the ethnological notebooks of karl marx - Marxists Internet Archive

Notes to Introduction, pp. 72-74.p. 191, in opposition to separation of politics from science by Austinand Maine.)Morgan had included a brief passage on the Markgenossenschaft,Ancient Society, p. 371, which Marx did not excerpt. Morgan thencommented on Tacitus’ familia and propinquitas (see Marx, Morganexcerpts, pp. 72 and 98, and note 189). For Maine on the Mark see hisVillage Communies East and West, 1871, Lectures I and III, and onMaurer, ib., Lecture III. See also Maine’s Lectures on the Early Historyof Institutions, op. cit., passim, and note 125 above.134 Petr Kropotkin, Mutual Aid, 1902. Bound with: T. H. Huxley, TheStruggle for Existence, 1888. Reissued, Ashley Montagu, ed., n.d.135 Marx, Kapital, op. cit. v. I, pp. 45-46 (Eng. p. 91). In the English ofEngels-Moore-Aveling-Untermann, the words “In den altasiatischen,antiken usw. Produktionsweisen— ” are rendered “In the ancientAsiatic and other ancient modes of production__ ” Here the ‘antikeProduktionsweise’ is not a general mode, but a specific one : - that ofclassical antiquity, including Greece, Rome and other related societiesof that time, as opposed to the ancient Asiatic mode of production.136 Ibid., p. 44. The words ‘unmittelbar vergesellschaftet’ are renderedin the Eng. tr., op. cit., p. 89, as ‘directly associated.’ In the Frenchtr. of J. Roy, 1872, it is ‘association immédiate.’ (Capital, Fr. tr., v. 1,pt. I, 1938, p. 94). Marx controlled this translation. Since Marx waswriting about the relation of labor to society, it is socialized labor,that is, purposive, productive labor in a particular society, that is inquestion. The continuity and at the same time discontinuity of theproblem of socialization in industrial society can thereby be posedapart from the ideology of the problem, and as its presupposition.Vergesellschaftung is taken up in Kapital, v. 1 (ch. 24, Die sogenannteursprüngliche Akkumulation, section 7, Geschichtliche Tendenz derkapitalistischen Akkumulation = Eng., ch. 32), in which, as socialization,it is the outcome of the capitalist economy ; it is the opposite ofdirect, as in the earlier reference to labor in the primitive or peasantcommunity. (It is ‘socialisation’ in the French tr. of Capital, v. 1,pt. 3, 1939, pp. 224 and 225). Moreover, the relation of the communityto the society has now changed. Marx wrote in this section ofthe historical act of expropriation of property, - social to begin with, -by capitalist production, and the transformation of capitalist propertywhich rests on the conduct of production (Produktionsbetrieb) whichis social to begin with, (not vergesellschaftet, but gesellschaftlich) infact into social property. (Cf. also ib., p. 476; Eng., ib., p. 561.) Thereare two dialectical moments in this process: the transition from immediate,communal to mediate socialization and the transformation ofcapitalist property to the property of the society. The productionrelations are already social, it is their ownership which is at issue, hencethis process is separated from the other moments. The relation of the385