Monday, 4 December 2023

Capitalism in the Twenty-first Century through the Prism of Value: a review of the book by Carchedi and Roberts.

Guglielmo Carchedi and Michael Roberts are seasoned commentators on the changing fortunes of capitalism. In their latest, joint book Capitalism in the Twenty-first Century through the Prism of Value (Pluto Press, 2023), they bring these insights together and assess them through Marx’s theory of value and here especially the tendency of the falling rate of profit. In this blog post, I will discuss their main contributions as well as provide some critical reflections. 

The main achievement of this volume, the key contribution of Carchedi and Roberts, is that they unite their wide-ranging assessments of topics from the destruction of the environment, via inflation to imperialism and artificial intelligence within a clear understanding of Marx’s theory of value. Their discussions are, therefore, clearly driven by a historical materialist perspective. In capitalist production based on wage labour and the private ownership or control of the means of production, it is only living labour, i.e. variable capital, which can produce surplus value, underpinning capitalist profits. ‘It is the transformation of abstract human labour into the value of the commodities which is the focus of the law of value’ (P.2). In the relentless competition between different capitals, however, they all try to gain an advantage by increasing productivity through the introduction of new technologies in the production process, i.e. constant capital, requiring less variable capital. As the authors maintain, ‘the major factor influencing profitability is technology. New technologies replace workers with means of production. They produce less value and surplus value but realise more value at the cost of the technological laggards’ (P.2).

 

While one particular capitalist may gain an advantage in this competition, other capitalists are compelled to innovate in order to catch up or even overtake their competitor. As a result, there is a constant tendency towards increasing constant capital and shedding variable capital in the capitalist production process. Hence, there is a tendency towards a constant increase in what is called the ‘organic composition of capital’ (P.3). Considering that only variable capital can produce surplus value and that the rate of profit is the surplus value created divided by variable capital plus constant capital, the emphasis on increasing constant capital results inevitably in a falling rate of profit. Marx’s theory of value, in short, identifies an inevitable tendency of a declining rate of profit. ‘Thus, the law of value leads to surplus value, the organic composition of capital and the rate of profit on capital. With these categories, we have the basis of a Marxist theory of 21st century capitalism’ (P.4).




Of course, Marx in Capital Vol.3 noted a number of counter-tendencies, strategies available to capital to mitigate the declining rate of profit (Marx 1894/1981: 339-48). Carchedi and Roberts point them out: 1) an increase in the rate of exploitation of labour; 2) a cheapening of constant capital lowering the organic composition of capital; 3) the lowering of wages below the normal value of labour power; 4) profits from foreign trade; and 5) fictitious profits in the financial sphere (PP.93-4). And yet, over time, these counter-tendencies can always only ameliorate temporarily capitalism’s tendency to crisis. In the end, the tendency of the declining rate of profit and the related structural pressures for capital always re-assert themselves.

 

There are a whole range of economic problems, Carchedi and Roberts concern themselves with. I will highlight their discussions of several of them. First, they start off their volume with a focus on the relation between value and nature and the related climate crisis. As they point out, as long as capitalists can access cheap energy and raw materials, the increasing organic composition of capital can be checked and the tendency of the falling rate of profit countered for a while albeit with disastrous consequences for the environment and ultimately humanity. ‘Capitalism thus turns the “free gifts of nature” into profit. And in the incessant drive to raise profitability, it depletes and degrades natural resources’ (P.17). In other words, in order to overcome crisis, capitalism is compelled to expand relentlessly into nature in a desperate search for cheap inputs to counter the tendency of the falling rate of profit.

 

Another key contribution by Carchedi and Roberts is their understanding of inflation. It is widely claimed that raising wages cause higher levels of inflation. And yet, as they point out, ‘a rise in wages will generally lead to a fall in profits, not a price rise. That is why capitalists oppose wage rises vehemently’ (P.79). Connecting their analysis of inflation to the production of value, by contrast, they conclude that ultimately it is both wages plus profits that put upward pressure on prices and capitalists, in their constant search for higher profits, therefore, bear key responsibility for rising inflation. Hence, ‘inflation in the prices of consumer goods is accounted for principally in terms of the production of value, itself a consequence of the decreasing profitability’ (P.91).

 

Equally compelling is Carchedi and Roberts’ assessment of imperialism and the way imperialist countries on the basis of their technological superiority extract surplus value from dominated countries through unequal exchange in trade relations, which in turn is another ‘important counter-tendency to the decreasing growth of surplus value in the imperialist countries’ (P.120). When countries with companies predominantly based on advanced technologies and thus high organic compositions of capital trade with countries with predominantly labour-intensive companies, i.e. low organic compositions of capital, and considering that profit rates are equalised among countries, the former will receive surplus value created in the latter. After all, a high organic composition of capital implies high productivity levels, but low profit rates, while a low organic composition of capital implies low productivity levels, but a high rate of profit.

 

Their assessment of the increasing deployment of robots and AI in the production process is also pertinent. Of course, this does increase capitalist productivity. However, it will not ensure profitability permanently either. More robots imply a higher organic composition of capital, which in turn results in a falling rate of profit. The more robotisation spreads through the whole economy, the more downward pressure on profitability there is. ‘This is the great contradiction of capitalism: increasing the productivity of labour through more machines reduces the profitability of capital’ (P.156).

 

While many observers highlight the shortcomings of capitalism, few actually engage in developing concrete alternatives. Carchedi and Roberts, by contrast, dedicate a full chapter to the question of socialism/communism. This is the final major contribution I would like to highlight. As they point out, ‘socialism would mean a society without classes and without the exploitation of wage labour. Under socialism, the means of production would be commonly owned and production would not be for the market but direct to the consumer without any process of exchange for money. Production would be by the free association of producers in common, distributed by society through democratic decisions’ (P.187). Key ingredients for success are ‘workers’ democracy’ (P.225), something which has been lacking in Stalin’s Soviet Union, for example, as well as economic planning using labour time as measure at least in the initial period (PP.234-6). This will ultimately provide the basis for everyone being able to develop their own capacities and interests. ‘The creation of positions’, they write, ‘encompassing a wide variety of tasks and the rotation of individuals among different positions would ensure that each can realise his/her potentialities to the maximum during his/her working time’ (P.232).

 

As impressive as this systematic assessment of a large number of economic issues of capitalism through Marx’s theory of value is, there are, however, several areas in which a wider reflection might be necessary for a full understanding. First, there is Carchedi and Roberts’ dismissal of degrowth theory, arguing instead for ‘controlled and planned growth’ (P.37). They are right, when they say that under socialism it will be possible to focus exclusively on the production of use value. They are wrong, however, when they believe that the limits to growth in a situation of finite planetary resources would not apply to socialism. Even in a communist society, we could not endlessly focus on increasing economic growth. They are also wrong, when they argue that ‘if growth is halted, it means that the underdeveloped countries are condemned to remain stuck in the swamp of poverty, constantly on the brink of famine’ (P.37). Degrowth theorists such as Jason Hickel make clear that in the overall scheme of things, while industrialised countries would have to cut back their economic production drastically, there would be still space for further development of developing countries (Hickel 2020: 187-96). Degrowth can only work if it goes hand in hand with a global redistribution of wealth.

 

Second, can imperialism be reduced to economic dependencies, as the authors suggest? Imperialism through ‘free trade’ is an important feature. It was part of Britain’s role in the international economy during the 19th century (see Gallagher and Robinson 1953) and it continues today in the form of neo-colonial relations. Nevertheless, has not direct, coercive political power always been part of imperialism and the building of empires especially during the 19th century? Carchedi and Roberts contrast their understanding of imperialism with ‘colonialism’, defined as ‘the appropriation of natural resources, military occupation, the direct state control of colonies, the stealing by the imperialist countries of commodities not produced capitalistically and the brutal exploitation of labour in the colonies’ (P.117). In practice, however, it is doubtful whether these two forms of exploitation can be so clearly distinguished.

 

Third, they dismiss the notion of super-exploitation, the suppression of the price of labour below the level necessary for workers to ensure their own reproduction, identified by Marini (1973/2022) as a key characteristic of capitalism in the periphery of the global economy. For them, the fact that super-exploitation also occurs elsewhere is proof enough that this concept does not hold any explanatory value. ‘Hundreds of millions of workers everywhere, not just in the “Global South”, are paid below the value of the labour power, the cost of its reproduction – in the US, Germany, Italy, Spain; a large portion of this falls upon the migrant workers in those “advanced” countries’ (P.134). While this is correct as such, as Jaime Osorio makes clear in response, it is not about whether super-exploitation occurs or not. ‘The central issue … is to pinpoint the predominant forms of exploitation in distinct social formations in “normal” periods of reproduction, looking at the sectors of the working population they affect and the impact they have on the reproduction of capital’ (Osorio 2022: 177). And it is in this respect that super-exploitation dominates capitalist social relations of production in peripheral spaces in the global economy.

 

Finally, I am not convinced about Carchedi and Roberts’ assessment of the Chinese economy not being dominated (yet) by capitalist economic laws. The country’s economy, the authors argue, ‘is not yet dominated by the market, by investment decisions based on profitability; or by capitalist companies and bosses; or by foreign investors’ (P.213). Crucial in this respect is, according to the authors, that Chinese state-owned enterprises (SOEs), the public ownership of the means of production are still dominant, with a special role played by the financial sector. ‘The major banks are state-owned and their lending and deposit policies are directed by the government. There is no free flow of foreign capital into and out of China. Capital controls are imposed and enforced and the currency’s value is manipulated to set economic targets’ (P.215). However, large state-owned sectors were part of Western industrialised countries in the post – World War Two period. This did not undermine the capitalist nature of these economies.

 

Equally, the assessment that ‘the great “one belt, one road” project for central Asia is not aimed to make profit. It is to expand China’s economic influence globally and extract natural and other technological resources for the domestic economy’ (P.217) is rather surprising. An alternative explanation for the ‘one belt, one road’ project is China’s rather desperate search for new profitable investment opportunities to overcome an increasingly severe crisis of overaccumulation. As William I. Robinson points out, ‘Chinese capitalism now shows many of the telltale structural signs of crisis: a hypertrophied financial sector, including banking assets that ballooned to some $50 trillion in 2021, not including shadow finance; a runaway spiral of household and corporate debt that went from 178 percent of GDP in 2010 to 287 percent in 2021; overcapacity; a slowdown in growth rates; and social polarization’ (Robinson 2022: 73). In other words, Chinese capitalism suffers from exactly the same structural pressures, as capitalism elsewhere.

 

Nevertheless, these points of critical engagement should not make us overlook the major contributions of this volume. It provides us with a masterful Marxist assessment of current developments in global capitalism and is a must read for every historical materialist scholar, interested in understanding current crisis tendencies.  


Andreas Bieler


Professor of Political Economy
University of Nottingham/UK

Andreas.Bieler@nottingham.ac.uk

4 December 2023

No comments:

Post a Comment

Comments welcome!