Primitive accumulation of capital - Revision history

General-KJ: Removed defunct template

2024-02-27T19:00:06Z

Removed defunct template

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:00, 27 February 2024
Line 20:		Line 20:

	As the bourgeoisie became stronger in England and was able to change laws, Enclosure acts were proclaimed in the United Kingdom in the 16th and 17th century, which put this land for sale. Prices were prohibitive to peasants and only the bourgeoisie (as well as feudal lords partaking in capitalist ventures) were able to purchase it. They then closed the many hectares of land in parcels with fences or hedges and employed locals to work on this land in an effectively capitalist relation of production (the worker surrendered the product of their labour to the landowner), whereas they had for centuries used this land freely without having to pay for it or surrender their labour.		As the bourgeoisie became stronger in England and was able to change laws, Enclosure acts were proclaimed in the United Kingdom in the 16th and 17th century, which put this land for sale. Prices were prohibitive to peasants and only the bourgeoisie (as well as feudal lords partaking in capitalist ventures) were able to purchase it. They then closed the many hectares of land in parcels with fences or hedges and employed locals to work on this land in an effectively capitalist relation of production (the worker surrendered the product of their labour to the landowner), whereas they had for centuries used this land freely without having to pay for it or surrender their labour.

	~~== External links ==~~
	~~{{External links\|Wikipedia=Primitive accumulation of capital}}~~
	[[Category:Marxist terminology]]		[[Category:Marxist terminology]]
	[[Category:Capitalism]]		[[Category:Capitalism]]
	[[Category:Economics]]		[[Category:Economics]]

Ledlecreeper27: Marx quote

2023-12-17T19:39:59Z

Marx quote

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:39, 17 December 2023
Line 1:		Line 1:
			{{Quote\|The discovery of gold and silver in [[Americas\|America]], the [[genocide\|extirpation]], [[slavery\|enslavement]] and entombment in mines of the [[Indigenous peoples of the Americas\|aboriginal population]], the beginning of the conquest and looting of the East Indies, the turning of [[Africa]] into a warren for the commercial hunting of black-skins, signalised the rosy dawn of the era of [[capitalism\|capitalist production]]. These idyllic proceedings are the chief momenta of primitive accumulation. On their heels treads the commercial war of the European nations, with the globe for a theatre. It begins with the [[Eighty Years' War\|revolt]] of the [[Netherlands]] from [[Monarchy of Spain (1516–1700)\|Spain]], assumes giant dimensions in [[Kingdom of Great Britain (1707–1801)\|England]]’s Anti-[[Jacobin War]], and is still going on in the [[Opium War\|opium wars]] against [[Qing dynasty\|China]].\|[[Karl Marx]]\|[https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1867-c1/ch31.htm Capital]\|Chapter 31: Genesis of the Industrial Capitalist}}

	In [[Marxist economics]], the phenomenon of '''primitive accumulation''' (also called '''previous accumulation''', '''original accumulation''') of [[capital]] concerns the origin of capital, and therefore of how class distinctions between [[Bourgeoisie\|possessors]] and [[Proletariat\|non-possessors]] came to be.		In [[Marxist economics]], the phenomenon of '''primitive accumulation''' (also called '''previous accumulation''', '''original accumulation''') of [[capital]] concerns the origin of capital, and therefore of how class distinctions between [[Bourgeoisie\|possessors]] and [[Proletariat\|non-possessors]] came to be.

	[[Adam Smith]]'s hypothesis for primitive accumulation depicted a peaceful process, in which some workers laboured more diligently than others and gradually built up wealth, eventually leaving the less diligent workers to accept living wages for their labour. [[Marx]] rejected this explanation as "childishness", instead stating that, in the words of David Harvey, primitive accumulation "entailed taking land, say, enclosing it, and expelling a resident population to create a landless proletariat, and then releasing the land into the privatised mainstream of capital accumulation". This ~~would be~~ accomplished through violence, war, [[Slavery\|enslavement]], and [[colonialism]].		[[Adam Smith]]'s hypothesis for primitive accumulation depicted a peaceful process, in which some workers laboured more diligently than others and gradually built up wealth, eventually leaving the less diligent workers to accept living wages for their labour. [[Marx]] rejected this explanation as "childishness", instead stating that, in the words of David Harvey, primitive accumulation "entailed taking land, say, enclosing it, and expelling a resident population to create a landless proletariat, and then releasing the land into the privatised mainstream of capital accumulation". This was accomplished through violence, war, [[Slavery\|enslavement]], and [[colonialism]].

	== Marxist distinction with other economists ==		== Marxist distinction with other economists ==

Ledlecreeper27 at 17:21, 9 August 2023

2023-08-09T17:21:07Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:21, 9 August 2023
Line 1:		Line 1:
	In ~~Marxian~~ economics, the phenomenon of '''primitive accumulation''' (also called '''previous accumulation''', '''original accumulation''') of capital concerns the origin of capital, and therefore of how class distinctions between possessors and non-possessors came to be.		In [[Marxist economics]], the phenomenon of '''primitive accumulation''' (also called '''previous accumulation''', '''original accumulation''') of [[capital]] concerns the origin of capital, and therefore of how class distinctions between [[Bourgeoisie\|possessors]] and [[Proletariat\|non-possessors]] came to be.

	[[Adam Smith]]'s hypothesis for primitive accumulation depicted a peaceful process, in which some workers laboured more diligently than others and gradually built up wealth, eventually leaving the less diligent workers to accept living wages for their labour. [[Marx]] rejected this explanation as "childishness", instead stating that, in the words of David Harvey, primitive accumulation "entailed taking land, say, enclosing it, and expelling a resident population to create a landless proletariat, and then releasing the land into the privatised mainstream of capital accumulation". This would be accomplished through violence, war, enslavement, and colonialism.		[[Adam Smith]]'s hypothesis for primitive accumulation depicted a peaceful process, in which some workers laboured more diligently than others and gradually built up wealth, eventually leaving the less diligent workers to accept living wages for their labour. [[Marx]] rejected this explanation as "childishness", instead stating that, in the words of David Harvey, primitive accumulation "entailed taking land, say, enclosing it, and expelling a resident population to create a landless proletariat, and then releasing the land into the privatised mainstream of capital accumulation". This would be accomplished through violence, war, [[Slavery\|enslavement]], and [[colonialism]].

	== Marxist distinction with other economists ==		== Marxist distinction with other economists ==
	For political economists like Smith, economy has transhistorical laws of motion (in his words, man has a natural "propensity to truck, barter, and exchange" and this is how capitalism arose). In other words, no matter the system, no matter the time, man will always have this propensity.		For political economists like Smith, economy has transhistorical laws of motion (in his words, man has a natural "propensity to truck, barter, and exchange" and this is how capitalism arose). In other words, no matter the system, no matter the time, man will always have this propensity.

	For Marx however, every economic epoch has its own historically specific laws of motion. Capitalism is for Marx by no means the result of human nature but that of a historical process.		For Marx, however, every economic epoch has its own historically specific laws of motion. Capitalism is for Marx by no means the result of human nature but that of a historical process.

	In ''[[Library:Capital, vol. I\|Capital]],'' Marx writes: "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."		In ''[[Library:Capital, vol. I\|Capital]],'' Marx writes: "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."
Line 15:		Line 15:

	=== Enclosure of the commons ===		=== Enclosure of the commons ===
	A very appropriate example is the [[enclosure of the commons]] that took place in the [[United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland\|United Kingdom]]. Under [[feudalism]], British peasants enjoyed common land, which belonged to all people living in a locality and which they were able to freely use -- as grazing pastures, a source of wood, for foraging and growing crops, etc.		A very appropriate example is the [[enclosure of the commons]] that took place in the [[United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland\|United Kingdom]]. Under [[feudalism]], British [[Peasantry\|peasants]] enjoyed common land, which belonged to all people living in a locality and which they were able to freely use -- as grazing pastures, a source of wood, for foraging and growing crops, etc.

	As the bourgeoisie became stronger in England and was able to change ~~law~~, ~~Inclosure~~ acts were proclaimed in the United Kingdom in the 16th and 17th century, which put this land for sale. Prices were prohibitive to peasants and only the bourgeoisie (as well as feudal lords partaking in capitalist ventures) were able to purchase it. They then closed the many hectares of land in parcels with fences or hedges and employed locals to work on this land in an effectively capitalist relation of production (the worker surrendered the product of their labour to the landowner), whereas they had for centuries used this land freely without having to pay for it or surrender their labour.		As the bourgeoisie became stronger in England and was able to change laws, Enclosure acts were proclaimed in the United Kingdom in the 16th and 17th century, which put this land for sale. Prices were prohibitive to peasants and only the bourgeoisie (as well as feudal lords partaking in capitalist ventures) were able to purchase it. They then closed the many hectares of land in parcels with fences or hedges and employed locals to work on this land in an effectively capitalist relation of production (the worker surrendered the product of their labour to the landowner), whereas they had for centuries used this land freely without having to pay for it or surrender their labour.

	== External links ==		== External links ==
Line 23:		Line 23:
	[[Category:Marxist terminology]]		[[Category:Marxist terminology]]
	[[Category:Capitalism]]		[[Category:Capitalism]]
			[[Category:Economics]]

CriticalResist: expanded article with example, improved readability

2022-09-05T17:04:50Z

expanded article with example, improved readability

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:04, 5 September 2022
Line 1:		Line 1:
	In Marxian economics, the phenomenon of '''primitive accumulation''' (also called '''previous accumulation''', '''original accumulation''') of capital concerns the origin of capital, and therefore of how class distinctions between possessors and non-possessors came to be.		In Marxian economics, the phenomenon of '''primitive accumulation''' (also called '''previous accumulation''', '''original accumulation''') of capital concerns the origin of capital, and therefore of how class distinctions between possessors and non-possessors came to be.

	[[Adam Smith]]'s ~~account of~~ primitive~~-original~~ accumulation depicted a peaceful process, in which some workers laboured more diligently than others and gradually built up wealth, eventually leaving the less diligent workers to accept living wages for their labour. [[~~Marx\|Karl~~ Marx]] rejected this explanation as "childishness", instead stating that, in the words of David Harvey, primitive accumulation "entailed taking land, say, enclosing it, and expelling a resident population to create a landless proletariat, and then releasing the land into the privatised mainstream of capital accumulation". This would be accomplished through violence, war, enslavement, and colonialism.		[[Adam Smith]]'s hypothesis for primitive accumulation depicted a peaceful process, in which some workers laboured more diligently than others and gradually built up wealth, eventually leaving the less diligent workers to accept living wages for their labour. [[Marx]] rejected this explanation as "childishness", instead stating that, in the words of David Harvey, primitive accumulation "entailed taking land, say, enclosing it, and expelling a resident population to create a landless proletariat, and then releasing the land into the privatised mainstream of capital accumulation". This would be accomplished through violence, war, enslavement, and colonialism.

	~~The crucial~~ distinction ~~that lies between marx's account of the pritimitive accumulation and that of political~~ economists ~~is this: whereas for~~ political economists like Smith economy has transhistorical laws of ~~motion—in~~ his words, man has a natural "propensity to truck, barter, and exchange" and this is ~~why we end up with~~ capitalism, ~~for~~ Marx every economic epoch has its own historically specific laws of motion. Capitalism is for Marx by no means the result of human nature but that of a historical process.		== Marxist distinction with other economists ==
			For political economists like Smith, economy has transhistorical laws of motion (in his words, man has a natural "propensity to truck, barter, and exchange" and this is how capitalism arose). In other words, no matter the system, no matter the time, man will always have this propensity.

			For Marx however, every economic epoch has its own historically specific laws of motion. Capitalism is for Marx by no means the result of human nature but that of a historical process.

	In ''[[Library:Capital, vol. I\|Capital]],'' Marx writes: "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."		In ''[[Library:Capital, vol. I\|Capital]],'' Marx writes: "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."

	So what distinguishes one epoch from another is the mode in which the surplus labour, that is, the total product of labour minus the amount consumed for the producers' own reproduction, is extracted. As capitalism rests on the commodification of labour power, it presupposes the appropriate production relations that make this possible. The concept of primitive accumulation for Marx refers exactly to the genesis of such production relations. In his account of the primitive accumulation in Capital, Marx traces primitive accumulation to the process of the expropriation of the peasants from their means of production in the English countryside. As peasants came to lose their access to the means of production which had been secured under feudalism in the form of customary tenures, they were increasingly forced to sell the only thing they were left to sell: their labour power.		So what distinguishes one epoch from another is the mode in which the surplus labour, that is, the total product of labour minus the amount consumed for the producers' own reproduction, is extracted. As capitalism rests on the commodification of labour power, it presupposes the appropriate production relations that make this possible. The concept of primitive accumulation for Marx refers exactly to the genesis of such production relations. In his account of the primitive accumulation in Capital, Marx traces primitive accumulation to the process of the expropriation of the peasants from their means of production in the English countryside. As peasants came to lose their access to the means of production which had been secured under feudalism in the form of customary tenures, they were increasingly forced to sell the only thing they were left to sell: their labour power.

			== Examples ==

			=== Enclosure of the commons ===
			A very appropriate example is the [[enclosure of the commons]] that took place in the [[United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland\|United Kingdom]]. Under [[feudalism]], British peasants enjoyed common land, which belonged to all people living in a locality and which they were able to freely use -- as grazing pastures, a source of wood, for foraging and growing crops, etc.

			As the bourgeoisie became stronger in England and was able to change law, Inclosure acts were proclaimed in the United Kingdom in the 16th and 17th century, which put this land for sale. Prices were prohibitive to peasants and only the bourgeoisie (as well as feudal lords partaking in capitalist ventures) were able to purchase it. They then closed the many hectares of land in parcels with fences or hedges and employed locals to work on this land in an effectively capitalist relation of production (the worker surrendered the product of their labour to the landowner), whereas they had for centuries used this land freely without having to pay for it or surrender their labour.

	== External links ==		== External links ==

Jucheguevara at 20:00, 13 September 2021

2021-09-13T20:00:40Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:00, 13 September 2021
Line 11:		Line 11:
	== External links ==		== External links ==
	{{External links\|Wikipedia=Primitive accumulation of capital}}		{{External links\|Wikipedia=Primitive accumulation of capital}}
			[[Category:Marxist terminology]]
			[[Category:Capitalism]]

Jucheguevara: added see also

2020-11-24T01:41:31Z

added see also

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:41, 24 November 2020
Line 5:		Line 5:
	The crucial distinction that lies between marx's account of the pritimitive accumulation and that of political economists is this: whereas for political economists like Smith economy has transhistorical laws of motion—in his words, man has a natural "propensity to truck, barter, and exchange" and this is why we end up with capitalism, for Marx every economic epoch has its own historically specific laws of motion. Capitalism is for Marx by no means the result of human nature but that of a historical process.		The crucial distinction that lies between marx's account of the pritimitive accumulation and that of political economists is this: whereas for political economists like Smith economy has transhistorical laws of motion—in his words, man has a natural "propensity to truck, barter, and exchange" and this is why we end up with capitalism, for Marx every economic epoch has its own historically specific laws of motion. Capitalism is for Marx by no means the result of human nature but that of a historical process.

	In Capital Marx writes :"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."		In ''[[Library:Capital, vol. I\|Capital]],'' Marx writes: "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."

	So what distinguishes one epoch from another is the mode in which the surplus labour, that is, the total product of labour minus the amount consumed for the producers' own reproduction, is extracted. As capitalism rests on the commodification of labour power, it presupposes the appropriate production relations that make this possible. The concept of primitive accumulation for Marx refers exactly to the genesis of such production relations. In his account of the primitive accumulation in Capital, Marx traces primitive accumulation to the process of the expropriation of the peasants from their means of production in the English countryside. As peasants came to lose their access to the means of production which had been secured under feudalism in the form of customary tenures, they were increasingly forced to sell the only thing they were left to sell: their labour power.		So what distinguishes one epoch from another is the mode in which the surplus labour, that is, the total product of labour minus the amount consumed for the producers' own reproduction, is extracted. As capitalism rests on the commodification of labour power, it presupposes the appropriate production relations that make this possible. The concept of primitive accumulation for Marx refers exactly to the genesis of such production relations. In his account of the primitive accumulation in Capital, Marx traces primitive accumulation to the process of the expropriation of the peasants from their means of production in the English countryside. As peasants came to lose their access to the means of production which had been secured under feudalism in the form of customary tenures, they were increasingly forced to sell the only thing they were left to sell: their labour power.

Jucheguevara: added external links

2020-11-24T01:40:03Z

added external links

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:40, 24 November 2020
Line 8:		Line 8:

	So what distinguishes one epoch from another is the mode in which the surplus labour, that is, the total product of labour minus the amount consumed for the producers' own reproduction, is extracted. As capitalism rests on the commodification of labour power, it presupposes the appropriate production relations that make this possible. The concept of primitive accumulation for Marx refers exactly to the genesis of such production relations. In his account of the primitive accumulation in Capital, Marx traces primitive accumulation to the process of the expropriation of the peasants from their means of production in the English countryside. As peasants came to lose their access to the means of production which had been secured under feudalism in the form of customary tenures, they were increasingly forced to sell the only thing they were left to sell: their labour power.		So what distinguishes one epoch from another is the mode in which the surplus labour, that is, the total product of labour minus the amount consumed for the producers' own reproduction, is extracted. As capitalism rests on the commodification of labour power, it presupposes the appropriate production relations that make this possible. The concept of primitive accumulation for Marx refers exactly to the genesis of such production relations. In his account of the primitive accumulation in Capital, Marx traces primitive accumulation to the process of the expropriation of the peasants from their means of production in the English countryside. As peasants came to lose their access to the means of production which had been secured under feudalism in the form of customary tenures, they were increasingly forced to sell the only thing they were left to sell: their labour power.

			== External links ==
			{{External links\|Wikipedia=Primitive accumulation of capital}}

Theredserpent at 01:37, 24 November 2020

2020-11-24T01:37:50Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:37, 24 November 2020
Line 2:		Line 2:

	[[Adam Smith]]'s account of primitive-original accumulation depicted a peaceful process, in which some workers laboured more diligently than others and gradually built up wealth, eventually leaving the less diligent workers to accept living wages for their labour. [[Marx\|Karl Marx]] rejected this explanation as "childishness", instead stating that, in the words of David Harvey, primitive accumulation "entailed taking land, say, enclosing it, and expelling a resident population to create a landless proletariat, and then releasing the land into the privatised mainstream of capital accumulation". This would be accomplished through violence, war, enslavement, and colonialism.		[[Adam Smith]]'s account of primitive-original accumulation depicted a peaceful process, in which some workers laboured more diligently than others and gradually built up wealth, eventually leaving the less diligent workers to accept living wages for their labour. [[Marx\|Karl Marx]] rejected this explanation as "childishness", instead stating that, in the words of David Harvey, primitive accumulation "entailed taking land, say, enclosing it, and expelling a resident population to create a landless proletariat, and then releasing the land into the privatised mainstream of capital accumulation". This would be accomplished through violence, war, enslavement, and colonialism.

			The crucial distinction that lies between marx's account of the pritimitive accumulation and that of political economists is this: whereas for political economists like Smith economy has transhistorical laws of motion—in his words, man has a natural "propensity to truck, barter, and exchange" and this is why we end up with capitalism, for Marx every economic epoch has its own historically specific laws of motion. Capitalism is for Marx by no means the result of human nature but that of a historical process.

			In Capital Marx writes :"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."

			So what distinguishes one epoch from another is the mode in which the surplus labour, that is, the total product of labour minus the amount consumed for the producers' own reproduction, is extracted. As capitalism rests on the commodification of labour power, it presupposes the appropriate production relations that make this possible. The concept of primitive accumulation for Marx refers exactly to the genesis of such production relations. In his account of the primitive accumulation in Capital, Marx traces primitive accumulation to the process of the expropriation of the peasants from their means of production in the English countryside. As peasants came to lose their access to the means of production which had been secured under feudalism in the form of customary tenures, they were increasingly forced to sell the only thing they were left to sell: their labour power.

Jucheguevara: created page

2020-11-19T18:46:52Z

created page

New page

In Marxian economics, the phenomenon of '''primitive accumulation''' (also called '''previous accumulation''', '''original accumulation''') of capital concerns the origin of capital, and therefore of how class distinctions between possessors and non-possessors came to be.

[[Adam Smith]]'s account of primitive-original accumulation depicted a peaceful process, in which some workers laboured more diligently than others and gradually built up wealth, eventually leaving the less diligent workers to accept living wages for their labour. [[Marx|Karl Marx]] rejected this explanation as "childishness", instead stating that, in the words of David Harvey, primitive accumulation "entailed taking land, say, enclosing it, and expelling a resident population to create a landless proletariat, and then releasing the land into the privatised mainstream of capital accumulation". This would be accomplished through violence, war, enslavement, and colonialism.