英文录入文档格式.docx
- 文档编号:3117041
- 上传时间:2023-05-01
- 格式:DOCX
- 页数:7
- 大小:20.01KB
英文录入文档格式.docx
《英文录入文档格式.docx》由会员分享,可在线阅读,更多相关《英文录入文档格式.docx(7页珍藏版)》请在冰点文库上搜索。
ThatroundofthedebatewasdecisivelywonbyStruve,Bulgakov,Tugan-BaranowskyandLenin.Buttheirvictoryonlysetthestageforanother,evenmoreimportantseriesofquestions:
ifcapitalismwasindeedcapableofself-sustainedgrowth,whatistheretopreventitfromgrowingforever?
Whatareitslimits,inotherwords?
Moreover,howarewetounderstandthedevastatingcrisisitisperiodicallysubjectto?
Tugan-Baranowsky’sresponsewastoarguetheextremepositionthatcapitalismwastotallyindependentofconsumption,providedDepartmentsIandIIgrewinthecorrectproportionstooneanother.But,heargued,giventheanarchyofcapitalistproduction,thiscorrectproportionalitywasamatterofchance.Thetrial-by-errornatureofcapitalistproductionwouldthereforeperiodicallygiverisetosuchgreatimbalancesthatreproductionwouldbeinterruptedandacrisisbreakout.LeninrejectedTugan-Baranowsky’sassertionthatconsumptionwasirrelevant,butatthistimeotherthanemphasizingtheanarchyofcapitalistproductionasasourceofcrisistheory.Hewasnottoreturntohissubject.InGermany,sometenyearslaterthedisproportionalitytheoryofcrisescroppedupagain,thistimeinRudolphHilfer-ding’smassiveworkonmonopolycapitalism.BothTugan-BaranowskyandHilferdingwerelatertoarguethatsinceitwastheanarchyofcapitalismwhichledtocrises,planningwouldeliminatecrises.“Organizedcapitalism,”inHilferding’swords,wasthesolution,andtheparliamentarypathtoStatecontrolwasthemeans.
RosaLuxemburgrefusedtoacceptthisresolutionofthedebate.Asarevolutionaryactivist,shewascompletelyopposedtothereformismwhichthedisproportionalitytheoryseemedtoengender.Onceoneadmits“thatcapitalistdevelopmentdosenotmoveinthedirectionofitsownruin,”shedeclared,“thensocialismceasestobeobjectivelynecessary.”Toabandonthetheoryofcapitalistcollapsewastoabandonscientificsocialism.AndsoshesetouttorevivetheMarxistunder-consumptiondebate.
SinceitwasMarx’sexamplesofexpandingreproduction(balancedgrowth)whichprovedtobethedecisivefactorintheearlierdebateamongRussianMarxists,Luxemburgattackedtheseexamplesdirectly.Marxplainlydemonstratedtheabstractpossibilityofexpandedreproduction,sheconcerned,buthedidnotseemtorealizebecause,fromasocialpointofview,thecapitalistbehavioritrequiresmakesnosense.Imaginethatattheendofaproductioncyclethewholesocialproductisdepositedinawarehouse.Atthispointcapitalistscomeforwardandwithdrawaportionofthetotalproducttoreplacetheirproducergoodsusedupinthelastcycle,andworkerscomeandwithdrawtheirmeansofconsumption.Thisleavesthesurplusproduct,fromwhichcapitalistswithdrawaportionfortheirpersonalconsumption.NowLuxemburgasks,wheredothebuyersfortherestoftheproductcomefrom?
(Thisisofcoursethetraditionalunder-consumptionproblemoffillingthe“demandgap”).IfMarxisright,shesays,thenitisthecapitalistclasswhichbuysbacktherestoftheproductinordertoinvestitandthusexpandproductivecapacity.Butthatmakesnosenseatall,for“whoarethenewconsumersforwhosesakeproductionisevermoretobeenlarged?
”EvenifcapitalistsdidwhatMarxsaystheywill,inthenextperiodproductivecapacitywillbeevengreater,thegaptobefilledevenlarger,andtheproblemevenmoreintractable.“Marx’sdiagramofaccumulationdoesnotsolvethequestionofwhoistobenefitintheendbyenlargedreproduction…”Expandedreproductionisalgebraicallypossiblebutsociallyimpossible.
Itfollowsthatactualcapitalistaccumulationcanbeexplainedonlythroughsomeforcesexternalto“pure”capitalistrelations.LuxemburgnotesthattheMalthusiansolutionofathirdclassofunproductiveconsumersmakesnosense,sincetheirrevenuecouldonlycomefromprofitsorwages.Similarly,foreigntradeamongcapitalistnationsalsoprovidesnosolutionforcapitalismasawhole,sinceitisinternaltotheworldsystem.Shethereforearguesthatcapitalistaccumulationrequiresastrataofbuyersoutsideofcapitalistsocietywhocontinuallybuymorefromitthantheyselltoit.Thustradebetweencapitalistandnon-capitalistspheresisaprimenecessityforthehistoricalexistenceofcapitalism,andimperialismnecessarilyarisesascapitalistnationsstruggleovercontroloftheseallimportantsourcesofeffectivedemand.Moreover,ascapitalismexpandstocovertheglobethenon-capitalismmilieushrinkscorrespondingly,andwithitshrinkstheprimesourceofaccumulation.Thetendencytocrisesisheightened,andcompetitionamongcapitalistnationfortheremainingnon-capitalistareasintensifies.Worldcrises,warsandrevolutionsaretheinevitableoutcomesofthisprocess.
EvenifLuxemburgwererightabouttheimpossibilityofaccumulation,hersolutionwouldnotworksinceitrequiresthe“ThirdWorld”tocontinuallybuymorethanitsells.Wherewouldtheexcessrevenuecomefrom?
Butinfactsheisalsowrongaboutthepossibilityofaccumulation.Toseethisweneedtoreturnbrieflytotheanalysispresentedatthebeginningofthissection.Recallthatattheendoftheproductioncycle,itisthecapitalistswhoareinpossessionofthewholesocialproduct.Atthesametime,itisalsotheirgrossinvestmentandpersonalconsumptionexpenditureswhicharetheoriginalsourceofeffectivedemandforthisveryproduct(sinceworker’swagesareapartofoverallinvestment).Now,asidefromtheirownpersonalconsumption,theirremainingexpenditure(grossinvestment)isinnowaymotivatedbyconsumptionassuch.Itismotivatedentirelybytheanticipationofprofit.WhatMarx’sexamplesshowisthatifcapitalistsdidundertaketheappropriateamountofinvestment,thentheywouldindeedbeabletoselltheirproductandmaketheanticipatedprofits.Ifthissuccessspursthemtoreinvestonceagaininanticipationofyetmoreprofits,theywouldberewardedonceagain,andsoon.Allthewhileconsumptionwouldexpandduetothegrowingemploymentofworkersandthegrowingwealthofcapitalists.Butthisexpansionofconsumptionwouldbeaconsequence,notacause.
YetifthisrefutesLuxemburg’scriticismsofexpandedreproduction,itstilldoesnotanswerthetwocrucialquestionsshebeganwith.First,whatforces,ifany,makeexpandedreproductionpossibleinreality?
Andsecond,isitnottruethatifexpandedreproductionisactuallypossible,“capitalistdevelopmentdosenotmoveinthedirectionofitsownruin?
”
Thatwhichtheorydebates,realitydecides.In1929adevastatingworldwidecapitalistcrisiserupted,tobefollowedbyovertenyearsofdeepdepressionandunemployment.Giventhisback-ground,morerapidlyrosetoprominence.
Thefirstmajorattempttoreviveunder-consumptiontheoryasanexplanationofcriseswasmadebyPaulSweezy,inhisinfluentialbookTheTheoryofCapitalistDevelopment(1942).Sweezyexplicitlysetouttoformulateanunder-consumptiontheory“freeoftheobjectionswhichhavebeenleveledatearlierversions.”
InthisearlyattemptSweezyisstillverymuchinthegripofthetraditionalunder-consumptionnotionthatthedemandforconsumergoodsregulatesoverallproduction.FromthispointofviewDepartmentIappearsaspartoftheverticallyintegratedproductiveapparatusofDepartmentIIsothatchangesintheoutputofDepartmentI(producergoods)areineffectchangesinthecapacitytoproduceconsumergoods.Inaddition,Sweezyarguesthat“empiricalevidence”suggeststhata1%changeinDepartmentIoutputwillincreasecapacityoutputofconsumergoodsby1%.ThisisavirtualreplayofHobson,whomweanalyzedearlier.
Nowconsidereffectivedemand,whichaswehaveseeniscomposedofcapitalistconsumptionandtotalinvestmentexpenditures(thelatterinturnbeingcomposedofexpendituresonproducergoodsandonhiringworkers).Ascapitalismdevelops,Sweezynotes,mechanizationproceedsapaceandittakesmoreandmoremachinesandmaterialstobackuponeworker;
thismeansthatcapitalistinvestmentexpendituresonproducergoodsrisefasterthanthoseonwages.Givenhisanalysisofproduction,theinvestmentexpendituresonproducergoodsimplyproportionalincreasesinconsumergoodscapacity,whereasthemoreslowlyrisingexpendituresonwagesofcoursetranslateintoworkers’consumption.Itappears,therefore,thatthecapacitytoproduceconsumergoodsexpandsfasterthantheconsumptiondemandofworkers.A“demandgap”thusopensup.Ofcourse,capitalistconsumptiondemandmightfillthegap.Butascapitalismdevelopscapitaliststendtoinvestproportionatelymore,andconsumeproportionatelyless,oftheirprofits,sothattheirconsumptionlagsbehindtheproductivecapacityofDepartmentII.Sweezyconcludes:
…itfollowsthattherei
- 配套讲稿:
如PPT文件的首页显示word图标,表示该PPT已包含配套word讲稿。双击word图标可打开word文档。
- 特殊限制:
部分文档作品中含有的国旗、国徽等图片,仅作为作品整体效果示例展示,禁止商用。设计者仅对作品中独创性部分享有著作权。
- 关 键 词:
- 英文 录入
![提示](https://static.bingdoc.com/images/bang_tan.gif)