On Sat, Nov 15, 2025 at 08:28 PM, Tom Walker wrote:

> 
> What do you mean by a "one-off event"? From Grundrisse to the 1861-63
> manuscript of Capital to Theories of Surplus Value to the published Das
> Kapital Marx discussed this surplus population as integral to the logic of
> capital. It also plays a role in regulating the wages of employed labour
> and providing an indispensable disposable reserve of labour during an
> expansion. The notion of this surplus population being both disposable and
> indispensable is central to the logic of capital and its barriers.

It is "one-off" in that it (the "surplus population") is created when capital 
in its regions of birth enters what we can call its mature phase of being - 
real subsumption, increasing use of machinery, increasing preponderance of 
relative surplus value: a surplus population is created, and maintained. It 
doesn't get increasingly large - it expands and contracts with the rhythms of 
reproduction - nor does it get progressively more miserable, either absolutely 
or relatively. It is important to put it like this because the begrudgers of 
Marx say that (1) Marx held to an immiseration thesis, (2) this immiseration 
thesis posited that the working class would grow increasingly materially 
miserable, (3) this hasn't happened, and (4) Marx was wrong. Whether (1) is 
true depends on what "immiseration" means: if it is argued, as in (2), that it 
is continuous in that it is posited that a greater and greater part of the 
proletariat is rendered "surplus" to reproduction and/or the material 
conditions position of this part of the proletariat grow ever worse then it is 
not true. (I take Charles' point about "textualists" but if someone says Marx 
says x in order to argue that Marx was wrong but Marx never said it it is 
incumbent on us to point this out.)  (3) is correct. (4) is not correct because 
in relation to (1) and (2) Marx's argument is misconstrued. With respect to the 
post 48/49 Marx there is no "kernel of truth" with respect to (2), (3) and (4); 
if we want to characterise the post 48/49 Marx's argument with regard to the 
genesis of a "surplus population" and its subsequent position vis-à-vis 
reproduction I don't think that "immiseration", since others have used it in a 
different sense, is the most helpful term.


-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#39284): https://groups.io/g/marxmail/message/39284
Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/116301050/21656
-=-=-
POSTING RULES & NOTES
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
#4 Do not exceed five posts a day.
-=-=-
Group Owner: [email protected]
Unsubscribe: https://groups.io/g/marxmail/leave/13617172/21656/1316126222/xyzzy 
[[email protected]]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-


Reply via email to