Marx On Aristotle - Freedom, Money, and Politics - Harvey C. Mansfield Jr.

Marx on Aristotle: Freedom, Money, and Politics
Author(s): Harvey C. Mansfield Jr.

Source: The Review of Metaphysics, Vol. 34, No. 2 (Dec., 1980), pp. 351-367
Published by: Philosophy Education Society Inc.
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/20127503 .
Accessed: 27/11/2013 07:48
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Philosophy Education Society Inc. is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The
Review of Metaphysics.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded from 130.194.20.173 on Wed, 27 Nov 2013 07:48:06 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
MARXON ARISTOTLE:
FREEDOM,MONEY, AND POLITICS
HARVEY C. MANSFIELD, JR.
the most
mittedly
difficult
in part 1 of Capital,
is acknowledged
debt to Aristotle
IVIarx's
and,
as will
the most
be argued,
ad
fundamen
tal part of his principal work.1 His principal work is the one which
establishes that the labor theory of value holds not only in the state of
as
nature,
nor
for Locke,
in primitive
only
as to prove
a way
in such
for Adam
civilized society and, as against Ri
Smith, but also in the highest

cardo,
as
society,
that
is and must
the proletariat
be
exploited but will and can never exploit. With the analysis and re
duction of capital into labor, the possibility of freedom in this new
is merely
which
meaning,
writings,
in the
asserted
and
is proven
secured
with
of his
"humanism"
the necessity
earlier
of science.
In order to show that labor is the source of all value and of no

Marx
tyranny,
form."
cle.
Here
Marx
Aristotle
was
in the
opponent
it necessary
found
encountered
his
or "the money
to analyze money,
as
Aristotle
both
aid and as obsta
source
for the understanding

could enter
that men
conclusion
of forms
a realm
but
his
of freedom
leaving any vestige and every kind of slavery behind them. For
Marx, this required the eradication of politics in the Aristotelian
sense,
in which
politics
establishes
necessarily
some
form
of rule.2
we
to part 1 of Capital.
proceed
disagreement,
to Capi
of Political
the subtitle
Marx
gave
Economy"
"Critique
a
his
from
of
that
solution
tal, indicating
appears
critique
bourgeois
But what
does Marx mean
and bourgeois
economics
society.
by the
To
consider
their
in "political
"political"
ately or even explained
economy"?
in Capital,
The
but
answer
the source
is not
given
of "political"
immedi
proves
1
vol. 1, trans. B. Fowkes
Karl Marx, Capital,
(New York,
1977), 1:
at 1:102.
References
is acknowledged
the debt to Hegel
89-90,
94,151-52;
vol. 3, trans. S. Moore and E. Avel
3 will be from Marx, Capital,
to Capital
edi
I have also used the German
1967).
ing (New York: Modern Library,
in Berlin,
4th ed., 3 vols. (1890, reprinted
tion of Das Capital,
1968).
2Aristotle Politics
Review
of Metaphysics
Copyright ?
34
1274b39, 1275a32, 1276b3.
(December
1980):
351-367
1980 by theReview ofMetaphysics

352
HARVEYC. MANSFIELD, JR.
not
to be bourgeois.
To understand
the peculiar
character
antithetical
Marx himself begins Capital

the
analysis
of a commodity.
that
one must
source,
appreciate
of his analysis.3
at some distance from politics, with
In the preface
he
likens
his procedure
to that of a chemist studying the cells of a body rather than the body
as an organic whole
(which would
a physicist
with
himself
compares
organic,
and
be easier
studying
"tendencies
discovering
but unavailing).
working
He
even
and non
nature,
with
organic
iron necessity
to
fulfill themselves."
Accordingly, he examines England in the man
ner of the physicist only as typical and illustrative, the "classic locus"
of capitalism, and deals with individuals only as they are "personifica
of economic
tions
in "a process
viewed
categories"
ered
creatures
of their
social
in the
cal method"
second
history"
relations.4
Yet of course in the afterword

preface,
of natural
as individuals but are consid
inwhich they are not held responsible
he avows
his adoption
approval
its description
edition),
and quotes with
(printed immediately
after the
of "the dialecti
as disclosing
the origin,
"the special
laws that regulate
existence,
development,
and death of a given
social organism
and its replacement
by another,
we
one
A
social
is
the
its history
one."5
have,
higher
organism
given
so
one
that
dominant
social
form
stages
proceeding
by contradictory
succeeds another; this is the history of a social whole,
but of an indi
or life-cycle
of a non
typical
history
are
as
individuals
of serving
whose
human
capable
hardly
organism
of his time").
Marx's
science
is
("the leading monkey
personifications
called "the cyclical view of his
with what
is sometimes
not compatible
one?ours.
vidual
It is not
the
tory" but in truth is no view of history at all.

iron necessity
in the
actual
history
we
have
It finds tendencies
had,
and
so must
of
have
had.
A commodity,
notes
from Aristotle,
then, is a cell with

both
use
value
and
a history.
exchange
It has, as Marx
value.6
Although
See Shlomo Avineri,

The Social and Political
Thought of Karl Marx
(Cambridge:
Cambridge
1971), pp. 159-60; Lucio Col
University
Press,
and Hegel,
trans. L. Garner
letti, Marxism
(London: New Left Books,
1979), pp. 128-31.
4
1: 90-92
179.
Capital
Ibid., 1: 102; cf. ?: 168with 169, 1: 798 with 783-84.
These special
laws cannot be "models" of something more general,

as attempted
by Melvin
Rader, Marx's
(Oxford: Oxford University
Interpretation
of History
Press,
1979).6
Ibid.,
cal Economy,
to the Critique
1:179; and Karl Marx, A Contribution
of Politi
trans. M. Dobb
(New York,
1970), pp. 27 n, 42 n.

MARX ON ARISTOTLE:FREEDOM,MONEY, AND POLITICS

at first
of investigation
change
of human
ties'.
it develops
The
value.7
prevails
. . ."8 To
course
seems
explain
in its use,
that its value is expressed
as
what
course
in the
only in its ex
the course
follows
investigation
as can be seen from
sentence
the first
of
inwhich the capitalist mode of pro
of societies
appears
to be
of Marx's
however,
history,
"The wealth
Capital:
duction
of a commodity
the value
353
an
'immense
collection
a commodity
of
is, he must
commodi
explain
what
it is in the most developed society, inwhich value is fully manifested

in exchange; but to do this, he must begin with the apparent value of
in use
a commodity
and
show
how
use
which
value,
seems
at first
to
be intrinsic to the commodity, is replaced by its true exchange value,

which seems at first to be accidental. To begin with use value is not
merely hypothetical for the purpose of analysis; it is also historical,
men
because
talist modes
of apparent
has
change
which
labor
at one time actually

of production
prevailed
use.
live
Now men
a far
lived
in societies
in which
noncapi
in terms
was measured
and value
in capitalist
societies
in noncapitalist
than
in which
ex
in
societies,
in homogeneous
human
range
greater
basis
of exchange
the nonhistorical
to historical
is coming
realization.
on ex
to assume
of a society
based
the realization
appears
as the
in
he
human
labor
value
the
discloses
way
change
homogeneous
in the first chapter
of Capital.
He excludes
true measure
of value
use value
human
from exchange
and finds homogeneous
labor to be
Marx
the only common property

historical:
nonhistorical
left. His science is both nonhistorical and
in that
exchange
value
of exchange
value
is the perfect
society;
the actual development
of value follows
society
analysis
to exchange
value
value.9
The
difficulty
is true
value
historical
of societies
in Marx's
science
and
the
in that
the
from
use
is caused
by his particular attempt to combine the best and the average, for the
average society could not be reformed to the level of the best if it
were
society
not
clear by nonhistorical
analysis
of exchange
and the best
value,
the perfect
is the
society
not
could
be
actualized
society
that
7
1: 128, 152.
8Capital
Ibid., 1: 125.
9
"Political economy, which
as an independent
first emerged
science
is only able to view the social division of
during the period of manufacture,
. . ." Ibid., 1:
labor in terms of the division found in manufacture
486; and
see 1: 90-92,
3: 825, 876, 883. But note Karl Marx,
101-103,
273; Capital
trans. M. Nicolaus
Grundrisse,
(New York,
1973), p. 107.

354

if it were not clear in our history that the perfect society
universally
come.
must
In Marx,
therefore,
contrast
fundamental
exists
between
capitalist societies based on exchange value, of which England is

both classic locus and herald of the future, and the evanescent, but
actual,
societies
societies
noncapitalist
succeed.
through most
ceding
in accordance with
succeeding
as that
noncapitalism
which
value,
capitalist
and
include feudal societies,
societies
Noncapitalist
of Capital,
an immediately
stage, Marx
which
on use
based
the laws of history by
the pre
contradicts
stage of history
contrast
and
between
capitalism
In
and feudalism.
this he
capitalism
the
presents
between
and Hegel have been followed by Max Weber and by all the students
of social and political development in our day who make the funda
But
when
the
reveal
modern
between
distinction
mental
wishes
Marx
of
societies.10
contrast"
"strictest
he
fully,
returns
to the ideologists or interpreters
cities, particularly
"the writers
the
more
contrast
fundamental
traditional
and
to make
classical
are
who
antiquity,
to
and
to ancient
of ancient cities,
concerned
exclusively
with quality and use value," and of these, especially to Aristotle.n

is as if he were
contrary
admitting,
ism was chiefly derivative

use
between
the
and
value
laws
that
capitalism
of history,
to the
and
It
feudal
to
from the ancient city in its attachment

is not
contrast
fundamental
the
that
laws of history,
feudalism.12
the adjacent
in accordance
one
with
Feudalism,
a higher
than the ancient
stage
city
the no
which
adumbrated
Christianity,
be
might
with
its association
through
human
tion of universal
equality.
not reveal
the fundamental
does
But
it is a higher
because
contrast
between
it
stage,
capitalism
and
noncapitalism.
Aristotle,
Marx
says,
lacked
a concept
of value,
that
is, exchange
value, because he did not see how things unequal in quality could be
made
commensurable
equalization.
ics, Marx
for exchange
except
by
some
partly
arbitrary
Quoting from the fifth book of the Nicomachean
repeats
Aristotle's
argument
that
exchange
requires
10
Robert
Eth
equal
C. Tucker, The Marxian

Idea (New York:
Revolutionary
Books,
1970), pp. 92-93.
11
a discerning
1: 486, where Marx also makes
to
reference
Capital
was
"characteristic
which
ahead
of
its
instinct,"
Xenophon's
bourgeois
time,
1: 488; and see 1: 132, 1041.
12
3: 384 and chap. 36 in which
See Capital
relation
"pre-capitalist
ships" are considered
together.
Basic


ity and
equality
things
impossible
Such commensurability
is use
so some
and
value;
exchange possible.
not
(money)
practical
note
in Capital,14
attention
calling
in
money
and nomos
Further,
prevented
measure
on slavery,
The
labor-power.
labor as human
labor
foreign
makeshift
to their
must
true
..."
which
nature,
be found to make
as Marx
to accept money.13
Aristotle,
a point
makes
of
of the conventionality
to the connection
nomisma
between
(convention).
same
was
Aristotle
passage,
is the requisite
nonarbitrary
was
value
the
fact
that
Greek
by
society
on the natural
men
hence
of
and
their
inequality
to Marx
according
from seeing
of exchange
founded
be
"it is in truth
commensurable.
A need is the true basis on which men agree by
of convention
the makeshift
does
would
to become
that Aristo
says
since (quoting Aristotle)
so different
for
and he
commensurability;
requires
tle comes to a stop here,
355
that human
in this
labor
of the equality
can only be deciphered,
"secret"
and equal worth

he continues,
when
of all
"the
concept of human equality has already acquired the fixity of a popular

prejudice."15 This is possible only in a society in which the form of
commodities
ucts
is the general
form of the prod
value)
is, exchange
in
of a relation
Aristotle's
shines
his
genius
discovery
(that
of labor.
ship of equality in the expression of the value of commodities, and

only the historical limitations of his society kept him from finding
"in truth" this equality
in.
consisted
excuse
from
for Aristotle
that Aristotle
Marx's
One might
gather
on "the concept
of human
since
But
had never
reflected
equality."
what
Marx was familiar with
the first book of the Politics,
where Aristo
that,
worth
as well
as money,
it would
be safer to suppose
slavery
on that concept
to
Aristotle's
reflection
is
Marx,
according
no more
in
than a popular
Can the difference
prejudice.16
value
between
tle discusses
measured
tal, he says
a philosopher's
reflection
and a popular
in terms of homogeneous
human
labor? Marx
in the preface,
for "the reader
who
is willing
be
prejudice
wrote
Capi
to learn
some
13
Nicomachean
1133bl6-23
(cf. 1133a27); Marx,
Ethics,
Aristotle,
1: 151; Critique,
trans.
p. 68; Grundrisse,
p. 163; Early Writings,
Capital
R. Livingstone
and G. Benton
(New York,
p. 377.
1975),
14
p. 117 n; Grundrisse,
p. 160.
15Critique,
1: 152; Volksvorurteils,
not a "fixed popular
Capital
opinion" as
Fowkes
translates
(cf. 1: 93).
16
3: 384
Ibid., 1: 179, 253-54,
267, 444, 532, 997, 1041; and Capital
in Aristotle,
discussed
Politics
1255b32-37.
85, on the slave stewards

356
HARVEY C. MANSFIELD, JR.
thing new and therefore to think for himself,"17 and he closed his pref
ace with
which
an
of disdain
for
expression
never made
I have
concessions"
"so-called
and
to
opinion,
public
in sup
Dante
quoting
port.18 (Will this suffice to place Dante in the Communist limbo if it

exists?) This is not the sort of reader Engels had inmind when he
reported in the preface to the English edition of Capital that on the
Continent, it is often called "the Bible of the working class."19
us
in the
value,
the
concept of human equality has the fixity of a popular prejudice.
He
Marx
not
does
tells
merely
but
say,
also
to
enslavement
on
change
the
basis
the
of their
it has more
anyway.
distinction
does
needs.
body's
needs
human
"exclusively"
value remains,
use
to Marx,
is made
To Marx,
exchange
to satisfy
needs
labor is power
or free with
needs.
Men
than
equal
a popu
in freedom,
ex
men
To Aristotle,
with
their depen
in accordance
not hold
sic value.20
needs
truth
seem to be on the basis of their
dence on bodies that make unrelenting

He
are
that men
presupposes
not equal in slavery as they might

common
of exchange
society
that
he presupposes,
He
lar prejudice.
that
demands on them and then die

but in contra
by use value,
even
in exchange,
the intrin
human
labor; and
by
possible
and thus to become
free of
have
this power
until
only potentially
no reason
but Marx
value,
gives
to discern
the freedom
this potenti
of exchange
live in a society
a
not have
would
why
philosopher
uses materialism
Marx
if it exists,
before
it is developed.
ality,
men
not the concept
to
them.
Does
idealism
liberate
and
equalize
they
some
deserve
equality
for themselves?that
of thinking
commodities?in
of living among
human
union
freedom.21
lecture on the subject that merely

In his account
or more accurately,
of
on the part of those capable

reflection
or pressure
the stimulus
is, without
sure
to be
that it is a true
order
contradiction?
and not a plastered-over
of opposites
discussion
of slavery
Aristotle's
is more
open-minded
modern
to
freedom
is not
asserts
achieved
than
the possibility
any
of
by homogeneous,
indiscriminate human labor but it depends on the
17
1: 90; Marx, Theories
trans. E. Burns,
3
Capital
of Surplus Value,
vols. (Moscow: Progress
Publishers,
1963), 1: 287.
18
1: 93; note Marx's
5. 13.
Capital
change of the original, Purgatorio
Cf. Critique,
p. 23. M. M. Bober, Karl Marx's
Interpretation
of History
(New York,
1965), p. 123.
19
1: 112.
Capital
20
Aristotle
Politics
1257a6-34.
21
1255b4-6.
Ibid., 1253M5-18,


soul
and
the
No man
soul's
can be
independence
freer than when
of the body
he is ruling
or rule
over
his
357
the body.22
since he
and
body,
be entirely
free of his body even when
it, no man and no
ruling
can
be
free.
Since
freedom
cannot
be
society
entirely
perfect
has to decide,
in part arbitrarily,
who
should
every
achieved,
society
cannot
be free and who slave.
Such a decision is political; it is based on an
as to who
opinion
a commodity
what
rule
should
rather
than
derived
from
an analysis
of
is.
An opinion as to who should rule implies choice of rulers within

the necessity of rule. The economy described by Aristotle might
therefore be called (though Marx does not so call it) the "natural econ
omy," as it is determined by the different qualities of men with their
to us, as it appears,
our
that nature
needs
presents
beyond
econ
to
It
also
be
called
the
"conventional
capacity
change.
might
as opinions
insofar
of those
and needs
and
omy"
qualities
differing
use value predomi
their political
in which
relevance
differ.
Societies
different
over
value are both natural

and conventional:
natural
exchange
are imposed
the needs men
find useful
to society
by nature;
are
and conventional,
not
because
useful
goods
necessarily
by nature
and because
useful goods do not exchange
to
laws
of nature
according
nates
because
or of economics.
and
to satisfy
Nature
their
forces
needs
by
men
to use
the
in which
exchange
force
of convention
they must
resort
to
politics.
Aristotle
indicates the dependence
of exchange on politics in both
we have mentioned.
In the Politics
he presents
passages
exchange
as arising not between
a society
within
individuals
but between
socie
ties by importing things in which men were deficient and exporting

surpluses.23
the
existence
of societies
politically
to maintain
their self-sufficiency.
Here money
seeking
to be conventional
was
its conventionality
(as in the Ethics
emphasized)
for the
assumes
and
separate
is shown
Money
he
Thus
by
the
stamp
impressed
is created by political authority
on
it as
token
of the
amount.
to cross political boundaries
or to dis
of political
and not to transcend
self-sufficiency
of politics.
ex
In the Ethics,
where
Aristotle
does
consider
pose
a
individuals
within
the discussion
"comes to
change between
society,
a stop,"
sake
as Marx
says,
and
turns
to political
justice,
22
Ibid.
1254a34-1255a2.
23
1: 182, 253-54,
Marx, Capital
Ibid.',' 1257a28-34;
177, 317; Grundrisse,
pp. 170, 226; Critique,
p. 50 n.
which
is justice
1041; Capital

3:
358
HARVEY
the
between
free
JR.
life in self-sufficiency.24
equal
living a common
are free (else the transaction
that men
is not
and
presupposes
Exchange
C. MANSFIELD,
voluntary) and equal. But freedom and equality cannot be taken for
granted in the supposed capacity for homogeneous labor; they must
as far as they
be secured,
enters
prejudice" necessarily
and
equal.
Marx
tics,
masters.
have
that men
believed
serve
where
His
At
politically.25
they
solution
overcome
could
this
jail-keepers
on the tendencies
depends
laws
makeshift,
compromise
to their varying
opinions
laws
this point,
into the determination
as nature's
Economic
noticed.
can be,
that
cannot
that men
of their
varying
"popular
of who
is free
enslavement
and
their
own
in poli
task
of iron necessity
will replace
we
be repealed
legislate
needs.
the
politically
according
Marx
did not invent
the idea of achieving such unrepealable laws; he took it over from the
bourgeois political economists he criticized, and perfected it. This
idea
continues
whether
economists
as constitutive
of modern
for
economics,
today
are liberals or conservatives
in
believe
their
they
own iron necessity

by new
laws
that
and will not suffer their laws to be repealed except

also
cannot
be repealed.
Marx
this idea
perfected
laws could be found that were
constitutive
that economic
by showing
as a whole,
of society
not merely
of a self-contained
(though not self
as we now
he felt free to dis
sufficient)
say.
"economy"
Thereby
structure
with
the
constitutional
and
that
pense
political
safeguards
the bourgeois
economy.
accompanied
Marx's
seem
might
the historical,
economic
eminently
laws, which
repealable
character
transitory
nature
of its laws which
describe
under
the working
communism.
of capitalism,
He
stresses
as well
as the alien,
of capitalism
are to be superseded
commu
under
imposed
nism by human
control
and rational
planning.
nism can the realm of necessity
be supplemented
Only
under
by the realm
commu
of free
dom, "the development of human power which is an end in itself."

But precisely in this passage "necessity" is called "freedom" in the
lesser
sense
of rational,
common
control
of nature.26
While
promis
24
see also 1163b-1164a3,
NE
an economic
where
rela
1134a25-29;
is
cited
to
illustrate
tionship25
political
friendship.
"Do we never find in antiquity
an inquiry into which form of landed
etc. is the most productive,
creates the greatest
wealth?
Wealth
property
. . . The
does not appear as the end of production
is always which
question
mode of property
creates the best citizens."
Marx, Grundrisse,
p. 487.
26
3: 819-20.
Capital

MARX ON ARISTOTLE:FREEDOM, MONEY, AND POLITICS

ing to men an expansion of freedom
cannot
beyond their wildest
the proof that the proletariat

as transitory.
to appear
and can be emancipated
Marx
thoughts,
has been
exploited
To do so would
be to
permit
provisional and to suggest that in the
ismerely
admit that Marxism
359
men might
under
in self-development
communism
as
would make
them gaze back rue
such horrors
encounter
possibly
as on a golden
is clear
of capitalism
age.27 What
fully on the iniquities
free
adventure
(which reflects the historical and nonhistorical
in the ambiguity
ture
of his
between
analysis)
and as lawlessness
hence
cal opinion,
Marx's
the
called
follows.
use
freedom
is that
as rational
freedom
unchallengeable
must
be free
and
solution to the enslavement
assumption
of conventional
na
of laws
politi
irreversible.
caused by politics might be
as
and his argument
of qualities,
proceeds
quantification
has a two-fold
it creates
The labor in commodities
character;
or value
in exchange
value
it is expressed
simply.
use
as creating
in various
value
is found
labors, qualitatively
value
Labor
and
different, requiring the division of labor. Such labor is "a condition of

for the exis
of all forms of society,
existence,
independent
. . ,"28 Use
an eternal
nature.
of
value
is
of men,
necessity
men
men
na
not among
but between
and
produced
by an exchange
human
tence
ture
and
But
of his day.29
nent divided
that
as well
material
as human
labor,
and Father Labor, Marx specifies in the sexist idiom
Mother Nature
ties
of nature's
is composed
use
so composed,
remains
divided
value
into labors,
cannot exchange.
and with
the human
compo
into incommensurable
value
overcomes
quali
the difference
Exchange
uses by discovering
a measure
different
go to supply
from the material
of commodities
that abstracts
supplied
by nature.
on
is
human
value
alone
based
labor
because
homogeneous
Exchange
of labors
it is based
that
only
on homogeneous
human
labor.
Labor
produces
com
by changing their form, but the exchange value (henceforth

"value") of the commodity is not in its individual form. Value is
"purely social" and thus invisible in the individual commodity. This
invisible form is money, the genesis of which must be traced in an
modities
of the value
analysis
form.30
27
In denying
labor produces value, Bertell Oilman ap
that, for Marx,
unaware
of
this
2d ed. (Cambridge: Cambridge
pears
difficulty; Alienation,
Press,
1976), pp. 194, 254.
University
28
1: 139.
29Capital
1: 593; 3: 830.
See also Capital
30
p. 70; but the analysis of forms as the way to quantification
Critique,
is lacking in the Critique.

360
some
exchanged
each
but because
convention
and
it relative
equivalent
of linen = 1 coat,
20 yards
for one
can be
Commodities
a form
has
commodity
to all other
commodities.
linen
the
not
another
of
that makes
In the
equation
in the coat,
its value
expresses
because
which is the material of value relative to the linen. The linen has the
relative value, then, but the coat, being the equivalent of the linen,
has
The
form.31
the equivalent
form
relative
is a comparison
commodities with different qualities which makes

It is value
to exchange.
because
it is congealed
of two
it possible for them
human
embod
labor,
ied in the form of some object but capable of being abstracted

that
object
and
take
place
unless
in some
reembodied
other
from
cannot
object.
Exchange
are transformed
into quantities,
and this
qualities
of
human
the
abstractness
Forms
forms.
express
labor, as
requires
in
to
the
of
manufacture
for example
tailoring
they relate weaving
linen and coat. The coat must be different from the linen to express
the congelation of labor and yet the same as the linen and all other
commodities to express its invisible value. In this way linen and coat
speak to one
ties in which
modity
to the expression
people
impressing
are willing
modity
itself.
Money
But in the
for pushy men.

spokesperson
as
defines
form, Marx
production
an equivalent
form so that
object,
to exchange
it for another.
Any
commodity
for a toilet
the most
beautiful
other,
painting
are
democratic
altogether
is compelled
commodity
Every
as its equivalent,
and no commodity
It may
talks!
as the
equivalent
of a form on an
for any
exchange
since
commodities
other.33
of its own value.

not
of commodities,
language
In considering
the
the
There
is a language
of commodi
says.32
com
converts
the use value
of another
Marx
another,
one commodity
appear
to be
endowed
to
with
will
bowl,
each
regard
com
to accept
other
every
can stand as equivalent
to
as is an
with
value by nature,
object endowed with its properties, but this appearance ismerely the
result of the concretization of abstract labor in a commodity, not the
of any value
expression
by nature,
they are given
less (air) or when

("natural
in themselves,
that
Things
can be useful
to men,
but only when
in itself.
In their
natural
form,
31
1: 139.
Capital
32
Ibid., 1: 144; cf. 176, 189.
33
Ibid., 1: 159, 164, 166, 178; see Aristotle
Zur
or trampled on
the natural form is disregarded
meadows").34
things
Politics
is, as
form
are not useful.
1259b8.
34
Capital 1: 131, 163, 323; 3: 745, 747, 768, 848; Roman Rosdolsky,
Entstehungsgeschichte
1968), 1: 114.
des Marxschen
'Kapital',
2 vols.

(Frankfurt,
MARX ON ARISTOTLE: FREEDOM,MONEY, AND POLITICS

see form
form, we
equivalent
as exchangeable,
themselves
understood
In the
are
forms
Marx,
Aristotle
found
(it appears),
only in products,
natural
things have
useful
only
ness.
At
shows
see
dissolve
time
hierarchy
how
Each
Forms
thus
as for Plato
self-subsistent,
being
self-subsistence
and deny distinctive
and put noble
and
destroy
hierarchy
they
on a level.
necessary
We
forms.35
and
far from
So
same
the
For
products.
for Plato
while
in
things
individuality in the uses and
have, for him, the function of overcoming

of objects.
qualities
and Aristotle,
forms
itself,
overcoming
hence useful
361
money
commodity
is generated
and
is relative
as Marx
of money,
analysis
of the forms
of commodities.
in the
destroyed
out
to another
equivalent
in
commodity,
deed to any other commodity, finally to a single commodity.
Any
can serve as the general

form and become
value
the uni
commodity
when
excluded
from
other
versal
all
which,
commodities,
equivalent,
becomes
is not what makes
commodities
money.
Money
exchange
it is because
able; rather,
is possible
and invented.36
tive and equivalent

commodities
formed
ness
into quantities,
into a whole,
under
political
to their
and
the
"the world
of this democratic
communism
will
of rulers
relations
money,
Through
the different qualities of

use
different
commodities
are
values
are
themselves
of commodities."37
which
world,
that money
of the rela
exchangeable
but because
forms of commodities,
corresponding
brought
is a "citizen"
are
commodities
Each
with
the world
replace
and ruled.
thereby
commodity
conscious
rational
as we
trans
know
it having
can serve as money,

a universal
com
commodity
cer
asserts
in contrast
to Aristotle,
best,
and, Marx
are
as
serve
tain commodities,
the precious
nature
fit
to
metals,
by
Gold and silver are not by nature money,
for money
is the
money.
any
Although
serves
modity
value
of human
these metals
labor; but money
have physical properties
the requirements
to the abstractness
unitable
remark,
being
is by nature
of money.
of money,
Every
and
and
silver,
that perfectly
sample
every
gold
correspond
finds
homogeneous
35
Aristotle
36
37Capital
38Capital
Ibid., 1:
the universal
human
sample
commodity
labor, in the very
corresponding
is divisible
and re
to manifest
commodity
1070al3-21.
Metaphysics
1: 188; Grundrisse,
p. 165; Critique,
1: 155, 158-61,
165.
162, 183; Critique,
to
is uniform,
(fusible) at will, as required for quantification.38

Marx
because
p. 155; Grundrisse,
Strange to
value,
that
p. 168.
p. 239.

value
seems
362
to have
from
value
human
of human
independent
even
from
abstract
labor,
two qualities
of pure
other
not,
are ordered
by
quality
at the
overcomes
by no end.40
metals"
"precious
of their preciousness.
does
but
Rather,
of forms that have no hierarchy
the formlessness
out establishing
ture
that
the
mentions
a third
make
gold exhibits
would
Marx
forms.39
of course,
labor,
is the form
Gold
to abstract
to arrive
human
of forms but not by being the form of forms, above
the divisiveness
the
abstractness.
seems
He
labor.
The
of forms
divisiveness
is overcome
and
with
hierarchy, and in accordance with nature (although it
so Marx
to admit,
does not admit,
that na
be slightly
awkward
one of which must
two metals
fit for money,
be chosen
provides
convention).41
on money
in the Ethics,
to the passage
Marx
was
to
who
the
first
the
back
go
says:
great
investigator
as so many
so
forms of thought,
to analyze
the value
form, as well
was
In
Aristotle
of
nature.
This
Aristotle."42
and
fact,
speaks
ciety
In his
".
reference
. . . we
form (eidos) in the passage on money

the Ethics.43
He
that
says
(chrematistik?)
dealing
as to whether
argument
ment
he
retail
especially
money
says that money

to cite
is not embarrassed
which
one wealthy
in money
may
trade
in the Politics,
often
of wealth-getting
on an
and he carries
with money,
is wealth.
On
is nonsense
the
not the one in
is a "form"
and
the
side
of the
argu
conventional,
entirely
as proving
that some
story of Midas
in the necessities
be lacking
of nour
ishment since by the greed of his prayer all things served to him
turned
pathy
would
some hidden
to gold.44
have
Aristotle
may
sym
Although
was
not
in
and
for Midas
wealth
(whose
any case
money),
gold,
as
secure
to
not ignore Plato
he is anxious
does Marx,
limits to
wealth-getting.
page
later
he
says
that
those
who
pursue
wealth
without limit are set on life but not on the good life or seek the good
His argument against
life as measured by bodily enjoyments.45
39
. . . the
as repre
but merely
god among commodities,"
"Money is
while
of its social character; Grundrisse,
pp. 221-22;
sentative,
individual,
Capital 40 3: 573.
1: 183-84; Grundrisse,
pp. 166, 174-86.
41Capital
and especially
to
226-27
Cf. Grundrisse,
pp. 183-85,
209-10,
75.
with
p.
Critique,
gether 42
1: 151.
43Capital
Politics
1257b2.
Aristotle
44
Cf. Marx,
1257bl2-17;
Ibid.,
why often
lacking in necessities?
p. 222.
pp. 377-79; Grundrisse,
Early 45
Writings,
Politics
1257b39-1258a2.
Aristotle


has
money
from
expanded
concern
for
bodily
363
which
necessity,
would have to be of individuals, to a view of the good life, that is, of

the human
He
good.
thus
However
human
further
from
by abstraction
merely
the
must
good
in
of indi
it appears
explained,
value is both individual and social and cannot be
that for Aristotle,

calculated
that
stop at the human

good.
be
this conclusion
might
must
viduals
indicates
of individuals and that the subsistence
clude the subsistence
individuals.
For Marx,
value
could object that this conception might
is purely social; but Aristotle
as was Midas,
a life of mere
a society
to wealth
devoted
abun
produce
can
use
use
and
there be value without
dance for all. How
(or good)
without reference to individuals? Their needs are both to live and to

live well, and they cannot assume that both needs can be satisfied if
both
are
abundance
forgotten
for all
when
is held
and good of each.46

answer
Marx's
have
a "wealth
are
individuals
forth
is that men,
of human
abstracted
as presumptive
each
needs"
that
into
guarantee
and
society
for the life
and all together,

individually
to live indepen
them
permits
of such a well-rounded
capable
are
Men
of any one of them.47
as permits
in communism,
achieve
life, which
necessarily
they must
a
a
microcosm
of homogeneous
to become
each
individual
whole,
of gold.
He need not spare a
the properties
human
labor imitating
dent
thought
He need
tion
for his
not
of other
tion of what
not
and he need
own,
concentrate
on one
is beneath
to the
his
own
to the whole.
or subordina
exclusion
is no hierarchy:
hence
to what
him and no devotion
is above
In his
needs.
need
sacrifice
life there
no rejec
him.
He
not repeat Midas's

that it was a mistake)
mistake
would
(to the extent
no longer be capable
of being misguided.
because
he would
Impervi
in living the well
ous to beauty,
And
his eye could not see glitter.
rounded life, he would have lost his yearning

Far
from
leveling
intended to preserve
richness
of human
or vulgarizing,
Marx's
the variety
of qualities
freedom?and
to do
for it.
quantification
of value
is
in human life and the
so without
chy. On the way to no hierarchy there is hierarchy
resort
to hierar
in the passionate
46
in our time who has had the best view of Marxism,
The observer
Alexander
has spoken of its "promise that morality
will fall
Solzhenitsyn,
like manna from Heaven
after the socialization
of property."
From Under
the Rubble,
trans. M. Scammell
(Boston,
1975), p. 14.
47
Marx, Early Writings,
pp. 348, 356, 358.

364
rejection of bourgeois society and in the elevation of the Communist

By means of this final effort and
party to a temporary dictatorship.
last
this
is removed
from human
submission,
life,
hierarchy
without
and richness:
society
politics.
achieves
of value Marx
social character
by transform
free
variety
leaving
The purely
ing use values
that
But
qualities.
as long as individuals
of com
values
exchange
individuals of different
satisfy distinct
values must
Use
modities.
into
individuals
satisfy
are distinct,
are enslaved
they
to
the one-sided qualities that make them distinct and to the domi
neering needs of those qualities. They live in bondage to things, for
mused
were
by money
not
men's
seek
are determined
as farmers
example,
their
crops,
and
created
objects
as if these
When
necessities.
imposed
in this way by the qualities of things, they
lives are determined

to overcome
but
are be
they
and by the "fetishism of commodities"
humanly
vainly
by
the
of their
onesidedness
of the
"reflection
real world"
is law
in its widest
is rule of some men

If politics
some
makes
that arbitrarily
gion.48
vention
by
others
free,
some
This
is reli
which
sense,
at
and
condition
tempt to impose the conditions of their own lives on the whole.
to a con
according
to
slave
according
their qualities, religion is the culmination of both politics and conven

It makes
tion.
conventional
all men
political
even the ruling

class.
slaves,
believes
that Marx
formalism
Religion
he can
is the
replace
with the scientific analysis of the money form. It will "vanish only
life daily offer men
when the practical relations of everyday
one
and with na
another
with
thoroughly intelligible relationships
ture."49 Religion is the spurious political whole that he will replace
true
the
with
Marx
whole.
says that fetishism
commodities,"50
munism
economic
might
is "inseparable from the production of
of commodity
and the exposure
seem
the
to require
therefore
fetishism
abandonment
under
com
of com
modity exchange and exchange value altogether as being tainted with

Yet in the Grundrisse Marx speaks of
bourgeois self-deception.
"free
exchange"
as the condition
of communism
mal freedom of bourgeois exchange
in contrast
to the
for
inwhich the equality of exchange
48
1: 173, 178; 3: 809, 820.
49Marx, Capital
1: 173; 3: 820.
Nathan
Roten
See Colletti,
pp. 270-72;
Capital
Basic
Problems
Marx's
streich,
Bobbs-Merrill,
of
Philosophy
(Indianapolis:
Marx und die Verwirklichung
der Philo
1965), chap. 7; Armin Wildermuth,
(The Hague: Martinus
1970), chap. 22.
sophie, 50 2 vols.
Nijhoff,
1: 165.
Capital


as an equality
is perceived
underlies
bourgeois
however
the
without
talism.52
Moreover,
each freely
in which
(and without
the
Such
ment).
noted,
were
capitalism
the communist
social. Marx's
after
despite
remains
formula
his
ability
greater
Aristotle's
within
person
of the social
edge
could
dom
to a reflection
of the material,
of natural
the wholesomeness
consists
in the
that
out human
labor
but
in view
merely
satisfaction
men
supplies
to produce
of nature's
Marx
with
of needs,
a "wealth
properties
labor, and
rule
voring particular
repository
to acknowl
compelled
hence
of nature.
Nature
or
of men
if human
use
in furnishing
of human needs."
free
value.
With
As we have seen,
as money,
metals
with
precious
of homogeneous,
abstract
human
enslavement.
to those
that correspond
Natural
it concrete.
that make
the
justice
but considers
be enslaved;
values, men would
exchange
of manifold
contribution
needs
(which is poten
na
with
labor must
be considered
cooperation
tial freedom),
human
ture as well as overcoming
of natural
for use
nature
also makes
available,
through
commutative
in
for
was
needs,
as the enslaver
not be understood
It is nature
accord
dialectic right side up, and return the
In order to turn Hegel's

ideal
govern
it is per
to each
as an equal
of self-development
in the process
and needs.53
stock of abilities
each
capi
is one
planning
all in common
an exchange
or needs,
counts
it does not take account of individual worth
because
out with
slogan of the Critique of the
to his ability,
according
a
of exchange:
formula
all,
each
Program?"from
ing to his needs"?is,
which
each person,
be
on equality
if
intolerable
"develops"?with
in representative
consent
because
is, or requires,
exchange
development
Gotha
This
thrown
of rational
society
human labor
doubt
consents?nay,
of
attenuation
fectly free and perfectly
one.
casting
it would
exchange
and as we have
understood;
standard
used to condemn
of persons.51
in homogeneous
He cannot simply reject the equality

that
as an equality
not
of things,
365
of conventions;
commodities
now
that
enslavement
one-sided
and the ways
was
imposed
conventions
fa
of life they determine
51
simultaneous
of the
p. 159. Note Marx's
Grundrisse,
acceptance
1: 165.
of perception,
and subjectivity
Capital
objectivity
52
a
Yet Marx does imply that homogeneous
human
labor is merely
1: 172.
standard,
provisional
Capital
53
1131b25-1132a7.
Aristotle NE
Tucker, pp. 38, 48. Cf. Leszek Ko
3 vols. (Oxford: Oxford University
Currents
lakowski, Main
of Marxism,
Press,
1978), 1: 131, 171, 179, 311; but can one have individual subjectivity
without individualworth?

366
have

been
can live
Marxian
science, men
by the undistorted
co
with
In
and
with
each
other.
their
nature,
relationship
are not
the supervision
of some few who
they will permit
replaced
in an easy
operation
their rulers
are merely
their
after departing
so to speak.54
bookkeepers,
from the natural
of Aristo
economy
as exchange
after
from use
value,
departing
but
Thus, Marx,
to it?just
returns
tle,
returns
to it. Marx
value,
is a politi
that man
agrees with Aristotle
he
corrects
to
cal animal,
that
social.55
For
except
political
political
or
are
states
to the Greek
refers
and
cities
variable
and
histori
city,
as
to
In
and
such
bound
Marx's
rational
cally determined,
disappear.
society, the political and the conventional, having been reduced to the
function
economic
He
to say that man

that nature
can omit
by human
will nature,
are no
of management,
labor
by granting
men
required
by nature.
animal because
it is
longer
a social
is by nature
is rendered
wholesome
a wholeness
of needs
to men.56
and
But
therewith
the
knowledge of freedom, guarantee that history does not carry them

through communism and beyond? Will the "absolute limit" of na
ture's
24-hour
their
freedom?57
to man
the
day
set
to the mischief
bounds
It is ominous
social
animal
that
as a species
in Capital,
being,
suitably
he could
species,
that
to believe
Marx
went
back
He
modified.58
have
communism
to Aristotle
as
do as well
Marx
no
for as he very
the
to analyze
to
refers
knew,
doctrine of
allowed
apparently
too.
and Darwin
first
as
longer
well
the Aristotelian
the notion of species being presupposes

eternal
men
himself
the
value
form, and in doing so he returned to Aristotle's thought and to the

intelligibility of the things Aristotle thought about.59 The natural
described
is evanescent,
but it requires
economy
only to
by Aristotle
of
the
of
value
be corrected
Marx's
concept
discovery
by
supposedly
of Aristotle
to Aristotle.
Marx's
correction
indiscernible
presup
54
1: 448-50,
3: 436, 440, 851.
55Capital
p. 201; Grundrisse,
Ibid., 1: 444; cf. Early Writings,
pp. 84, 496.
56
3: 632 he allows that nature makes human labor suf
Yet in Capital
fice to support men.
57
1: 419; 3: 820. Marx hopes for the shortening
of the work
Capital
not for the lengthening
of nature's day.
ing day,
58
re
the Aristotelian,
anti-Darwinian
p. 356. Note
Early Writings,
mark in Grundrisse,
p. 105: "Human anatomy contains a key to the anatomy
of the ape."
59
Grundrisse,
pp. 110-11,
488; cf. Karl Marx and Friedrich
Engels,
trans, unk. (Moscow: Progress
The German
Publishers,
1976), p.
Ideology,
154.

367
In Capital,
and
antagonist;
not Hegel,
to be
Aristotle,
appears
the principal
to be
distinction
appears
between
the ancients,
is in part enslaved
who believed
that man
to
econ
not.
and
the
true
who
did
is
It
that
nature,
moderns,
political
into being as an independent
science
omy sprang
only "during the pe
riod of manufacture"
and that "its accentuation
of quantity
and ex
Aristotle.
poses
Marx's
main
value"
change
classical
But
is to be
minder
with
of form
according
attitude
of the writers
and use
The "political" is exploitation

sion
"the
hold
by quality
exclusively
in "political
is a remainder
"political"
economy"
of the natural
economy.
antiquity,
the
contrasted
who
to the
in commodities
to distinct
the
qualities.
forms
qualitative
quantify
is homogeneous
which
human
of
value."60
and
a re
through formalism, by the exten

conventions
Formalism
by means
labor, and
that
occurs
of
the
instead
rule men's
when
men
lives
to
fail
of value,
concept
one
elevate
quality
to the quality of qualities, personified in God or reified in a concept

such as freedom.61 Bourgeois formalism is less disguised than that of
Aristotle
do the
self.
or of "Aristotelity"
classical
and
writers,
It is nonetheless
political
economy"
of "political"
moval
derived
is the
from
same
because
so reveals
it promises
itself by
more
freedom
than
to conceal
trying
from Aristotle;
and Marx's
"critique
as his correction
of Aristotle,
the
"political
it
of
re
economy."
Harvard
60
1: 486-88.
Capital
61
and Class
Georg Luk?cs, History
stone (Cambridge, Mass.: M.I.T.
Press,
University.
trans. R. Living
Consciousness,
1971), pp. 83-110.


Marx On Aristotle - Freedom, Money, and Politics - Harvey C. Mansfield Jr.

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Marx On Aristotle - Freedom, Money, and Politics - Harvey C. Mansfield Jr.

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Marx on Aristotle: Freedom, Money, and Politics

Author(s): Harvey C. Mansfield Jr.

This content downloaded from 130.194.20.173 on Wed, 27 Nov 2013 07:48:06 AM

civilized society and, as against Ri

Smith, but also in the highest

In order to show that labor is the source of all value and of no

for the understanding

1274b39, 1275a32, 1276b3.

1980 by theReview ofMetaphysics

This content downloaded from 130.194.20.173 on Wed, 27 Nov 2013 07:48:06 AM

HARVEYC. MANSFIELD, JR.

Marx himself begins Capital

at some distance from politics, with

Yet of course in the afterword

as individuals but are consid

inwhich they are not held responsible

and quotes with

succeeds another; this is the history of a social whole,

tory" but in truth is no view of history at all.

then, is a cell with

See Shlomo Avineri,

Ibid., 1: 102; cf. ?: 168with 169, 1: 798 with 783-84.

laws cannot be "models" of something more general,

This content downloaded from 130.194.20.173 on Wed, 27 Nov 2013 07:48:06 AM