Supposing one man were to own all the means of production, and
supposing he were to have in his possession one machine which could
produce in an indefinite amount all that human beings need in order to
live. Then there would be no economic reason why this one man should
provide wealth for anyone except himself and his family. He might turn
out enough things to support a few others whom he wanted for private
servants or to amuse him, but there would be no reason why he should
support the masses around him.
Now it is true that we have not yet come, under Capitalism, to so
extreme a case. But the moral applies, though modified, to Capitalism
in its last stages, when very few men control the means of production,
when machinery has become very efficient, and when the great mass
of people are dependent upon employment by the capitalist for their
existence.
Consider that it is of the essence of Capitalism to keep wages down,
that is, to buy labour cheap. Therefore, the labourer who actually
produces, say, boots cannot afford to buy a sufficient amount of
the boots which he himself has made. The capitalist controlling the
boot-making machinery, when he has provided himself with a dozen pair
of boots, and the working classes of the community with such boots as
their wages permit them to buy, must either try to sell the extra boots
abroad (and that outlet can’t last long) or stop making them. He has
restricted the home market by the necessity of cheap labour, and you
have the absurd position of men making more goods than they need, and
yet having less of those goods available for themselves than they need:
the labourer producing, or able to produce, every year enough clothing
for ten years, and yet not being able to afford sufficient for one: the
labourer producing or able to produce ten good overcoats, yet not able
to buy one.
So under Capitalism in its last stages you have the abnormal position
of millions of men ready to make the necessaries of life, of machinery
ready to produce those necessaries, of raw material standing ready to
be worked up by the machinery if only labourers could be put on, and
yet all the machinery standing idle, the wealth not being produced,
and the mass who could produce it going hungry and ill-shod and badly
clothed. And the more Capitalism develops the more that state of things
will develop with it.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account