第10章

Inmediaevalsociety，especiallyintheearliercenturies，productionwasessentiallydirectedtowardssatisfyingthewantsoftheindividual。

Itsatisfied，inthemain，onlythewantsoftheproducerandhisfamily。

Whererelationsofpersonaldependenceexisted，asinthecountry，italsohelpedtosatisfythewantsofthefeudallord。Inallthistherewas，therefore，noexchange;theproducts，consequently，didnotassumethecharacterofcommodities。Thefamilyofthepeasantproducedalmosteverythingtheywanted:clothesandfurniture，aswellasmeansofsubsistence。Onlywhenitbegantoproducemorethanwassufficienttosupplyitsownwantsandthepaymentsinkindtothefeudallord，onlythendiditalsoproducecommodities。Thissurplus，thrownintosocialisedexchangeandofferedforsale，becamecommodities。Theartisansofthetowns，itistrue，hadfromthefirsttoproduceforexchange。Butthey，also，themselvessuppliedthegreatestpartoftheirownindividualwants。Theyhadgardensandplotsofland。Theyturnedtheircattleoutintothecommunalforest，whichalso，yieldedthemtimberandfiring。Thewomenspunflax，wool，andsoforth。

Productionforthepurposeofexchange，productionofcommodities，wasonlyinitsinfancy。Hence，exchangewasrestricted，themarketnarrow，themethodsofproductionstable;therewaslocalexclusivenesswithout，localunitywithin，themark[114]inthecountry;

inthetown，theguild。

Butwiththeextensionoftheproductionofcommodities，andespeciallywiththeintroductionofthecapitalistmodeofproduction，thelawsofcommodityproduction，hithertolatent，cameintoactionmoreopenlyandwithgreaterforce。Theoldbondswereloosened，theoldexclusivelimitsbrokenthrough，theproducersweremoreandmoreturnedintoindependent，isolatedproducersofcommodities。Theanarchyofsocialproductionbecameapparentandgrewtogreaterandgreaterheight。Butthechiefmeansbyaidofwhichthecapitalistmodeofproductionintensifiedthisanarchyofsocialisedproductionwastheexactoppositeofanarchy。Itwastheincreasingorganisationofproduction，uponasocialbasis，ineveryindividualproductiveestablishment。Bythis，theold，peaceful，stableconditionofthingswasended。Whereverthisorganisationofproductionwasintroducedintoabranchofindustry，itbrookednoothermethodofproductionbyitsside。Whereitlaidholdofahandicraft，thatoldhandicraftwaswipedout。Thefieldoflabourbecameabattle-ground。Thegreatgeographicaldiscoveries，andthecolonisationfollowinguponthem，multipliedmarketsandquickenedthetransformationofhandicraftintomanufacture。Thewardidnotsimplybreakoutbetweentheindividualproducersofparticularlocalities。Thelocalstrugglesbegotintheirturnnationalconflicts，thecommercialwarsoftheseventeenthandtheeighteenthcenturies。[115]Finally，modernindustryandtheopeningoftheworldmarketmadethestruggleuniversal，andatthesametimegaveitanunheard-ofvirulence。Advantagesinnaturalorartificialconditionsofproductionnowdecidetheexistenceornon-existenceofindividualcapitalists，aswellasofwholeindustriesandcountries。Hethatfallsisremorselesslycastaside。ItistheDarwinianstruggleoftheindividualforexistencetransferredfromnaturetosocietywithintensifiedviolence。Theconditionsofexistencenaturaltotheanimalappearasthefinaltermofhumandevelopment。Thecontradictionbetweensocialisedproductionandcapitalisticappropriationnowpresentsitselfasanantagonismbetweentheorganisationofproductionintheindividualworkshop，andtheanarchyofproductioninsocietygenerally。

Thecapitalisticmodeofproductionmovesinthesetwoformsoftheantagonismimmanenttoitfromitsveryorigin。Itisneverabletogetoutofthat“viciouscircle“whichFourierhadalreadydiscovered。

WhatFouriercouldnot，indeed，seeinhistimeisthatthiscircleisgraduallynarrowing;thatthemovementbecomesmoreandmoreaspiral，andmustcometoanend，likethemovementoftheplanets，bycollisionwiththecentre。Itisthecompellingforceofanarchyintheproductionofsocietyatlargethatmoreandmorecompletelyturnsthegreatmajorityofmenintoproletarians;anditisthemassesoftheproletariatagainwhowillfinallyputanendtoanarchyinproduction。Itisthecompellingforceofanarchyinsocialproductionthatturnsthelimitlessperfectibilityofmachineryundermodernindustryintoacompulsorylawbywhicheveryindividualindustrialcapitalistmustperfecthismachinerymoreandmore，underpenaltyofruin。Buttheperfectingofmachineryismakinghumanlaboursuperfluous。Iftheintroductionandincreaseofmachinerymeansthedisplacementofmillionsofmanualbyafewmachine-workers，improvementinmachinerymeansthedisplacementofmoreandmoreofthemachine-workersthemselves。Itmeans，inthelastinstance，theproductionofanumberofavailablewage-workersinexcessoftheaverageneedsofcapital，theformationofacompleteindustrialreservearmy，asIcalleditin1845，*9availableatthetimeswhenindustryisworkingathighpressure，tobecastoutuponthestreetwhentheinevitablecrashcomes，aconstantdead-weightuponthelimbsoftheworkingclassinitsstruggleforexistencewithcapital，aregulatorforthekeepingofwagesdowntothelowlevelthatsuitstheinterestsofcapital。Thusitcomesabout，toquoteMarx，thatmachinerybecomesthemostpowerfulweaponinthewarofcapitalagainsttheworkingclass;thattheinstrumentsoflabourconstantlytearthemeansofsubsistenceoutofthehandsofthelabourer;

thattheveryproductoftheworkeristurnedintoaninstrumentforhissubjugation。Thusitcomesaboutthattheeconomisingoftheinstrumentsoflabourbecomesatthesametime，fromtheoutset，themostrecklesswasteoflabour-power，androbberybaseduponthenormalconditionsunderwhichlabourfunctions;thatmachinery，themostpowerfulinstrumentforshorteninglabour-time，becomesthemostunfailingmeansforplacingeverymomentofthelabourer’stimeandthatofhisfamilyatthedisposalofthecapitalistforthepurposeofexpandingthevalueofhiscapital。Thusitcomesaboutthattheoverworkofsomebecomesthepreliminaryconditionfortheidlenessofothers，andthatmodernindustry，whichhuntsafternewconsumersoverthewholeworld，forcestheconsumptionofthemassesathomedowntoastarvationminimum，andindoingthisdestroysitsownhomemarket。“Thelawthatalwaysequilibratestherelativesurplus-population，orindustrialreservearmy，totheextentandenergyofaccumulation，thislawrivetsthelabourertocapitalmorefirmlythanthewedgesofVulcandidPrometheustotherock。Itestablishesanaccumulationofmiserycorrespondingwithaccumulationofcapital。Accumulationofwealthatonepoleis，therefore，atthesametimeaccumulationofmisery，agonyoftoil，slavery，ignorance，brutality，mentaldegradation，attheoppositepole，i。e。，onthesideoftheclassthatproducesitsownproductintheformofcapital“(Marx’sCapital，p。671。)Andtoexpectanyotherdivisionoftheproductsfromthecapitalisticmodeofproductionisthesameasexpectingtheelectrodesofabatterynottodecomposeacidulatedwater，nottoliberateoxygenatthepositive，hydrogenatthenegativepole，solongastheyareconnectedwiththebattery。

Wehaveseenthattheeverincreasingperfectibilityofmodernmachineryis，bytheanarchyofsocialproduction，turnedintoacompulsorylawthatforcestheindividualindustrialcapitalistalwaystoimprovehismachinery，alwaystoincreaseitsproductiveforce。Thebarepossibilityofextendingthefieldofproductionistransformedforhimintoasimilarcompulsorylaw。Theenormousexpansiveforceofmodernindustry，comparedwithwhichthatofgasesismerechild’splay，appearstousnowasanecessityforexpansion，bothqualitativeandquantitative，thatlaughsatallresistance。

Suchresistanceisofferedbyconsumption，bysales，bythemarketsfortheproductsofmodernindustry。Butthecapacityforextension，extensiveandintensive，ofthemarketsisprimarilygovernedbyquitedifferentlawsthatworkmuchlessenergetically。Theextensionofthemarketscannotkeeppacewiththeextensionofproduction。Thecollisionbecomesinevitable，andasthiscannotproduceanyrealsolutionsolongasitdoesnotbreakinpiecesthecapitalistmodeofproduction，thecollisionsbecomeperiodic。

Capitalistproductionhasbegottenanother“viciouscircle“。

Asamatteroffact，since1825，whenthefirstgeneralcrisisbrokeout，thewholeindustrialandcommercialworld，productionandexchangeamongallcivilisedpeoplesandtheirmoreorlessbarbarichangers-on，arethrownoutofjointaboutonceeverytenyears。Commerceisatastandstill，themarketsareglutted，productsaccumulate，asmultitudinousastheyareunsaleable，hardcashdisappears，creditvanishes，factoriesareclosed，themassoftheworkersareinwantofthemeansofsubsistence，becausetheyhaveproducedtoomuchofthemeansofsubsistence;bankruptcyfollowsuponbankruptcy，executionuponexecution。Thestagnationlastsforyears;

productiveforcesandproductsarewastedanddestroyedwholesale，untiltheaccumulatedmassofcommoditiesfinallyfiltersoff，moreorlessdepreciatedinvalue，untilproductionandexchangegraduallybegintomoveagain。

Littlebylittlethepacequickens。Itbecomesatrot。Theindustrialtrotbreaksintoacanter，thecanterinturngrowsintotheheadlonggallopofaperfectsteeplechaseofindustry，commercialcredit，andspeculation，whichfinally，afterbreak-neckleaps，endswhereitbegan——intheditchofacrisis。Andsooverandoveragain。Wehavenow，sincetheyear1825，gonethroughthisfivetimes，andatthepresentmoment(1877)wearegoingthroughitforthesixthtime。AndthecharacterofthesecrisesissoclearlydefinedthatFourierhitallofthemoffwhenhedescribedthefirstascriseplethorique，acrisisfromplethora。

Inthesecrises，thecontradictionbetweensocialisedproductionandcapitalistappropriationendsinaviolentexplosion。Thecirculationofcommoditiesis，forthetimebeing，stopped。Money，themeansofcirculation，becomesahindrancetocirculation。Allthelawsofproductionandcirculationofcommoditiesareturnedupsidedown。Theeconomiccollisionhasreacheditsapogee。Themodeofproductionisinrebellionagainstthemodeofexchange，theproductiveforcesareinrebellionagainstthemodeofproductionwhichtheyhaveoutgrown。

Thefactthatthesocialisedorganisationofproductionwithinthefactoryhasdevelopedsofarthatithasbecomeincompatiblewiththeanarchyofproductioninsociety，whichexistssidebysidewithanddominatesit，isbroughthometothecapitaliststhemselvesbytheviolentconcentrationofcapitalthatoccursduringcrises，throughtheruinofmanylarge，andastillgreaternumberofsmall，capitalists。Thewholemechanismofthecapitalistmodeofproductionbreaksdownunderthepressureoftheproductiveforces，itsowncreations。Itisnolongerabletoturnallthismassofmeansofproductionintocapital。Theyliefallow，andforthatveryreasontheindustrialreservearmymustalsoliefallow。Meansofproduction，meansofsubsistence，availablelabourers，alltheelementsofproductionandofgeneralwealth，arepresentinabundance。But“abundancebecomesthesourceofdistressandwant“(Fourier)，becauseitistheverythingthatpreventsthetransformationofthemeansofproductionandsubsistenceintocapital。Forincapitalisticsocietythemeansofproductioncanonlyfunctionwhentheyhaveundergoneapreliminarytransformationintocapital，intothemeansofexploitinghumanlabour-power。Thenecessityofthistransformationintocapitalofthemeansofproductionandsubsistencestandslikeaghostbetweentheseandtheworkers。Italonepreventsthecomingtogetherofthematerialandpersonalleversofproduction;italoneforbidsthemeansofproductiontofunction，theworkerstoworkandlive。

Ontheonehand，therefore，thecapitalisticmodeofproductionstandsconvictedofitsownincapacitytofurtherdirecttheseproductiveforces。

Ontheother，theseproductiveforcesthemselves，withincreasingenergy，pressforwardtotheremovaloftheexistingcontradiction，totheabolitionoftheirqualityascapital，tothepracticalrecognitionoftheircharacterassocialproductiveforces。

Thisrebellionoftheproductiveforces，astheygrowmoreandmorepowerful，againsttheirqualityascapital，thisstrongerandstrongercommandthattheirsocialcharactershallberecognised，forcesthecapitalistclassitselftotreatthemmoreandmoreassocialproductiveforces，sofarasthisispossibleundercapitalistconditions。Theperiodofindustrialhighpressure，withitsunboundedinflationofcredit，notlessthanthecrashitself，bythecollapseofgreatcapitalistestablishments，tendstobringaboutthatformofthesocialisationofgreatmassesofmeansofproductionwhichwemeetwithinthedifferentkindsofjoint-stockcompanies。Manyofthesemeansofproductionandofcommunicationare，fromtheoutset，socolossalthat，liketherailways，theyexcludeallotherformsofcapitalisticexploitation。Atafurtherstageofevolutionthisformalsobecomesinsufficient:theofficialrepresentativeofcapitalistsociety——thestate——willultimatelyhaveto*10undertakethedirectionofproduction。Thisnecessityforconversionintostatepropertyisfeltfirstinthegreatinstitutionsforintercourseandcommunication——thepostoffice，thetelegraphs，therailways。

Ifthecrisesdemonstratetheincapacityofthebourgeoisieformanaginganylongermodernproductiveforces，thetransformationofthegreatestablishmentsforproductionanddistributionintojoint-stockcompaniesandstatepropertyshowshowunnecessarythebourgeoisieareforthatpurpose。

Allthesocialfunctionsofthecapitalistarenowperformedbysalariedemployees。Thecapitalisthasnofurthersocialfunctionthanthatofpocketingdividends，tearingoffcoupons，andgamblingontheStockExchange，wherethedifferentcapitalistsdespoiloneanotheroftheircapital。Atfirstthecapitalistmodeofproductionforcesouttheworkers。Nowitforcesoutthecapitalists，andreducesthem，justasitreducedtheworkers，totheranksofthesurpluspopulation，althoughnotimmediatelyintothoseoftheindustrialreservearmy。

Butthetransformation，eitherintojoint-stockcompanies，orintostateownership，doesnotdoawaywiththecapitalisticnatureoftheproductiveforces。Inthejoint-stockcompaniesthisisobvious。Andthemodernstate，again，isonlytheorganisationthatbourgeoissocietytakesoninordertosupportthegeneralexternalconditionsofthecapitalistmodeofproductionagainsttheencroachmentsaswelloftheworkersasofindividualcapitalists。Themodernstate，nomatterwhatitsform，isessentiallyacapitalistmachine，thestateofthecapitalists，theidealpersonificationofthetotalnationalcapital。Themoreitproceedstothetakingoverofproductiveforces，themoredoesitactuallybecomethenationalcapitalist，themorecitizensdoesitexploit。Theworkersremainwage-workers——proletarians。Thecapitalistrelationisnotdoneawaywith。Itisratherbroughttoahead。But，broughttoahead，ittopplesover。Stateownershipoftheproductiveforcesisnotthesolutionoftheconflict，butconcealedwithinitarethetechnicalconditionsthatformtheelementsofthatsolution。

Thissolutioncanonlyconsistinthepracticalrecognitionofthesocialnatureofthemodernforcesofproduction，andthereforeintheharmonisingofthemodesofproduction，appropriation，andexchangewiththesocialisedcharacterofthemeansofproductionAndthiscanonlycomeaboutbysocietyopenlyanddirectlytakingpossessionoftheproductiveforceswhichhaveoutgrownallcontrolexceptthatofsocietyasawhole。

Thesocialcharacterofthemeansofproductionandoftheproductstodayreactsagainsttheproducers，periodicallydisruptsallproductionandexchange，actsonlylikealawofnatureworkingblindly，forcibly，destructively。

Butwiththetakingoverbysocietyoftheproductiveforces，thesocialcharacterofthemeansofproductionandoftheproductswillbeutilisedbytheproducerswithaperfectunderstandingofitsnature，andinsteadofbeingasourceofdisturbanceandperiodicalcollapse，willbecomethemostpowerfulleverofproductionitself。

Activesocialforcesworkexactlylikenaturalforces:blindly，forcibly，destructively，solongaswedonotunderstand，andreckonwith，them。Butwhenonceweunderstandthem，whenoncewegrasptheiraction，theirdirection，theireffects，itdependsonlyuponourselvestosubjectthemmoreandmoretoourownwill，andbymeansofthemtoreachourownends。Andthisholdsquiteespeciallyofthemightyproductiveforcesoftoday。Aslongasweobstinatelyrefusetounderstandthenatureandthecharacterofthesesocialmeansofaction——andthisunderstandinggoesagainstthegrainofthecapitalistmodeofproductionanditsdefenders——solongtheseforcesareatworkinspiteofus，inoppositiontous，solongtheymasterus，aswehaveshownaboveindetail。Butwhenoncetheirnatureisunderstood，theycan，inthehandsoftheproducersworkingtogether，betransformedfrommasterdemonsintowillingservants。Thedifferenceisasthatbetweenthedestructiveforceofelectricityinthelightningofthestorm，andelectricityundercommandinthetelegraphandthevoltaicarc;thedifferencebetweenaconflagration，andfireworkingintheserviceofman。Withthisrecognition，atlast，oftherealnatureoftheproductiveforcesoftoday，thesocialanarchyofproductiongivesplacetoasocialregulationofproductionuponadefiniteplan，accordingtotheneedsofthecommunityandofeachindividual。Thenthecapitalistmodeofappropriation，inwhichtheproductenslavesfirsttheproducerandthentheappropriator，isreplacedbythemodeofappropriationoftheproductsthatisbaseduponthenatureofthemodernmeansofproduction:

upontheonehand，directsocialappropriation，asmeanstothemaintenanceandextensionofproduction——ontheother，directindividualappropriation，asmeansofsubsistenceandofenjoyment。

Whilstthecapitalistmodeofproductionmoreandmorecompletelytransformsthegreatmajorityofthepopulationintoproletarians，itcreatesthepowerwhich，underpenaltyofitsowndestruction，isforcedtoaccomplishthisrevolution。Whilstitforcesonmoreandmorethetransformationofthevastmeansofproduction，alreadysocialised，intostateproperty，itshowsitselfthewaytoaccomplishingthisrevolution。Theproletariatseizespoliticalpowerandturnsthemeansofproductioninthefirstinstanceintostateproperty。But，indoingthis，itabolishesitselfasproletariat，abolishesallclassdistinctionsandclassantagonisms，abolishesalsothestateasstate。Societythusfar，baseduponclassantagonisms，hadneedofthestate，thatis，ofanorganisationoftheparticularclass，whichwasprotemporetheexploitingclass，forthemaintenanceofitsexternalconditionsofproduction，and，therefore，especially，forthepurposeofforciblykeepingtheexploitedclassesintheconditionofoppressioncorrespondingwiththegivenmodeofproduction(slavery，serfdom，wage-labour)。Thestatewastheofficialrepresentativeofsocietyasawhole;thegatheringofittogetherintoavisibleembodiment。Butitwasthisonlyinsofarasitwasthestateofthatclasswhichitselfrepresented，forthetimebeing，societyasawhole:inancienttimes，thestateofslave-owningcitizens;intheMiddleAges，thefeudallords;

inourowntime，thebourgeoisie。Whenatlastitbecomestherealrepresentativeofthewholeofsociety，itrendersitselfunnecessary。Assoonasthereisnolongeranysocialclasstobeheldinsubjection;assoonasclassrule，andtheindividualstruggleforexistencebaseduponourpresentanarchyinproduction，withthecollisionsandexcessesarisingfromthese，areremoved，nothingmoreremainstoberepressed，andaspecialrepressiveforce，astate，isnolongernecessary。Thefirstactbyvirtueofwhichthestatereallyconstitutesitselftherepresentativeofthewholeofsociety——thetakingpossessionofthemeansofproductioninthenameofsociety——thisis，atthesametime，itslastindependentactasastate。Stateinterferenceinsocialrelationsbecomes，inonedomainafteranother，superfluous，andthendiesoutofitself;thegovernmentofpersonsisreplacedbytheadministrationofthings，andbytheconductofprocessesofproduction。Thestateisnot“abolished“。Itdiesout。Thisgivesthemeasureofthevalueofthephrase“afreepeople’sstate“，bothastoitsjustifiableuseattimesbyagitators，andastoitsultimatescientificinsufficiency[117];andalsoofthedemandsoftheso-calledanarchistsfortheabolitionofthestateoutofhand。

Sincethehistoricalappearanceofthecapitalistmodeofproduction，theappropriationbysocietyofallthemeansofproductionhasoftenbeendreamedof，moreorlessvaguely，byindividuals，aswellasbysects，astheidealofthefuture。Butitcouldbecomepossible，couldbecomeahistoricalnecessity，onlywhentheactualconditionsforitsrealisationwerethere。Likeeveryothersocialadvance，itbecomespracticable，notbymenunderstandingthattheexistenceofclassesisincontradictiontojustice，equality，etc。，notbythemerewillingnesstoabolishtheseclasses，butbyvirtueofcertainneweconomicconditions。Theseparationofsocietyintoanexploitingandanexploitedclass，arulingandanoppressedclass，wasthenecessaryconsequenceofthedeficientandrestricteddevelopmentofproductioninformertimes。Solongasthetotalsociallabouronlyyieldsaproducewhichbutslightlyexceedsthatbarelynecessaryfortheexistenceofall;solong，therefore，aslabourengagesalloralmostallthetimeofthegreatmajorityofthemembersofsociety——solong，ofnecessity，thissocietyisdividedintoclasses。Sidebysidewiththegreatmajority，exclusivelybondslavestolabour，arisesaclassfreedfromdirectlyproductivelabour，whichlooksafterthegeneralaffairsofsociety:thedirectionoflabour，statebusiness，law，science，art，etc。Itis，therefore，thelawofdivisionoflabourthatliesatthebasisofthedivisionintoclasses。Butthisdoesnotpreventthisdivisionintoclassesfrombeingcarriedoutbymeansofviolenceandrobbery，trickeryandfraud。Itdoesnotpreventtherulingclass，oncehavingtheupperhand，fromconsolidatingitspowerattheexpenseoftheworkingclass，fromturningitssocialleadershipintoanexploitationofthemasses。

Butif，uponthisshowing，divisionintoclasseshasacertainhistoricaljustification，ithasthisonlyforagivenperiod，onlyundergivensocialconditions。Itwasbasedupontheinsufficiencyofproduction。

Itwillbesweptawaybythecompletedevelopmentofmodernproductiveforces。And，infact，theabolitionofclassesinsocietypresupposesadegreeofhistoricalevolutionatwhichtheexistence，notsimplyofthisorthatparticularrulingclass，butofanyrulingclassatall，and，therefore，theexistenceofclassdistinctionitselfhasbecomeanobsoleteanachronism。

Itpresupposes，therefore，thedevelopmentofproductioncarriedouttoadegreeatwhichappropriationofthemeansofproductionandoftheproducts，and，withthis，ofpoliticaldomination，ofthemonopolyofculture，andofintellectualleadershipbyaparticularclassofsociety，hasbecomenotonlysuperfluousbuteconomically，politically，intellectuallyahindrancetodevelopment。Thispointisnowreached。Theirpoliticalandintellectualbankruptcyisscarcelyanylongerasecrettothebourgeoisiethemselves。

Theireconomicbankruptcyrecursregularlyeverytenyears。Ineverycrisis，societyissuffocatedbeneaththeweightofitsownproductiveforcesandproducts，whichitcannotuse，andstandshelplessfacetofacewiththeabsurdcontradictionthattheproducershavenothingtoconsume，becauseconsumersarewanting。Theexpansiveforceofthemeansofproductionburststhebondsthatthecapitalistmodeofproductionhadimposeduponthem。

Theirdeliverancefromthesebondsistheonepreconditionforanunbroken，constantlyaccelerateddevelopmentoftheproductiveforces，andtherewithforapracticallyunlimitedincreaseofproductionitself。Noristhisall。Thesocialisedappropriationofthemeansofproductiondoesaway，notonlywiththepresentartificialrestrictionsuponproduction，butalsowiththepositivewasteanddevastationofproductiveforcesandproductsthatareatthepresenttimetheinevitableconcomitantsofproduction，andthatreachtheirheightinthecrises。Further，itsetsfreeforthecommunityatlargeamassofmeansofproductionandofproducts，bydoingawaywiththesenselessextravaganceoftherulingclassesoftodayandtheirpoliticalrepresentatives。Thepossibilityofsecuringforeverymemberofsociety，bymeansofsocialisedproduction，anexistencenotonlyfullysufficientmaterially，andbecomingdaybydaymorefull，butanexistenceguaranteeingtoallthefreedevelopmentandexerciseoftheirphysicalandmentalfaculties——thispossibilityisnowforthefirsttimehere，butitishere。*11

Withtheseizingofthemeansofproductionbysocietyproductionofcommoditiesisdoneawaywith，and，simultaneously，themasteryoftheproductovertheproducer。Anarchyinsocialproductionisreplacedbysystematic，definiteorganisation。Thestruggleforindividualexistencedisappears。Thenforthefirsttimeman，inacertainsense，isfinallymarkedofffromtherestoftheanimalkingdom，andemergesfrommereanimalconditionsofexistenceintoreallyhumanones。Thewholesphereoftheconditionsoflifewhichenvironman，andwhichhavehithertoruledman，nowcomesunderthedominionandcontrolofmanwhoforthefirsttimebecomesthereal，consciouslordofnaturebecausehehasnowbecomemasterofhisownsocialorganisation。Thelawsofhisownsocialaction，hithertostandingfacetofacewithmanaslawsofnatureforeignto，anddominatinghim，willthenbeusedwithfullunderstanding，andsomasteredbyhim。

Man’sownsocialorganisation，hithertoconfrontinghimasanecessityimposedbynatureandhistory，nowbecomestheresultofhisownfreeaction。

Theextraneousobjectiveforcesthathavehithertogovernedhistorypassunderthecontrolofmanhimself。Onlyfromthattimewillmanhimself，withfullconsciousness，makehisownhistory——onlyfromthattimewillthesocialcausessetinmovementbyhimhave，inthemainandinaconstantlygrowingmeasure，theresultsintendedbyhim。Itisthehumanity’sleapfromthekingdomofnecessitytothekingdomoffreedom。

Toaccomplishthisactofuniversalemancipationisthehistoricalmissionofthemodernproletariat。Tothoroughlycomprehendthehistoricalconditionsandthustheverynatureofthisact，toimparttothenowoppressedclassafullknowledgeoftheconditionsandofthemeaningofthemomentousactitiscalledupontoaccomplish，thisisthetaskofthetheoreticalexpressionoftheproletarianmovement，scientificsocialism。

III。

PRODUCTIONAfterallthathasbeensaidabove，thereaderwillnotbesurprisedtolearnthattheexpositionoftheprincipalfeaturesofsocialismgivenintheprecedingpartisnotatallinaccordancewithHerrDühring’sview。Onthecontrary。Hemusthurlitintotheabysswhereliealltheotherrejected“bastardsofhistoricalandlogicalfantasy“，“barrenconceptions“，“confusedandhazynotions“{D。K。G。498}，etc。

ToHerrDühring，socialisminfactisnotatallanecessaryproductofhistoricaldevelopmentandstilllessofthegrosslymaterialeconomicconditionsoftoday，directedtowardthefillingofthestomachexclusively{231}。He’sgotitallworkedoutmuchbetter。Hissocialismisafinalandultimatetruth;

itis“thenaturalsystemofsociety“{D。Ph。282}，whoserootsaretobefoundina“universalprincipleofjustice“{D。C。282}，andifhecannotavoidtakingnoticeoftheexistingsituation，createdbythesinfulhistoryofthepast，inordertoremedyit，thismustberegardedratherasamisfortuneforthepureprincipleofjustice。HerrDühringcreateshissocialism，likeeverythingelse，throughthemediumofhisfamoustwomen。Insteadofthesetwopuppetsplayingthepartofmasterandservant，astheydidinthepast，theyperformthisonce，forachange，thepieceontheequalityofrights——andthefoundationsoftheDühringiansocialismhavebeenlaid。

ItthereforegoeswithoutsayingthattoHerrDühringtheperiodicalcrisesinindustryhavenotatallthehistoricalsignificancewhichwewerecompelledtoattributetothem。

Inhisview，crisesareonlyoccasionaldeviationsfrom“normality“

{218}andatmostonlyservetopromote“thedevelopmentofamoreregulatedorder“{219}。The“commonmethod“{227}ofexplainingcrisesbyover-productionisinnowiseadequateforhis“moreexactconceptionofthings“{343}。

Ofcoursesuchanexplanation“maybepermissibleforspecificcrisesinparticularareas“。As，forexample，“aswampingofthebookmarketwithworkssuddenlyreleasedforrepublicationandsuitableformasssale“{227}。

HerrDühringcanatanyrategotosleepwiththegratifyingfeelingthathisimmortalworkswillneverbringonanysuchworlddisaster。

Heclaims，however，thatingreatcrises，itisnotover-production，butrather“thelaggingbehindofpopularconsumption……artificiallyproducedunder-consumption……interferencewiththenaturalgrowthoftheneedsofthepeople“(！)“whichultimatelymakethegulfbetweensupplyanddemandsocriticallywide“{D。C。227，228}。

Andhehasevenhadthegoodfortunetofindadiscipleforthiscrisistheoryofhis。

Butunfortunatelytheunder-consumptionofthemasses，therestrictionoftheconsumptionofthemassestowhatisnecessaryfortheirmaintenanceandreproduction，isnotanewphenomenon。Ithasexistedaslongastherehavebeenexploitingandexploitedclasses。Eveninthoseperiodsofhistorywhenthesituationofthemasseswasparticularlyfavourable，asforexampleinEnglandinthefifteenthcentury，theyunder-consumed。Theywereveryfarfromhavingtheirownannualtotalproductattheirdisposaltobeconsumedbythem。Therefore，whileunder-consumptionhasbeenaconstantfeatureinhistoryforthousandsofyears，thegeneralshrinkageofthemarketwhichbreaksoutincrisesastheresultofasurplusofproductionisaphenomenononlyofthelastfiftyyears;andsoHerrDühring’swholesuperficialvulgareconomicsisnecessaryinordertoexplainthenewcollisionnotbythenewphenomenonofover-productionbutbythethousand-year-oldphenomenonofunder-consumption。Itislikeamathematicianattemptingtoexplainthevariationintheratiobetweentwoquantities，oneconstantandonevariable，notbythevariationofthevariablebutbythefactthattheconstantquantityremainsunchanged。Theunder-consumptionofthemassesisanecessaryconditionofallformsofsocietybasedonexploitation，consequentlyalsoofthecapitalistform;butitisthecapitalistformofproductionwhichfirstgivesrisetocrises。Theunder-consumptionofthemassesisthereforealsoaprerequisiteconditionofcrises，andplaysinthemarolewhichhaslongbeenrecognised。Butittellsusjustaslittlewhycrisesexisttodayaswhytheydidnotexistbefore。

HerrDühring’snotionsoftheworldmarketarealtogethercurious。Wehaveseenhow，likeatypicalGermanmanofletters，heseekstoexplainrealindustrialspecificcrisesbymeansofimaginarycrisesontheLeipzigbookmarket——thestormontheoceanbythestorminateacup。Healsoimaginesthatpresent-daycapitalistproductionmust“dependforitsmarketmainlyonthecirclesofthepossessingclassesthemselves“{221}，whichdoesnotpreventhim，onlysixteenpageslater，frompresenting，inthegenerallyacceptedway，theironandcottonindustriesasthemodernindustriesofdecisiveimportance{236}——thatis，preciselythetwobranchesofproductionwhoseoutputisconsumedonlytoaninfinitesimallysmalldegreewithinthecircleofthepossessingclassesandisdependentmorethananyotheronmassuse。WhereverweturninHerrDühring’sworksthereisnothingbutemptyandcontradictorychatter。Butletustakeanexamplefromthecottonindustry。IntherelativelysmalltownofOldhamalone——itisoneofadozentownsroundManchesterwithfiftytoahundredthousandinhabitantsengagedinthecottonindustry——inthistownalone，inthefouryears1872to1875，thenumberofspindlesspinningonlyNumber32yarnincreasedfromtwoandahalftofivemillion;sothatinonemedium-sizedEnglishtownthereareasmanyspindlesspinningonesinglecountasthecottonindustryofallGermany，includingAlsace，possesses。AndtheexpansionintheotherbranchesandareasofthecottonindustryinEnglandandScotlandhastakenplaceinapproximatelythesameproportion。Inviewofthesefacts，itrequiresastrongdoseofdeep-rooted{555-56}effronterytoexplainthepresentcompletestagnationintheyarnandclothmarketsbytheunder-consumptionoftheEnglishmassesandnotbytheover-productioncarriedonbytheEnglishcotton-millowners。*12

Butenough。OnedoesnotarguewithpeoplewhoaresoignorantofeconomicsastoconsidertheLeipzigbookmarketinthemodernindustrialsense。LetusthereforemerelynotethatHerrDühringhasonlyonemorepieceofinformationforusonthesubjectofcrises，thatincriseswehavenothing“buttheordinaryinterplayofoverstrainandrelaxation“{228};thatover-speculation“isnotonlyduetotheplanlessmultiplicationofprivateenterprises“，butthat“therashnessofindividualentrepreneursandthelackofprivatecircumspectionmustalsobereckonedamongthecauseswhichgiverisetooversupply“{229}。

Andwhat，again，isthe“causewhichgivesrise“totherashnessandlackofprivatecircumspection？Justpreciselythisveryplanlessnessofcapitalistproduction，whichmanifestsitselfintheplanlessmultiplicationofprivateenterprises。Andtomistakethetranslationofaneconomicfactintomoralreprobationasthediscoveryofanewcauseisalsoapieceofextreme“rashness“。

Withthiswecanleavethequestionofcrises。Intheprecedingsectionweshowedthattheywerenecessarilyengenderedbythecapitalistmodeofproduction，andexplainedtheirsignificanceascrisesofthismodeofproductionitself，asmeansofcompellingthesocialrevolution，anditisnotnecessarytosayanotherwordinreplytoHerrDühring’ssuperficialitiesonthissubject。Letuspassontohispositivecreations，the“naturalsystemofsociety“{D。Ph。282}。

Thissystem，builtona“universalprincipleofjustice“{D。C。

320}andthereforefreefromallconsiderationoftroublesomematerialfacts，consistsofafederationofeconomiccommunesamongwhichthereis“freedomofmovementandobligatoryacceptanceofnewmembersonthebasisoffixedlawsandadministrativeregulations“{323}。

Theeconomiccommuneitselfisaboveall“acomprehensiveschematismofgreatimportinhumanhistory“{341}

whichisfarsuperiortothe“erroneoushalf-measures“，forexample，ofacertainMarx{342}。Itimplies“acommunityofpersonslinkedtogetherbytheirpublicrighttodisposeofadefiniteareaoflandandagroupofproductiveestablishmentsforuseincommon，jointlyparticipatingintheproceeds“{322}。Thispublicrightisa“righttotheobject……inthesenseofapurelypublicisticrelationtonatureandtotheproductiveinstitutions“{342}。

Weleaveittothefuturejuristsoftheeconomiccommunetocudgeltheirbrainsastowhatthismeans;wegiveitup。Theonlythingwegatheristhatitisnotatallthesameasthe“corporativeownershipofworkers’

associations“{342}whichwouldnotexcludemutualcompetitionandeventheexploitationofwage-labour。

Inthisconnectionhedropstheremarkthattheconceptionofa“collectiveownership“，suchasisfoundalsoinMarx，is“tosaytheleastunclearandopentoquestion，asthisconceptionofthefuturealwaysgivestheimpressionthatitmeansnothingmorethancorporativeownershipbygroupsofworkers“{295}。

ThisisonemoreinstanceofHerrDühring’susual“vilehabits“ofpassingoffathingforwhatitisnot，“forwhosevulgarnature“——tousehisownwords——“onlythevulgarwordsnottywouldbequiteappropriate“

{D。K。G。506};itisjustasbaselessalieasHerrDühring’sotherinventionthatbycollectiveownershipMarxmeansan“ownershipwhichisatoncebothindividualandsocial“{503，505}。

Inanycasethismuchseemsclear:thepublicisticrightofaneconomiccommuneinitsmeansoflabour，isanexclusiverightofpropertyatleastasagainsteveryothereconomiccommuneandalsoasagainstsocietyandthestate。

Butthisrightisnottoentitlethecommune“tocutitselfoff……

fromtheoutsideworld，foramongthevariouseconomiccommunesthereisfreedomofmovementandobligatoryacceptanceofnewmembersonthebasisoffixedlawsandadministrativeregulations……like……belongingtoapoliticalorganisationatthepresenttime，orparticipationintheeconomicaffairsofthecommune“{D。C。322-23}。

Therewillthereforeberichandpooreconomiccommunes，andthelevellingouttakesplacethroughthepopulationcrowdingintotherichcommunesandleavingthepoorones。SothatalthoughHerrDühringwantstoeliminatecompetitioninproductsbetweentheindividualcommunesbymeansofnationalorganisationoftrade，hecalmlyallowscompetitionamongtheproducerstocontinue。Thingsareremovedfromthesphereofcompetition，butmenremainsubjecttoit。

Butwearestillveryfarfromclearonthequestionof“publicisticright“{322}。TwopagesfurtheronHerrDühringexplainstous:

Thetradecommune“willatfirstcoverthepolitico-socialareawhoseinhabitantsformasinglelegalentityandinthischaracterhaveattheirdisposalthewholeoftheland，thedwellingsandproductiveinstitutions“

{325}。

Soafterallitisnottheindividualcommuneatwhosedisposalthesethingsare，butthewholenation。The“publicright“{322}，“righttotheobject“，“publicisticrelationtonature“{342}andsoforthisthereforenotmerely“atleastunclearandopentoquestion“{295}:itisindirectcontradictionwithitself。Itisinfact，atanyrateinsofaraseachindividualeconomiccommuneislikewisealegalentity，“anownershipwhichisatoncebothindividualandsocial“{D。K。G。503}，andthislatter“nebuloushybrid“

{504}isonceagain，therefore，onlytobemetwithinHerrDühring’sownworks。

Inanycasetheeconomiccommunehasatitsdisposalinstrumentsoflabourforthepurposeofproduction。Howisthisproductioncarriedon？JudgingbyallHerrDühringhastoldus，preciselyasinthepast，exceptthatthecommunetakestheplaceofthecapitalists。Themostwearetoldisthateveryonewillthenbefreetochoosehisoccupation，andthattherewillbeequalobligationtowork。

Thebasicformofallproductionhithertohasbeenthedivisionoflabour，ontheonehand，withinsocietyasawhole，andontheother，withineachseparateproductiveestablishment。HowdoestheDühring“sociality“{seeD。C。263，277，291}standonthisquestion？

Thefirstgreatdivisionoflabourinsocietyistheseparationoftownandcountry。

Thisantagonism，accordingtoHerrDühring，is“inthenatureofthingsinevitable“{232}。But“itisingeneraldoubtfultoregardthegulfbetweenagricultureandindustry……asunbridgeable。Infact，therealreadyexists，toacertainextent，constancyofinterconnectionwithpromisestoincreaseconsiderablyinthefuture“{250}。Already，welearn，twoindustrieshavepenetratedagricultureandruralproduction:“inthefirstplace，distilling，andinthesecond，beet-sugarmanufacturing……

theproductionofspiritsisalreadyofsuchimportancethatitismorelikelytobeunder-estimatedthanover-estimated“{250-51}。And“ifitwerepossible，asaresultofsomeinventions，foralargernumberofindustriestodevelopinsuchawaythattheyshouldbecompelledtolocalisetheirproductioninthecountryandcarryitonindirectassociationwiththeproductionofrawmaterials“{251}——thenthiswouldweakentheantithesisbetweentownandcountryand“providethewidestpossiblebasisforthedevelopmentofcivilisation“。Moreover，“asomewhatsimilarresultmightalsobeattainedinanotherway。Apartfromtechnicalrequirements，socialneedsarecomingmoreandmoretotheforefront，andifthelatterbecomethedominantconsiderationinthegroupingofhumanactivitiesitwillnolongerbepossibletooverlookthoseadvantageswhichensuefromacloseandsystematicconnectionbetweentheoccupationsofthecountrysideandthetechnicaloperationsofworkinguprawmaterials“{252}。

Nowintheeconomiccommuneitispreciselysocialneedswhicharecomingtotheforefront;andsowillitreallyhastentotakeadvantage，tothefullestpossibleextent，oftheabove-mentionedunionofagricultureandindustry？WillHerrDühringnotfailtotellus，athisaccustomedlength，his“moreexactconceptions“{343}ontheattitudeoftheeconomiccommunetothisquestion？Thereaderwhoexpectedhimnottowouldbecruellydisillusioned。Theabove-mentionedmeagre，stalecommonplaces，onceagainnotpassingbeyondtheschnaps-distillingandbeet-sugarmakingsphereofthejurisdictionofPrussianlaw，areallthatHerrDühringhastosayontheantithesisbetweentownandcountryinthepresentandinthefuture。

Letuspassontothedivisionoflabourindetail。HereHerrDühringisalittle“moreexact“。Hespeaksof“apersonwhohastodevotehimselfexclusivelytooneformofoccupation“{D。C。257}。Ifthepointatissueistheintroductionofanewbranchofproduction，theproblemsimplyhingesonwhetheracertainnumberofentities，whoaretodevotethemselvestotheproductionofonesinglearticle，cansomehowbeprovidedwiththeconsumption(！)theyrequire{278}。Inthesocialitariansystemnobranchofproductionwould“requiremanypeople“，andthere，too，therewouldbe“economicspecies“ofmen“distinguishedbytheirwayoflife“

{329}。

Accordingly，withinthesphereofproductioneverythingremainsmuchthesameasbefore。Insocietyuptonow，however，an“erroneousdivisionoflabour“{327}hasobtained，butastowhatthisis，andbywhatitistobereplacedintheeconomiccommune，weareonlytold:

“Withregardtothedivisionoflabouritself，wehavealreadysaidabovethatthisquestioncanbeconsideredsettledassoonasaccountistakenofthevariousnaturalconditionsandpersonalcapabilities“{259}。

Inadditiontocapabilities，personallikingsaretakenintoaccount:

“Thepleasurefeltinrisingtotypesofactivitywhichinvolveadditionalcapabilitiesandtrainingwoulddependexclusivelyontheinclinationfeltfortheoccupationinquestionandonthejoyproducedintheexerciseofpreciselythisandnootherthing“{D。Ph。283}(exerciseofathing！)。

Andthiswillstimulatecompetitionwithinthesocialitariansystem，sothat“productionitselfwillbecomeinteresting，andthedullpursuitofit，whichseesinitnothingbutameansofearning，willnolongerputitsheavyimprintonconditions“{D。C。265}。

Ineverysocietyinwhichproductionhasdevelopedspontaneously——andourpresentsocietyisofthistype——thesituationisnotthattheproducerscontrolthemeansofproduction，butthatthemeansofproductioncontroltheproducers。Insuchasocietyeachnewleverofproductionisnecessarilytransformedintoanewmeansforthesubjectionoftheproducerstothemeansofproduction。Thisismostofalltrueofthatleverofproductionwhich，priortotheintroductionofmodernindustry，wasbyfarthemostpowerful——thedivisionoflabour。Thefirstgreatdivisionoflabour，theseparationoftownandcountry，condemnedtheruralpopulationtothousandsofyearsofmentaltorpidity，andthepeopleofthetownseachtosubjectiontohisownindividualtrade。Itdestroyedthebasisoftheintellectualdevelopmentoftheformerandthephysicaldevelopmentofthelatter。Whenthepeasantappropriateshisland，andthetownsmanhistrade，thelandappropriatesthepeasantandthetradethetownsmantotheverysameextent。

Inthedivisionoflabour，manisalsodivided。Allotherphysicalandmentalfacultiesaresacrificedtothedevelopmentofonesingleactivity。

Thisstuntingofmangrowsinthesamemeasureasthedivisionoflabour，whichattainsitshighestdevelopmentinmanufacture。Manufacturesplitsupeachtradeintoitsseparatepartialoperations，allotseachofthesetoanindividuallabourerashislifecalling，andthuschainshimforlifetoaparticulardetailfunctionandaparticulartool。“Itconvertsthelabourerintoacrippledmonstrosity，byforcinghisdetaildexterityattheexpenseofaworldofproductivecapabilitiesandinstincts……Theindividualhimselfismadetheautomaticmotorofafractionaloperation“

(Marx)——amotorwhichinmanycasesisperfectedonlybyliterallycripplingthelabourerphysicallyandmentally。Themachineryofmodernindustrydegradesthelabourerfromamachinetothemereappendageofamachine。

“Thelife-longspecialityofhandlingoneandthesametool，nowbecomesthelife-longspecialityofservingoneandthesamemachine。Machineryisputtoawronguse，withtheobjectoftransformingtheworkman，fromhisverychildhood，intoapartofadetail-machine“(Marx)。Andnotonlythelabourersbutalsotheclassesdirectlyorindirectlyexploitingthelabourersaremadesubject，throughthedivisionoflabour，tothetooloftheirfunction:theempty-mindedbourgeoistohisowncapitalandhisowninsanecravingforprofits;thelawyertohisfossilisedlegalconceptions，whichdominatehimasanindependentpower;the“educatedclasses“ingeneraltotheirmanifoldspeciesoflocalnarrow-mindednessandone-sidedness，totheirownphysicalandmentalshort-sightedness，totheirstuntedgrowthduetotheirnarrowspecialisededucationandtheirbeingchainedforlifetothisspecialisedactivity——evenwhenthisspecialisedactivityismerelytodonothing。

Theutopianswerealreadyperfectlyclearintheirmindsastotheeffectsofthedivisionoflabour，thestuntingontheonehandofthelabourer，andontheotherofthelabourfunction，whichisrestrictedtothelifelonguniformmechanicalrepetitionofoneandthesameoperation。

TheabolitionoftheantithesisbetweentownandcountrywasdemandedbyFourier，asbyOwen，asthefirstbasicprerequisitefortheabolitionoftheolddivisionoflabouraltogether。Bothofthemthoughtthatthepopulationshouldbescatteredthroughthecountryingroupsofsixteenhundredtothreethousandpersons;eachgroupwastooccupyagiganticpalace，withahouseholdrunoncommunallines，inthecentreoftheirareaofland。ItistruethatFourieroccasionallyreferstotowns，buttheseweretoconsistinturnofonlyfourorfivesuchpalacessituatedneareachother。Bothwriterswouldhaveeachmemberofsocietyoccupiedinagricultureaswellasinindustry;withFourier，industrycoverschieflyhandicraftsandmanufacture，whileOwenassignsthemainroletomodernindustryandalreadydemandstheintroductionofsteam-powerandmachineryindomesticwork。Butwithinagricultureaswellasindustrybothofthemalsodemandthegreatestpossiblevarietyofoccupationforeachindividual，andinaccordancewiththis，thetrainingoftheyouthfortheutmostpossibleall-roundtechnicalfunctions。Theybothconsiderthatmanshouldgainuniversaldevelopmentthroughuniversalpracticalactivityandthatlabourshouldrecovertheattractivenessofwhichthedivisionoflabourhasdespoiledit，inthefirstplacethroughthisvariationofoccupation，andthroughthecorrespondinglyshortdurationofthe“sitting“——touseFourier’sexpression——devotedtoeachparticularkindofwork。BothFourierandOwenarefarinadvanceofthemodeofthoughtoftheexploitingclassesinheritedbyHerrDühring，accordingtowhichtheantithesisbetweentownandcountryisinevitableinthenatureofthings;thenarrowviewthatanumberof“entities“{D。C。257}mustinanyeventbecondemnedtotheproductionofonesinglearticle，theviewthatdesirestoperpetuatethe“economicspecies“{329}ofmendistinguishedbytheirwayoflife——peoplewhotakepleasureintheperformanceofpreciselythisandnootherthing，whohavethereforesunksolowthattheyrejoiceintheirownsubjectionandone-sidedness。Incomparisonwiththebasicconceptionsevenofthe“idiot“{D。K。G。286}Fourier’smostrecklesslyboldfantasies;incomparisonevenwiththepaltriestideasofthe“crude，feeble，andpaltry“{295，296}Owen——HerrDühring，himselfstillcompletelydominatedbythedivisionoflabour，isnomorethananimpertinentdwarf。

Inmakingitselfthemasterofallthemeansofproductiontousetheminaccordancewithasocialplan，societyputsanendtotheformersubjectionofmentotheirownmeansofproduction。Itgoeswithoutsayingthatsocietycannotfreeitselfunlesseveryindividualisfreed。Theoldmodeofproductionmustthereforeberevolutionisedfromtoptobottom，andinparticulartheformerdivisionoflabourmustdisappear。Itsplacemustbetakenbyanorganisationofproductioninwhich，ontheonehand，noindividualcanthrowontheshouldersofothershisshareinproductivelabour，thisnaturalconditionofhumanexistence;andinwhich，ontheotherhand，productivelabour，insteadofbeingameansofsubjugatingmen，willbecomeameansoftheiremancipation，byofferingeachindividualtheopportunitytodevelopallhisfaculties，physicalandmental，inalldirectionsandexercisethemtothefull——inwhich，therefore，productivelabourwillbecomeapleasureinsteadofbeingaburden。

Todaythisisnolongerafantasy，nolongerapiouswish。Withthepresentdevelopmentoftheproductiveforces，theincreaseinproductionthatwillfollowfromtheveryfactofthesocialisationoftheproductiveforces，coupledwiththeabolitionofthebarriersanddisturbances，andofthewasteofproductsandmeansofproduction，resultingfromthecapitalistmodeofproduction，willsuffice，witheverybodydoinghisshareofwork，toreducethetimerequiredforlabourtoapointwhich，measuredbyourpresentconceptions，willbesmallindeed。

Noristheabolitionoftheolddivisionoflabourademandwhichcouldonlybecarriedthroughtothedetrimentoftheproductivityoflabour。

Onthecontrary。Thankstomodernindustryithasbecomeaconditionofproductionitself。“TheemploymentofmachinerydoesawaywiththenecessityofcrystallisingthedistributionofvariousgroupsofworkmenamongthedifferentkindsofmachinesafterthemannerofManufacture，bytheconstantannexationofaparticularmantoaparticularfunction。Sincethemotionofthewholesystemdoesnotproceedfromtheworkman，butfromthemachinery，achangeofpersonscantakeplaceatanytimewithoutaninterruptionofthework……Lastly，thequicknesswithwhichmachineworkislearntbyyoungpeople，doesawaywiththenecessityofbringingupforexclusiveemploymentbymachinery，aspecialclassofoperatives。”Butwhilethecapitalistmodeofemploymentofmachinerynecessarilyperpetuatestheolddivisionoflabourwithitsfossilisedspecialisation，althoughithasbecomesuperfluousfromatechnicalstandpoint，themachineryitselfrebelsagainstthisanachronism。Thetechnicalbasisofmodernindustryisrevolutionary。“Bymeansofmachinery，chemicalprocessesandothermethods，itiscontinuallycausingchangesnotonlyinthetechnicalbasisofproduction，butalsointhefunctionsofthelabourer，andinthesocialcombinationsofthelabour-process。Atthesametime，ittherebyalsorevolutionisesthedivisionoflabourwithinthesociety，andincessantlylaunchesmassesofcapitalandofworkpeoplefromonebranchofproductiontoanother。

Modernindustry，byitsverynature，thereforenecessitatesvariationoflabour，fluencyoffunction，universalmobilityofthelabourer……Wehaveseenhowthisabsolutecontradiction……ventsitsrageintheincessanthumansacrificesfromamongtheworking-class，inthemostrecklesssquanderingoflabour-power，andinthedevastationcausedbysocialanarchy。Thisisthenegativeside。Butif，ontheonehand，variationofworkatpresentimposesitselfafterthemannerofanoverpoweringnaturallaw，andwiththeblindlydestructiveactionofanaturallawthatmeetswithresistanceatallpoints，modernindustry，ontheotherhand，throughitscatastrophesimposesthenecessityofrecognising，asafundamentallawofproduction，variationofwork，consequentlyfitnessofthelabourerforvariedwork，consequentlythegreatestpossibledevelopmentofhisvariedaptitudes。

Itbecomesaquestionoflifeanddeathforsocietytoadaptthemodeofproductiontothenormalfunctioningofthislaw。Modernindustrymakesitaquestionoflifeanddeathtoreplacethemonstrosityofadestituteworkingpopulationkeptinreserveatthedisposalofcapitalforthechangingneedsofexploitationwiththeabsoluteavailabilityofmanforthechangingrequirementsoflabour;toreplacewhatisvirtuallyamerefragmentoftheindividual，themerecarrierofasocialdetail-function，withthefullydevelopedindividual，towhomthedifferentsocialfunctionsaresomanyalternatingmodesofactivity“(Marx，Capital)。

Modernindustry，whichhastaughtustoconvertthemovementofmolecules，somethingmoreorlessuniversallyfeasible，intothemovementofmassesfortechnicalpurposes，hastherebytoaconsiderableextentfreedproductionfromrestrictionsoflocality。Water-powerwaslocal;

steam-powerisfree。Whilewater-powerisnecessarilyrural，steam-powerisbynomeansnecessarilyurban。Itiscapitalistutilisationwhichconcentratesitmainlyinthetownsandchangesfactoryvillagesintofactorytowns。

Butinsodoingitatthesametimeunderminestheconditionsunderwhichitoperates。Thefirstrequirementofthesteam-engine，andamainrequirementofalmostallbranchesofproductioninmodernindustry，isrelativelypurewater。Butthefactorytowntransformsallwaterintostinkingmanure。

Howevermuchthereforeurbanconcentrationisabasicconditionofcapitalistproduction，eachindividualindustrialcapitalistisconstantlystrivingtogetawayfromthelargetownsnecessarilycreatedbythisproduction，andtotransferhisplanttothecountryside。ThisprocesscanbestudiedindetailinthetextileindustrydistrictsofLancashireandYorkshire;

moderncapitalistindustryisconstantlybringingnewlargetownsintobeingtherebyconstantflightfromthetownsintothecountry。Thesituationissimilarinthemetal-workingdistrictswhere，inpart，othercausesproducethesameeffects。

Oncemore，onlytheabolitionofthecapitalistcharacterofmodernindustrycanbringusoutofthisnewviciouscircle，canresolvethiscontradictioninmodernindustry，whichisconstantlyreproducingitself。

Onlyasocietywhichmakesitpossibleforitsproductiveforcestodovetailharmoniouslyintoeachotheronthebasisofonesinglevastplancanallowindustrytobedistributedoverthewholecountryinthewaybestadaptedtoitsowndevelopment，andtothemaintenanceanddevelopmentoftheotherelementsofproduction。

Accordingly，abolitionoftheantithesisbetweentownandcountryisnotmerelypossible。Ithasbecomeadirectnecessityofindustrialproductionitself，justasithasbecomeanecessityofagriculturalproductionand，besides，ofpublichealth。Thepresentpoisoningoftheair，waterandlandcanbeputanendtoonlybythefusionoftownandcountry;andonlysuchfusionwillchangethesituationofthemassesnowlanguishinginthetowns，andenabletheirexcrementtobeusedfortheproductionofplantsinsteadoffortheproductionofdisease。

Capitalistindustryhasalreadymadeitselfrelativelyindependentofthelocallimitationsarisingfromthelocationofsourcesoftherawmaterialsitneeds。Thetextileindustryworksup，inthemain，importedrawmaterials。SpanishironoreisworkedupinEnglandandGermanyandSpanishandSouth-Americancopperores，inEngland。Everycoalfieldnowsuppliesfueltoanindustrialareafarbeyonditsownborders，anareawhichiswideningeveryyear。AlongthewholeoftheEuropeancoaststeam-enginesaredrivenbyEnglishandtosomeextentalsobyGermanandBelgiancoal。

Societyliberatedfromtherestrictionsofcapitalistproductioncangomuchfurtherstill。Bygeneratingaraceofproducerswithanall-rounddevelopmentwhounderstandthescientificbasisofindustrialproductionasawhole，andeachofwhomhashadpracticalexperienceinawholeseriesofbranchesofproductionfromstarttofinish，thissocietywillbringintobeinganewproductiveforcewhichwillabundantlycompensateforthelabourrequiredtotransportrawmaterialsandfuelfromgreatdistances。

Theabolitionoftheseparationoftownandcountryisthereforenotutopian，also，insofarasitisconditionedonthemostequaldistributionpossibleofmodernindustryoverthewholecountry。Itistruethatinthehugetownscivilisationhasbequeathedusaheritagewhichitwilltakemuchtimeandtroubletogetridof。Butitmustandwillbegotridof，however，protractedaprocessitmaybe。WhateverdestinymaybeinstorefortheGermanEmpireofthePrussiannation，[119]Bismarckcangotohisgraveproudlyawarethatthedesireofhisheartissuretobefulfilled:thegreattownswillperish。[120]

AndnowseehowpuerileisHerrDühring’sideathatsocietycantakepossessionofallmeansofproductionintheaggregatewithoutrevolutionisingfromtoptobottomtheoldmethodofproductionandfirstofallputtinganendtotheolddivisionoflabour;thateverythingwillbeinorderonce“naturalopportunitiesandpersonalcapabilitiesaretakenintoaccount“

{D。C。259}——thatthereforewholemassesofentitieswillremain，asinthepast，subjectedtotheproductionofonesinglearticle;whole“populations“{275}

willbeengagedinasinglebranchofproduction，andhumanitycontinuetobedivided，asinthepast，intoanumberofdifferentcrippled“economicspecies“{329}，fortherestillare“porters“and“architects“{D。K。G。

500}。Societyistobecomemasterofthemeansofproductionasawhole，inorderthateachindividualmayremaintheslaveofhismeansofproduction，andhaveonlyachoiceastowhichmeansofproductionaretoenslavehim。AndseealsohowHerrDühringconsiderstheseparationoftownandcountryas“inevitableinthenatureofthings“{D。C。232}，andcanfindonlyatinypalliativeinschnaps-distillingandbeet-sugarmanufacturing——two，intheirconnectionspecificallyPrussian，branchesofindustry;

howhemakesthedistributionofindustryoverthecountrydependentoncertainfutureinventionsandonthenecessityofassociatingindustrydirectlywiththeprocurementofrawmaterials——rawmaterialswhicharealreadyusedataneverincreasingdistancefromtheirplaceoforigin！

AndHerrDühringfinallytriestocoveruphisrearbyassuringusthatinthelongrunsocialwantswillcarrythroughtheunionbetweenagricultureandindustryevenagainsteconomicconsiderations，asifthiswouldbesomeeconomicsacrifice！

Certainly，tobeabletoseethattherevolutionaryelementswhichwilldoawaywiththeolddivisionoflabour，alongwiththeseparationoftownandcountry，andwillrevolutionisethewholeofproduction;seethattheseelementsarealreadycontainedinembryointheproductionconditionsofmodernlarge-scaleindustryandthattheirdevelopmentishinderedbytheexistingcapitalistmodeofproduction——tobeabletoseethesethings，itisnecessarytohaveasomewhatwiderhorizonthanthesphereofjurisdictionofPrussianlaw，thanthecountrywhereproductionofschnapsandbeet-sugararethekeyindustries，andwherecommercialcrisescanbestudiedonthebookmarket。Tobeabletoseethesethingsitisnecessarytohavesomeknowledgeofreallarge-scaleindustryinitshistoricalgrowthandinitspresentactualform，especiallyintheonecountrywhereithasitshomeandwherealoneithasattaineditsclassicaldevelopment。ThennoonewillthinkofattemptingtovulgarisemodernscientificsocialismandtodegradeitintoHerrDühring’sspecificallyPrussiansocialism。

IV。

DISTRIBUTIONWehavealreadyseenthatDühringianeconomicscomesdowntothefollowingproposition:thecapitalistmodeofproductionisquitegood，andcanremaininexistence，butthecapitalistmodeofdistributionisofevil，andmustdisappear。WenowfindthatHerrDühring’s“socialitarian“systemisnothingmorethanthecarryingthroughofthisprincipleinfantasy。Infact，itturnedoutthatHerrDühringhaspracticallynothingtotakeexceptiontointhemodeofproduction——assuch——ofcapitalistsociety，thathewantstoretaintheolddivisionoflabourinallitsessentials，andthatheconsequentlyhashardlyawordtosayinregardtoproductionwithinhiseconomiccommune。

Productionisindeedasphereinwhichrobustfactsaredealtwith，andinwhichconsequently“rationalfantasy“{D。Ph。46}shouldgivebutlittlescopetothesoaringofitsfreesoul，becausethedangerofmakingadisgracefulblunderistoogreat。Itisquiteotherwisewithdistribution——whichinHerrDühring’sviewhasnoconnectionwhateverwithproductionandisdeterminednotbyproductionbutbyapureactofthewill——distributionisthepredestinedfieldofhis“socialalchemising“{D。K。G。237}。

Totheequalobligationtoproducecorrespondstheequalrighttoconsume，exercisedinanorganisedmannerintheeconomiccommuneandinthetradingcommuneembracingalargenumberofeconomiccommunes。“Labour“ishere“exchangedforotherlabouronthebasisofequalvaluation……Serviceandcounterservicerepresenthererealequalitybetweenquantitiesoflabour“

{D。C。256}。Andthis“equalisationofhumanenergies“applies“whethertheindividualshaveinfactdonemoreorless，orperhapsevennothingatall“{D。Ph。281};forallperformances，insofarastheyinvolvetimeandenergy，canberegardedaslabourdone——thereforeevenplayingbowlsorgoingforawalk{seeD。C。266}。Thisexchange，however，doesnottakeplacebetweenindividualsasthecommunityistheownerofallmeansofproductionandconsequentlyalsoofallproducts;ontheonehandittakesplacebetweeneacheconomiccommuneanditsindividualmembers，andontheotherbetweenthevariouseconomicandtradingcommunesthemselves。

“Theindividualeconomiccommunesinparticularwillreplaceretailtradewithintheirownareasbycompletelyplannedsales“{326}。Wholesaletradewillbeorganisedonthesamelines:“Thesystemofthefreeeconomicsociety……consequentlyremainsavastexchangeinstitution，whoseoperationsarecarriedoutonthebasisprovidedbythepreciousmetals。Itisinsightintotheinevitablenecessityofthisfundamentalqualitywhichdistinguishesourschemefromallthosefoggynotionswhichclingeventothemostrationalformsofcurrentsocialistideas“{324}。

Forthepurposesofthisexchange，theeconomiccommune，asthefirstappropriatorofthesocialproducts，hastodetermine，“foreachtypeofarticles，auniformprice“{277}，basedontheaverageproductioncosts。“Thesignificancewhichtheso-calledcostsofproduction……haveforvalueandpricetoday，willbeprovided“(inthesocialitariansystem)

“……bytheestimatesofthequantityoflabourtobeemployed。Theseestimates，byvirtueoftheprincipleofequalrightsforeachindividualalsointheeconomicsphere，canbetracedback，inthelastanalysis，toconsiderationofthenumberofpersonsthatparticipatedinthelabour;theywillresultintherelationofpricescorrespondingbothtothenaturalconditionsofproductionandtothesocialrightofrealisation。Theoutputofthepreciousmetalswillcontinue，asnow，todeterminethevalueofmoney……

Itcanbeseenfromthisthatinthechangedconstitutionofsociety，onenotonlydoesnotlosethedeterminingfactorandmeasure，inthefirstplaceofvalues，and，withvalue，oftheexchangerelationsbetweenproducts，butwinsthemgoodandproperforthefirsttime“{326-327}。

Thefamous“absolutevalue“{D。K。G。499}isatlastrealised。

Ontheotherhand，however，thecommunemustalsoputitsindividualmembersinapositiontobuyfromitthearticlesproduced，bypayingtoeach，incompensationforhislabour，acertainsumofmoney，daily，weeklyormonthly，butnecessarilythesameforall。“Fromthesocialitarianstandpointitisconsequentlyamatterofindifferencewhetherwesaythatwagesdisappear，or，thattheymustbecometheexclusiveformofeconomicincome“{D。C。

263}。Equalwagesandequalprices，however，establish“quantitative，ifnotqualitativeequalityofconsumption“{268}，andtherebythe“universalprincipleofjustice“{282}isrealisedintheeconomicsphere。

Astohowthelevelofthiswageofthefutureistobedetermined，HerrDühringtellsusonlythatheretoo，asinallothercases，therewillbeanexchangeof“equallabourforequallabour“{D。C。257}。Forsixhoursoflabour，therefore，asumofmoneywillbepaidwhichalsoembodiesinitselfsixhoursoflabour。

Nevertheless，the“universalprincipleofjustice“mustnotinanywaybeconfoundedwiththatcrudelevellingdownwhichmakesthebourgeoissoindignantlyopposeallcommunism，andespeciallythespontaneouscommunismoftheworkers。Itisbynomeanssoinexorableasitwouldliketoappear。

The“equalityinprincipleofeconomicrightsdoesnotexcludethevoluntaryadditiontowhatjusticerequiresofanexpressionofspecialrecognitionandhonour……Societyhonoursitselfinconferringdistinctiononthehighertypesofprofessionalabilitybyamoderateadditionalallocationforconsumption“{267}。

AndHerrDühring，too，honourshimself，whencombiningtheinnocenceofadovewiththesubtlenessofaserpent，[Matthew10:16——Ed。]hedisplayssuchtouchingconcernforthemoderateadditionalconsumptionoftheDühringsofthefuture。

Thiswillfinallydoawaywiththecapitalistmodeofdistribution。

For“supposingundersuchconditionssomeoneactuallyhadasurplusofprivatemeansathisdisposal，hewouldnotbeabletofindanyuseforitascapital。Noindividualandnogroupwouldacquireitfromhimforproduction，exceptbywayofexchangeorpurchase，butneitherwouldeverhaveoccasiontopayhiminterestorprofit“{264-65}。Hence“inheritanceconformingtotheprincipleofequality“{289}wouldbepermissible。Itcannotbedispensedwith，for“acertainformofinheritancewillalwaysbeanecessaryaccompanimentofthefamilyprinciple“。Buteventherightofinheritance“willnotbeabletoleadtoanyamassingofconsiderablewealth，asthebuildingupofproperty……canneveragainaimatthecreationofmeansofproductionandpurelyrentiers’existences“{291}。

Andthisfortunatelycompletestheeconomiccommune。Letusnowhavealookathowitworks。

WeassumethatallofHerrDühring’spreliminaryconditionsarecompletelyrealised;wethereforetakeitforgrantedthattheeconomiccommunepaystoeachofitsmembers，forsixhoursoflabouraday，asumofmoney，saytwelvemarks，inwhichlikewisesixhoursoflabourareembodied。

Weassumefurtherthatpricesexactlycorrespondtovalues，andtherefore，onourassumptions，coveronlythecostsofrawmaterials，thewearandtearofmachinery，theconsumptionofinstrumentsoflabourandthewagespaid。Aneconomiccommuneofahundredworkingmemberswouldthenproduceinadaycommoditiestothevalueoftwelvehundredmarks;andinayearof300working-days，360，000marks。Itpaysthesamesumtoitsmembers，eachofwhomdoesashelikeswithhisshare，whichistwelvemarksadayor3，600marksayear。Attheendofayear，andattheendofahundredyears，thecommuneisnoricherthanitwasatthebeginning。DuringthiswholeperioditwillneveroncebeinapositiontoprovideeventhemoderateadditionalallocationforHerrDühring’sconsumption，unlessitcarestotakeitfromitsstockofmeansofproduction。Accumulationiscompletelyforgotten。Evenworse:asaccumulationisasocialnecessityandtheretentionofmoneyprovidesaconvenientformofaccumulation，theorganisationoftheeconomiccommunedirectlyimpelsitsmemberstoaccumulateprivately，andtherebyleadsittoitsowndestruction。

Howcanthisconflictinthenatureoftheeconomiccommunebeavoided？Itmighttakerefugeinhisbeloved“taxes“{24}，thepricesurcharge，andsellitsannualproductionfor480，000insteadof360，000。Butasallothereconomiccommunesareinthesameposition，andwouldthereforeactinthesameway，eachofthem，initsexchangeswiththeothers，wouldhavetopayjustasmuch“taxes“asitpocketsitself，andthe“tribute“

{374}wouldthushavetofallonitsownmembersalone。

Ortheeconomiccommunemightsettlethematterwithoutmoreadobypayingtoeachmember，forsixhoursoflabour，theproductoflessthansixhours，say，offourhours，oflabour;thatistosay，insteadoftwelvemarksonlyeightmarksaday，leavingthepricesofcommodities，however，attheirformerlevel。Inthiscaseitdoesdirectlyandopenlywhatitstrivedtodoinahiddenandindirectwayintheformercase:

itformsMarxiansurplus-valuetotheamountof120，000marksannually，bypayingitsmembers，onoutrightcapitalistlines，lessthanthevalueofwhattheyproduce，whileitsellsthemcommodities，whichtheycanonlybuyfromit，attheirfullvalue。Theeconomiccommunecanthereforesecureareservefundonlybyrevealingitselfasan“ennobled“trucksystem*13onthewidestpossiblecommunistbasis。

Sohaveyourchoice:Eithertheeconomiccommuneexchanges“equallabourforequallabour“{257}，andinthiscaseitcannotaccumulateafundforthemaintenanceandextensionofproduction，butonlytheindividualmemberscandothis;oritdoesformsuchafund，butinthiscaseitdoesnotexchange“equallabourforequallabour“。

Suchisthecontentofexchangeintheeconomiccommune。Whatofitsform？Theexchangeiseffectedthroughthemediumofmetallicmoney，andHerrDühringisnotalittleproudofthe“world-historicimport“

{D。C。341}ofthisreform。Butinthetradingbetweenthecommuneanditsmembersthemoneyisnotmoneyatall，itdoesnotfunctioninanywayasmoney。Itservesasamerelabourcertificate;touseMarx’sphrase，itis“merelyevidenceoftheparttakenbytheindividualinthecommonlabour，andofhisrighttoacertainportionofthecommonproducedestinedforconsumption“，andincarryingoutthisfunction，itis“nomore’money’thanaticketforthetheatre“。Itcanthereforebereplacedbyanyothertoken，justasWeitlingreplacesitbya“ledger“，inwhichthelabour-hoursworkedareenteredononesideandmeansofsubsistencetakenascompensationontheother。[121]Inaword，inthetradingoftheeconomiccommunewithitsmembersitfunctionsmerelyasOwen’s“labourmoney“，that“phantom“whichHerrDühringlooksdownuponsodisdainfully，butneverthelessishimselfcompelledtointroduceintohiseconomicsofthefuture。Whetherthetokenwhichcertifiesthemeasureoffulfilmentofthe“obligationtoproduce“，andthusoftheearned“righttoconsume“{320}isascrapofpaper，acounteroragoldcoinisabsolutelyofnoconsequenceforthispurpose。

Forotherpurposes，however，itisbynomeansimmaterial，asweshallsee。