with an iron necessity. "
127. ^ Karl Marx: The capital. Critique of Political Economy. First volume. Book I: The Production Process of Capital . In: Institute for Marxism-Leninism at the Central Committee of the SED (Ed.): Karl Marx Friedrich Engels Works (MEW) . tape 23 . Dietz Verlag, Berlin 1962, p. 674 : “This is the absolute, general law of capitalist accumulation. Like all other laws, its implementation is modified by manifold circumstances, the analysis of which does not belong here. "
128. ^ Karl Marx: The capital. Critique of Political Economy. Third volume. Book III: The Overall Process of Capitalist Production . In: Institute for Marxism-Leninism at the Central Committee of the SED (Ed.): Karl Marx Friedrich Engels Works (MEW) . tape 25 . Dietz Verlag, Berlin 1964, p. 242 : "There must be counteracting influences at play which thwart and nullify the effect of the general law and only give it the character of a tendency [...]"
129. ^ Karl Marx: The capital. Critique of Political Economy. First volume. Book I: The Production Process of Capital . In: Institute for Marxism-Leninism at the Central Committee of the SED (Ed.): Karl Marx Friedrich Engels Works (MEW) . tape 23 . Dietz Verlag, Berlin 1962, p. 789-791 .
130. ↑ ^{a b} Michael Heinrich: Critique of the political economy. An introduction . 14th edition. Butterfly Verlag, Stuttgart 2018, p. 126 .
131. ^ Karl Marx: The capital. Critique of Political Economy. First volume. Book I: The Production Process of Capital. In: Institute for Marxism-Leninism at the Central Committee of the SED (Ed.): Karl Marx Friedrich Engels Works (MEW) . tape 23 . Dietz Verlag, Berlin 1962, p. 654 : "If, on the one hand, accumulation presents itself as a growing concentration of the means of production and the command of labor, then, on the other hand, as a repulsion of many individual capitals from one another."
132. ^ Karl Marx: The capital. Critique of Political Economy. First volume. Book I: The Production Process of Capital . In: Institute for Marxism-Leninism at the Central Committee of the SED (Ed.): Karl Marx Friedrich Engels Works (MEW) . tape 23 . Dietz Verlag, Berlin 1962, p. 655 : "In addition, the progress of accumulation increases the centralizable material, ie the individual capital [...]"
133. ^ Karl Marx: The capital. Critique of Political Economy. First volume. Book I: The Production Process of Capital . In: Institute for Marxism-Leninism at the Central Committee of the SED (Ed.): Karl Marx Friedrich Engels Works (MEW) . tape 23 . Dietz Verlag, Berlin 1962, p. 656 : "[...] centralization takes place on the violent path of annexation - where certain capitals become so predominant centers of gravity for others that they break their individual cohesion and then attract the individual fragments - or a group merges already educated, resp. in the formation of conceptual capitals by means of the smoother process of the formation of stock corporations [...] "
134. ^ Karl Marx: The capital. Critique of Political Economy. First volume. Book I: The Production Process of Capital . In: Institute for Marxism-Leninism at the Central Committee of the SED (Ed.): Karl Marx Friedrich Engels Works (MEW) . tape 23 . Dietz Verlag, Berlin 1962, p. 654-656 .
135. ↑ Michael Heinrich: Critique of the political economy. An introduction . 14th edition. Butterfly Verlag, Stuttgart 2018, p. 165-166 .
136. ^ Karl Marx: The capital. (Economic manuscript 1863-1865). Third book. In: International Marx-Engels Foundation Amsterdam (ed.): Marx-Engels-Gesamtwerke (MEGA) II.4.2. Economic manuscripts 1863–1867. Part 2. 2nd edition. De Gruyter Academy, 2012, p. 458–459 : “The stock corporations in general - developed with the credit system - have the tendency to separate this labor of superintendence as a function more and more from the possession of the capital, be it owned or borrowed [...] But on the one hand only The owner of the capital, the monied capitalist, confronts the functioning capitalist (and with the credit system this monied capital itself assumes a social character and is borrowed from other persons than its immediate owners), on the other hand the mere manager who does not own the capital under any title, neither on loan nor otherwise, provides all real functions which the functioning capitalist has as a functioning one, only the functional remains and the capitalist disappears as a superfluous person from the production process. "
137. ↑ Michael Heinrich: Critique of the political economy. An introduction . 14th edition. Butterfly Verlag, Stuttgart 2018, p. 107-113 .
138. ↑ Michael Heinrich: Critique of the political economy. An introduction . 14th edition. Butterfly Verlag, Stuttgart 2018, p. 104-105 .
139. ↑ Michael Heinrich: Critique of the political economy. An introduction . 14th edition. Butterfly Verlag, Stuttgart 2018, p. 114 .
140. ↑ Michael Heinrich: Critique of the political economy. An introduction . 14th edition. Butterfly Verlag, Stuttgart 2018, p. 117-120 .
141. ^ Karl Marx: The capital. Critique of Political Economy. First volume. Book I: The Production Process of Capital . In: Institute for Marxism-Leninism at the Central Committee of the SED (Ed.): Karl Marx Friedrich Engels Works (MEW) . tape 23 . Dietz Verlag, Berlin 1962, p. 545-546 .
142. ↑ Michael Heinrich: Critique of the political economy. An introduction . 14th edition. Butterfly Verlag, Stuttgart 2018, p. 105-106 and pp. 110-113 .
143. ↑ Michael Heinrich: Critique of the political economy. An introduction . 14th edition. Butterfly Verlag, Stuttgart 2018, p. 114 .
144. ↑ Michael Heinrich: Critique of the political economy. An introduction . 14th edition. Butterfly Verlag, Stuttgart 2018, p. 172-173 .
145. ↑ Michael Heinrich: Critique of the political economy. An introduction . 14th edition. Butterfly Verlag, Stuttgart 2018, p. 173 .
146. ↑ Michael Heinrich: Critique of the political economy. An introduction . 14th edition. Butterfly Verlag, Stuttgart 2018, p. 166-168 .
147. ↑ Michael Heinrich: Critique of the political economy. An introduction . 14th edition. Butterfly Verlag, Stuttgart 2018, p. 123-125 .
148. ↑ Michael Heinrich: Critique of the political economy. An introduction . 14th edition. Butterfly Verlag, Stuttgart 2018, p. 148-151 .
149. ^ Karl Marx: The capital. Critique of Political Economy. Third volume. Book III: The Overall Process of Capitalist Production . In: Institute for Marxism-Leninism at the Central Committee of the SED (Ed.): Karl Marx Friedrich Engels Works (MEW) . tape 25 . Dietz Verlag, Berlin 1964, p. 242-250 .
150. ^ Karl Marx: The capital. Critique of Political Economy. First volume. Book I: The Production Process of Capital . In: Institute for Marxism-Leninism at the Central Committee of the SED (Ed.): Karl Marx Friedrich Engels Works (MEW) . tape 23 . Dietz Verlag, Berlin 1962, p. 790 : "Hand in hand with this centralization or the expropriation of many capitalists by a few, the entanglement of all peoples in the net of the world market and thus the international character of the capitalist regime develops."
151. ↑ Michael Heinrich: Critique of the political economy. An introduction . 14th edition. Butterfly Verlag, Stuttgart 2018, p. 115-116 .
152. ↑ Michael Heinrich: Critique of the political economy. An introduction . 14th edition. Butterfly Verlag, Stuttgart 2018, p. 115-116 and pp. 211-212 .
153. ^ Karl Marx: The capital. Critique of Political Economy. First volume. Book I: The Production Process of Capital . In: Institute for Marxism-Leninism at the Central Committee of the SED (Ed.): Karl Marx Friedrich Engels Works (MEW) . tape 23 . Dietz Verlag, Berlin 1962, p. 529-530 : “And every advance in capitalist agriculture is not only an advance in art, the worker, but at the same time in the art of robbing the soil, every advance in increasing its fertility for a given period of time is at the same time a progress in ruin permanent sources of this fertility. [...] Capitalist production therefore only develops the technology and combination of the social production process, while at the same time it undermines the spring sources of all wealth: the earth and the worker. "
154. ^ Karl Marx: The capital. Critique of Political Economy. First volume. Book I: The Production Process of Capital . In: Institute for Marxism-Leninism at the Central Committee of the SED (Ed.): Karl Marx Friedrich Engels Works (MEW) . tape 23 . Dietz Verlag, Berlin 1962, p. 184 : "The representation of the product as a commodity requires such a developed division of labor within society that the distinction between use value and exchange value [...] has already been made."
155. ^ Karl Marx: The capital. Critique of Political Economy. First volume. Book I: The Production Process of Capital . In: Institute for Marxism-Leninism at the Central Committee of the SED (Ed.): Karl Marx Friedrich Engels Works (MEW) . tape 23 . Dietz Verlag, Berlin 1962, p. 790 : "Hand in hand with this centralization [...] the cooperative form of the work process develops on an ever-increasing scale, [...] the transformation of work equipment into work equipment that can only be used jointly, the economization of all means of production through their use as means of production combined, social work, the intertwining of all peoples in the network of the world market [...] "
156. ^ Karl Marx: The capital. Critique of Political Economy. Third volume. Book III: The Overall Process of Capitalist Production . In: Institute for Marxism-Leninism at the Central Committee of the SED (Ed.): Karl Marx Friedrich Engels Works (MEW) . tape 25 . Dietz Verlag, Berlin 1964, p. 374 : “The development of the credit system and the steadily growing disposal of industrialists and merchants, mediated by the bankers, over all money savings of all classes of society and the progressive concentration of these savings to the masses, in which they can act as money capital, must also arise press the interest rate. "
157. ^ Karl Marx: The capital. Critique of Political Economy. Third volume. Book III: The Overall Process of Capitalist Production . In: Institute for Marxism-Leninism at the Central Committee of the SED (Ed.): Karl Marx Friedrich Engels Works (MEW) . tape 25 . Dietz Verlag, Berlin 1964, p. 452 : “Formation of stock corporations. As a result: 1. Immense expansion of the scale of production and undertakings, which were impossible for individual capitals. Such undertakings at the same time, which were formerly government undertakings, become social. 2. Capital, which in itself is based on a social mode of production and presupposes a social concentration of means of production and labor, is given here the direct form of social capital (capital of directly associated individuals) in contrast to private capital, and its enterprises appear as social enterprises in contrast to Private companies. It is the abolition of capital as private property within the limits of the capitalist mode of production itself. "
158. ↑ Carl Menger: Principles of Economics . Braumüller, Vienna 1871, p. 253-254 ( deutschestextarchiv.de [accessed on June 21, 2020]): “The economic interest of the individual economic individuals leads them, with increased knowledge of their interest, without any agreement, without legislative compulsion, even without any consideration for that public interest in giving their goods for other, more salable goods in exchange, [...] and so, under the powerful influence of custom, the phenomenon that can be observed everywhere with the rising economic culture comes to light that "perform, pay" according to which money in our language simply means as a payment object. "
159. ↑ Michael Heinrich: Monetary Value Theory. Money and Crisis in Marx . In: PROKLA. Journal of Critical Social Science . tape 31 , no. 123 , 2001, p. 159-160 ( prokla.de ).
160. ↑ Michael Heinrich: Monetary Value Theory. Money and Crisis in Marx . In: PROKLA. Journal of Critical Social Science . tape 31 , no. 123 , 2001, p. 160 .
161. ^ Hans A. Frambach: The evolution of modern economic categories. Origin and change of central concepts of neoclassical economic theory (= Volkswirtschaftliche Schriften, issue 428) . Duncker & Humblot, Berlin 1993, p. 90-91 and pp. 99-101 .
162. ↑ Michael Heinrich: Critique of the political economy. An introduction . 14th edition. Butterfly Verlag, Stuttgart 2018, p. 170-171 .
163. ↑ Heinz-J. Bontrup: Economics. Basics of micro and macro economics . 2nd Edition. R. Oldenbourg Verlag, Munich / Vienna 2004, p. 408-409 .
164. ^ Carl Menger: Principles of Economics . 2nd Edition. Hölder-Pichler-Tempsky AG / G. Freytag GmbH, Vienna / Leipzig 1923, p. 1 : "The needs are the ultimate reason, the importance which their satisfaction has for us, the ultimate measure, the assurance of their satisfaction the ultimate goal of all human economy."
165. ^ William Stanley Jevons: The Theory of Political Economy . Macmillan and Co., London / New York 1871, p. 44 : "PLEASURE and pain are undoubtedly the ultimate objects of the Calculus of Economy. To satisfy our wants to the utmost with the least effort [...] in other words, to maximize comfort and pleasure, is the problem of economy. "
166. ^ Karl Marx: The capital. Critique of Political Economy. First volume. Book I: The Production Process of Capital . In: Institute for Marxism-Leninism at the Central Committee of the SED (Ed.): Karl Marx Friedrich Engels Works (MEW) . tape 23 . Dietz Verlag, Berlin 1962, p. 250 : “However, it is clear that if in an economic social formation it is not the exchange value but the use value of the product that predominates, the surplus labor is limited by a narrower or wider circle of needs, but not an unrestricted need for surplus labor from the character of production itself arises. In antiquity, therefore, there is terrible evidence of overwork, where it is a matter of obtaining exchange value in its independent monetary form, in the production of gold and silver. Working violently to death is the official form of overwork here. [...] But these are exceptions in the old world. But as soon as peoples, whose production still moves in the lower forms of slave labor, compulsory labor, etc., are drawn into a world market dominated by the capitalist mode of production, which develops the sale of their products abroad for the predominant interest, the barbaric atrocities of slavery, Serfdom, etc. grafted the civilized horror of overwork. "
167. ^ Karl Marx: The capital. Critique of Political Economy. First volume. Book I: The Production Process of Capital . In: Institute for Marxism-Leninism at the Central Committee of the SED (Ed.): Karl Marx Friedrich Engels Works (MEW) . tape 23 . Dietz Verlag, Berlin 1962, p. 280–281 : “But in its immeasurably blind drive, its werewolf hunger for extra work, capital overruns not only the moral, but also the purely physical maximum limits of the working day. It usurps the time for growth, development and healthy maintenance of the body. It robs time, requires the consumption of open air and sunlight. It kinks at the meal and, if possible, incorporates it into the production process itself, so that food is added to the worker as a mere means of production, such as coal to the steam boiler and tallow or oil to the machinery. It reduces the healthy sleep for the collection, renewal and refreshment of the vital force to as many hours of numbness as the revitalization of an absolutely exhausted organism makes it indispensable. Instead of the normal maintenance of labor here the barrier to the working day, conversely the greatest possible daily expenditure of labor, however pathologically violent and embarrassing, determines the barrier to the worker's rest period. Capital does not ask about the lifespan of labor. What is of interest is only the maximum of manpower that can be made fluid in one working day. It achieves this goal by shortening the length of labor, just as a greedy farmer achieves increased soil yield by depriving the soil of fertility. "
168. ^ Mark Neocleous: The Political Economy of The Dead: Marx's Vampires . In: HISTORY OF POLITICAL THOUGHT. Vol. XXIV. No. 4. 2003, p. 669-671 .
169. ^ Mark Neocleous: The Political Economy of The Dead: Marx's Vampires . In: HISTORY OF POLITICAL THOUGHT. Vol. XXIV. No. 4 . 2003, p. 681 .
170. ^ Karl Marx: The capital. Critique of Political Economy. First volume. Book I: The Production Process of Capital . In: Institute for Marxism-Leninism at the Central Committee of the SED (Ed.): Karl Marx Friedrich Engels Works (MEW) . tape 23 . Dietz Verlag, Berlin 1962, p. 247 : “The capitalist has his own view of this ultima Thule, the necessary limit of the working day. As a capitalist he is only capital personified. His soul is the capital soul. But capital has a single life drive, the drive to utilize itself, to create surplus value, with its constant part, the means of production, to suck in the greatest possible amount of surplus labor. Capital is dead labor, which is only vampire-like animated by sucking in living labor and lives all the more the more it sucks in it. The time during which the worker works is the time during which the capitalist consumes the labor-power he has bought. If the worker consumes his available time for himself, he steals from the capitalists. "
171. ^ Karl Marx: The capital. Critique of Political Economy. First volume. Book I: The Production Process of Capital . In: Institute for Marxism-Leninism at the Central Committee of the SED (Ed.): Karl Marx Friedrich Engels Works (MEW) . tape 23 . Dietz Verlag, Berlin 1962, p. 271 : “The constant capital, the means of production, are, viewed from the point of view of the valorization process, only there to suck in labor and with every drop of labor a proportional amount of surplus labor. In so far as they fail to do so, their very existence constitutes a negative loss for the capitalist, for they represent useless capital advances while they are idle, and this loss becomes positive as soon as the interruption necessitates additional expenses to restart the work. The lengthening of the working day beyond the limits of the natural day into the night only works as a palliative, only approximately quenches the vampire's thirst for living working blood. To acquire work during all 24 hours of the day is therefore the immanent drive of capitalist production. "
172. ^ Karl Marx: The capital. Critique of Political Economy. First volume. Book I: The Production Process of Capital . In: Institute for Marxism-Leninism at the Central Committee of the SED (Ed.): Karl Marx Friedrich Engels Works (MEW) . tape 23 . Dietz Verlag, Berlin 1962, p. 319-320 : “It must be confessed that our worker comes out of the production process differently than he entered it. In the market, as the owner of the commodity "labor", he faced other commodity owners, commodity owner the commodity owner. The contract by which he sold his labor power to the capitalist proved, so to speak, in black and white, that he was free to dispose of himself that he was "not a free agent," that the time he is free to sell his labor is the time he is compelled to sell it, that in fact his nipple does not let go of "as long as one Muscle, a tendon, a drop of blood to exploit "."
173. ^ Mark Neocleous: The Political Economy of The Dead: Marx's Vampires . In: HISTORY OF POLITICAL THOUGHT. Vol. XXIV. No. 4 . 2003, p. 675–676 : “In a slightly different vein, Rousseau concedes that in one sense vampires do indeed exist - in the minds of those who had attested to their existence - and that this existence is important because it raises questions concerning how one interprets the world and, more important, the kinds of authorities that verify such interpretations. In a letter to Christophe de Beaumont, the Archbishop of Paris, Rousseau observes that 'if there is in the world an attested history, it is just that of vampires. Nothing is lacking; depositions, certificates of notables, surgeons, curés and magistrates. The proof in law is utterly complete. Yet with all this, who actually believes in vampires? Will we all be condemned for not believing in them? ' For Rousseau, vampires are 'miraculous' phenomena 'attested' to by all the major authorities, with the corollary that the same authorities will thus condemn us if we fail to accept the claims for the existence of vampires. In other words, belief in vampires is evidence of the way the institutions of authority are legitimized by superstitious and unenlightened views. "
174. ^ William Clare Roberts: Marx's Inferno. The Political Theory of Capital . Princeton University Press, Princeton / Oxford 2017, p. 130 .
175. ^ Mark Neocleous: The Political Economy of The Dead: Marx's Vampires . In: HISTORY OF POLITICAL THOUGHT. Vol. XXIV. No. 4 . 2003, p. 678-679 .
176. ^ Mark Neocleous: The Political Economy of The Dead: Marx's Vampires . In: HISTORY OF POLITICAL THOUGHT. Vol. XXIV. No. 4 . 2003, p. 684 : "In one sense of course Marx was indeed employing a rhetorical literary device, one gleaned not from 'classic literature' as many of his allusions are, nor from any of the 'great thinkers' he so often refers to either directly or elliptically , but one which plays on one of the many popular if irrational beliefs of the time. But this was not simply a rhetorical device, for Marx uses it to illustrate one of the central dynamics of capitalist production - the distinction between living and dead labor, a distinction that picks up on a more general theme in his work: the desire to create a society founded on the living of full and creative lives rather than one founded on the rule of the dead. Writing for readers reared on and steeped in the central motifs of popular literature, Marx thus invoked one of its most powerful metaphors to force upon them a sense of the appalling nature of capital: its affinity with death. "
177. ^ Mark Neocleous: The Political Economy of The Dead: Marx's Vampires . In: HISTORY OF POLITICAL THOUGHT. Vol. XXIV. No. 4 . 2003, p. 681-684 .
178. ↑ Joseph Alois Schumpeter: Theory of economic development. A study of entrepreneurial profits, capital, credit, interest and the business cycle . 7th edition. Duncker & Humblot, Berlin 1987, p. 195-196 .
179. ^ Eduard March: The theory of economic development by Joseph A. Schumpeter in its relationship to the Marxian system . In: Economy and Society. Economic journal of the Chamber for Workers and Salaried Employees for Vienna, 6th year, issue 3 . 1980, p. 256 and p. 259 .
180. ^ Joseph Alois Schumpeter: Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy . 10th edition. Narr Francke Attempto Verlag, Tübingen 2020, p. 27-30 .
181. ↑ Joseph Alois Schumpeter: Theory of economic development. A study of entrepreneurial profits, capital, credit, interest and the business cycle . 7th edition. Duncker & Humblot, Berlin 1987, p. XXIV : “I am not saying this to make anything that I write in this book related to his [= Karl Marx, d. V.] to connect big names. The intention and the results are far too different to give me the right to do so. Similarities in the results, which undoubtedly exist (compare, for example, the thesis of this book that in perfect equilibrium the interest would be zero with Marx's proposition that constant capital produces no surplus value) is not only due to a very large difference in the general one Basic attitude erased, but also achieved by methods so different that any emphasis on parallels would be highly unsatisfactory for Marxists. "
182. ↑ Joseph Alois Schumpeter: Theory of economic development. A study of entrepreneurial profits, capital, credit, interest and the business cycle . 7th edition. Duncker & Humblot, Berlin 1987, p. 223 : “Only this surplus, which appears in the private sector as entrepreneurial profit and interest on capital, can be described as surplus value in the Marxist sense. There is no such thing as an excess of this kind that can be explained in any other way. "
183. ^ Eduard March: The theory of economic development by Joseph A. Schumpeter in its relationship to the Marxian system . In: Economy and Society. Economic journal of the Chamber for Workers and Salaried Employees for Vienna, 6th year, issue 3 . 1980, p. 262–263 : “With the help of the capital fund temporarily given to him by the banks, the entrepreneur is able to establish a relationship of domination over things and people in order to give them a new productive orientation. Bank credit is therefore only one method of initiating new production relationships. Schumpeter thus makes a radical break with the material concept of capital, which can be traced back to the time of classical economics. But the similarity of Schumpeter's concept of capital to that of Marx is, in our opinion, only a purely verbal one. Because the relationship of domination over people and things that has arisen with the help of bank credit results in the appearance of surplus value, but this does not arise from the sphere of production, as is the case with Marx, but from that of circulation. "
184. ^ Joseph Alois Schumpeter: Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy . 10th edition. Narr Francke Attempto Verlag, Tübingen 2020, p. 31 : “Here he proved [= Marx, d. V.] not only gave a much sharper insight into the nature of the problem, but also improved the conceptual apparatus that he had adopted. For example, he replaced Ricardo's distinction between fixed and circulating capital with the distinction between constant and variable (wage) capital, and Ricardo's rudimentary ideas about the duration of the production process with the much more precise concept of the "organic structure of capital", and with good reason. which revolves around the relationship between constant and variable capital. [...] "
185. ↑ Joseph Alois Schumpeter: Theory of economic development. A study of entrepreneurial profits, capital, credit, interest and the business cycle. 7th edition. Duncker & Humblot, Berlin 1987, p. XXIII : “At the beginning it was not clear to me what might be obvious to the reader at first glance, namely that this idea and this intention are exactly the same as the idea and the intention of the economic doctrine of Karl Marx Are based. Indeed, what set him apart from the economists of his own time and those who preceded him was precisely a vision of economic evolution as a particular process generated by the economic system itself. In all other respects he only used and adopted the concepts and statements of Ricardian economic theory, but the idea of ​​economic evolution, which he clad in an insignificant Hegelian setting, is entirely his own. "
186. ^ Eduard March: The theory of economic development by Joseph A. Schumpeter in its relationship to the Marxian system . In: Economy and Society. Economic policy journal of the Chamber for Workers and Salaried Employees for Vienna. 6th year, issue 3 . 1980, p. 260 : “Marx repeated the basic idea of ​​Schumpeter that capitalism had a tendency to innovate and that the innovator would fight for a temporary monopoly position by virtue of his performance, which would become a source of profit, repeated and with all desirable clarity. We want to limit ourselves here to a quote from the first volume of Capital: “The capitalist who uses the improved mode of production therefore appropriates a larger part of the working day for surplus labor than the other capitalists in the same business. It does in detail what capital does by and large in producing relative surplus-value. On the other hand, however, that extra value disappears as soon as the new mode of production is generalized and the difference between the individual value of the more cheaply produced goods and their social value disappears ... "
187. ↑ Michael Heinrich: The science of value. The Marxian Critique of Political Economy between Scientific Revolution and Classical Tradition . 8th edition. Westphalian steam boat, Münster 2020, p. 208-219 .
188. ↑ Michael Heinrich: The science of value. The Marxian Critique of Political Economy between Scientific Revolution and Classical Tradition . 8th edition. Westphalian steam boat, Münster 2020, p. 233-240 .
189. ↑ Michael Heinrich: The science of value. The Marxian Critique of Political Economy between Scientific Revolution and Classical Tradition . 8th edition. Westphalian steam boat, Münster 2020, p. 227-228 .
190. ↑ Michael Heinrich: The science of value. The Marxian Critique of Political Economy between Scientific Revolution and Classical Tradition . 8th edition. Westphalian steam boat, Münster 2020, p. 253-257 .
191. ↑ Michael Heinrich: The science of value. The Marxian Critique of Political Economy between Scientific Revolution and Classical Tradition . 8th edition. Westphalian steam boat, Münster 2020, p. 316 .
192. ↑ Michael Heinrich: The science of value. The Marxian Critique of Political Economy between Scientific Revolution and Classical Tradition . 8th edition. Westphalian steam boat, Münster 2020, p. 316-318 .