Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
1
The Theory of Capitalist States Colin Barker Halaman 2
Now if the capital relation has this form, and if the state
is an aspect of the capital relation, we might expect to find
in the state form elements of this dual determination. As we
do. The nation-state, capitalisms state form, is itself both a
structure of despotism vis--vis its subjects and a
structure of competition vis--vis its rivals. Its very form
expresses the fact that the capitalist state is not something
above and separate from the relations of capitalist
production, but is itself directly part of those relations.
Being anything but a state of the whole bourgeoisie, each
nation-state is never more than a state of some capital(s), of
a segment of the whole bourgeoisie. Moreover, to insist on
The Theory of Capitalist States Colin Barker Halaman 6
H&P are not, of course, alone in the view that the state
is not capital, which is repeated by numbers of writers,
including Altvater, Offe and Habermas. In all cases, the
strict demarcation line drawn between state and capital
rests on an account of the state form in which the state is
treated in the singular. [6] In all cases, for the purpose of
analyzing the capitalist state, the bounds of capitalism are
treated as coterminous with the national frontiers. That is,
rather than seeing capitalist society as a global social
formation, as a real totality, the world is seen as a set of
capitalist societies, a mere agglomeration and not a unity.
Notes
to this aspect of the capitalist state seem not to remark on it. For example,
Martin Shaw (1974) produced a very useful critical review of some
problems in the development of the Marxist theory of the state without
even mentioning the states national form: yet his view, that Russia and
Eastern European countries are state capitalist formations, depends
theoretically on exactly this conception.
3. There is a very useful discussion of this in Banaji, 1977.
4. E.g. Marx, 1973, p.421: Since value forms the foundation of capital,
and since it therefore necessarily exists only through exchange
for counter-value, it thus necessarily repels itself from itself. A universal
capital, one without alien capitals confronting it, with which it exchanges
and, from the present standpoint, nothing confronts it but wage-
laborers or itself is therefore a non-thing. The reciprocal compulsion
between capitals is already contained in capital as realized exchange-
value.
5. E.g. Marx, 1976, p.477: ... in the society where the capitalist mode of
production prevails, anarchy in the social division of labor and despotism
in the manufacturing division of labor mutually condition each other ...
6. In the case of Elmar Altvater, who is extremely explicit in theorizing a
conceptual gap between capital and state, the problem is rooted in a
misreading and misinterpretation of Engels Anti-Dhring. Engels, who
admittedly did not theorize his point fully, wrote of the possibility of the
centralization and concentration of capital reaching the state itself, and
gave a clear affirmative answer to the question, would such a national
state capital still be capital? (Engels, 1959, p.384). The modern state, he
explained, is essentially ... the ideal personification of the total national
capital. Altvater does not notice that Engels is talking of a
total national capital, and reads him as referring to the absurd notion of a
completely centralized capital in general. Had Engels meant any such
thing, he would as Altvater suggests have been uttering a nonsense.
But he wasnt: Altvater was misreading him, seemingly because he himself
forgot that national limits do not coincide with capitalist limits. See
Altvater, 1973, esp. p.99; Barker, 1977.
7. It is sometimes argued, against the validity of the very concept of state
capital itself, that capitalist production rests on a particular form
of private property relations. Far from disputing the point, I would only
The Theory of Capitalist States Colin Barker Halaman 15
Bibliography
Altvater, Elmar, 1973, Notes on some problems of state
interventionism, Kapitalistate, 1.
Banaji, Jairus, 1977, Modes of production in a materialist conception of
history, Capital and Class, 3.
Barker, Colin, 1977, On Altvater, mimeo, CSE Manchester.
von Braunmhl, Claudia, 1974, Kapitalakkumulation im
Weltzusammenhang. Zum methodischen Ansatz einer Analyse
des brgerhichen Nationalstaates, Gesellschaft, 1, Frankfurt.
von Braunmhl, Claudia, 1976, Die nationalstaatliche Organisiertheit der
brgerlichen Gesellschaft: Ansatz zu einer historischen und
systematischen Untersuchung, Gesellschaft, 8/9, Frankfurt.
von Braunmhl, Claudia, 1977, The nation state and the world market:
on the national organisation of bourgeois society in John
Holloway and Sol Picciotto, eds., The State and Capital: a
Marxist Debate, Edward Arnold, forthcoming.
Cliff, Tony, 1970, State Capitalism in Russia, Pluto.
Engels, Frederick, 1959, Anti-Dhring, Moscow.
Harman, Chris, 1974, Bureaucracy and Revolution in Eastern Europe,
Pluto.
Holloway, John and Picciotto, Sol, 1977, Capital, Crisis and the
State, Capital and Class, 2.
Marx, Karl, 1973, Grundrisse, Penguin.
Marx, Karl, 1976, Capital, Vol. 1, Penguin.
Shaw, Martin, 1974, The theory of the state and politics: a central
paradox of Marxism, Economy and Society, 3.4.