Absolute Property - G. Kay & J. Mott

8/17/2019 Absolute Property - G. Kay & J. Mott

1/22

Absolute Property - G. Kay & J. Mott

An analysis of the nature and development of private property in relation to the state

in class society, and the political prevention of the abundance that modern productive

capacities make possible.

" If the productive capacities already deployed were oriented towards need, necessary

labour would be reduced to a minimum, so that nothing would stand between men

and what they need to live. Money and the law of labour would lose their force, and,

as its foundations crumbled, the political state would wither away. The state of

abundance is not a Utopian vision but the real possibility of conditions already in

existence. [...]

" either its remoteness as a practical possibility, nor its completeness as a solution to

politics, make its concept idealist. It is the possibility of political society whose

development has provided its historical materials ! the universal capacities and needs

of labour, which at present exist negatively as weapons of mass destruction and

relative surplus population "underdevelopment#.$ [...]"The state of abundance is not deduced as a Utopian daydream from speculations on

human nature% the possibility of a direct unity of needs and capacities arises

exclusively from their formal separation in political society. Moreover it is not &ust a

possibility given by the determination of labour!power as a commodity, but a

necessity' it is the necessary, though not inevitable, resolution of sub&ective wealth

and ob&ective poverty."

'Absolute Property' is Chapter 1 of (olitical )rder and the *aw of *abour , G. Kay &

J. Mott; Ma!illa, #o$o, 1%.

(((((((((((((((((

Absolute Property

)+eoffrey ay - ames Mott *

+ !o$er soiety, here the o$itios of life are pri-ate property, ee$s are

separate$ fro! apaities. A state of abu$ae oul$ alter this. ee$s a$ apaitiesoul$ o!e to/ether, a$ lose off the spae betee the!. + !o$er soiety, this

spae is fille$ by the $ese strutures of pri-ate property 0 politial or$er a$ the la

of labour i a state of abu$ae they oul$ ha-e o plae. +f the pro$uti-e

apaities alrea$y $eploye$ ere oriete$ toar$s ee$, eessary labour oul$ be

re$ue$ to a !ii!u!, so that othi/ oul$ sta$ betee !e a$ hat they ee$

to li-e. Moey a$ the la of labour oul$ lose their fore, a$, as its fou$atios

ru!ble$, the politial state oul$ ither aay. 2he state of abu$ae is ot a

3topia -isio but the real possibility of o$itios alrea$y i e4istee. As the

tetieth0etury -ersio of the 'state of ature' ori/ially i-ete$ by politial

philosophy as !o$er soiety as ta5i/ shape, abu$ae 5eeps the tra$itio of

ritiis! ali-e.

1


2/22

2he /reat tra$itio of politial philosophy fro! the si4teeth to the ei/hteeth etury

realise$ that pri-ate property a$ otrat lay at the heart of politial soiety. +t

otraste$ the orl$ to a o6eture$ epoh fro! hih it as belie-e$ to ha-e

ori/iate$. 7iei/ politial soiety i the li/ht of its past, as oppose$ to its future,

philosophy resorte$ to ata-is! a$ /a-e pro!iee to a atural state or hu!a

o$itio. + this state of ature, the ri/ht to property as preset, but uable toestablish a or$er apable of esuri/ its sur-i-al. 8ee the ee$ for its

for!alisatio ito a politial state. 9ut hile pri-ate property oul$ be e4trapolate$

ba5 ito the state of ature, it is ot possible to re-erse the proe$ure, a$ pro6et it

forar$ to a state of abu$ae. :ousseau sai$ !e ere fore$ to uit the atural

state beause their poers as persos beo!e ia$euate to sustai the! but he $i$

ot e-isa/e the i!!ese $e-elop!et of pro$uti-e fores that be/a ith the

i$ustrial re-olutio. 2he $e-elop!et of hu!a apaities to beo!e e!bo$ie$ i

self0re/ulati/ !ahies, poits to the possibility of furishi/ the ee$s of

subsistee ith a !ii!u! of li-i/ labour. 2his ofir!s the olusio of atural

la, that pri-ate property is at the heart of politial soiety, oly the e!phasis is

altere$.


3/22

of establishi/ a $iret uity i the!sel-es. 2he -ery e4istee of a le/al bo$

betee persos a$ thi/s presupposes their real separatio. + fat, pri-ate property

presupposes ot 6ust oe but a hole series of separatios of hih this is the first

a!ely, the !aterial o$itios of life are le/al thi/s o-er hih o perso a

e4erise a $iret lai!. othi/ i apitalist soiety a be auire$ throu/h si!ple

possessio or atural ri/ht, sie there are o $iret relatios btee !e a$ theorl$ about the!. 2hus the first separatio i!plie$ by pri-ate property as a o$itio

of its e4istee, a$ a o$itio otiually repro$ue$ by its e4istee, is a

ate/orial split betee persos a$ thi/s, hih far fro! bei/ o-ero!e by their

refie!et ito le/al sub6ets a$ ob6ets, is reifore$ by it. 2his pri!ary separatio

is o!ple!ete$ by a seo$ 0 the $i-isio of' sub6et fro! sub6et a$ ob6et fro!

ob6et0throu/h hih property is !a$e to or5 as a syste!.

2he $istiti-e feature of !o$er property that sets it apart fro! the earlier a$ less

$e-elope$ for!s of lassial atiuity a$ feu$alis!, is that these to separatios,

hih result i a orl$ of i$i-i$ual sub6ets o the oe si$e a$ $isrete ob6ets o

the other, ha-e beo!e absolute by o!bii/ to for! a thir$ the separatio of theri/ht to property fro! all ob6ets. + apitalist soiety the le/al apaities that sta!p

a i$i-i$ual as a oer of property are ot $eri-e$ fro! $iret possessio. -ery at of e4ha/e reuires its parties to reo/ise

eah other as property oers, but here e4ha/e is irre/ular the reo/itio is

speifi as re/ar$s ti!e, plae, parties a$ /oo$s. A ee$s to reo/ise the property

ri/hts of 9 oly o the oasio of their barter, a$ the oly i respet to the

partiular ob6et he see5s to auire fro! hi! 9's reo/itio of A is si!ilarly

restrite$. 9ut i apitalist soiety here e4ha/e is /eeral a$ i!persoal, the

ri/ht to property aot be establishe$ i suh a piee!eal ay. + fat it is

establishe$ i$epe$etly of all a$ ay speifis of ti!e, plae, parties a$ /oo$s.


4/22

e4press its o$itios a$ its operatios; a$ the le/al for!ula persona!res has alays

bee e!bo$ie$ i a lar/e u!ber of $etaile$ las of otrat, tort, theft, trespass a$

so o. +t as throu/h these las that !o$er sub6eti-ity arose a$ throu/h their

elaboratio that it $e-elope$ toar$s ui-ersality. 9ut it oul$ be ro/ to rea$ the

state ito this proess as a ostat or /i-e fator, sie this oul$ $ey its historial

harater. 2he le/islatio that fou$e$ !o$er property trasfor!e$ !e a$ theirreal o$itios ofsubsistee ito sub6ets a$ ob6ets ofproperty. A$ at the same

time transformed the law!making body into the political state. 2he first ats of !o$er

property ere effete$ throu/h the offies of the feu$al su=erai, hih i the proess

assu!e$ the $epersoalise$ harater of a !oarhy. 2his as the set at a $istae

fro! the other feu$al or$ers a$ opee$ the ay for the e politial $i-isio of the

state fro! i-il soiety. 2he !o$er la of property as ot etirely e at its

ieptio, but $epe$e$ hea-ily upo :o!a la hih ha$ alrea$y $e-elope$ the

oepts of le/al persoality a$ publi so-erei/ty, thou/h ot to the full a$

absolute e4tet they ere to ahie-e i apitalist soiety. 2he trasfor!atio of feu$al

or$ers throu/h the !e$iu! of :o!a la la too5 eturies; the outo!e as e-er

ie-itable a$ li5e all atual history it pursue$ a uertai a$ a-eri/ ourse. etits proess as $eter!ie$ at e-ery !o!et by the oetio of pri-ate property to

the state ithout hih ot oly the past but also the preset oul$ be a seseless

haos.

2he lo/ial struture of absolute property o!prises three ele!ets

)+* sub6ets are pulle$ aay fro! ob6ets i so far as sub6eti-ity is ot $efie$ i

relatio to ay partiular ob6et;

)* sub6ets approah ob6ets throu/h a alrea$y establishe$ ui-ersal ri/ht of

oership appliable to ay ob6et;

)@* all ele!ets of the atural orl$ are $efie$ as ob6ets i as !uh as all of the!

ualify for appropriatio by sub6ets.

+t is a struture that presupposes the e4istee of a state for it is oly throu/h the

!e$iu! of a state that persos a$ thi/s a be for!ally ostitute$ as sub6ets a$

ob6ets prior to their atual ollisios. B the other si$e, it is eually ertai that

politial authority i soiety oly assu!es the for! of a state here real appropriatio

is effete$ throu/h le/al sub6ets a$ ob6ets that are ostitute$ prior to it.

2he $iret eouter of a sub6et ith a ob6et spells the $estrutio of the ob6et,

for it is the at of osu!ptio. 2hus the property relatio oly really flourishes i the

!o!et betee pro$utio a$ osu!ptio he the ob6et !o-es i the sphere of irulatio a$ is e4ha/e$ as a o!!o$ity. 2he at of e4ha/e hih !o-es the

o!!o$ity ito the sphere of osu!ptio is a bilateral relatio betee sub6ets i

hih they aor$ eah other reo/itio. 2o i$epe$et ills !eet a$ reo/ise

the!sel-es i eah other. o o!plete is reiproity i this at, a$ the oseuet

i$etity of the parties i-ol-e$, that lassial Ger!a philosophy oei-e$ the pri!e

!o-er at or5 here as a o!!o or ui-ersal ill that trase$e$ the i$i-i$uals

atually i-ol-e$, ho !erely partiipate$ i it. 2he i$ealist harater of this

oeptio a easily be ritiise$, partiularly the otio that ui-ersal ill ha$

ori/is outsi$e the atual pratie of e4ha/e; but this $oes ot $i!iish the

ahie-e!et of Ger!a philosophy i reo/isi/ that e4ha/e as !ore tha a

series of ollisios a$ a $eter!iate struture fro! the -ery outset.


5/22

stabilise$, Ger!a philosophy propose$ that it a!e ito the orl$ fully for!e$. Dor

this reaso it oul$ ot /rasp the real history of e4ha/e hoe-er, it brou/ht to the

fore the fat that e4ha/e i !o$er soiety is ot a self0suffiiet syste! but oe

hih presupposes a ostituti-e fore.

9oth atural la a$ Ger!a lassial philosophy i their $ifferet ays /raspe$ thefat that pri-ate property oul$ oly beo!e the /eeral for! of appropriatio

)absolute property* o o$itio of the e4istee of the state. 9oth tra$itios

u$erstoo$ that e4ha/e ta5es plae o ter!s that are establishe$ outsi$e its

i!!e$iate sphere. B the si$e of ob6eti-ity so !uh is e4pliit i the fat that

!o$er e4ha/e is trasate$ throu/h a ui-ersal ob6et )!oey*, hih thou/h it

ori/iates i e4ha/e as a ob6et li5e all others, oly be/is to $e-elop its

ui-ersality he it sta$s apart a$ beo!es a politial ob6et. 2he politial ature

of !oey is e-i$et i its appearae 0it alays bears the hea$ of the prie, or so!e

other e!ble! of state. B the si$e of sub6eti-ity the sa!e applies 6ust as !oey is

i!!e$iately e4ha/eable as a ui-ersal ob6et hose re$etials $o ot ha-e to be

he5e$, so e-ery i$i-i$ual is aepte$ at fae -alue as a persona bona fide. Moeyis aepte$ beause it is a ui-ersal ob6et o aout of its bei/ politial the

i$i-i$ual is ui-ersally reo/ise$ beause he is a politial sub6et 0 a iti=e.

+ e-ery$ay affairs the !atter is ta5e for /rate$ i !ore substatial trasatios

suh as the sale a$ purhase of a house, searhes are !a$e ito title; but these

searhes are restrite$ to the lai! of the seller to be the oer, a$ $o ot e4te$ to

his le/al apaity to o the house i the first plae. A le/al uriosity is that the

searhes ha-e to establish that the house is i$ee$ a ob6et of property that a be

alieate$ absolutely, sie houses are a subate/ory of hat as pre-iously 5o as

real property, a$ i so!e ases !e$ie-al ri/hts of usa/e still attah. 9ut this ao!aly

of real property, here feu$al fbr!s li/er o a$ lea-e their traes i !o$er soiety,

is preisely the e4eptio that pro-es the rule; that i politial soiety all persos a$

thi/s, by -irtue of bei/ i politial soiety u$er the state, e4ist i!!e$iately as

sub6ets a$ ob6ets of property.


6/22

reasoable to i!a/ie that pri-ate property as atural. A philosopher oul$ peer

throu/h the le/al ate/ories of sub6et a$ ob6et a$ still see !e a$ ature throu/h

the!, althou/h :ousseau a$ Kat fou$ this ireasi/ly $iffiult. + the ieteeth

etury ith the itesifiatio of property this oul$ o lo/er be $oe ratioally,

sie ayoe ho loo5e$ losely at either of the ele!ets of itesifie$ property

!erely sa a i-erte$ i!a/e of the other. Close e4a!iatio of apital re-eale$labour0poer, hile $etaile$ ispetio of labour0poer poite$ to apital. Politial

eoo!y hih otiue$ the tra$itio of atural la, thou/ht that he it peere$ at

labour a$ apital it oul$ see ature, but this illusio as o lo/er reasoable. 2he

otributio to politial philosophy by the theory of a state of ature as the politial

$i-isio of the state fro! i-il soiety. 2his arose fro! absolute property a$ at the

sa!e ti!e establishe$ it as a series of separatios )i* sub6et fro! ob6et; )* sub6et

fro! sub6et; )@* ob6et fro! ob6et; resu!e$ i the separatio of )?* sub6eti-ity

fro! all ob6ets )ui-ersal sub6eti-ity*. 2hese separatios ere li!ite$ by the uity

fro! hih they ere $eri-e$ a!ely, a $iret rlatio betee !a a$ his

surrou$i/s i a state of ature. >i/hteeth0etury ratioalis! appreiate$ these

separatios as artifiial, but by otrasti/ the! to a o6eture$ uity, it bea!euable to apprehe$ the real ature of the tesios i-ol-e$ i the!, a$ therefore

their li!its, a$ the li!its of politial soiety. 2he theory of abstratio hih

substitutes the state of abu$ae for that of ature elaborates these selfsa!e

separatios but i re-olutioary ter!s that re-eal these li!its.


7/22

si!ple a//re/atio of i$i-i$ual apitals but their totality. 2his totality is ot for!e$

by a osious oalitio o+ i$i-i$ual apitalists; o the otrary it operates throu/h

their !utual atipathy )o!petitio*. 2he sub6et of apital0i0/eeral is the apitalist

lass, but sie apital is e4erise$ as pri-ate property this sub6et is $eo!pose$ a$

ia$euate to its ob6et. 2he resulti/

!is!ath of sub6et a$ ob6et pro-i$es the opportuity for a re-olutio hereby thelatter sei=es the iitiati-e. 2he hall!ar5 of pri-ate property as apital is preisely this

$ispossessio of the ill.

2he /eeral iruit of apital, M0C0M' )here M represets !oey a$ C a

o!!o$ity*, buyi/ i or$er to sell, is a i-ersio of the si!ple irulatio of

o!!o$ities, C0M0C'. 2he latter represets the e4ha/e of use0-alues for

osu!ptio a$ 5eeps the persoal sub6et to the fore/rou$ a$ thi/s i their

plae as ob6ets of $ispositio. 2he for!er, hoe-er, starti/ a$ e$i/ ith !oey,

so that its oly possible e$ is uatitati-e /ai 0 a e4ess of M' o-er M or surplus

-alue0bri/s the ob6et to the fore here it is i a positio to $ispose of the sub6et.

A i$i-i$ual !ay hoose to beo!e a apitalist, but ha-i/ !a$e this hoie thelo/i of au!ulatio $isposes of his ill. At the sa!e ti!e e-e the possibility of

this hoie presupposes property i e4ess of persoal reuire!ets a$, i this

respet, alrea$y prefi/ures the ature of apital as property apart fro! ay ee$s of

the sub6et. + the iruit of apital, o!!o$ities as use0-alues beo!e a !eas of

irulati/ -alues; hile !oey, the ui-ersal o!!o$ity that is i$ifferet to

partiular use0-alues a$ hee i$ifferet to ee$s, loses the irle ith itself a$

ta5es itself as its o riterio. 2he separatio of sub6et fro! ob6et that lies at the

heart of si!ple property is itesifie$ as the ob6et $elares its i$epe$ee.

Dor this reaso the lassi le/al for! of property, persona!res, is uite ia$euate for

apital. Just as apital is its o riterio, a$ au!ulatio a e$ i itself, so the

le/al for! of apital $isar$s all e4teral sub6ets. 2he establish!et of this le/al

for! i the ieteeth etury, the 6oit sto5 o!pay ith li!ite$ liability, is ofte

iterprete$ as a a$ ho !easure to protet the iterests of i$i-i$ual i-estors, but

this fails to /rasp its real si/ifiae.


8/22

othi/ but apital 0 the i-est!ets ofsharehol$ers so that apital is preset at both

poles of property, as both sub6et a$ ob6et. 2his is the harateristi le/al for! of

apital orrespo$i/ a$euately to its eoo!i for!. Just as !oey hih is

i$ifferet to o!!o$ities as use0-alues a$ hee i$ifferet to ee$, beo!es both

pre!ise a$ result of the eoo!i iruit of apital, so the sub6et a$ ob6et of

apital0as0property auire a uity hih is si!ilarly i$ifferet to o$itios outsi$eitself.

2he itesifiatio of property ito i$ustrial apital reuires the trasfor!atio of'

the apaity to labour ito a o!!o$ity a$ results i a le/al for! hih is the

atithesis to that of apital.


9/22

eessary before they $o so as a routie that appears atural. 2he seller of labour0

poer !ust be a free i$i-i$ual e$oe$ ith the apaity to o property; a$ at

the sa!e ti!e a perso ho has o atual property, sie o oe ith ay i$epe$et

!eas of li-i/ oul$ sell his labour0poer o a re/ular a$ iter!iable basis. 2hus

the or5er !ust be at oe a perso of property, but a perso ithout property; a

sub6et of property, but oe ith o ob6et e4ept his o perso. + other or$s, theo$itios eessary for labour0poer to ta5e its plae re/ularly o the !ar5et as a

o!!o$ity are preisely those that $efie ui-ersal sub6eti-ity 0 the ri/ht to o

property totally separate$ fro! all partiular ob6ets of property; hee totally

%


10/22

separate$ fro! all real property 0 absolute poverty. 2he for!al otet of ui-ersal

sub6eti-ity is free$o!; its real otet is the po-erty of the proletariat. Absolute

property itesifie$ i apitalist soiety is absolute po-erty the proletaria is the

para$i/!ati iti=e of the politial state.

2he ui-ersal sub6et is separate$ fro! all ite!s of property sa-e oe 0 hi!self. 2he

oly thi/ to hih a iti=e a lay $iret lai! is his o perso, a$ fro! this

property relatio )the self oi/ the self* spri/ all the ri/hts of !o$er $e!oray

the ri/ht to stri5e; free speeh a$ assoiatio; $ue proess of la; a$ the frahise.

+ the last aalysis the struture of ri/ht is othi/ but the possessio of self; liberal

$e!oray othi/ but a elaboratio of this ele!etal property for!, here the self

is thro ba5 ito its self, ito loeliess a$ isolatio 0 melancholy ):ousseau*;

unhappy consciousness )8e/el*; social misery )Mar4*.

A!STRA"TION AN T#E "RITI$%E OF NAT%RE+ 9ritai toar$s the e$ of the si4teeth etury a le/al $istitio as $ra

betee the perso of the !oarh )>li=abeth 2u$or or Ja!es tuart* a$ the

!oarh as suh. 2hrou/h a $otrie 5o as the '5i/'s to bo$ies' the 5i/ as

perei-e$ as a orporatio sole, hereby i a$$itio to a atural perso he as

reo/ise$ as oe of a bo$y of !oarhs e4isti/ throu/h ti!e 0 the suessio

... the ing has in him two /odies, vi0, a /ody natural and a /ody politic. 1is /ody

natural "if it be considered in itself# is a /ody mortal, sub&ect to all Infirmities that

come by ature or Accident, to the imbecility of Infancy or )ld Age, and the like

2efects that happen to the natural /odies of other (eople. /ut his /ody politic is a

body that cannot be seen or handled, consisting of (olicy and +overnment, and

constituted for the 2irection of the (eople, and the Management of the (ublic 3eal,

and this /ody is utterly void of Infancy and )ld Age, and other natural 2efects and

Imbecilities, which the /ody natural is sub&ect to, and for this 4ause, what the ing

does in his /ody politic, cannot be invalidated or frustrated by any disability of his

/ody natural.'(

8istorially a eor!ous /ulf $i-i$es the '2u$or :e-olutio i Go-er!et' fro! the

osoli$atio a$ buil$i/ of the liberal state i the ieteeth etury. e-ertheless

this $otrie, for!ulate$ at the ti!e he the politial state as e!er/i/ out of the

feu$al or$ers, foresha$os later $e-elop!ets a$ i$iates so!e of their !ostessetial ualities i a hi/hly /raphi ay.

2he le/al $i-isio of the 5i/'s bo$y is a orete historial istae of separatio

assoiate$ ith pri-ate property the ter!s of its for!ulatio, hih outerpose

politis to ature, are those of atural la. Dor all these reasos that it is historially

orete; that it e4presses the fu$a!etal teets of atural la i lear a$ si!ple

ter!s; a$ that it $iretly oers the for!atio of the state )so-rei/ty*; this

$otrie pro-i$es a o-eiet li5 betee the aalysis of property i ter!s of

atural la a$ its refie!et throu/h the oept of abstratio.

9eause poer i the si4teeth etury as oei-e$ as the persoal apaity of the!oarh, the $efiitio of a !a as a soial perso, apart fro!, a$ i$epe$et of,

1


11/22

his Iatural' bei/, as restrite$ to the 5i/. +t is oly ith the $e-elop!et of liberal

$e!oray that it has bee broa$ee$ to the hole of soiety; thou/h this has

happee$ re!ar5ably reetly. 2hus hile it is possible to see the 5erel of liberal

$e!oray i the reoeptualisatio of the !oarh i the si4teeth etury, a$

trae the lo/ial !o-e!et fro! oe to aother s!oothly, the atual !o-e!et of

history as turbulet a$ uertai. 2he re$efiitio of the feu$al !oarh preipitate$ a trai of e-ets outsi$e the oer of the layers ho for!ulate$ the

$otrie of the '5i/'s to bo$ies'; or $i$ these e-ets flo fro! it ie-itably.

e-ertheless the separatio of the offie of the !oarh fro! the perso of the 5i/

as a $isi-e first step i the buil$i/ of the state; a$ its theorisatio as a set piee

i the philosophy of atural la. Dro! its -ery be/ii/s this philosophy as the

self0osiousess of the state. + the perio$ up to the Dreh :e-olutio it pro-i$e$

the fra!eor5 ithi hih politial 5ole$/e as $e-elope$. + the suee$i/

half etury politial $e-elop!ets fore$ a theoretial reostrutio that as

ahie-e$ by lassial Ger!a philosophy. 2he i the ieteeth etury, ith the

osoli$atio of i$ustrial apitalis! a$ the e!er/ee of the or5i/ lass as a

alto/ether e fore i history, a further reali/!et of politial thi5i/ too5 plaeas Mar4 sythesise$ the to tra$itios a$ !o-e$ beyo$ the! ith the theory of

abstratio.

Abstratio, it !ust be e!phasise$ fro! the outset, is a real proess a$ ot a !etal

ostrutio. +t oul$ appear that a atipathy e4ists betee the real a$ the

abstract , a$ that the proper relatio of oe to the other is that of opposites, i.e.

abstrat !eas ureal. 9ut this is ot the ase. 2he separatio of sub6et fro! ob6et,

hih is oe !o!et of the proess of abstratio, is real eou/h, a$ $efies the

absolute po-erty of the or5i/ lass.

+ the $otrie of the '5i/'s to bo$ies' a lear lie is $ra betee ature

oei-e$ as ori/ial, a$ politis that is $eri-e$.


12/22

the !ost serious $oubt. 2hus the theory of abstratio i so far as it oul$ appear to

i!ply !e fully for!e$ by ature ith al+ the speifis of i$i-i$uality, falls at the

first hur$le sie it oul$ see! to reuire a 5ole$/e that a e-er be obtaie$.

lt is si/ifiat that the $otrie of the '5i/'s to bo$ies' restrits the oept of

ature tothe physial bo$y, but this offers o ay out. >-e if the e4istee of aasoial hu!a biolo/y ere oe$e$ 0 a bi//er oessio tha !i/ht appear at first

si/ht 0 the theory of abstratio oul$ !a5e o substatial step forar$ by its o

riteria.


13/22

) 1* -e if it as

possible to $iso-er a oasio o hih pristie hu!a ature oul$ be e4a!ie$,

the proble! oul$ still re!ai of $e!ostrati/ that the $iso-eries !a$e about it

ere rele-at to soiety. 2he thir$ ter! !ust ori/iate i soiety itself.

Abstratio, it !ust be stresse$ oe a/ai, is a real proess. 2herefore to tal5 of the

o0abstrat as real oul$ ot a$euately $isti/uish it. 2he !ost appropriate ter!

for o0abstratio is rationality. 2he theory of abstratio therefore has three ter!s

Abstrat, ratioal a$ real. 9oth the abstrat a$ the ratioal are real. 2he proble! isthat the ratioal has o $iret or i!!e$iate e!pirial for! i !o$er soiety.

' 5very child ', rote Mar4, 'knows that a country that ceased to work, I will not say for

a year, but for a few weeks, would die.")( *abour , oei-e$ as the purposi-e

trasfor!atio of atural !aterials to satisfy hu!a ee$s, is easy to apprehe$ as the

ratioal 5erel of soiety. 2he $iffiulty is that labour ta5e this ay is ot the sa!e

as labour as it is atually perfor!e$ i apitalist soiety )orete labour*, sie this is

e4erise$ u$er o$itios of abstratio. + apitalist soiety the e4pe$iture of

labour is $eter!ie$ ithi a proess of pro$utio hose first purpose is profit

apaities are re$efie$ toar$s this e$ a$ the satisfatio of ee$s !a$e

ii$etal. 2his is e4pliit i the for!al o$itios of e!ploy!et)1* 2he or5er has o ri/hts i the pro$ut of his labour hih is the property of his

1@


14/22

e!ployer.

)* 8e eters the proess of pro$utio throu/h a trasatio that separates hi! ot

oly fro! hat he pro$ues but also fro! the apaities he e4erises i pro$utio

by selli/ his labour0poer he trasfers the ill to $ispose of his o ati-ity to

aother.

)@* + this trasatio )the a/e relatio* all partiularity, ee$ a$ apaity is$isre/ar$e$ as uality thus $i-erse apaities are e4presse$ i a o!!o for! as

!oey, here they sur-i-e -esti/ially as $ifferees of uatity. 2he poer of

abstratio, hoe-er, $oes ot e$ here as the proess of pro$utio beo!es !ore

fully apitalist, so the atual e4pe$iture of labour )orete labour* beo!es

ireasi/ly $eter!ie$ by profit. 2his is e-i$et i the folloi/

)?* + or5 itself s5ills a$ the o$itios of labour /eerally, ra/i/ fro!

teholo/ies to the loatio of pro$utio, are ot $eter!ie$ by the partiular

apaities of labour, but by apital.


15/22

+ for!alisi/ ratioality, abstratio ie-itably sets all partiularities to oe si$e.

2hus, ithi the $otrie of the '5i/'s to bo$ies', the 5i/'s '9o$y politi' $isre/ar$s

his '9o$y atural'; a$ iti=eship o-erri$es all ee$s a$ apaities. 2he real /rou$

of partiularity is the labour proess, for it is here, throu/h the soial $e-elop!et of

pro$uti-ity, that ee$s a$ apaities $e-elop their possibilities a$ auire $efiite

shape.

+t is throu/h labour that !a ats upo the orl$ a$ by ha/i/ it si!ultaeously

ha/es hi!self. Moreo-er, sie pro$utio is i otiuous flu4, ee$s a$

apaities, i.e. partiularities, are ot ostat or, beause of the $i-isio of labour,

are they uifor!ly $istribute$ aross soiety, !a5i/ i$i-i$uals fasi!iles of eah

other. Partiularity arisi/ out of labour therefore, uli5e hu!a ature see i

essetialist ter!s, -aries alo/ to a4es si!ultaeously aross soiety a$ throu/h

ti!e.

Corete labour is fully subsu!e$ by abstratio )apital* both for!ally a$ really.

e-ertheless the ee$s a$ apaities of labour are ot ostitute$ e4lusi-ely by

apital labour is ot o6ure$ up by apital but is a e4teral o$itio to be ta5ea$ for!alise$. +t is i this irre$uible harater of labour that the thir$ ter! i the

for!ula of abstratio a be fou$.

atural la, as it is e4presse$ i the $otrie of the '5i/'s to bo$ies', outerposes

politis )e4pliit abstratio* to ature )partiularity* as thou/h the latter i its e4isti/

e!pirial for! is ot alrea$y $eter!ie$ by abstratio. +t treats politis a$ ature i

ter!s of si!ple $ifferee, as thou/h they ere i$epe$et of eah other a$

apable of sta$i/ aloe. 9ut sie both are $eter!ie$ by abstratio this approah

rests upo a false pre!ise. 8ee its olusio that politis is the abstratio of

soiety; a superstruture that rests upo a o0abstrat base, atually e4isti/ ature

or eoo!is, as it a!e to be alle$, is also false. +t is uite i!possible to $e-elop a

satisfatory theory of abstratio ith oly to ter!s. A thir$ ter!, labour, as a

potetial uity of ee$s a$ apaities, has to be a$$e$. 2his o-ero!es the

theoretial iosisteies of the $ya$i approah, ahors the theory of abstratio i

soial ter!s hih ha/e ith historial $e-elop!et, a$ $ispeses ith all atural

essees.

SO"IA* FORM

8istory is built upo the fou$atio of labour hih is the oly !eas throu/h hih

!e appropriate ature. +t is throu/h labour that !e ta5e possessio of the orl$ a$tur atural !aterials ito pro$uts that satisfy ee$s. Dor this reaso labour is the

ratioal 5erel of soiety. 9ut pri-ate property iterrupts thi/s sie it is built upo a

separatio of !e fro! the orl$ arou$ the!. +t iterposes itself first as a e$/e that

fores !e apart fro! ature, a$ the as a pressure that el$s the! to/ether.

eparatio a$ uio our si!ultaeously throu/h the establish!et of sub6ets a$

ob6ets of property. 2hus pri-ate property has to si$es to it orrespo$i/ to

fu$a!etal aspets of abstratio first, separatio; seo$, uifor!ity. As sub6ets

of property all !e are eui-alet a$ !o-e o the sa!e plae.

+ apitalist soiety abstratio sa!ps ratioality. 2he iterourse of !e ith

ature is iterrupte$, a$ trasfor!e$ ito the e4ha/e of o!!o$ities. ub6eti-ity

a$ ob6eti-ity are soial for!s. 2he proess of abstratio a$ the ostitutio ofthese soial for!s are oe a$ the sa!e for! is the rystallisatio of abstratio.

1E


16/22

Cosi$er the fa!iliar proess of ei/hi/, here a loaf of brea$, for e4a!ple, is

plae$ o oe sale a$ so!e piees of iro o the other.


17/22

sub6ets a$ ob6ets so as to obliterate atural $istitios betee the!, this !a5es

possible the itesifiatio of property.

Capitalist pro$utio, pri-ate property reflete$ ba5 ito itself, ofir!s the fial

poit, )?*. 2he or/aisatio of pro$utio for profit is the abstratio of pro$utio

fro! ratioal ee$.

2ra$itioal politial philosophy reo/ise$ that the for!al aalysis of pri-ate property

as the oly -ali$ starti/0poit for the theory of the state. 2e$eies i !o$er

theory ha-e !isiterprete$ it as formalist i to seses. 6irst , it has let support to

the popular i!pressio that for!al !eas fi4e$ a$ ri/i$. #a a$ a$!iistratio,

throu/h hih the for!al harater of !o$er soiety is establishe$, appear, at first

si/ht, to support this i!pressio. +t is te!pti/ to i!a/ie the for!al struture of

soiety as the fra!eor5 of a !o$er offie blo5 that $eter!ies the spae ithi

hih ati-ities ta5e plae, a$ e-e the ati-ities the!sel-es. 9ut hile this i!a/e

athes the $eter!iate poer of for!alisatio a$ its syste!i harater, its flui$ity

is !isse$. A !ore appropriate i!a/e of the for!ality of !o$er soiety is!athe!atis, hih o!bies oheree a$ !o-e!et. + !athe!atis a4io!s are

elaborate$ ithout bei/ fu$a!etally altere$. 2he a4io! of apitalist soiety is the

si/le ui-ersal for! of pri-ate property but this o!prises a series of for!al

ele!ets i otiuous flu4 a$ $e-elop!et. 2his /i-es a second false i!pressio,

that the apaity of a for! to be elaborate$ is the apaity of the for! to elaborate

itself aor$i/ to a lo/i all its o )teleolo/y*.

#abour, a$ labour aloe, it !ust be stresse$, is the !aispri/ of history.


18/22

pri-ate property a$ otrat at the heart of the theory of the state. 2he !ost

i!portat otributors to the i ra$itio of atural la ere 8obbes a$ #o5e i the

se-eteeth etury a$, i the ei/hteeth etury, :ousseau hose 7ocial 4ontract

!ar5e$ its ul!iatio. 2he !etho$ of this tra$itio as to otrast politial soiety

here the state as $e-elope$, ith the atural state here it as abset. ie the

atural state as base$ upo o6eture, the results of this approah ere li!ite$. + partiular its theory of the trasitio fro! the atural to the politial state by !eas of

a soial otrat harboure$ iosisteies hih it oul$ e-er resol-e. A soial

otrat, li5e ay other, a oly be etere$ by persos possessi/ the appropriate

apaities, that is by sub6ets of ri/ht. 9ut as it a!e to be u$erstoo$ by politial

philosophers that these apaities ere politial, a$ that ri/ht oul$ oly be

establishe$ throu/h the state, the iosistey of otrat theory bea!e /lari/. +

or$er to !a5e the otrat that for!e$ the state, !e ha$ to be e$oe$ ith ri/hts

that $eri-e fro! the state. 9y the ti!e :ousseau atte!pte$ to perfet the lo/i of

otrat theory, there as o esape fro! the olusio that the state as a

eessary o$itio for its o reatio.

At this poit the theory of atural la uo-ere$ the fu$a=etal fat of the politial

state, that it is self0ostituti/, but it as uable to buil$ upo it. Politial theory i

the se-eteeth a$ ei/hteeth eturies for!e$ part of the i$er !o-e!et of

!o$er thou/ht that ilu$e$ the $e-elop!et of sietifi theory. + partiular,

eto's or5 o physis a$ !athe!atis e4erise$ profou$ ifluee o-er it a$

ispire$ a !ehaial lo/i of ause a$ effet. 9ut hile this !etho$ alloe$

politial theory to brea5 ith feu$al thou/ht a$ $e-elop as a siee, it i!pe$e$

atural la as it a!e lose to $islosi/ the self0ostituti/ ature of the state.


19/22

i!!e$iate otat ith the orl$ about the!, a$ to be able to ta5e possessio of

aythi/ they lai$ ha$s upo. 2his state as o6etural, but as a poit of otrast it

fouse$ the $istiti-e feature of politial soiety here appropriatio is o lo/er

$iret but is !e$iate$ throu/h sub6eti-ity a$ ob6eti-ity 0 pri-ate property. + both

states appropriatio i!plies fore, first to ta5e a$ the to hol$. 9ut hereas i the

state of ature this fore is e4erise$ $iretly by a i$i-i$ual i his o iterests, i politial soiety it is e4erise$ i$iretly, by others o his behalf. Aor$i/ to

:ousseau !e uit the state of ature beause their i$i-i$ual poers /re too ea5

to sustai the!; a$ i retur for their atural ri/hts reei-e$ politial ri/hts uphel$

by the poer of the o!!uity as a hole. + ter!s of appropriatio this !eat that

i$i-i$uals o lo/er e4erise$ fore to retai possessios hih they o hel$ as

pri-ate property throu/h ri/hts /uaratee$ the! by the state.

2he $istitio betee this isi/ht ito politial soiety a$ the o-etioal liberal

-ie oul$ ot be sharper. + the liberal -ie politial soiety is sustaie$ throu/h a

reiproity of ri/hts. 2he ri/ht of oe i$i-i$ual is si!ply !irrore$ i that of aother

)a orl$ of iter0sub6eti-ity*, a$ this reates a o!!oalty of !utual iterestshih pro-i$es the be$ro5 of soiety. 2he state the e4presses this o!!oalty

throu/h its $e!orati ostitutio a$ safe/uar$s it ith its so-erei/ty. Aor$i/

to atural la, reor5e$ throu/h the theory of abstratio, the reiproal of lai!, its

eui-alet for!, is fore. A perso's lai! to a thi/ oly beo!es a ele!et of ri/ht

he the fore hih $efe$s it is e4rise$ by aother. + politial soiety here

partiular possessios are hel$ throu/h a /eeral property ri/ht, this fore is ui-ersal.

2here is o i!!e$iate !utuality of iterests, as liberal theory ote$s, but a

ui-ersal eui-alee of sub6ets !e$iate$ throu/h their o!!o relatio to a

absolute fore. 2he e4poet of this fore is the state, hih $oes ot sta$ outsi$e as

a thir$ party uphol$i/ the rules, but is the so-erei/ poer that ostitutes all

partiipats as sub6ets.

Aor$i/ to liberal theory, pri-ate property is roote$ i ratioal ee$ a$ the state

arri-es post festum, lo/ially if ot historially, to protet its s!ooth operatio as a

syste!. Aor$i/ to the theory of abstratio, pri-ate property is abstrate$ fro! all

ratioality, a$ is roote$ i fore. 2he state is ot a seo$0or$er safe/uar$ of absolute

property after it has $eri-e$ itself ratioally, but the ui-ersal fore that is a

i$ispesable part of it.

Althou/h it is a /eeral or ui-ersal fore i soiety, the state re!ais a speial fore,

sie it is oly oe part of soiety. 2he oseuees of this a$ the atte!pts toresol-e the! ha-e !a$e up the etral !atter of politial theory. :ousseau, ho

refuse$ to be otete$ ith the ostitutioal baalities of liberalis!, loo5e$ for a

resolutio i the oept of a /eeral ill hih o!pelle$ all -ali$ly establishe$

states to e4erise poer ratioally for the o!!uity as a hole. + the ei/hteeth

etury, before property ha$ itesifie$ ito apitalist pro$utio a$ still appeare$ to

ha-e roots, hoe-er atteuate$, i a syste! of ee$s, suh a ill as still plausible.

9ut oe i$ustrial apitalis! ha$ sei=e$ hol$ of soiety, harsher realities a!e to the

fore. 2hus #ei, or5i/ forar$ fro! Mar4's aalysis of apitalis!, replae$

:ousseau's /eeral ill ith the oept of the lass state 0 i.e. the state as a speial

fore i soiety that is /eeral oly i the sese that it e4erises poer o-er the hole

of soiety. ie this poer )fore* is the reiproal of property lai!s, a$ sie pri-ate property i its tur is the for! throu/h hih labour is e4ploite$ by apital,

1%


20/22

the state of its -ery ature is a lass or apitalist state. At this poit the /reat tra$itio

of politial philosophy, hih be/a ith Mahia-elli, reahe$ its olusio 0 a$ o

si/ifiat a$-ae has bee !a$e i state theory sie. 2he purpose of this tra$itio

as to $islose the aato!y of the state, a$ hat pro-i$es the the!e of otiuity

throu/h its $e-elop!et is the atte!pt to pro$ue a uitary theory of the state i ter!s

of pri-ate property a$ otrat.

+ the late ieteeth etury the state etere$ a e phase i its history as its

a$!iistratio as elaborate$ to a historially upree$ete$ $e/ree. tarti/ i

9ritai i the 1Hs a phase of liberal state0buil$i/ as iau/urate$ i hih the

state o lo/er appeare$ a $istat fore but bea!e losely lo5e$ ito soiety. + the

tetieth etury, partiularly i the perio$ sie the eo$


21/22

)1* ha$ to pro-i$e the basis for a real history of apitalis!;

)* to a-oi$ irularity of thou/ht lea$i/ to ostal/ia, it oul$ o lo/er be $eri-e$

fro! si!ple property; a$

)@* it ha$ to offer a real alterati-e to the preset i ter!s of ee$s a$ apaities as

they ere atually $e-elope$.

+ the 4ommunist Manifesto )1?*, Mar4 a$ >/els $e-elope$ a ritiue of

apitalist soiety that !et these o$itios, a$ fro! that ti!e the state of abu$ae

superse$e$ that of ature as the sta$poit of /euie politial aalysis.

Abu$ae, or o!!uis!, is ot ifatile affluee 0 the repliatio of pro$uts for

the i!!e$iate /ratifiatio of $esiri/ sub6ets 0 sie it $issol-es for!al sub6ets a$

the oti/ey of $esire. or is it a e!pirial ratioalisatio of resoures aay

fro! $estrutio a$ aste. +ts possibility is $iretly struture$ ito pro$uti-e

apaities, hih are therefore ot !eas to be $ispose$ of aor$i/ to e4teral

e$s. + other or$s, abu$ae aot be ahie-e$ throu/h a pla hih see5s to

reoile !eas to e$s, sie suh a pla oul$ retai the for!al separatio of ee$sa$ apaities. 2he plae$ ratioalisatio of apitalist pro$utio throu/h for!al

reaso is o alterati-e. or is it pratial for so lo/ as ee$s are for!ally separate$

fro! apaities, the la of -alue o-erhel!s all efforts at ratioalisatio, a$, as

reet e-ets, >ast,


22/22

[1] 2hese ere the ter!s i hih a le/al $otrie 5o as the '5i/'s to bo$ies'

as for!ulate$ toar$s the e$ of the si4teeth etury. ee >$!u$ Plo$e,

)11F* 4ommentaries, or 8eports, pp. 1@0E. 2his passa/e is ite$ i >.

Katoroit=, )1%EH* The ing9s Two /odies% A 7tudy in Medieval (olitical Theology.

[] Mar4 to Ku/el!a )11 July 1F*.

Absolute Property - G. Kay & J. Mott

Documents