Marxism

70 . The Early Marx . h , ot of infection, the further role of portraying in

Ph1losop Y s sp . of h"l h · th · . If th egative dissolution p I osop y-1.e., e process of its ~!~y-:h~s historical nemesis I shall demonstrate on another occa-

sion. d F b h' d" . b [H f r on the other ban , euer ac s 1scovenes a out the ow a, . h. f

~ature of philosophy require~ still, f_or t ~1r pr~o a_t least, a critical settling of accounts with philosophical dialectic will be seen from my exposition itself.]

Estranged Labour3

We have proceeded from the premises of political economy. We have accepted its language and its laws. We presupposed private property, the separation of labour, capital and land, and of wages, profit of capital and rent of land-likewise division of labour, competition, the concept of exchange-value, etc. On the basis of political economy itself, in its own words, we have shown that the worker sinks to the level of a commodity and becomes indeed the most wretched of commodities; that the wretchedness of the worker is in inverse proportion to the power and magnitude of his pr~duction; that the necessary result of competition is the accumu- lati~n of capital in a few hands, and thus the restoration of monop· ?1Y_m a more terrible form; that finally the distinction between cap· itahst and land-rentier, like that between the tiller of the soil and the factory-worker, disappears and that the whole of society must fall apart into the two classes-the property-owners and the proper- tyless workers.

p I'" I 't do itica economy proceeds from the fact of private property, but 1 oesnote 1· · f Jae th x~ am it to us. It expresses in general, abstract ormu- e mcttenal process through which private property actually

;:~es, :°t these formulae it then takes for laws. It does not co~- frome~ t ese laws-i.e., it does not demonstrate how they anse not discfo;eih nature of private property. Political economy ~oes and hetwee e s_ource of the division between labour and capital, relationsh· n capital and land. When for example, it defines the to be th ip J°! wages to profit, it takes'the interest of the capitalists posed to \~

0 ~nnate_ c~use; i.e., it takes for granted what it is sut

explained f ve. Similarly, competition comes in everywhere. It 1; and appare~~r ;;te~al circumstances. As to how far these ~xte;aa necessary Y rtuitous circumstances are but the expression

course of d 1 . teaches us nothing. We h eve opment, political economy be a 3 D' ave seen how, to it, exchange itself appears to z.i If &t/ren,d I f (hls

ote on Ttzts !;d Arbei~. See the xii, above, for a discussion o Tel'lllinology, p. term. [R. T.]

Economic and Philosophic Man .hf of . uscri,,.s J 844 • 7 l

fortmtous fact. The only wheels wh 'ch 1· . I · 1 po 1tica econom ts · motion are avarice and the Y se m P t 't . war amongst the avaricious come I ion . -

Precisely because political economy does not grasp th · 'th· th . e connec-t10ns w1 m e movement it was poss1'b] t · h . ' e o counterpose for

mstance, _t e doctrme of competition to the doctrine of mono' ol the doctrme of craft-liberty to the doctrine of the t· P by, d · f h • • . corpora 10n, t e ?ctrme o t e d1v1S10~ _of landed property to the doctrine of the big estate-for competition, craft-liberty and the division of landed prop~rty were explamed and comprehended only as fortuitous, pre- meditated and v10lent conseque?ces of monopoly, the corporation, and feudal property, not as theu necessary, inevitable and natural consequences.

Now, therefore, we have to grasp the essential connection ?etween private property, avarice, and the separation of labour, cap- ital and landed. property; between exchange and competition, value and the devaluation of men, monopoly and competition, etc.; the connection between this whole estrangement and the money- system.

Do not let us go back to a fictitious primordial condition as the political economist does, when he tries to explain. Such a primor- dial condition explains nothing. He merely pushes the question away into a grey nebulous distance. He assumes in the form of fact, of an event, what he is supposed to deduce-namely, the necessary relationship between two things-between, for example, division of labour and exchange. Theology in the same way explains the origin of evil by the fall of man: that is, it assumes as a fact, in historical form, what has to be explained.

We proceed from an actual economic fact. The worker becomes all the poorer the more wealth he produces,

the more his production increases in power and range. :i?ie worker becomes an ever cheaper commodity the more com_mod1ties he cr~- ates. With the increasing value of the world of thmgs proceeds m direct proportion the devaluation of the world of men. Labour pro- duces not only commodities; it produces !tsel~ and ~he ':"orker as a commodity-and does so in the proportion m which 1t produces commodities generally. . .

This fact expresses merely that the obiect _which_ labour produces-labour's product--confronts it as something alten, as _a power independent of the producer. Th~ produ~t of labour is labou~ Which has been congealed in an ob1ect, whi~h ha~ ~com_e ~ater!al: it is the ob;ecti-{ication of labour. Labours re_a?zabon IS ~: oh1e~tification. In the conditions dealt with b~ pohtical econ-

y this realization of labour appears as loss of reality for the work-

r 72 . The Early Marx

b. ti'fi tion as loss of the object and object-bondage; appro. ers· o 1ec ca . • 4 .' . strangement, as alienation. Pnation as e 1· . lo f 1· So much does labour's rea izat_1on appear. as ss o rea 1ty that the worker loses reality to the pomt of starv~ng to death. So much d b'ectification appear as loss of the ob1ect that the worker is r:Sbe~ ~f the objects most necessary not onl_y for h_is life but for his work. Indeed, labour itself becomes an O~Ject which he can get hold of only with the greatest effort a~d ~1th the mo~t irregular interruptions. So much does the appropnahon of the ob1ect appear as estrangement that the more objr.cts the worker produces the fewer can he possess and the more he falls under the dominion of his product, capital.

All these consequences are contained in the definition that the worker is related to the product of his labour as to an alien object. For on this premise it is clear that the more the worker spends himself, the more powerful the alien objective world becomes which he creates over-against himself, the poorer he himself-his inner world-becomes, the less belongs to him as his own. It is the same in religion. The more man puts into God, the less he retains i? himself. The worker puts his life into the object; but now his hf~ no (o?ger belongs to him but to the object. Hence, the greater th1S actiVIty, the greater is the worker's lack of objects. Whatever the product of his labour is, he is not. Therefore the greater this product, the less is he himself. The alienation of the worker in his product means not only that his labour becomes an object, an external existence, but that it exists outside him independently, as sometbi~g alien to him, and that it becomes a' power of its own ~~nfro?tmg him; it means that the life which he has conferred on

e obiect confronts him as something hostile and alien . du ~t us rw look more closely at the objecti-fi,cation, at the pr~ thee ob~

0 th~e worker; and therein at the estrangement, the loss 0 0 Ject, 1s product.

... ~e worker can create nothing without nature without the se~- •wv..., externaJ ld I . , . rnani· fested in h. tr . · t ~s the material on which his labor ish. h it Prod ' w IC it is active, from which and by means of w ic uces.

But just as t z ·t · the sense that labo na ure prov~des l~bor with the means_ of I e in rate, on the oth h ur cannot li-ve without objects on which to ;pernore restricted er an?, it also provides the means of life in t e f the

sense-1 e th . b . tence o worker hi · ·, e means for the physical su sis mself. Thus the h e,ctef1l91

world 5 more the worker by his labour appropriates t of life i~ ~ns~ous nature, the more he deprives himself of l ~tld 4 ,, e ouble respect: first, that the sensuous externa · .\Jlenat1on"-&,~

w11Jser1111i.

Economic and Philosophic Manus ';.ts f en,_, o 1844 • 73 more and more ceases to be an ob·ect belon . . be his labour's means of life; and 1econdl ftg _to his labour-to ceases to be means of life in the i'm dy,t at it more and more . . me 1a e sense me f h physical subsistence of the worker. • ans or t e

Thus in this double respect the worker be 1 . b. t fi t . h h . comes a s ave of his o 1e~ ' rs , m t at e receives an object of labou . .

receives work; and secondly in that he rec . r, 1.e., ofm that _he Th f

. • e1ves means subsist- ence. ere ore, it enables him to exist Ii st k

d h . . , r , as a wor er; and

secon ' as a p ysical sub1ect. The extremity of th's b d . h ' ·t · I 1 on age 1s t at I is _on y as_ a worker that he continues to maintain himself as a physical sub1ect, and that it is only as a physical rub1'ect that he . worker. 1s a

(The _ law~ of ~olitical economy express the estrangement of the worker m his ob1ect thus: the more the worker produces, the less he has to consume; the more values he creates the more valueless the more unworthy he becomes; the better fo~ed his product, th; more deformed becomes the worker; the more civilized his object. the more barbarous becomes the worker; the mightier labour ?ecomes, the more powerless becomes the worker; the more ingen- 10us labour becomes, the duller becomes the worker and the more he be<:o.mes nature's bondsman.)

Political economy conceals the estrangement inherent in the nature of labour by not considering the direct relationship between the worker (labour) and production. It is true that labour produces f?r the rich wonderful things-but for the worker it produces priva- tion. It produces palaces-but for the worker, hovels. It produces beauty-but for the worker, deformity. It replaces labour by machines-but some of the workers it throws back to a barbarous tYPe of labour, and the other workers it turns into machines. It pro- duces intelligence-but for the worker idiocy, cretinism.

The direct relationship of labour to its produce is the relation- ship of the worker to the objects of his production. The relation- ship of the man of means to the objects of production and to pro- duction itself is only a consequence of this first relationship-and confirms it. We shall consider this other aspect later.

When we ask then what is the essential relationship of labour we are asking ab~ut th; relationship of the worker to production.

Till now we have been considering the estrangement, the aliena• tion of the worker only in one of its aspects, i.e., the worker's rela- tionship to the products of his labour. But the estrangement is m~n~fested not only in the result but in the act of production- w1thm the producing activity itself. How would th~ worker co~e to face the product of his activity as a stranger, were 1t not that m the very act of production he was estranging himself from himself? The product is after all but the summary of the activity of production.

IL,.,,_, , ' ~ ;.'t- '-> .... ,--- "

74 • The Early Marx If then the product of labour is alienation, production itself must be active alienation, the alienation of activity, the activity of aliena- tion. In the estrangement of the object of labour is merely summa- rized the estrangement, the alienation, in the activity of labour itself.

What, then, constitutes the alienation of labour? First, the fact that labour is external to the worker, i.e., it does

not belong to his essential being; that in his work, therefore, he does not affirm himself but denies himself, does not feel content but unhappy, does not develop freely his physical and mental energy but mortifies his body and ruins his mind. The worker therefore only feels himself outside his work, and in his work feels outside himself. He is at home when he is not working, and when he is working he is not at home. His labour is therefore not volun- tary, but coerced; it is forced labour. It is therefore not the satisfac- tion of a need; it is merely a means to satisfy needs external to it. Its alien character emerges clearly in the fact that as soon as no physical or other compulsion exists, labour is shunned like the plague. External labour, labour in which man alienates himself, is a labour of self-sacrifice, of mortification. Lastly, the external charac- ter of labour for the worker appears in the fact that it is not his own, but someone else's, that it does not belong to him, that in it he belongs, not to himself, but to another. Just as in religion the spo?taneous activity of the human imagination, of the human brain and the human heart, operates independently of the individ- ual-that is, operates on him as an alien, divine or diabolical activ- ity-:-:in the same way the worker's activity is not his spontaneous achVIty. It belongs to another; it is the loss of his self.

As a result, therefore, man ( the worker) no longer feels himself !0 be freely active in any but his animal functions-eating, drink· mg, ~roc'.eating, or at most in his dwelling and in dressing-up, etc.; an~ m his human functions he no longer feels himself to be any- thing but an animal. What is animal becomes human and what is human becomes animal. h Certainly ~ting, drinking, procreating, etc., are also genuinely

uman functions. But in the abstraction wh·ich separates them from the s~here of all other human activity and turns them into sole and ultimate ends, they are animal. i We have _considere~ the act of estranging practical human activ· l• labour, m two of its aspects. ( 1) The relation of the worker to Th_fnoduct of labour as an alien object exercising power over him,

1 1 s relation is at the same time the relation to the sensuous exter-

na woritl, to the objects of nature as an alien world antagoniSticsJIY oPposed to him ( ) Th 1 . of . 0 duc-tion with . h · 2 . e re ahon of labour to the act pr f the m t e labour process. This relation is the relation °

Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844 · 75 worker to his own activity as an alien activity not belonging to him; it is activity as suffering, strength as weakness, begetting as emascu- lating, the worker's own physical a~d. mental enerITT'., _his p~son~l life or what is life other than activity-as an act1V1ty which IS turned against him, neither depends on nor belongs to him. Here we have self-estrangement, as we had previously the estrangement of the thing.

We have yet a third aspect of estranged labour to deduce from the two already considered. . . .

Man is a species being, not only because m practice and m theory he adopts the species as his object (his own as well as th?se of other things), but-and this is only another way ?f. expr~:;. it-but also because he treats himself as the actual, l1V1ng spe . • because he treats himself as a universal and th~refor~ a free '::~~

The life of the species, both in man a~d 10 ~mmal\; anic physically in the fact that man (like the ammal) hv~hon 1

1 . 1 . compared wit an amma ' nature· and the more umversa man 15 . h' h he ' . h h of ·norgamc nature on w ic the more universal 1s t e sp ere 1 • . ht etc constitute a

lives. Just as plants, an_imals, sto_nes, the aii~1~f 'the~~. partly as part of human consciousness m the r~ f rt-his spiritual objects of natural science, pa~tly as ob1:~t~ ~e ~ust first prepare inorganic nature, spiritual nounshment w 1~ the realm of practice to make it palatable and digestibl~so to:u:an activity. Physically they constitute a part of human hfe and hether they appear in man lives only on these products of nadtur~i· wg or whatever it may the form of food heating, clothes, a w_e m ' •rested precisely in b ' · · practice mam both e. The universality of man is 10 h • inorganic body- the universality which makes all nature is of life and ( 2) the . ) h' d'rect means ' N t masmuch as nature is ( 1 1s 1 · f h' life-activity. a ure material the obi'ect and the instrume~t IS far as it is not itself . ' ' th t JS in so . h' 1s man's inorganic body-nature, a ' s that nature JS is the human body. Man lives o~ n_atur~:::s intercourse if he is body, with which he must remain 10 ·tual life is linked to nature not to die. That man's physical and sp1~tself for man is a part of means simply that nature is linked to 1 ' _ nature. d (

2 ) himself, his own

~n estranging from man (_1) nature, rlabour estranges the spe- a~tive functions, his life-actiVIty, eStm_ng:f the species into a m~n.s Cle~ horn man. It turns for him the life 'fe of the species and md1- o~ individual life. First it estrange_s t~e-~i al life in its abstract form VIduaI life, and secondly it makes m~1v11tewise in its abstract and the purpose of the life of the species, 1 estranged form. . . productive life itself, a For in the first place labour, life::~:~ing a need-the need PPears to man merely as a means

r 76 . The Early Marx to maintain the physical existence .. Yet. the productive life is the life of the species. It is life-engendering I~fe. ~e whole character _of

species-its species character-is contained in the c~aracter of its ~Ee-activity; and free, conscious activ~ty is man's species character. Life itself appears only as a me~ns t~ life. . . . . .

The anim:JI is immediately identical with its hfe-acbv1ty. It do~s not distinguish itself from it. It is its life-acti~ty. Ma~ makes his life-activity itself the object of his will and of his consc1ousne~s. He has conscious life-activity. It is not a determination with which he directly merges. Conscious life-activity directly distinguis~es man from animal life-activity. It is just because of this that he 1s a ~pe• cies being. Or it is only because he is a species being th~t he is a Conscious Being, i.e., that his own life is an object for him. Only because of that is his activity free activity. Estrange? labour reverses this relationship, so that it is just because ma_n 1s con- scious being that he makes his life-activity, his· essential being, a mere means to his existence. . . . . ork-

In creating an obiective world by his practical act1V1ty, in w . ing-up inorganic narure, man proves himself a conscious spec~e: being, i.e., as a being that treats the species as its_ own ess~nti~s being, or that treats itself as a species being. Admittedly amma also produce. They build themselves nests, dwellings,_ li~e the _be:, beavers ants etc. But an animal only produces what 1t 1mmed1at Y

, , . h'l t an needs for itself or its young. It produces one-sidedly, w ! m of produces universally. It produces only under the domin1?n immediate physical need, whilst man produces even when he 1s free from physical need and only truly produces in freedom therefromf An animal produces only itself, whilst ~an re~roduces t~e who!~. 0

1 nature. An animal's product belongs 1mmed1ately to its phys1ca body, whilst man freely confronts his product. An animal fo~s things_ in accordance wit~ the standard and the need of t?e speCI: to which it belongs, whilst man knows how to produce in accor ance with the standard of every species, and knows how to apply everywhere the inherent standard to the object. Man therefore also forms things in accordance with the laws of beauty.

It is just in the working-up of the objective world, therefore, that man first really proves himself to be a species being. This produc- ~on is his active species li~e. Through and because of this ~roducf tion, nature appears as h1S work and his reality. The ob1ect 0 labour is, therefore, the ob;ectification of man's species life: for b: duplicates himself not only, as in consciousness, intellectually, _bu also actively, in reality, and therefore he contemplates himself .111 af

b. t 0 world that he has created. In tearing away from man the o J_ec . his production, therefore, estranged labour tears from him bis sp~ cie, life, his Tea) species objectivity, and transforms his advantll8'

· of 1844 • 77 . d Philosophic Manuscripts ure Economic an that his inorganic body, nat '

. I . to the disadvantage over amma s m. f 'ty free activity, to _a is taken from_ h1;~grading spontaneo~s ac i~s iife a means to his

Similarly, m d labour makes mans spec1 means, estrange . cies is thus trans- physical exist~nce. s which man has ofh h~h!~pecies life becomes

The consc1ousnes . such a way t at formed by estrangement m . for him a means. thus· . iritual species

Estranged labour_ tu~s. g both nature and his td his individual ( 3} Man's spec1~s ~:n• to him, into a m~~ns as it does exter·

ro rty into a bemg a ' own body from II?, ~xifenc;. It estrang~s. mane~sence, his human bem~an is estranged nal nature and his spmtual uence of the fact th~t 'ty from his spe-

(4) An immediate conseq from his life-actiVIIf, man is con· f h's labour, mf17J. a Wh t from the product o i ent of man from th other man. a

cies being is the estrange7:1 confronted by e oduct of his labooJ fronted by himself, h~ is t his work, to the pr the other man, an applies to a man's relation t°a man's relation to d and to himself, also holds o d object of labou~. nature is estrangech to the other man's lab~u.r an that man's spec;s m the other, as ea

In fact, the propos1ti~n man is estranged o . hi in from him means tha~ on ential nature:6 fa t every rela_~s J the of them is from man s ess man and ID . c d and expre:,•=

The estrangement o~ elf 'is first reahze en man which man stands_ to hims stands to other mged labour eac~on in relationship in which a ~a;onship of estra:ard and the pasi

Hence within the re a I with the stan the views the other i~ ac~rda::orker. of political eco;:irormu· which he finds h1mse as from a fact action. We a ur We

We took our departur; and his prodd alienated f la!:£ p<>liti- estrangement of the w~. er fact....estrang~~ merely a ac lated the concert of t 1;_hence analysi concept of have analysed this concep . . l life the ·tself

l lll rea -""t I ' ca economy. f rther, how and p,~ ts me as ·an

Let us now see, u must express 'f it confron estranged, alienated latur is alien to me,/ . . n alien, a

If the product of la our does it belong me, if 1t 15 a alien power, to w~o~, ~en, not belo~g~ong?

If my own actiVIty 0 ~hen does it coerced activity, to whom, ' . l roduc-

To a being other than me. . the princ1pa P Who is this being? . the earliest times .,_,,.,,ssc/ilich111 Wrs•11 • The gods? To be sure, ill essential nature

"spe .. 5. "Species nature" (and, ea~u.~~•,i cles beln1")-G11tt11nr.rt11eso11 ,

78 · The Early Marx tion ( for example, the building of temples, etc. , in Egypt, India and Mexico) appears to be in the service of the gods, and the prod. uct belongs to the gods. However, the gods on their own were never the lords of labour. No more was nature. And what a contra- diction it would be if, the more man subjugated nature by his labour and the more the miracles of the gods were rendered super- fluous by the miracles of industry, the more man were to renounce the joy of production and the enjoyment of the produce in favour of these powers.

The alien being, to whom labour and the produce of labour belongs, in whose service labour is done and for whose benefit the produce of labour is provided, can only be man himself.

If the product of labour does not belong to the worker, if it con· fronts him as an alien power, this can only be because it belongs to some other man than the worker. If the worker's activity is a tor- ment to him, to another it must be delight and his life's joy. Not the gods, not nature, but only man himself can be this alien power over man .

We must bear in mind the above-stated proposition that man's relation to himself only becomes objective and real for him through his relation to the other man. Thus, if the product of his labour, his labour objectified, is for him an alien, hostile, powerful object independent of him, then his position towards it is such that some- one else is master of this object, someone who is alien, hostile, pow· erful, and independent of him. If his own activity is to him an unfree activity, then he is treating it as activity performed in the service, under the dominion, the coercion and the yoke of another man.

Every self-estrangement of man from himself and &om nature appears in the relation in which he places himself and nature to men other than and differentiated from himself. For this reason religious self-estrangement necessarily appears in the relationship of the layman to the priest, or again to a mediator, etc., since we are here dealing with the intellectual world . In the real practical world self-estrangement can only become manifest through "the real practi- cal relationship to other men. The medium through which estrangement takes place is itself practical. Thus through estranged labour man not only engenders his relationship to the object and to ~e act of production as to powers that are alien and hostile to him;_ he also engenders the relationship in which other men stand to his production and to his product and the relationship in which he stands to these other men. Just a; he begets his own productio~ as the loss of his reality, as his punishment; just as he begets his own product as a loss, as a product not belonging to him; so he begets the dominion of the one who does not produce over produc-

. and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844 · 79 Economic . the roduct. Just as he estranges from hi~self h~s

tion and over p f to the stranger activity which is not his Ctl.vity so h e con ers own a '

own. 1 considered this relationship. fro~ the Till now we have on y d J t r we shall be considenng it also

d ·nt of the worker an a e stan POI . f th non-worker. from the standpomt o / t d labour then the worker produces

Through estranged, a iena e f ' alie~ to Jabour and stand- the relationship to this l~bo~~ o o; tr:nworker to labour engend~~ ing outside it. The relations _ ip_ r whatever one chooses to ca the relation to it of the c?p1tahs;o;erty is thus the product, the the master of labour. Private p f l'enated labour, of the exter·

quence o a 1 result the necessary conse ' nd to himself. nal reiation of the worker to nature a nal sis from the concept of

Private property thus res~lts by a y f estranged labour, of • f alienated man, 0 alienated labour-1.e ., 0

estranged life, of. estranged£ 7;n ,movement of private profp7 ;;:J True it is as a result O e l'enated labour ( 0 a ie .

we ha;e obtained the concept of a I analysis of this conceptth1t . . But on t be e life) from political economy. . te property appears o ence

becomes clear that though lf ;our it is really its co;setct of source the cause of alienate a ' t the cause but t e e .

' . b · ning are no • becomes reap-just as the gods m the e~m Later this relationship man 's intellectual confusion. . te prop-

t of pnva rocaJ. . . f the developmen ne hand it Only at the ~ery culmmatton oe namely, that on the o it is the

erty does this, its secret, re-:tfrf ' r and that s~con:Ythis aliena- is the product of alienate a ?u 1•f the realization ]. ates 1tse , means by which labour a ten . hitherto . n vanous tzon. . 1 beds light o This exposition immediate Y s

I soul of pro·

unsolved conflicts. f om labour as ~he rea roperty every· ( 1) Political economy starts thr ·ng and to pnvatel Pded in favour

d . · · no 1 • cone u uctton; yet to labour 1t ~ve~ p oudhon has d tand however, thing. From this contrad1ctton r erty We un e_rs of' estranged

· t prop · d' tton of labour and against pnva . the contra ic erely fonnu- h . d'ctton 1s has m t at this apparent contra 1 J'fcal economy

labour with itself, and that Po 1 1 ·vate property lated the laws of estranged labour. that wages ant kbour pays for

We also understand, there~ret the object O ce of labour's are identical: where the pro uc~ecessary consequ~:bour does not labour itself the wage is but a age of Jabour, e We shall estrangement, for after all in th~h: servant of th; f~ · some con- appear as an end in itself but as bile will only e u develop this point later, and meanw clusions.

80 • The Early Marx A forcing-up of wages ( disregarding all other difficulties, includ·

ing the fact that it would only be by force, too, that the higher wages, being an anomaly, could be maintained) would therefore be nothing but better payment for the slave, and would not conquer either for the worker or for labour their human status and dignity.

Indeed, even the equality of wages demanded by Proudhon only transforms the relationship of the present-day worker to his labour into the relationship of all men to labour. Society is then conceived as an abstract capitalist.

Wages are a direct consequence of estranged labour, and estranged labour is the direct cause of private property. The down· fall of the one aspect must therefore mean the downfall of the other.

( 2 _) From the relationship of estranged labour to private prop- erty it further follows that the emancipation of society from private property, e_tc., _from servitude, is expressed in the political form of the emancipation of the workers; not that their emancipation alone wa~ at stake but because the emancipation of the workers contains umversal human emancipation-and it contains this, because the whole of human servitude is involved in the relation of the worker to production, and every relation of servitude is but a modification and consequence of this relation.

J USt as we have found the concept of private property from the concept of estranged, alienated labour by analysis in the same way every category f 1· · I ' f th

O po ihca economy can be evolved with the help 0 ese two factors · d h 11 fi . . trade co . . ' an we s a nd agam m each category, e.g.,

P ' . mpehtion, capital, money, only a definite and developed

ex reSS1on of the first foundations Before considering th· fi · · I

two bl is con gurahon however let us try to so ve

pro ems . ' ' ( i) To define the I • · h arise genera nature of private property as 1t as

n as a result of est d 1 b . . . ' h social property. range a our, m its relation to truly urnan, ( 2 ) We have accept d th . . • as a fact d e e estrangement of labour, its alienation,

man co~e a; ~e have analysed this fact. How, we now ask, does ment roote~ ien~e, to estrange, his labour? How is this estrange- already g i~ t e nature of human development? We have forming :e a on_g way to the solution of this problem by trans- question a: t~uestion as _to the o~gin of private property into the humanity' d the relation of alienated labour to the course of one think: ~v~opment. For when one speaks of private property, When ° eing concerned with something external to man . himself~~peaks of labour, one is directly concerned wi~ -m~n soluti . IS new formulation of the question already contains its

on.

Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844 • 81 As to (1): The general nature of private property and its rela-

tion to truly human property. Alienated labour has resolved itself for us into two elements

which mutually condition one another, or which are but different expressions of one and the same relationship. Appropriation appears as estrangement, as alienation; and alienation appears as appropria- tion, estrangement as true enfranchisement.

We have considered the one side-alienated labour in relation to the worker himself, i.e., the relation of alienated labour to itself. The property-relation of the non-worker to the worker and to labour we have found as the product, the necessary outcome of this relation of alienated labour. Private property, as the material, sum- mary expression of alienated labour, embraces both relations-the relation of the worker to work, to the product of his labour and to the non-worker, and the relation of the non-worker to the worker and to the product of his labour. .

Having seen that in relation to the worker who appropriate~ nature by means of his labour, this appropriation appears as estrangement, his own spontaneous activity as acti~ty for ano~er and as activity of another, vitality as a sacrifice of ltfe, pro?uction of the object as loss of the object to an alien power, to an alien per- son-we shall now consider the relation to the worker, to labour and _its object of this person who is alien ~o labo~r and the "'.ork:;~

First it has to be noticed, that everythmg which appears ?1 th worker as an activity of alienation, of estrangement, appears m e non-worker as a state of alienation, of estrangement. rod ti

Secondly that the worker's real practical attitude in p uc Icon d ' ' ) ·n the non-wor er

an to the product ( as a state of mind appears 1

confr~nting him as a theoretical attitud~- . the worker which th Thirdly, the non-worker does everythmg aga1nstd ·nst himself

e worker does against himself; but he does not O agai what he does against the worker. . 6

Let us look more closely at these three relations.

Private Property and Communism .Re p x . . f n11ertylessness and property

so lo · · XXIX. The antithes!S o prvr . is of labour and capit:f as_ it is not comprehended as ~he _antithes not sped in its activ!hll remains an antithesis of !~differen~~tithesr not yet grasped connection, its internal relation~ • this forst form even Wit~s a contradiction. It can find expresSl.:~n roperty ( as in ancient Rout the advanced development of pn ar ~s having been established~e, Turkey, etc.). It does not yet :~tr the subjective 6. At this . Y private property itself. But a ou '

Doint the first manuscript breaks off unfinished,

nat consumption, although communal activity and communal con- sumption-i.e., activity and consumption which are manifested and directly confirmed in real association with other men-will occur wherever such a direct expression of sociality stems from the true character of the activity's content and is adequate to the nature of consumption.

But again when I am active scienti-fi.cally, etc.,-when I am engaged in activity which I can seldom perform in direct commu- nity with others-then I am social, because I am active as a man. Not only is the material of my activity given to me as a social prod- uct ( as is even the language in which the thinker is active) : my own existence is social activity, and therefore that which I make of myself, I make of myself for society and with the consciousness of myself as a social being.

My general consciousness is only the theoretical shape ?f that _of which the living shape is the real community, the social fab~1c, although at the present day general consciousness is an abstraction from real life and as such antagonistically confronts it. Con~e- quently, too, the activity of my general consciousness, as an acbv- Hy, ;s my theoretical e,cistence as a soda! being. . .

1 What is to be avoided above all is the re-estabhshmg 0 "Society" as an abstraction vis-a-vis the individual. The indivi~ual is the social being: His life, even if it may not appear in t~e direct fonn of a communal lffe can;ed out togethe, wHh othe,S-:--". th.f'j fore an expression and confirmation of social life. Man's _

10 ~ 1~1

and species life are not different, however much--and this 1s . 10

c;;i- table-the mode of existence of the individual is a more ~arti~\~ or more general mode of the life of the species, or t?e hfe

0 species is a more particular or more general individu~I hfe. "al life

In his consciousness of species man confirms his real soci sely and simply repeats his real existence in thought, just ~s conv:r and the being of the species confirms itself in species-consc1ousnes is for itself in its generality as a thinking being: . d. idual ( and

Man, much as he may therefore be a part~cular 1? r "dual and it is precisely his particularity which makes him an m 1~~ity_:_the a real individual social being), is just as much the dto erienced ideal totality-the subjective existence of thou~ht an e( world as society present for itself; just as he exists also m ~he rea and as a

l . t f ocial existence, the awareness and the rea en1oymen o s totality of human life-activity. , . t but at the same

Thinking and being are thus no doubt distznc ' . e time they "'• ;n unity wffh each other. . s over the ~i-

Dectth seems to be a harsh victory ~f the spe~ie determinate 111 individual and to contradict their umty. But t e h mortal. vidual is only a determinate species being, and as sue

and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844 . 87 (

4 ) Just as private property is only the sensuous expression of

the fact that man becomes obiective for himself and at the same time becomes to himself a strange and inhuman object; just as it expresses the fact that the assertion of his life is the alienation of his life, that his realization is his loss of reality, is an alien reality : conversely, the positive transcendence of private property-Le., the sensuous appropriation for and by man of the human essence and of human life, of objective man, of human _achieveme~ts-is no_t to be conceived merely in the sense of direct, one-sided grati- fication-merely in the sense of possessing, of ':'2ving. Man appropriates his total essence in a total !°anner, that 1s to say, ~s a whole man . Each of his human relations to the world-see~ng, hearing, smelling, tasting, feeling, thinking, being r:re: ~:11~:j wanting acting loving-in short, all the org~ns. 0 h 1; IVI re being like thos~ organs which are directly s?cial )n t eutheo~ act

71

' , · h · entatwn to ou,e ' in their obiective orientation _ or m t eir on . ti of the human the appropriation of that ob1ect, t~e arpr~~r:~7festation of the world; their orientation to the 0~1ect is t d h man suffering, for human world;

8 it is human eflica~ousne~~ anent :f self in man.

suffering apprehended humanly, IS an en, -r d one-sided that an Privat~ property has made us s_o stur ~; exists for us as <:3pi·

object is only ours when we have it-w en ;runk, worn, inhabited, ta!, or when it is directly possessed, eate~lthough private pr?perty etc. -in short when it is used by us.

1 . ti'ons of possession as

. ' ' . d. t rea i.za • h life of itself again conceives all these uec as means 1s t e means of life, and the life which th~y s;;~ capital. there• Private property-labour and_ conve~1::ental senses there ha:ense of

In place of all these physical an of all these sens~th~lute pov· fore come the sheer estrangement b educed to this abs the outer having. The human bein~ had ~:s inner w_ealth t;wenty.One erty in order that he might yie. ,, see Hess in the world. ( On the category of "having, h complete Sheets.) . erty is therefor\t t it is this

The transcendence of pnvate prop d attributes; u ibutes have emancipation of all human sense~ an senses and a~ beCOme a emancipation precisely because t es~ man The eye ~\ human become sub1·ectively and objectively, u beco· me a soci~,,:,.,,

8 have

' • b" t has The • .,, ... -human eye just as its o 7ec for man. ·c;janS 'They object-an ~bject emanatin~ from -~anractice theo~~ing, but th: therefore become · directly _m thei th: sake of. thU and to man, relate themselves to the thing for ·

1 b·on to 1tse . tblni relates

th · · • b' t · human re a if the h man1Y-1ng itself 1s an o 7ec zve . ly · onlY being u thing buJD~e human

8 , for this reason it is just as highly

l>rtced as the determinations of human itself to [Mar$] essence and activities. [Ma,:c] 9

, ln Practice I can relate mvself to a

8 · The Early Marx nd vice versa. Need or enjoyment have consequently lost their e~o. istical nature, and nature has lost its mere utility by use becommg ruman use.

In the same way, the senses and enjoyments of other men have >ecome my own appropriation. Besides these direct orga~s, there- :ore, social organs develop in the form of society; th us, for instance, 1ctivity in direct association with others, etc., has become an organ :or expressing my own life, and a mode of appropriating human !ife. .

It is obvious that the human eye gratifies itself in a way differe~t from the crude, non-human eye; the human ear different from t e crude ear, etc. the

To recapitulate; man is not lost in his object only when. . 5 object becomes for him a human object or objective ~an . . n:1s ;e

possible only when the object becomes for him a social ob1ec ' . g h imself for himself a social being, just as society becomes a bem for him in this object. . . rld

On the one hand, therefore, it is only when the ob1ec,tive wotial becomes everywhere for man in society the world of 1!1an s es~e:wn powers

1 -human reality, and for that reason the reality of ?1s . ca-

essential powers-that all obiects become for him the ob1~ct~fi di- tion of himself, become objects which confirm and realize his i~he ,iduality, become his objects: that is, man himself becomes the object. The manner in which they become his depends on cor- nature of the ob;ects and on the nature of the essential pow~r la· responding to it; for it is precisely the determinateness of t~is r;,

0 tionship which shapes the particular, real mode of affirmabo~. the the eye an object comes to be other than it is to the ear, an The object of the eye is another object than the object of the ear. peculiarity of each essential power is precisely its peculi~r esse;.:; and therefore also the peculiar mode of its objectification, \ .1 _ ob;ectively actual living being. Thus man is affirmed in the O iec tive world not only in the act of thinking, but with all his senses. . t

On the other hand, looking at this in . its subjective a~pect : 1;:;e as music alone awakens in man the sense of music, and 1ust a_s

0 most beautiful music has no sense for the unmusical ear-:-1s n f object for it, because my object can only be the confirmation ~s one of my essential powers and can therefore only be so for me_ my essential power is present for itself as a subjective capacis%; because the sense of an object for me goes only so far as ?11!ttnfor go (has only sense for a sense corresponding to that obJe those this reason the senses of the social man are ~th~r sense\~~J:d rich- of the non-social man. Only through the obiectively un

I. "Essential powers"-Wesenskril1te : my essential nature, my I.e., l>OWers belonging to me as part of

very being.

. nd Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844 • 89 Economic a . • h . b . ·s the richness of sub1ecbve uman

Ss of man's essential emg t f beauty of form-in short, ne . 1 ar an eye or . th sensibility (bal mut~ur:a~ gratifications, sen~es confirmb mughg t =~ senses capa e O an) either cultivated or ro selves as essential )o~~r; ~~:'senses but also th_e so-eall~d :: being. F:e npo:a~7c~l senses (will, love, et~) to l~ ab;:rtue of its senses- of the senses-com . f the five sense-the ~umanness umanized nature. The formmgdiwn to the obi·ect by virtue of h t ' h1'story of the world

' b f the en ire senses is a la our O estricted . dhasonlyar present. . crude practical nee of food that

The sense caught up m 't i's not the human fo~ t s well be h · g man 1 . Jd JUS a sense. For t e starvm ' in as food; ·It co~ sa wherein

exists, but only its abstract tt !ould be imposs~ to re~urdened there in its crudest fo~m, a~ that of animals. et ·n minerals this feeding-activity differs f ro~he finest play; the dea el 1the unique man in need has no sense or b t not the beauty an ""-us the

·1 alue u · J sense 111 ' d sees only the me~canh e v has no mineralo~ca . th~retical an nature of the mmeral: he ssence both m it~ man, as well as objectification of the human e ke man's sense u b·re wealth of

. · · ed to ma . t the en practical aspects 1s reqmr ondmg 0 to create the human sense corresp . e operty, of its human and natural substance. ement of prrvatd prspiritual wealth

f the mov · I an rial for Just as resulting rom f its matena 11

the 11lllte . wealth as well as its poverty-;>\; finds to handda ces 11llln in : and poverty-the budding sit1~ed society pr~ : roan profou Y this development: s? est_a roduces _the . . . !ism entire richness of his bemg ~ts endunng tsm, spmtua ·ca1 endowed with all the senses-as .1 •sm and obJecb their antithe~..,.

1 . h bJ ·ectiv1 l Jose . the soc= It will be seen OVj su ffering, on Y titheses 1n tical and materialism, activity an~ su ce as such ~n of the theore cti- character, and thus their extSten the resolubon virtue of the pra ly condition; it will be see~ howractical way, b: by no m~ns ~~:so- antitheses is only possible in t n is therefor f life which f

1 111 as

cal energy of men . Their reso u O al problelll O• ed 'this pro e a problem of knowledge, _but a ;~use it conceiv JiSbed Phy could not solve precisely b d the estab _.,,_,

. .i.,"'1'V an , essenpu,. merely a theoretical one. . ory of inu--- 1 ok of mans Hitherto It will be seen how the hiSt the open bo cholog)'•_ an's

obiective existence of industry are of burttan P~on with ~use Powers, the exposure to the sen~es parable conn of utility, think this W:1s not conceived i~ its in~:rnal relati0f e could . onlybstract• essentuzl being but only m an ex nt peo~ in its- a -~-11·ty

· ' · t ngerne ' h1sto,, the = rnoVJng in the realm of es ra r ·on or to be man's general mode of being-~.;~rature, etc.,- general character as politics, :trt, 1

90 • The Early Marx of man's essential powers and man's species-activity. We have before us the ob;ectified essential powers of man in the form of sensuous, alien, useful ob;ects, in the form of estrangement, dis- played in ordinary material industry ( which can be conceived as a part of that general movement, just as that movement ca~ _be ~n- ceived as a particular part of industry, since all human activity h1th· erto has been labour-that is, industry-activity estranged from itself).

A psychology for which this, the part of history most contempo- rary and accessible to sense, remains a closed book, cannot beco~e a genuine, comprehensive and real science. What indeed are we think of a science which airily abstracts from this large parth.r human labour and which fails to feel its own incompleteness, \:h~ such a wealth of human endeavour unfolded before it means n e ing more to it than, perhaps, what can be expressed in on word-"need," "vulgar need"? d

· ·ty an The natural sciences have developed an enormous acbVJ . 1

o-h 1 d . . I Phi OS ave accumu ate a constantly growing mass of matena · . to phy, however, has remained just as alien to them as they remai~ n h ·1 h Th · · · · al illuSto · p 1 osop y. e1r momentary umty was only a chimeric . . The will was there, but the means were lacking. Even hiStonog:f phy pays regard to natural science only occasionally, as a factor.es enlightenment and utility arising from individual great d!scover~~ But natural science has invaded and transformed human bfe all d more practically through the medium of industry· and has prepare. h .. h - '·hdtocon uman emancipation, owever directly and much 1t a - n summate dehumanization. Industry is the actual historical relatio f t d h ' th refore, ? na ure, an t erefore of natural science to man. If, e tidJ.

Industry is conceived as the exoteric reveldtion of man's essen f Powers, we also gain an understanding of the human essen~e s~- nature or the natural essence of man. In consequence, natu?' ·c-- ence will lose its abstractly material-or rather its ideab~ti h s tendency, and will become the basis of human ;cience, ~s ~t :n already become the basis of actual human life, albe~t 10 is a es~~ged_ form. One basis for life and another basis for science the priori_ a he. The nature which comes to be in human history- it genesis of human society-is man's real nature· hence nature as ·s comes to be through industry, even though in a~ estranged forrn, 1 true anthr,opological nature ·

• JI sc1-Sense--pei-ception ( see F euerbach) must be the basis of a fold ence. Only when it proceeds from sense-perception in the ~o t is, form both of sensuous consciousness and of sensuous need-t

1 f bis·

only when science proceeds from nature-is it true science. A 0

us tory is the preparafion for "man" to become the object of sensu ...,e ...,,., • ...., · d -' th " t 1,eco ... ~v•-.;aousness, an ,or e needs of "man as man ° al his· [natural, sensuous] needs. History itself is a real part of natur

Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844 • 91 tory-of nature's coming to be man. Natural science will in time subsume under itself the science of man, just as the science of man will subsume under itself natural science: there will be one science.

Man is the immediate object of natural science: for immediate, sensuous nature for man is, immediately, human sensuousness ( the expressions are identical )-presented immediately in the form of the other man sensuously present for him. For his own sensuous- ness first exists as human sensuousness for himself through the other man. But nature is the immediate object of the science of man : the first object of man-man-is nature, sensuousness; and the particular human sensuous essential powers can only find their self-knowledge in the science of the natural world in general, since they can find their objective realization in natural o~jec~s. only. The element of thought itself-the element of thoughts !1vmg ~xpres- sion-!anguage-is of a sensuous nature. The soeta~ reality of nature, and human natural science, or the natural science about man, are identical terms. I'ti It will be seen how in place of the wealth and poverty of po

1 •

cal economy come the rich human being and rich h~ma~ nee~ The rich human being is simultaneously the human bemg

1 ~ nee

of a totality of human life-activities-the man in whoml bis olwnth r 1· · ·ty need Not on Y wea , ea 1zahon exists as an inner necess1 , as · . . I

but likewise the poverty of man-given socialism-receives JD _eqtuah . I . 'fi ce Poverty is e measure a human and therefore socia sigm can · . th need . b · to expenence e passive bond which causes the human eing Th d · ·on of fh

be°g eOIDIDI 0 t e greatest wealth-the other human m · f my essential the_ ~bjective being in me, the sensuous outburs~ oactivity of my activity, is emotion which thus becomes here t e ~ng ' d . . endent when he stan s

( 5) A being only considers himself in~ep f t when he owes his. own feet; and he only stands on_ bis ;wi;h;egrace of another

is existence to himself. A man who ]Ives 1 ) · completely by the regards himself as a dependent being. Bu~ iv;enance of my life, rue~ of another if I owe him not 0 °:1Y t i: ~: is the source of my l"f t if he has, moreover, created my life- life bas necessarily a 1 e; and if it is not of my own creation, ~y ·s therefore an idea source of this kind outside it. The Creation ci' ·ousness The self- very d 'ffi Jar cons · . med· 1 cult to dislodge from popu . ;neomprehensibT.e to 1t, be iate~ being of nature and of man

15 . ractical life.

~se 1t c~ntradicts everything pal~able ,n ~ghty blow from geo- ge e _creation of the earth has received a the formation of the ea~-i.e., from the science which present~ss as self-generation. Gen~ t~e coming-to-be of the ellrth, as _a rrefut~tion of the theory of ~zo aequivoca2 is the only practica

creation. 2· 5llontan eous generation.

,,,

92 • The Early Marx Now it is certainly easy to say to the single individual what Aris-

totle has already said. You have been begotten by your father and your mother; therefore in you the mating of two human beings-a species-act of human beings-has produced the human being. You see, therefore, that even physically, man owes his existence to man. Therefore you must not only keep sight of the one aspect-the infinite progression which leads you further to enquire: "Who begot my father? Who his grandfather?", etc. You must also hold on to the circular movement sensuously perceptible in that progres- sion, by which man repeats himself in procreation, thus a~ways remaining the subject. You will reply, however: I grant you this cir- cular movement; now grant me the progression which drives me even further until I ask: Who begot the first man, and nature as a whole? I can only answer you: Your question is itself a product of abstraction. Ask yourself how you arrived at that question. Ask yourself whether your question is not posed from a standpoint to which I cannot reply, because it is a perverse one. Ask you~self whether that progression as such exists for a reasonable mind. When you ask about the creation of nature and man, you are ab- stracting, in so doing, from man and nature. You postulate them. as ?on-existent, and yet you want me to prove them to you a~ exist· 1 ~· Now I say to you: Give up your abstraction and you will also

give up your question. Or if you want to hold on to your abstrac· tion, then be consistent, and if you think of man and nature as non-existent, then think of yourself as non-existent, for you too are surely nature and man. Don't think don't ask me for as soon as you think and ask, your abstraction' from the existence of nature and man has no meaning. Or are you such an egoist that you pos· tulate everything as nothing, and yet want yourself to be?

You can reply: I do not want to postulate the nothingness of nature. I ask you about its genesis, just as I ask the anatomist about the formation of bones, etc.

But _since f?r the socialist man the entire so-called history of the worl1 is nothmg but_ the begetting of man through human labour, nothmg but the commg-to-be of nature for man he has the visible, irref?table proo~ of his birth through himself: of his process of commg-to-be. Smee the real existence of man and nature has become practical, sensuous and perceptible-since man has become for man as the being of nature, and nature for man as the being of man-the question about an alien being, about a being above ~ature man-a question which implies the admission of ~e mess~nhahty ?f nature and of man-has become impossible 10 practice. ~theism, as the denial of this inessentiality, has no longer any meanmg, for atheism is a negation of God, and postulat~s _the existence of man through this negation; but socialism as socialism

Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844 . 93

00 longer_ stands in any ne~d of such a mediation. It proceeds from

the practically and theoretically sensuous consciousness of man and of nature as the essence. Socialism is man's positive self-con- sciousness no longer mediated through the annulment of reli- gion, just as real life is man's positive reality, no longer mediated through the annulment of private property, through communism. Communism is the position as the negation of the negation, and is hence the actual phase necessary for the next stage of historical development in the process of human emancipation and recovery. Communism is the necessary pattern and the dynamic principle of the immediate future, but communism as such is not the goal of human development-the structure of human society.

The Meaning of Human Requirements We have seen what significance, given socialism, the wealth of

human needs has, and what significance, theref~re, both a new mode of production and a new ob;ect of production have: a new manifestation of the forces of human nature and a new ennchme~t f

h · · 'ficance JS 0 human nature.a Under private property t eir s

1 ~

1

reversed: every person speculates on creating a ~ew_need m ano th

eJ, so as to drive him to a fresh sacrifice, to place him m new ddepenth ·

d f affication an ere-

ence and to seduce him into a new mo e O gr I

al' f bl' h er the other an ien ore economic ruin Each tries to esta is ov fi h d The · . . fh' wnsel s nee.

power, so as thereby to find satisfaction ° is O • b n extension mcrease in the quantity of objects is accompanied_ y t· ted and of the realm of the alien powers to which m~f ;u~~al~widdling every new product represents a new potency s roan· his need :~d mutual plundering. Man beco_mes ever l~~:r;erpow'er hostile b money becomes ever greater 1f he 'Y3n ctly in inverse pro- ~in?; and the power of his money dechnes r:uction: that is, his

P rtion to the increase in the volume of P n d' · eases ee mess grows as the power of money mer e ne~d produced by the m The need for money is there~o~e the tr~ need which the latter

odem economic system, and it is the on Y an ever greater degree produces. The quantity of monev becomes dto everything to its its sol eff . . . · it re uces b e ective attnbute: 1ust as fits own movement : stract form, so it reduces itself in the cou~e·~temperance come to bo s_omething merely quantitative. Excess an ~y manifested in that th its true norm. Subjectively, this is even pat contriving and ever. ca~ ext~nsion of products and needs falls I~ °unnatural and imtigi- na culatmg subservience to inhuman, refine ' how to change crude

3 ry appetites.Private property does not know ture · ,nenscklic!len

• Force f ff' ftra/1; bu111an na · Weiens. s O human nature: menscklichen eSen

94 · The Early Marx need into human need . Its idealism is fantasy, caprice and whim· and no eunuch ~atters hi~ despot more basely or uses more despica'. ble means to shmula!e his dulled capacity for pleasure in order to sneak a favour for himself than does the industrial eunuch-the producer-in order _to sneak for himself a few pennies-in order to ch~rm the golden birds out of the pockets of his Christianly beloved neighbours. He puts hjmself at the service of the other's most ?epr:ived fancies, plays the pimp between him and his need, excites m him morbid appetites, lies in wait for each of his weaknesses-all so that h_e can ~hen_ dema~d the cash for this service of Jove . (Every p~oduct is a bait with which to seduce away the other's very being, his money; every real and possible need is a weakness which will ~ ad the fl y to the gluepot. General exploitation of communal

uman nature, just as every imperfection in man, is a bond with ?eaven-an avenue giving the priest access to his heart· every need 1s an o rt · ' f th ppo un~ty .t? approach one's neighbour under the guise o

e utmost am1ab1hty and to say to him: Dear friend, I give you wthha! Y0? need, but you know the conditio sine qua non; you kn ow

e mk m which h · · 'd ' g f you ave to sign yourself over to me; m prov1 in or your pleasure, I fleece you.)

fi And partly, this estrangement manifests itself in that it produces

re nement of need d f h · d b s t' 1 b . . s an o t e1r means on the one hand, an a e • 1a tharbanzahon, a complete, unrefined abst ract simplicity of need,

on e other- or rath · th · ' · · · - o -1 E ' er m at 1t merely resurrects itself m its opp - : 1

~-• • ve~ the need fo r fresh air ceases fo r the worker. Man returns 0 1h~n_g ma cave, which is now however contaminated with the

mep 1bc b th f ' ' · h c t' rea O plague given off by civilization, and which e i~~-muesh~o occupy only precariously, it being for him an alien hab-

h.1ohn '!' ich can be withdrawn from him any day-a place from w ic if he doe t h th' m ' s no pay, e can be thrown out any day. For is . oArtuaryh he has to pay . A dwelling in the light which Prometheus m esc ylu d · ' f h' h s esignated as one of the greatest boons, by means 0 ; IC he ma~e the savage into a huma n being, ceases to exist for t \ worker. Light, air, etc.-the simplest animal cleanliness-ceases 0 e a need for man. Dirt-this stagnation and putrefaction of

~ a~-the sewage of civilization (speaking quite literally)-comes 6 ° d e the element of life for him . Utter, unnatural neglect, put~e- e nature, comes to be his life-element . None of his senses exist

;ny _longer, and not only in his human fashion, but in an inhuman ashion, and therefore not even in an animal fashion . The crudest

modes (and instruments ) of human labour are coming back : the tti~ead mill of the Roman slaves for instance is the mea ns of produc-

on th ' ' · 1

' e means of existence, of many English workers . It 1s not on Y. that man has no human needs-even• his animal needs are ceasing to exist. The Irishman no longer knows any need now but

Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844 · 95 the need to eat, and indeed only the need to eat potatoes-and scabby potatoes at that, the worst kind of potatoes. But in each of their industrial towns England and France have already a little Ire- land. The savage and the animal have at least the need to hunt, to roam, etc.-the need of companionship. Mach!ne labour is simpli- fied in order to make a worker out of the human being still in the making, the completely immature human being, the child-whilst the worker has become a neglected child. The machine accomm0- dates itself to the weakness of the human being in order to make the weak human being into a machine. . .

How the multiplication of needs and of the mea~s of their satis- faction breeds the absence of needs and of means 1s demonstrated by the political economist ( and the capitalist: it s~ould be noted that it is always empirical business men we are talkmg abo?t when we refer to political economists- their scientific confesswn and mode of being). This he shows: .

( 1 ) By reducing the worker's need to the barest ~nd ~~st nns:- able level of physical subsistence, and by red ucing his achVJty ; 0 e most abstract mechanical movement. Hence, he says: Mll an asthn_o

f . t For he ca s even is other need either of activity or o en1oymen · life human life and existence. . 1 of life (existence ) as ( 2) By counting the lowest possible lev~ era! because it is the standard, indeed as the general sta~dar -~~: worker into an applicable to the mass of men . H~ c ang:s changes his activity insensible being lacking all needs, l_u~t a5r \ ·m therefore, every into a pure abstraction from all activity. -~ ~nd everything that luxury of the worker seems to be reprehen~t1 . \he realm of passive

b t eed-be i ID 1 goes beyond the most a strac n . . ms to him a uxury. enjoyment, or a manifestation of achv17;;-s.~e therefore simultan7- Political economy, this science of wea: th~ft of saving-a~d it ously the science of denial, of want, 0 ' the need of either

h ·t spares man d t is actually reaches the point w er~ 1 . f marvellous in u~ ry fresh air or physical exe.rcise. This s717nce O d its true ideal 1s the simultaneously the science of asceticism, at~ but productive slave.

. . d the asce ic th av ascetic but extortionate miser an art of his wages to_ e s_ · Its moral ideal is the worker who takes P d n abject art m which ings.bank, and it has even found ready-ma \:d it, bathed in senti- to clothe this its pet idea: they have presen -despite its worldly mentality on the stage. Thus political econ?mY the most moral of

' al science, 1 h n and wanton appearance-is a true mo~ f life and of al uma all the sciences. Self-denial, the denial O ou eat, drink and re~d needs, is its cardinal doctrine. The ]es~ Y dance hall, the pubhc- books; the less you go to the theat~e, t i: , paint, fen~e, etc.'. the house; the less you think, love, theonze, 5 gtreasure which neither more vou save-the e.reater becomes your

. The Early Marx 96 capital The less you are, the moths nor dust will devou;;~;s~\our ow~ life, the greater is y~ur more you have; the Jess y~u . p the ·store of your estranged bemg. alienated life--:-the hgrea t:•c~l economist takes from you in life and Everything which t e P0 1f1 in money and in wealth; and all

·t he replaces or you I t d in human1 y, t d your money can do. t can ea an . h. h you canno 0 , . l ·t the things w ic h

11 d the theatre; 1t can trave , 1 can

drink, go to the dan~e :he a:reasures of the past, political power approp~at~ art, lear~~n~iate for you-it can buy all this for you : it -all this 1t can app Py t b . all this it is inclined to do noth- . h dowment . e emg ' • 11 · IS t e true en . If bu itself· for everything else 1s after a its ing but create~~: 1' hav: the ~aster I have the servant and do not servant: And wt All passions and all activity must therefore b~ sub- need h;s.serv:;ri~e. The worker may only have enough for him to mergtet ii~ a and mav only want to live in order to have (enough). wan o ive, . . · fi ld f rf l ec n

Of course a controversy now arises m the e o po i ica o . omy The one side (Lauderdale, Malthus, etc.) recommends luxury and ·execrates thrift. The other (Say, Ricardo, e~c-) reco~mends thrift and execrates luxury. But the former admits ~hat it wants luxury in order to produce labour ( i.e., absolute thnft); and the latter admits that it recommends thrift ill order to produce wealt~ (i.e., luxury). The Lauderdale-Malthus school has the roma~t1c notion that avarice alone ought not to determine the consumption of the rich, and it contradicts its own laws in advancing extrava- gance as a direct means of enrichment. Against it, therefore, the ?ther side very earnestly and circumstantially proves that I do not m~rease but reduce my possessions by being extravagant. The ~a~- Rica_rdo school, however, is hypocritical in not admitting that it

15

prec:~ely whim an~ caprice which determine production. It for~ets th.e refined needs'; it forgets that there would be no production ; th?ut consumption; it forgets that as a result of competition ptO' rti?~ can only become more extensive and luxurious. It forgets ~!e~t: use th a~ determines a thing's value, and that fashion dete~- forgets t~\ It wishes to see only "useful things" produced, but it a useless ;

0 prr~~ction of too many useful things produces too lat

luxury and r a tn. Both sides forget that extravagance and thri And you ;:~t\ wealth ~nd poverty are equal. ur

senses as by sf ~? only stint the immediate 5ratification of yo re yours;lf all shari: mg yoursel~ of food, etc.: you must also

5 ~ if

Y?U want to be ec~;! g~nera~ mterest, all sympathy, all trust, etciiiu- Slons. . mical, tf you do not want to be ruined by

You must k 1 a k ma e eve th. . f 1 If 5 the political econory . mg that 1s yours saleable, i.e,; use u ·t...,ct

money b ff . mist: Do I b . "f I eJC •• Y o enng my b d o ey economic laws 1 tber's 0 Y for sale, by surrendering it to ano

Just? (The factory workers in France call the prostitution or tm::11 wives and daughters the xth working hour, which is literally cor- rect. )-Or am I not acting in keeping with political economy if I sell my friend to the Moroccans? (And the direct sale of men in the form of a trade in conscripts, etc., takes place in all civilized coun- tries . )-Then the political economist replies to me: You do not transgress my laws; but see what Cousin Ethics and Cousin Reli- gion have to say about it. My political economic ethics and religion have nothing to reproach you with, but- But whom am I now to ?elieve,_ ~~litical econo~y or et~ics? The ethics of political economy 1s acq1!1Sltion, work, thnft, s~b_nety-but political economy promises to satisfy my ne~ds. The ~ohhcal economy of ethics is the opulence of a good ~onsc1ence, of virtue, etc.; but how can I live virtuously if I do not hve? And how can I have a good conscience if I am not conscious of anything? It stems from the very nature of estrange- m~nt that . each sphere app~ies to me a different and opposite yard- s~1ck-eth1cs one and pohhcal economy another; for each is a spe- cific estrangement of man and focuses attention on a particular round of estranged essential activity, and each stands in an estranged relation to the other. Thus M . Michel Chevalier re- proaches Ricardo with having abstracted from ethics. But Ricardo is allowing political economy to speak its own language, and if it does not speak ethically, this is not Ricardo's fault. M. Chevalier abstracts from political economy in so far as he moralizes, but he real_l~ and necessarily abstracts from ethics in so far as he practises political economy. The reference of political economy to ethics, if it is other than an arbitrary, contingent and therefore unfounded and unscientific reference, if it is not being put up as a sham but is ~eant to be essential, can only be the reference of the laws of polit- ical economy to ethics. If there is no such connection, or if the con- trary is rather the case, can Ricardo help it? Besides, the opposition ?etween political economy and ethics- is only a sham opposition and 1ust as much no opposition as it is an opposition. All that happens is that political economy expresses moral laws in its own way. . Needlessness as the principle of political economy is most bril-

liantly shown in its theory of population. There are too many people. Even the existence of men is a pure luxury; and if the work_er is "ethical," he will be sparing in procreation. (Mill suggests pubhc acclaim for those who prove themselves continent in their ~exual relations, and public rebuke for those who sin against such a arre;11~ess of marriage. . . . Is not this the ethics, the teaching of scet~c1sm?) The production of people appears in the form of

public misery. . The meaning which production has in relation to the rich is seen

revealed in the meaning which it has for the poor. At the top the

98 . The Early Marx . fj d veiled ambiguous-a sham; lower . . always re ne ' ' . Th , manifestation is . f d frank-the real thmg. e worker's

it is rough, straight orwtar s~urce of gain than the re-fined need of d eed is a far grea er . h cru n

11 d ellings in London brmg more to t ose who

the nch The ce ar- w . 'th f let the~ than do the palaces; that 1s to s~y, hw1 ( re erence to the landlord they constitute greater wealth'. an t us to speak the Jan. guage of political economy) greater social wealth. . .

Industry speculates on the refinement of n~eds,. bu_t 1t speculates just as much on their crudeness, but on the1~ artificially pro~uced crudeness, whose true enjoyment, therefore, 1s self-stupefactwn- this seeming satisfaction of need-this civilization contained within the crude barbarism of need; the English gin-shops are therefore the symbolical embodiments of private property. Their luxury reveals the true relation of industrial luxury and wealth to man. They are th erefore rightly the only Sunday pleasures of the people, dealt with at least mildly by the English police.

:We have already seen how the political economist establishes the umty of labour and capital in a variety of ways:-( 1) Capital is 1/CCU~ulated labou~. ( 2 ) The purpose of capital within production ~~:rix (:~;~~Utl~~ ~f capital with profit, partly, capital as raw ment (the ma 0 . a 0 ?r), and partly, as itself a working instru- ductive labou/ (me) 1Tshcap1tal dir~ctly equated with labour)-is pro..

· 3 e worker 1s · t l ( ) costs of capital. ( 5) In I f a capi a • 4 Wages belong to uction of his Jife-eapitat 10; to th ~ worker, labour is the reprod- an aspect of his capital's.} t! ·tn relation to the capitalist, labour is

Fina!I ( ) C IV! y. f Y, 7 the political ec •

o capital and labour in th f onom1st postulates the original unity

t thhe worker; this is the orig: 01 rmt of

the unity of the capitalist and ese two as t . a sate of par d' Th . • 1 th pee s m the form f a ise. e way m wh1c 1

on~;at: ~se for th_e political econo:i:;0 pers~ns leap at each other's The na/xplamed by reference to a contingent event, and hence

precious m1;t:;s which are still dazzle~x~mal factors. (See Mill.) 4 money, are not and are therefore still t~e sensuous splendour of France and E

I yet fully developed etish.worshippers of metal

cal riddles is t~g ~nd· The extent to ~oney-nations .-Contrast of as true practicee . as~ of practice and w ~ch the solution of theoreti- sh~wn, for exam;t t_ e co~dition of e ected through practice, just fetish.worshippe _e, I~ fetishism. Th a real and positive theory, is sensu . r is differ t e sensuou • ous existence . . en from th t s consciousness of the sense and . . 1s std! d'ff a of th G h' spmt is nece I erent. Th e reek, because 1s 4 J ssary so long as the habstract enmity between . allles M·n e uma f 1· ' , Ekme1111 of P . . n ee mg for nature,

ol,tica/ & onomy,

Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844 99 the human sense of nature, and therefore also the natural sense of man, are not yet produced by man's own labour.

Equality is nothing but a translation of the German "Ich=lch" into the French, i.e., political form . Equality as the groundwork of communism is its political justification, and it is the same as when the German justifies it by conceiving man as universal self.con- sciousness. Naturally, the transcendence of the estrangement always proceeds from that form of the estrangement which is the dominant power : in Germany, self-consciousness; in France, equality, because politics; in England, real, material, practical. need taking only itself as its standard. It is from this standpoint that Proudhon is to be criticized and appreciated.

If we characterize communism itself because of its character as negation of the negation, as the appropriation of the human essence which mediates itself with itself through the negation of private property-as being not yet. the true, self.originating position but rather a position originating from private property, [ ... ]11

Since in that case6 the real estrangement of the life of man remains, and remains all the more, the more one is conscious of it as such, it may be accomplished solely by putting communism into operation .

In order to abolish the idea of private property, the idea of com- munism is completely sufficient. It takes actual communist action to abolish actual private property. History will come to it; and this movement, which in theory we already know to be a self-transcend- ing movement, will constitute in actual fact a very severe and pro- tracted process. But we must regard it as _a ~eal advance to have gained beforehand a consciousness of the limited character_ as well as of the goal of this historical movement-and a consciousness which reaches out beyond it.

When communist workmen associate with one another, theory, propaganda, etc., is their first end . But at the ·same time, as a r~ult of this association, they acquire a new need-the need for society -and what appears as a means becomes an end. You can observe this practical process in its most splendid results whe~ever ~ou . see French socialist workers together. Such things as smoking, dnnki~g, eating etc are no longer means of contact or mea~ that . bnng

' ·• · · d ersation which agam has together. Company association, an conv • .

. . ' h f th . the brotherhood of man is society as its end, are enoug or em,

S. In the manuscript the lower left cor- n~r of the page is torn off. J~st . the rtght:hand endings of the last six Imes ~emam, making restorations of the t~xt hmpossible. It is possible !o. _surmise, owever, that Marx here criticizes He·

gel's idealistic "transcending" of es-

t ngement (the words that have sur- ~~ed are cited in the next footnote).

~1 In "transcending" estrangement "in the old German manner-the ~fn.ner of the Hegelian phenom~ology: 1.e., in transcending it exclu~1vely m the "consciousness" of the subiect.

-' ,

.....

()

-~

100 . The Early Marx ·th them but a fact of life, and the nobility of

no mere phrase WI ' d b d' h

. on us from their work-hardene o 1es. man s mes up . d d l l

Wh 11 .tical economy claims that deman an supp y a ways

en po h d" . balance each other, it immediately forgets t at accor mg to its own claim ( theory of population) the supply of ~eople always exceeds the demand, and that, therefore, in the essential result of the whole production process-the existence of man-the disparity between demand and supply gets its most striking expression.

The extent to which money, which appears as a means, consti- tutes true power and the sole end-the extent to which in general that means which gives me substance, which gives me possession of the objective substance of others, is an end in itself-can be clearly seen from the facts that landed property wherever land is the source of life, and horse and sword wherever these are the true means of life, are also acknowledged as the true political powers in life. In the middle ages a social class is emancipated as soon as it is allowed to carry the sword. Amongst nomadic peoples it is the horse which makes me a free man and a participant in the life of the community.

We have said ~hove that man is regressing to the cave dwelling etc.-but th~t h~ 1s regressing to it in an estranged, malignant form. '[11e s_avage m his cave-:-a natural element which freely offers itself or his use a?d protection-feels himself no more a stranger, or rather feels himself to be just as much at home as a fish in water. B~t the cel~a~-dwelling of the poor man is a hostile dwelling, "an ahe:, r~straimng power which only gives itself up to him in so far as e tgilvesk up to it ~is blood and sweat"-a dwelling which he canno oo upon as his h . "Here I am th ,, own om~ where he might at last exclaim, one else's ho~se ~m:h ~ut where mstead he finds himself in some- him and throws'~: e t ~;~e of a stranger who daily lies in wait f~r also aware of the co:~ 1 t _e does ~ot pay his rent. Similarly, he 1s human dwelling-a res:e m 9uahty between his dwelling and a wealth. nee m that other world, the heaven of

Estrangement is manifested of life belong to someone ls nhot only in the fact that my means

· e e t at m d · • session of another but al .' Y esue 1s the inaccessible pas- something differe~t from 1~ the fact that everything is in itself and that, finally ( and this a se 1 :-

that my activity is something else the sway of inhuman pow{ p:.;:. also_ to the capitalist), all is under gant wealth given over who[i· t ere 15 a form of inactive, extrava- the one hand behaves as y O pleasu,re, the enjoyer of which on spending himself to no p: mer\ ephemeral individual franticallY tuman sweat and blood) a:1':e nows t~e slave.Jabour of others nows man himself and he elprey of his cupidity and therefore

e . , nceasoh· ' d mpty bemg. With such wealth th is own self, as a sacrificed an

appearance, partly as arrogance de contempt of man makes its an as the throwing.away of what

. ---

lo,....

- -·- - - - ;., . . ......... .. ·,.~

--. . • ""'llll , , _,_

........ ..._ __ ,.,, ___ -----'-~---'=----

Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844 • 101 ~an give ~ust~nance to _a hundred human lives, and partly as the infamous 1~lus1on that h~s ov.:n unbridled extravagance and ceaseless, unproductive consumption 1s the condition of the other's labour and therefore of his subsistence. He knows the realization of the essential powers of man only as the realization of his own excesses, his whims and capricious, bizarre notions . This wealth which, on the other hand, again knows wealth as a mere means, as something that is good for nothing but to be annihilated and which is therefore at once slave and master, at once generous and mean, capricious, pre- sumptuous, conceited, refined, cultured and witty-this wealth has not yet experienced wealth as an utterly alien power over itself: it sees in it, rather, only its own power, and not wealth but grau- fication [is its]7 final aim and end.

* * * Society, as it appears to the political economist, is civil_ society, in

which every individual is a totality of needs and only eXJsts for the other person, as the other exists for him, in so far as each becom~ a means for the other. The political economist reduces everyt~m~ (just as does politics in its Rights of ¥an) to man, i.e., to the_ md1- vidual whom he strips of all determinateness so as to class him as

capitalist or worker. . The division of labour is the expression in political economr of the social character of labour within the estran:ge~ent_. Or'. smce

l . . f h ctivity Within alienation, of

abour 1s only an expression o uman a ... the living of life as the alienating of life, the di~ton odf lab~uti:• too£, . . h tranged alienate pos1 ng o 1s therefore nothing else but t e es . ' ti" ·ty of man . l t • ·ty f the 811ec1es or as ac VI human activity as a rea ac 1v1 ° ,, as a species being. . . . of labour-and of course the

As for the essence of the divisto~ d s a major driving force in division of labour had to be conceive la:our was recognized as the the production of wealth as _soon ;s t the estranged and alienated essence of private property-i.e., ?tyu f the species-the political

f · ·ty an activi O • orm of human activi as d lf ontradictory about it.

economists are very unclear an se .c * * *

f M ey in Bourgeois Society

The Power o on . t merely anthropological If man's feelings, passions, etc., :r~:t truly ontological affirma·

phenomena in the [narrower)S sens) and if they are only really tions of essential being ( of na_tutrefo' r them as an object of sense,

. b" ct eXlS s affirmed because their o 1e then it is clear: This word 1s illegible.

is torn. 8· 7 · The bottom of the pa_ge Three or four Jines are missing.

102 . The Early Marx i That they have by no means merely one m~de ~f affirma.

• ( )b th that the distinctive character of their existence, of bon, ut ra er . d f h . ffi . th · J'f · constituted by the distinctive mo e o t eu a rmation. eu I e, 1s h . h h . . In what manner the object exists for t em, 1s t e c aractenshc mode of their gratifocation.

( 2 ) Whenever the sensuous affirmatio~ is th_e dire~t a~mulment of the object in its independent form ( as m eatmg, drmkmg, work- ing up of the object, etc.), this is the affirmation of the object.

( 3) In so far as man, and hence also his feeling, etc., are human, the affirmation of the object by another is likewise his own enjoy- ment.

(4) Only through developed industry-i.e., through the medium of pnvate property-does the ontological essence of human passion come. to be both _in its totality and in its humanity; the science of man is therefore itself a product of man's establishment of himself by practical activity.

(5) The meaning of private property-liberated from its e~~angemen~-is the existence of essential objects for man, both as o 1ects of enJ?yment and as objects of activity.

By possessmg the prope t f b . . . the property of ap . .' Y O ~ymg everythmg, by possessmg of eminent possefs~opna~g all ?b1ect~, money is thus the ob;ect omnipotence of its

1 ~n: t umversahty of its property is the

being. Money is the e~~!p therefore fu~ctions as the almi~hty ~etween his life and his m etwe~n man s need and the obiect, hfe for me, also mediates :ns ~f life. But that which mediates my me it is the other person. e existence of other people for me. For

"What, man! confou d . And head and back .; it, hands and feet And what we t k s1 ~• all are yours! Is that to be d!i: while life is sweet,

Six stallions red not ours? Is not th · ' say, I tan afford

eir stren th ' I tear along a g . my property? As if their I~ s£01rbng lord, t e ~nged to me."

Shakespeare in Timon of Athe~s· eph1stopheles, in Faust) 9 "Gold? Yellow 1· . I am ·d • g 1ttering .

no I le votarist! 'precious gold? No C d make bla k . : . Thus much f . ' . o s,

Wrong right b c white, foul f . 0 this will Wh : ase noble ld air,

Will lugY,y th1s . ' 0

young, coward valiant. Pl k our priests a d

uc stout men's ·11 n servants fro . 9. Goethe p1 ows from belo m y~ur sides, Study ni) Faust , (Part 1 w then heads: ' , translated by Ph"J:-Faust's (P

• ip Wayne enguin, 1949) 9 • p, I.

k

Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844 • 103 This yellow slave Will knit and break religions, bless the accursed; Make ~he hoar ]~prosy adored, place thieves An~ give them title, knee and approbation With senators on the bench: This is it That makes the wapf.en'd widow wed again· She, whom the spita -house and ulcerous so;es Would cast the gorge at, this embalms and spices To the April day again .... Damned earth, Thou common whore of mankind, that putt'st odds Among the rout of nations." 1

And also later: "O thou sweet king-killer, and dear divorce Twixt natural son and sire! thou bright defiler Of Hymen's purest bed! thou valiant Mars! Thou ever young, fresh, loved and delicate wooer, Whose blush doth thaw the consecrated snow That lies on Dian's lap! Thou visible God! That solder'st close impossibilities, And mak'st them kiss! That speak'st with every tongue, To every purpose! 0 thou touch of hea£1:sl Think thy slave man rebels, and by thy virtue Set them into confounding odds, that beasts May have the world in empirel"

2

Shakespeare excellently depicts the real nature ?f money. To understand him, let us begin, first of all, by expounding the passage

That which is for me through the medium of money-that for from Goethe.

which I can pay ( i.e., which money can buy )-that am I, th~ pos- sessor of the money The extent of the power of money_ IS th~ extent . of my powe~. Money's properties are ~y propertiesThan • d owers of its possessor. us, essential powers-the properties . an P O means determined by my ~hat I am and am capable of is by n f elf the most beauti- mdividuality. I am ugly, but I can buy g~; ~i: the effect of ugli- ful of women . Therefore am ~oney. I, in rny character ness-its deterrent power-is nulhfie }'furnishes me with twenty- as an individual, am lame, but mo~erm bad dishonest, unscrupu- four feet. Therefore I am: not lamed and th;refore so is its posses· lous, stupid; but money JS honour therefore its possessor is good. sor. Money is the supreme goo ' ble of being dishonest: I am Money, besides, saves me the a:ustupid, but money is the real therefore pr(,sumed boneSt . 1 h hould its possessor be stupid? mind of all things and how te:~/ for himself, and is he who has Besides he can buy talented P P . '

3 Marx quotes the Scblegel-T1eck

Act 4 Scene · 1 · Shakespeare, Timon °1 1'bens basis.) ' German translation. (Marx s emP 2. Ibid.

104 · The Early Marx power over the talented not more talented than the talent not I, who thanks to money am capable of all that th ~d? Do heart longs for, possess all human capacities? Does not e uman therefore transform all my incapacities into their contra tY money

If money is the bond binding me to human life b" ryd.. . t b

. d" d , m mg soc1en, o me, m mg ?1e an . nature and man, is not money the bond ,,

all bonds? Can It not dissolve and bind all ties? Is I·t n t th f of th · I f a· . · 0 , ere ore

e umversa agent o ivorce? It is the true agent f d" , 11 th t b" a· o ivorce as we as e _rue m mg agent-the [ universal JS galvano h · al power of Society. -c emic

Shakesp_eare stre_s~es especially two properties of money: i I) It is the v1S1ble divinity-the transformation of all human ~n nadtural prop~rties into their contraries, the universal confound- mg an overtummg of thin . t k b (

2 ) It • th gs: I ma es rothers of impossibilities.

nati·o is e common whore, the common pimp of people and ns.

The overturning and f d. ities th f . . con oun mg of all human and natural qual· mo~ey ~- ra~e~izatwn of impossibilities-the divine power of

- ies m its characte • · · d self-disposing sp . r as men s estranged, ahenatmg an kind. ecies-nature. Money is the alienated ability af ,n411·

That which I am bl all my individ I

una e to do as a man, and of which therefore means of mo: es:ntial powers are incapable, I am able to d~ by something whic{i . oney. th_us turns each of these powers

1010

trary. n Itself It IS not-turns it that is into its con· ff ' '

I long for a r ch because I am n t par icular dish or want to take the mail-coa the dish and ; str~ng enough to go by foot money fetches J!lC someth· e mail-coach th ' froJII me . mg in the realm . : . at is, it converts my wishes .1 ex· ~itated, imagined or 0 ~

11 Imagmation, translates them frorn

be~: enc;---from imagina;-1 ed e~tence into their sensuo~, ac ea1 pow:; n effecting this 1: t? l~fe, from imagined being 1nt~,!,.ye

N · ediahon, money is the truly creu•· o doubt de

demand is rnand also exi . t b~ ence for a mere thing of t sts tor h!m ~ho has no money, bu "isl· rema;ns ;e, for a third p ~e Imagmahon without effect or e fort effective d: me unreal a:d ' fo~ the others, and which there eeP my need rnand based on ob7ectless. The difference be~ oP and think:y Pllssion, my w:~ney an_d ineffective demand bas~t18 and the ima g,_ between the im ' ~tc., IS the difference betwe~n 'JI !Ile

If Ih gmed as it is f agmed which exists merely W 1th1

ave no or me t "d and self.reali . llloney for t ou s1 e me as a real object. real J A zmg need-to tvel, I have no need-that is, n\1d1

. n end or the Page is ravel. If I have the vocation for s torn out of th

e lllanuscrlpt.

Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844 • 105 but no money for it, I have no vocation for study-that is, no effective, no true vocation. On the other hand, if I have really no vocation for study but have the will and the money for it, I have an effective vocation for it. Being the external, common medium and faculty for turning an image into reality and reality into a mere image ( a faculty not springing from man as man or from human society as society), money transforms the real essential powers of man and nature into what are merely abstract conceits and there- fore imperfections-into tormenting chimeras-just as it trans- forms real imperfections and chimeras-essential powers which are really impotent, which exist only in the imagination of the individ- ual-into real powers and faculties.

In the light of this characteristic alone, money is thus the gen- eral overturning of individualities which turns them into their con- trary and adds contradictory attributes to their attributes.

Money, then, appears as this overturning power both against the individual and against the bonds of society, etc., which claim to be essences in themselves. It transforms fidelity into infidelity, love into hate, hate into love, virtue into vice, vice into virtue, servan_t into master, master into servant, idiocy into intelligence and intelligence

into idiocy. Since money, as the existing and active concept of value, con- founds and exchanges all things, it is the g~neral confounding and compounding of all things-the world upside-down-:-:the confound- ing and compounding of all natural and human qualities. .

He who can buy bravery is brave, though a coward. As money: 1s not exchanged for any one specific qualitr, for any oue specific thing, or for any particular human essential pawer, but f~r the entire objective world of man and nature, from the standpamt of its possessor it therefore serves to exchange. eve!}'. p~operty for ev_ery other, even contradictory, property an~ ~b1ect : it IS the fratenuza- ti f . 'bTf s It makes contrad1ct1ons embrace.

o~ o imposs1 \1 i~ . man and bis relationship to the world to be h ssume ma~ th:n eyou can exchange love only for love, ~t for

a uman one . . rt ou must be an artistically- trus!, etc. If you "".'ant

0 !0 ;:~~y t~ ~Jercise influence over other

cultivated person; if Y . h timulating and encouraginu 1

t be a person wit a s r;, peop e, you mus f vour relations to man and to effect on other people. Every on~

0 co' rresponding to the object of

t b Sp ecific expression, . . na ure ~ust e a . . 'dual life. If you love without evoking

your will, of your real,_ m_d,viour loving as loving does not produce love in return-that 15• if \ . expression of yourself as a loving reciprocal love; if through a tVl~f a loved person, then your love is person you do not make yourse impotent-a misfortune .

.t