Capital reading

Essays

Essay topics

course outline

texts

Grades

Topics & Readings (1^st term)

Topics & Readings (Winter term)

political science 210 (section C1)

The History of (Western) Political Thought

2006-07 : MWF 1-2 pm

Don Carmichael (Don.Carmichael@ualberta.ca)

Office: 11‑28 Tory

Phone: (780) - 492‑5390

Course Outline

This course is an introduction to political philosophy, conducted as a critical examination of some of the major classical writings in the history of western political thought. Although some effort will be made to relate these writings to their historical contexts, they will be used primarily as important and still relevant reflections on central questions of political life, and students will be encouraged to use these writings to develop their own understandings of these questions.

This section of the course will be discussion-oriented. As part of this focus on discussion, the course will include instruction in the skills of effective expression and argument. Students are invited to propose special projects and to suggest ways in which the course might be improved over the year.

Texts

NB: to save students the long line-ups in SUB bookstore, it will not be necessary purchase course materials for the first two weeks of the course. These materials will be available on the web page.

In an effort to reduce students' costs, most of the course readings have been edited into a coursepack, using copyright-free public domain sources. The coursepack for 2006-07 is the same as the one used last year.

These texts are available in SUB Bookstore:

Readings in The History of Western Political Thought (Coursepack)

Plato, Republic (Penguin, Lee translation). (used last year).

Grades

Grades will be based on essays and two exams: a mid‑term in December and a final. The pop quizzes and class participation will be worth 10%.

However, students will have a choice of being evaluated primarily through essays or instead through exams. Essay writing is an essential part of the learning in this course, but it seems that some students prefer exams (or are more successful on them) while others prefer essays. This year, as an experiment, students will be invited to decide for themselves whether to be graded primarily by essays or by exams. The essay-based format will require four essays, worth twice as much as the exams. The exam-based format will require three essays, with the same weight (45%) as the exams. .

exam-format

quiz/oral 10%

mid term 15%

final exam 30%

essays (4) 45% (equally weighted)

essay-format

quiz/oral 10%

mid term 10%

final exam 20%

essays (5) 60% (equally weighted)

You don’t have to do anything to indicate which format you want. Your grade will be calculated in both formats, and you’ll get whichever grade is better. If you’ve done four essays then this will obviously mean the exam format. If you’ve done five essays, your grade will be calculated with the five essays in the essay format, and also with your four best essays in the exam format, and you’ll get whichever grade is better.

Can you do more than five essays? Yes! Many students improve their skills of analysis and essay-writing over the year, and in some cases the improvement is enormous. It’s wonderful to see this happen. So you are welcome (and urged) to do more than the required number of essays; in which case, only your best essays will be used in determining the final grade.

Essay Requirements

Essay-writing (like other forms of expression) is a skill which can be developed and improved. Students will be encouraged to work at their essay writing skills and individual help will be available for students who want it.

Essays in this course should be brief (1200-1500 words), positional, and critical, arguing a definite thesis in relation to some aspect of the readings. These essays call for analysis and critical reflection. They are not research papers. They will not require any reading or research beyond the material assigned for the course. The best way to do well on such essays is by careful reading of the course material as indicated above.

At least four essays will be required, two in each term. All students must do essays on (1) the introductory themes (due early October), (2) Plato (due late November), and (3) Hobbes (due late February). The fourth essay may be written on either Aristotle (early January), or Rousseau (mid-March). Students who wish to write more than four essays may do so during the year (on any theorist on whom they haven’t already written) or on Marx (late March). There will be choice on all topics. Due dates and specific topics will be announced early in each term.

Late essay policy. Assignments will be due in class on the date stated. This deadline will be absolutely strict for the two exercises. For the essays there will be a brief grace period for late papers. Essays submitted on time will be marked and returned with comments as quickly as possible. Essays submitted in the grace period will be returned later, with fewer comments. Essays submitted after the grace period will be penalized.

Academic Integrity and Honesty

The Dean of Arts requests that course outlines remind students that academic dishonesty is a serious offence and can result in suspension or expulsion from the University. Students are particularly urged to familiarize themselves with the provisions of the Code of Student Behaviour (online at and avoid any behaviour which could potentially result in suspicions of cheating, plagiarism, misrepresentation of facts and/or participation in an offence.

Student Distress Centre

I truly hope this won’t be necessary for any of you, but students sometimes have hard times. At such times, the Student Distress Centre is there to help on all kinds of matters -- financial, personal, etc. You can reach them by Phone (492-HELP/ 492-4357) or Drop In (SUB 030-N) or Visit (www.su.ualberta.ca/sdc) or Chat ( www.campuscrisischat.com)

Topics & Readings (First term)

This schedule is provisional and will be revised as the course progresses.

DEADLINES: essay # 1: Wed, Oct 11^th (introduction) and Fri, Oct 13^th (essay)

essay # 2: Mon, Nov 20^th

INTRODUCTION : J.S. MILL: On Liberty, Representative Government, and Utilitarianism

Sept. 6-8 Introduction

Wed: introduction to the course

Fri: J.S. Mill, Biographical Note + On Liberty, ch 1 (web page)

Sept. 11‑15 Mill, On Liberty: freedom of thought and expression

Mon: On Liberty, ch 2 (web page) + : R. v Sharpe (web page) --censorship & child pornography

Wed: On Liberty, chs 3-4 (web page)

Fri On Liberty, ch 5

Sept. 18‑20 Mill, the justification -- freedom and democracy

Mon: Utilitarianism, ch 2 + Representative Govt, ch 3

Wed: Utilitarianism, ch 5

Fri: test case -- euthanasia: Rodriguez v BC

THE PROBLEM OF POLITICAL AUTHORITY -- Sophocles’ Antigone and Plato’s Socrates

Sept 25-29 Antigone and Socrates

Mon: Sophocles, Antigone : is Antigone guilty?

Wed: read Antigone again: should Creon punish Antigone?

Fri: Plato, Apology : is Socrates guilty?

Oct. 2-6 Plato’s Crito:

Mon: Crito : is Socrates obligated to stay?

Wed: read the Crito again: does Socrates submission (in the Crito) contradict his defiance in the Apology?

Fri: does the Crito mean that Antigone was wrong?

PLATO: REPUBLIC (for those using different texts, the Stephanus pages are listed in italics)

Oct. 9-13 Republic: Introduction K essay # 1 due Wed (introduction) and Fri (essay)

Mon: Thanksgiving holiday: no class

Wed: Cephalus, Polemarchus + Penguin text: “Translator’s Introduction” (xiii- lviii)

Fri: Thrasymachos -- just pp 40-47 (up to “Which is better?”)

Oct. 16-20 Republic: Foundations of The State

Mon: restatement by Glaucon & Adeimantus (Penguin, pp 40 - 52) – St 357a -367e

Wed: social needs, education (Penguin, pp 53-76) – St 368a - 383b

Fri: social classes (Penguin, pp. 96-100 + 112-29) – St 400d - 403c + 412b -427c

Oct. 23-27 Republic, Justice

Mon: the psyche (Penguin: pp.130-49) – St 427d - 441c

Wed: virtue in the individual (Penguin: pp. 149-56) – St 441c - 449a

Fri: women as guardians, the family (Penguin: pp. 157 - 81) – St 449a - 466d

Oct 30-Nov 3 Philosophy & Power

Mon: philosophy: (Penguin: pp 189-92 + 208-19) – St 471c - 474b + 487b - 497a

Wed: sun, line and cave analogies: (Penguin: pp. 226-48) – St 502d - 521b

Fri: comparison: cave analogy (Penguin, 240-48) with Mill, Representative Government ch 3

Nov. 6-10 Politics, Critical Issues

Mon: democracy, tyranny (Penguin: 275-78, 290-314) – St 543a- 545c, 553b - 576b

Wed: justice benefits (Penguin: 314-19, 330-334) – St 576c - 580c, 588b - 592b

Fri: is Plato mistaken? If so -- where, and why? ( no readings)

Nov. 13-17 Fun week: Plato vs Mill

Mon: no class (fall term break)

Wed: would Mill like Plato? review Representative Govt, ch 3

Fri: topic tba (no readings)

ARISTOTLE: Politics

Nov. 20-24 The "Nature" of Political Association K essay # 2 due Mon

Mon: Biographical Note + Politics, Book 1

Wed: Book 2 - the critique of Plato (property & families)

Fri: readings tba

Nov 27-Dec 1 Constitutions

Mon: Book 3 - citizenship & constitutions

Wed: Book 4 - types of constitution

Fri: Books 7-8 - Aristotle's ideal

Dec. 4-6 Review: Political Life and Human Happiness

Mon: Nicomachean Ethics - happiness

Wed Appendix: Aristotle on Slavery (comes after Book 8)

MID TERM: Friday, December 15^th, 2 pm (classroom)

THE ROMAN - MEDIEVAL PERIOD

Jan 8-12 Cicero, Aquinas and Machiavelli

Mon: Alfarabi: Selections (“Political regimes” and “Philosophy, politics and religion”)

Wed: Cicero and Aquinas (Cicero: On The Laws; and Aquinas, Summa Theologica

Fri: Machiavelli, The Prince

RIGHTS & AUTHORITY: HOBBES AND LOCKE (* Aristotle essays due Monday)

Jan 15-19 Hobbes, Leviathan Part One

Mon: introduction: read the section introduction + ch 13 (about 15 pp later)

Wed: man & society: Leviathan, chs 6-12

Fri: the need for authority: the state of nature: Leviathan, ch 13

Jan 22-26 The Argument for Authority: Leviathan, Part Two

Mon: Hobbes’ method: Leviathan, chs 1-5

Wed: natural right & morality: Leviathan, chs. 14‑16

Fri: authority: Leviathan, chs. 17-19

Jan 29-Feb 2 Authority, Liberty & Law

Mon: liberty & law : Leviathan, chs 20-21

Wed: law: Leviathan, chs 26-28 + Aquinas – review the last 3 pp (suicide, etc)

Fri: law & statecraft: Leviathan, chs 29-31

Feb 5-9 Locke, The Second Treatise B (* Hobbes essays due Monday)

Mon: human nature and natural rights: Second Treatise, chs 1-4

Wed: rights & authority: chs 7-9, 11, 19 (note that ch 5 on property is deferred to Friday)

Fri: property: Second Treatise, ch 5

Feb 12-16 Hobbes vs Locke: International Citizenship & Rights

Mon: the Hobbesian and Lockean models

Wed: human rights: Pocklington, “Against Inflating Human Rights” (access at web page)

Fri: are there human rights?

Feb 19-23 Reading Week

ROUSSEAU

Feb 26- Mar 2 Discourse on The Origin of Inequality B (* Hobbes vs Locke essays due Monday)

Mon: Biographical Note, Discourse, Part 1 (Readings, 211-25)

Wed: Discourse, Part 2 (Readings, 225-38)

Fri: critical evaluation (no readings).

Mar 5-9 The Social Contract: political issues

Mon: Book 1 (Readings, 239-47)

Wed: Book 2 (Readings, 247-56)

Fri: can people be Aforced to be free@?

Mar 12-16 Rousseau: questions of interpretation.

Mon: Books 3-4 (Readings, 257-67)

Wed: conceptions of freedom and democracy

Fri: critical evaluation (Is Rousseau more like Mill or more like Plato?)

MARX

Mar 19-23 Hegel and Athe young Marx@ -- (* Rousseau essays due Mon)

Mon: Hegel, AThe Master-Servant Dialectic@ (Readings, 267-72) NB- difficulty alert

Wed: Marx - Biographical Note, Graveside Speech, Critique of Hegel, -- then skip ahead to: Economic &

Philosophical Manuscripts (1): Alienated Labour

Fri: Economic & Philosophical Manuscripts, continued

Mar 26-30 Marxist Analysis

Mon: materialism -- Theses on Feuerbach, German Ideology

Wed: classes and exploitation: Capital, v 1

Fri: politics of class struggle: Communist Manifesto

Apr 2-6 Marx and Politics

Mon: Preface to Critique of Political Economy (Readings, 325-26)

Wed: “The Civil War in France” + “Critique of Gotha Programme”

Fri: no class - university closed

FINAL WEEK: THE YEAR IN REVIEW

Apr 9-13 Final weekB (* optional extra essays due Wednesday)

Mon: no class - university closed

Wed: Looking ahead: contemporary political theory

Fri: ast class - the year in review

FINAL EXAM: Thursday, April 19^th (2007) -- at 2 pm in the classroom.

ESSAYS AND ESSAY‑TOPICS

General Requirements

Essays should be double‑spaced with wide (1.5") margins on all four sides to allow for comments. They must footnote sources and they must contain a bibliography (even if just one work).

Essays in this course are expected to be brief (1200-1500 words), critical and positional. That is, the essay must adopt a specific position on the topic and then argue in support of this position using the course material. The position must be stated in the first paragraph as: “In this essay I will argue that ...”

These are not research papers. They should be produced (1) through critical reflection on the topic and the course material, and (2) through careful writing and re-writing of your position and arguments. Essays will not require any reading or research beyond the material assigned for the course. But they will require thought about the issue, conversation, and re-writing. Further comments and suggestions are outlined below.

The topics listed below are suggestive and others may be added later to reflect particular issues that arise in the course. Students are also encouraged to propose their own topics on issues of special interest. These should be discussed with the instructor well before the essay deadline.

The Nature of The Essay

Essays should be "position papers". The main concern is argument, rather than interpretation or research: you are expected to take a definite position on the topic, and to argue this position effectively. It is essential to show a good understanding of the theorist and text in question; but this understanding should be developed through a critical argument. Papers will be assessed mainly by the quality of their arguments: especially, by whether the argument is effective/persuasive, well‑organized, and clearly presented, with some appreciation for what might be said against it.

The fact that these are not "research papers" does not mean that you should not read widely (eg, commentaries and current philosophical discussions of the issues, as listed in the bibliography). On the contrary, you can sharpen your thinking and develop clearer critical perspectives by reading widely. In particular, whenever your essay deals with an important concept (eg, justice, or democracy, or freedom) it is a good idea to read more about this concept. But remember that your essay will be judged by the quality of your arguments, not by your sources. Thus your main priority should be to read (and re‑read) critically the text, to think carefully about the issues it raises, and to identify your own views on these issues as clearly as possible.

Some Tips

The key to your paper is your "thesis" (the position you argue). Your main concern should be to work out exactly ‑‑ and clearly ‑‑ what this is. The best way to do this is by thinking critically and carefully about the text. It also helps to read commentaries and to discuss the issues with friends ‑‑ this may clarify what you want to argue, and what may be said on the other side.

Your first paragraph should state your thesis clearly ("In this essay I will argue that ...") and indicate how you will argue it (eg: "I will argue this in three steps"). The rest of the paper should be organized around arguing this thesis as effectively as possible.

Obviously, you can't say much in a brief essay so you must choose the most important arguments. It may be necessary to define the topic more narrowly, ie, focussing your paper on just one of the issues raised by the topic.

You should also consider possible objections to your argument, and how you might rebut them (eg, if you are criticizing Plato, how might he respond : and what would you say in rebuttal?). Here again, you should be brief and selective.

Remember that you are trying to persuade: the aim of the paper is not to show off what you know (to a teacher) but rather to make a persuasive case (eg to a judge and jury).

Finally, this kind of essay will be new for most of you, and it will take some time to learn how to do it well. So be prepared to learn, and give yourself time over the year to do so. And remember the basic “Three Times Rule”: you will need to write your essay at least Three Times:

(1) After you choose the topic, DON’T write the essay: instead do some free writing around it -- perhaps more than once -- to let your real ideas emerge.

(2) After a few days, identify your position and write a draft of the paper. Leave it for a few days.

(3) Then read the draft critically. Examine your thesis – has it changed? Have you stated it adequately and clearly in the introduction? Examine your arguments – are there some points you need to develop further? Are there some important objections you need to consider? Then revise the paper.

Essay # 1: Topics

1. What would Mill say about suicide and assisted suicide. Would he be right?

2. Is Socrates right (in the Crito) that he has an obligation to obey the law even though it requires his death.? That is, do his arguments show that everyone today -- including you -- have this obligation?

3. Does Socrates’ consent argument in Crito show that Antigone has an obligation to obey the law?

Introduction due: Wed, Oct 11^th in class

Paper due: Friday, Oct 13^th, in class

Essay # 2 (Plato)

1. What’s the worst feature of Plato’s proposed political system? Can it be justified?

2. Could a democrat be a Platonist? What modifications would have to be made to Plato’s theory, and would the result be worthwhile?

3. Plato promotes the psychological harmony and social well-being of all citizens, where Mill advocates the widest possible freedom of individuals to live on their own terms. Which society would be better? Your answer should pay some attention to the actual operation of freedom of choice in our society (that it includes the freedoms to carry firearms and to choose the cigarettes and fast foods of one’s own choice.)

4. Some students have expressed a concern that the rulers in Plato’s republic might become corrupt (or imperfect) and that there are no controls or protections against this. Assume, for purposes of this essay, that this is not a problem (that it can be fixed in some way). More generally, assume that there are no practical problems with Plato’s proposed republic. On this assumption, would it be the best possible political system? (hint: do this topic only if your answer would be negative)

DUE: Monday, Nov 20^th.

grace period*: until Friday, Nov 24^th.

*As noted in the course outline, essays submitted on time -- Monday, Nov 20^th -- will be marked with comments and returned as quickly as possible. Essays submitted in the grace period will be returned later, with no comments. Essays submitted after the grace period will be penalized.

Aristotle Topics

2. Is the state of nature of international relations today better understood in Lockean terms or in Hobbesian terms? (That is, can you use the evidence of international relations to support either Hobbes or Locke against the other?)

3. Compare the conceptions of natural law and natural rights in Hobbes and Locke. (How are these conceptions justified by each? Which is more philosophically plausible?)

DUE: [extended] -- in class, Monday, Feb 26^th (grace period 5 days to Fri, Mar 2^nd )

Rousseau

1. Does the Social Contract respond adequately to the problem(s) outlined in the Second Discourse?

2. How can citizens be “free” when they are “forced to be free”?

3. It has been said that A...in the political theories of Hobbes and Locke, individuals confront one another and the state just as separate individuals, with no sense of community. Thus Hobbes and Locke both understand freedom as the freedom of separate individuals against one another and against the community. By contrast, Rousseau shows that we can be truly free only by acting with others as members of a community.@ Do you agree?

DUE: in class, Monday, March 19^th (grace period: 5 days to Fri, Mar 23^rd)

Final Topics (*only for those doing extra essays)

1. Is communism, as Marx describes it, hopelessly utopian?

2. Comparing Marx with either Aristotle or Locke (just one), which theorist has the better account of private property?

3. Is the idea of a social contract useful or appropriate as a way to understand the basis for political obligation? You might want to remember what Hobbes has to say about the possible objection that there was never historically a moment at which such a contract was written up.

4. Political theorists today (and polite company) generally do not discuss religion. By contrast, all of the theorists considered this term do so – some of them quite extensively. Who does it best?

5. "[Hobbes] shared with Plato a general distrust of his fellow man; but he thought that institutional control rather than the breeding and training of a ruling class of philosophical shamans was the only effective safeguard against the depravity of man." Discuss this quote by a detailed comparative analysis of one or two points of Hobbes's and Plato's views on government.

DUE: Wednesday April 11^th in class (grace period 2 days to Fri, April 13^th ).

Late Essays

Essays are DUE on the dates indicated. Papers submitted on time will be returned with comments as quickly as possible; papers submitted in the grace period will be given lower priority: they will be returned later and without comments; papers submitted after the grace period will be returned.

Frederick Engels

Speech at the Grave of Karl Marx

Highgate Cemetery, London. March 17, 1883

Transcribed by Mike Lepore. PUBLIC DOMAIN at http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/

On the 14th of March, at a quarter to three in the afternoon, the greatest living thinker ceased to think. He had been left alone for scarcely two minutes, and when we came back we found him in his armchair, peacefully gone to sleep -- but for ever.

An immeasurable loss has been sustained both by the militant proletariat of Europe and America, and by historical science, in the death of this man. The gap that has been left by the departure of this mighty spirit will soon enough make itself felt.

Just as Darwin discovered the law of development or organic nature, so Marx discovered the law of development of human history: the simple fact, hitherto concealed by an overgrowth of ideology, that mankind must first of all eat, drink, have shelter and clothing, before it can pursue politics, science, art, religion, etc.; that therefore the production of the immediate material means, and consequently the degree of economic development attained by a given people or during a given epoch, form the foundation upon which the state institutions, the legal conceptions, art, and even the ideas on religion, of the people concerned have been evolved, and in the light of which they must, therefore, be explained, instead of vice versa, as had hitherto been the case.

But that is not all. Marx also discovered the special law of motion governing the present-day capitalist mode of production, and the bourgeois society that this mode of production has created. The discovery of surplus value suddenly threw light on the problem, in trying to solve which all previous investigations, of both bourgeois economists and socialist critics, had been groping in the dark.

Two such discoveries would be enough for one lifetime. Happy the man to whom it is granted to make even one such discovery. But in every single field which Marx investigated -- and he investigated very many fields, none of them superficially -- in every field, even in that of mathematics, he made independent discoveries.

Such was the man of science. But this was not even half the man. Science was for Marx a historically dynamic, revolutionary force. However great the joy with which he welcomed a new discovery in some theoretical science whose practical application perhaps it was as yet quite impossible to envisage, he experienced quite another kind of joy when the discovery involved immediate revolutionary changes in industry, and in historical development in general. For example, he followed closely the development of the discoveries made in the field of electricity and recently those of Marcel Deprez.

For Marx was before all else a revolutionist. His real mission in life was to contribute, in one way or another, to the overthrow of capitalist society and of the state institutions which it had brought into being, to contribute to the liberation of the modern proletariat, which he was the first to make conscious of its own position and its needs, conscious of the conditions of its emancipation. Fighting was his element. And he fought with a passion, a tenacity and a success such as few could rival. His work on the first Rheinische Zeitung (1842), the Paris Vorwarts (1844), the Deutsche Brusseler Zeitung (1847), the Neue Rheinische Zeitung (1848-49), the New York Tribune (1852-61), and, in addition to these, a host of militant pamphlets, work in organisations in Paris, Brussels and London, and finally, crowning all, the formation of the great International Working Men's Association -- this was indeed an achievement of which its founder might well have been proud even if he had done nothing else.

And, consequently, Marx was the best hated and most calumniated man of his time. Governments, both absolutist and republican, deported him from their territories. Bourgeois, whether conservative or ultra-democratic, vied with one another in heaping slanders upon him. All this he brushed aside as though it were a cobweb, ignoring it, answering only when extreme necessity compelled him. And he died beloved, revered and mourned by millions of revolutionary fellow workers -- from the mines of Siberia to California, in all parts of Europe and America -- and I make bold to say that, though he may have had many opponents, he had hardly one personal enemy.

His name will endure through the ages, and so also will his work.

Karl Marx

Capital, Volume One

PUBLIC DOMAIN at http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/1867-c1/index.htm These selections are taken from Part I: Commodities and Money, Chapter 1, Section 1 and from Part III: The Production of Absolute Surplus‑Value, Chapter 9 Section 1. Values in pounds have been restated in dollars.

Commodity Value and Labour

A use‑value, or useful article, therefore, has value only because human labour in the abstract has been embodied or materialised in it. How, then, is the magnitude of this value to be measured? Plainly, by the quantity of the value‑creating substance, the labour, contained in the article. The quantity of labour, however, is measured by its duration, and labour‑time in its turn finds its standard in weeks, days, and hours.

Some people might think that if the value of a commodity is determined by the quantity of labour spent on it, the more idle and unskilful the labourer, the more valuable would his commodity be, because more time would be required in its production. The labour, however, that forms the substance of value, is homogeneous human labour, expenditure of one uniform labour‑power. The total labour‑power of society, which is embodied in the sum total of the values of all commodities produced by that society, counts here as one homogeneous mass of human labour‑power, composed though it be of innumerable individual units. Each of these units is the same as any other, so far as it has the character of the average labour‑power of society, and takes effect as such; that is, so far as it requires for producing a commodity, no more time than is needed on an average, no more than is socially necessary. The labour‑time socially necessary is that required to produce an article under the normal conditions of production, and with the average degree of skill and intensity prevalent at the time. The introduction of power‑looms into England probably reduced by one‑half the labour required to weave a given quantity of yarn into cloth. The hand‑loom weavers, as a matter of fact, continued to require the same time as before; but for all that, the product of one hour of their labour represented after the change only half an hour's social labour, and consequently fell to one‑half its former value.

We see then that that which determines the magnitude of the value of any article is the amount of labour socially necessary, or the labour‑time socially necessary for its production. Each individual commodity, in this connexion, is to be considered as an average sample of its class. Commodities, therefore, in which equal quantities of labour are embodied, or which can be produced in the same time, have the same value. The value of one commodity is to the value of any other, as the labour‑time necessary for the production of the one is to that necessary for the production of the other. "As values, all commodities are only definite masses of congealed labour‑time."

The value of a commodity would therefore remain constant, if the labour‑time required for its production also remained constant. But the latter changes with every variation in the productiveness of labour. This productiveness is determined by various circumstances, amongst others, by the average amount of skill of the workmen, the state of science, and the degree of its practical application, the social organisation of production, the extent and capabilities of the means of production, and by physical conditions. For example, the same amount of labour in favourable seasons is embodied in 8 bushels of corn, and in unfavourable, only in four. The same labour extracts from rich mines more metal than from poor mines. … In general, the greater the productiveness of labour, the less is the labour‑time required for the production of an article, the less is the amount of labour crystallised in that article, and the less is its value; and vice versa, the less the productiveness of labour, the greater is the labour‑time required for the production of an article, and the greater is its value. The value of a commodity, therefore, varies directly as the quantity, and inversely as the productiveness, of the labour incorporated in it.

The Degree Of Exploitation Of Labour‑Power

The surplus‑value generated in the process of production by C, the capital advanced, or in other words, the self‑expansion of the value of the capital C, presents itself for our consideration, in the first place, as a surplus, as the amount by which the value of the product exceeds the value of its constituent elements.

The capital C is made up of two components, one, the sum of money c laid out upon the means of production, and the other, the sum of money v expended upon the labour‑power; c represents the portion that has become constant capital, and v the portion that has become variable capital. At first then, C = c + v: for example, if $ 500 is the capital advanced, its components may be such that the $ 500 = $ 410 constant + $ 90 variable. When the process of production is finished, we get a commodity whose value = (c + v) + s, where s is the surplus‑value; or taking our former figures, the value of this commodity may be ($ 410 constant + $ 90 variable) + $ 90 surplus. The original capital has now changed from C to C', from $ 500 to $ 590. The difference is s or a surplus value of $90, Since the value of the constituent elements of the product is equal to the value of the advanced capital, it is mere tautology to say, that the excess of the value of the product over the value of its constituent elements, is equal to the expansion of the capital advanced or to the surplus‑value produced ...

In order to enable one portion of a capital to expand its value by being converted into labour‑power, it is necessary that another portion be converted into means of production. In order that variable capital may perform its function, constant capital must be advanced in proper proportion, a proportion given by the special technical conditions of each labour‑process. The circumstance, however, that retorts and other vessels, are necessary to a chemical process, does not compel the chemist to notice them in the result of his analysis. If we look at the means of production, in their relation to the creation of value, and to the variation in the quantity of value, apart from anything else, they appear simply as the material in which labour‑power, the value‑creator, incorporates itself. Neither the nature, nor the value of this material is of any importance. The only requisite is that there be a sufficient supply to absorb the labour expended in the process of production. That supply once given, the material may rise or fall in value, or even be, as land and the sea, without any value in itself; but this will have no influence on the creation of value or on the variation in the quantity of value.

In the first place then we equate the constant capital to zero. The capital advanced is consequently reduced from c + v to v, and instead of the value of the product (c + v) + s we have now the value produced (v + s). Given the new value produced = $ 180, which sum consequently represents the whole labour expended during the process, then subtracting from it $ 90 the value of the variable capital, we have remaining $ 90, the amount of the surplus‑value. This sum of $ 90 or s expresses the absolute quantity of surplus‑value produced. The relative quantity produced, or the increase per cent of the variable capital, is determined, it is plain, by the ratio of the surplus‑value to the variable capital, or is expressed by s/v. In our example this ratio is 90/90, which gives an increase of 100%. This relative increase in the value of the variable capital, or the relative magnitude of the surplus‑value, I call, "The rate of surplus‑value."

We have seen that the labourer, during one portion of the labour‑process, produces only the value of his labour‑power, that is, the value of his means of subsistence. Now since his work forms part of a system, based on the social division of labour, he does not directly produce the actual necessaries which he himself consumes; he produces instead a particular commodity, yarn for example, whose value is equal to the value of those necessaries or of the money with which they can be bought. The portion of his day's labour devoted to this purpose, will be greater or less, in proportion to the value of the necessaries that he daily requires on an average, or, what amounts to the same thing, in proportion to the labour‑time required on an average to produce them. If the value of those necessaries represent on an average the expenditure of six hours' labour, the workman must on an average work for six hours to produce that value. If instead of working for the capitalist, he worked independently on his own account, he would, other things being equal, still be obliged to labour for the same number of hours, in order to produce the value of his labour‑power, and thereby to gain the means of subsistence necessary for his conservation or continued reproduction. But as we have seen, during that portion of his day's labour in which he produces the value of his labour‑power, say three shillings, he produces only an equivalent for the value of his labour‑power already advanced by the capitalist; the new value created only replaces the variable capital advanced. It is owing to this fact, that the production of the new value of three shillings takes the semblance of a mere reproduction. That portion of the working‑day, then, during which this reproduction takes place, I call "necessary" labour‑time, and the labour expended during that time I call "necessary" labour. Necessary, as regards the labourer, because independent of the particular social form of his labour; necessary, as regards capital, and the world of capitalists, because on the continued existence of the labourer depends their existence also.

During the second period of the labour‑process, that in which his labour is no longer necessary labour, the workman, it is true, labours, expends labour‑power; but his labour, being no longer necessary labour, he creates no value for himself. He creates surplus‑value which, for the capitalist, has all the charms of a creation out of nothing. This portion of the working‑day, I name surplus labour‑time, and to the labour expended during that time, I give the name of surplus‑labour. It is every bit as important, for a correct understanding of surplus‑value, to conceive it as a mere congelation of surplus labour‑time, as nothing but materialised surplus‑labour, as it is, for a proper comprehension of value, to conceive it as a mere congelation of so many hours of labour, as nothing but materialised labour. The essential difference between the various economic forms of society, between, for instance, a society based on slave‑labour, and one based on wage‑labour, lies only in the mode in which this surplus‑labour is in each case extracted from the actual producer, the labourer.

Since, on the one hand, the values of the variable capital and of the labour‑power purchased by that capital are equal, and the value of this labour‑power determines the necessary portion of the working‑day; and since, on the other hand, the surplus‑value is determined by the surplus portion of the working‑day, it follows that surplus‑value bears the same ratio to variable capital, that surplus‑labour does to necessary labour, or in other words, the rate of surplus‑value

s surplus‑labour

‑‑ = ‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑--------

v necessary labour

Both ratios, s/v and surplus‑labour/necessary‑labour, express the same thing in different ways; in the one case by reference to materialised, incorporated labour, in the other by reference to living, fluent labour.

The rate of surplus‑value is therefore an exact expression for the degree of exploitation of labour‑power by capital, or of the labourer by the capitalist.