OF HUMANITY
Jacques Camatte
y,
Bl ack Red
Detroi t
1975
The essays included in the present work first appeared in the
journal In variance (Annee VI, Serle II, No. 3, 1973) with the titles,
"Errance de I'humanite; Conscience repressive; Communisme," and "Declin
du mode de production ou declin de I'humanite?" The author
of these Jacques worked with Amadeo and the
group of theoreticians were known as the Italian communist
left. After the events which took place in France in May of 1968,
Caratte, together with his comrades on In variance, began a critical
analysis of the activities of the Italian communist left, the work of
Bordiga as well as the work of Marx. The title of the journal originally
referred to "the invariance of the theory of the proletariat," the theory of
the League of Communists and the First International. By 1973 critics
said of this journal that "nothing varies more than In variance. By 1973
Camatte and his comrades, pursuing the critical analysis they had begun,
were led to conclude that "what is invariant is the aspiration to rediscover
the lost human community, and this cannot take place through a re
establishment of the past, but only through new creation." Their theoret
ical quest led them to a complete rejection of the theory of revolutionary
parties and organizations, the theory of revolutionary consciousness, the
theory of the progressive development of productive forces. "The French
May movement showed that what is needed is a new mode of living, a
new life." (The above quotations are from the last article in Invariance
No. 3, 1973.)
Works by Bordiga and Camatte are available (in Italian) from Ed.
I nternati onal, Casella Postale 177, 17100 Savona, Italy. Issues of
In variance are available (in French) from J. Camatte, B.P. 133, 83 170
Brignoles, France. The essays in the present work were translated from
French by Fredy Perlman with assistance from Camatte; the illustrations
were selected and prepared by Allan Foster; Lorraine Perlman and Judy
Campbell participated in the photography, printing and binding. The cover
is a detail from a painting by Dali; the two pictures facing the first page
of each essay are by Kley; the remaining illustrations are composed from
advertisements, "the discourse of capital." The present work is available
from Black & Red, P.O. Box 9546, Detroit, Michigan, 48202.
CONTENTS
I. The Wanderi ng of Humanity 5
1. Despoti sm of Capi tal 5
2 . Growth of Product ive Forces;
Domsti cati on of Hu man Bei ngs 16
CAPITAL
10lumCut
We can put you In better touch with your
business hy replacing a lot of time-consuming
non-productive status meetings. paperwork
and guesswork with simple, automated
systems that tell everyone who needs to
know, everything they need to know.
whenever they need lknow it. No matter
where they are or what they do ! how
they do it.
We can deliver a compatible, expandible,
high-perfonnance family of systems
We have another family of on-line/balch
that offers centralized control and a
of standard applications software
fon a network offering batch
real-time data entry
and retrieval.
decentralized
control and
JusttwobasioindustriessuppoHtmworld.
HelDing to move laster.
10
society. The law of value imprisoned human beings, forcing
them into stereotypes, into fixed modes of being. The highest
development of morality appeared in Kant's categorical
imperative. By engulfing the general equ by becoming
its own representation, capital removed the prohibitions and
rigid schemas. At that point human beings are fixed to its
movement, which can take off from the normal or abnormal,
moral or immoral human being.
The fi ni te, l i mi ted hu man bei ng, the i ndivi dual of
bourgeoi s soci ety, is di sappear i ng. Peopl e are passionatel y
cal l i ng for the l i berated hu man bei ng, a bei ng who i s at once
a soci al bei ng and a Gemeinwesen. But at present i t i s capi tal
that i s recomposi ng man, gi vi ng hi m form and matter;
communal bei ng comes i n the form of col l ecti ve worker,
i ndivi dual i ty i n the form of consumer of capi tal . Si nce capi tal
i s i ndef i ni te i t al l ows t he hu man bei ng to have access to a
state beyond the fi ni te i n an i nfi n i te becomi ng of appropria
ti on whi ch is never real i zed, renewi ng at every i nstant the
i l l usi on of total bl ossomi ng.
The human bei ng i n the i mage of capi tal ceases to
consi der any event defi n i tive, but as an i nstant i n an i nfi ni te
process. Enjoyment i s al l owed but i s never possi bl e. Man
becomes a sensual and passi ve voyeur, capi tal a sensual and
suprasensual bei ng. Hu man l i fe ceases to be a process and
becomes l i near. Aspi red by the process of capi tal , man can no
l onger be "h i msel f. " Th i s aspi rati on evacuates hi m, creati ng a
vacuu m whi ch he must conti nual l y sati sfy wi th representa
ti ons (capi tal ) . More general l y, capi tal in process secures i ts
domi nati on by maki ng every process l i near. Thus i t breaks
the movement of natu re, and this l eads to the destructi on of
nature. But i f thi s destructi on might endanger its own
process, capi tal adapts i tsel f to nature (by anti -pol l ut i on, for
exampl e) .
1 1
The non-living becomes autonomous-and triumphs.
Death in life: Hegel had intuited Nietzsche described it,
Rainer Maria Rilke sang about Freud almost institu-
tionalized it (the death exhibited it as
buffoon and the it: live death."
The fem movement has individualized it:
"The male likes death-it excites him sexually and,
already dead i nsi de, he wants to di e. "
6
The autonomy of form affects al l aspects of l i fe
domi nated by capi tal Knowl edge is val i d onl y if it i s
formal i zed, i f i t i s empti ed of content. Absol ute knowl edge i s
tautol ogy real i zed; i t i s dead form depl oyed over al l
knowl edge. Sci ence is i ts systemati zation ; epi stemol ogy i s i ts
redundancy.
I n the era of i ts real domi nati on, capital has run away
(as the cybernet i cians put i t) , i t has escaped
J
I t is no l onger
6
Valerie Solanas, The SCUM Manifesto (The Society for Cutting
Up Men), New York: Olympia Press, 1970.
7
We analyzed the autonomization of capital in Le Vie chapitre
idit du Capital et I'oeuvre eonomique de Marx ( 1966), particularly
in the notes added in 1972.
In a future article we will analyze this subject more thoroughly
by showing that Marx had raised the problem without recognizing it in
its totality, and by analyzing the capitalist mode of production of
today. This will also lead us to define labor and its role in the
develop
r
ent of humanity. G. Brule already bean such an analysis in
his article in In variance No. 2, Serie I I : "Le travail, I e travail productif
et les mythes de la classe ouvriere et de la classe moyenne. " ( Labor,
productive labor and the myths of the working class and the middle
class).
I n general we can say that the concept of labor is reductive: it
encompasses only one part of human activity. But the call for its
1 2
controlled by human beings. ( Human beings in the form of
proletarians might, at least passively, represent a barrier to
capitaL) It is no longer limited by nature. Some production
processes carried out over periods of time lead to clashes with
natural barriers: increase in the number of human beings,
destruction of nature, pollution. But these barriers cannot be
theoretically regarded as barriers which capital cannot super
sede. At present there are three possible courses for the
capitalist mode of production (in addition to the destruction
abolition is a call for the destruction of this remainder of activity,
which is a utopian demand of capital. The proj ect of communism
inserts itself into the context of human life, activity being no more than
a modality of expression. Love, meditation, day-dreaming, play and
other manifestations of human beings are placed outside the field of life
when we trap ourselves within the concept of labor. Marx defined l abor
as an activity
w
hich transforms nature or matter for one or another
purpose, but the concept of nature can no longer be accepted as it is. I n
the period of dominatio
n
of capital, the human being is no l onger in
contact with nature (especially during work). Between nature and the
individual lies capital. Capital becomes nature.
On the other hand, in his so-called "philosophical" works, Marx
clearly refers to all human activity and asserts that communism cannot
be reduced to the l iberation of labor. This position does not completely
disappear from the rest of Marx's works, and survives alongside the
"revolutionary reformist" conception expressed in Capital. For the
Marxiss the problem is subsequently simplified: they exalt labor, pure
and simple. In Trotsky's work, for example, there is no longer a trace of
Marx's complex analysis, but rather a dislay of the language of
domestication, the language of capital : "The entire history of humanity
is a hisory of the organization and eucation of social man for labor,
with a view to obtaining from him greater productivity. " (Terrorism
and Communism [ French e. : Paris: Ed. 10/ 18, 1963, p. 2 18] .)
1 3
Te P
o te Ft
Someday, there will be a machine that will
automatically feed and cycle originals. Provide
limitless sorting of Automatically adjust
for various ' two paper
rept
withe
~1.
Science Fiction? No. Science fact .
It's here today.
l
a
Y
.
1 4
of humanity-a hypothesis that cannot be ignored):
-complete autonomy of capital: a mechanistic
where human beings become simple accessories an
automated system, though still retaining an executive
role;
-mutation of the human being, or rather a change of
the species: producti on of a perfectl y programmabl e
bei ng which has l ost al l the characteristics of the
species Homo spiens. This wou l d not requi re an
automatized system, since th i s perfect human bei ng
wou l d be made to do whatever i s required;
-general ized l unacy: i n the place of hu man bei ngs, and
on the basi s of thei r present l i mi tati ons, capi tal real izes
everythi ng they desire ( normal or abnormal ) , but
human bei ngs cannot fi nd themsel ves and enj oyment
continual l y l ies in the future. The human bei ng is
carri ed off i n the ru n-away of capi tal , and keeps i t
gOi ng.
8
The resu l t is ul ti matel y the same: the evol ution of the
human bei ng i s frozen, sooner i n one case than in another.
These possi bi l i ties are abstract l imi ts; i n real i ty they tend to
u nfol d si mul taneousl y and i n a contradi ctory manner. To
conti nue on i ts i ndefi nite course, capital i s forced to cal l on
the acti vi ty of human bei ngs, t o exal t thei r creativity. And
to secure its permanence, capi tal has to act qu ickl y. It runs
i nto barri ers of ti me and space whi ch are l inked to the
decrease of natural resou rces (whi ch cannot all be repl aced
by synthetic substi tutes) and the mad i ncrease of human
8
This possibility i s described and exalted i n Future Shock by
Alvin Tofler.
1 5
population (which causes the disappearance of numerous
forms of life).
It becomes clear that raising the banner of labor or its
abolition remains on the terrain of capital, within the frame
work of its evolution. Even the movement toward u nlimited
generalization of desire is isomorphic to the indefinite move
ment of capital.
The capitalist mode of production is not decadent and
cannot be decadent. Bourgeoi s soci ety di si ntegrated, to be
su re, but thi s di d not l ead to communi sm. At most we can
say that communi sm was affi rmed i n opposi ti on to bou rgeoi s
soci ety, but not i n opposi ti on to capi tal . The run-away of
capi tal was not perceived; in fact th i s run-away was real i zed
onl y wi th the ri se of the fasci st, Nazi , popu l ar front move
ments, the New Deal , etc. , movements whi ch are transi tions
from formal to real domi nati on. It was thought that com
muni sm was emergi ng from the social i zati on of human ac
ti vi ty and thus from the destructi on of pri vate property,
whi l e i n fact capi tal was emergi ng as a materi al communi ty.
2. Growth of Productive Forces;
Domesticati on of Human Bei ngs
The capital i st mode of producti on becomes decadent
onl y wi th th outbreak of effective revol uti on agai nst capi tal .
As of now, human bei ngs have been decayi ng f or a century,
they have been domesti cated by capi tal . Thi s domesti cati on
i s the source of the prol etariat's i nabi l i ty to l i berate
humani ty. Productive forces conti nue to grow, but these are
forces of capital .
1 6
"Capitalist production develops technique and the
combination of the social production process only by
simultaneously using u p the two sources from which
all wealth springs: the land and the laborer."g
It makes no sense to proclaim that humanity's pro
ductive forces have stopped growing, that the capitalist mode
of production has begun to decay. Such views reveal the
inability of many theoreti cians to recogni ze the ru n-away O!
capi tal and thus to u nderstand communi sm and the com
mun i st revol uti on. Paradoxi cal l y, Marx anal yzed the de
composi ti on of bou rgeoi s soci ety and the condi ti ons for the
devel opment of the capi tal i st mode of producti on: a soci ety
where productive forces cou Id devel op freel y. What he
presented as the project of communi sm was real i zed by
capi tal .
Marx el aborated a dialecti c of the devel opment of
productive forces. 10 He hel d that human emanci pati on
depended on ,thei r fu l l est expansi on. Communi st revol uti on
-therefore the end of the capi tal i st mode of producti on-was
9
Marx, Capital, Vol . I [Le Capital, L. I , t. 2, p. 182. )
10
This requires a detai l ed study which wou l d incl ude the
anal ysis of l abor. I n the articl e which fol l ows we begin this study: it
presents the first concl usions we've reached. I n particul ar we want to
anal yze the stage of this decadence of humanity, how it is expressed,
etc. I n addition we want to show the intimate connection between the
movement of val ue and the dial ectic of the productive forces. The end
of the movement of val ue and of capital is the end of a mode of
representation and destroys its autonomy. The Marxian dial ectic wil l be
compl etel y overcome.
1 7
to take place when this mode of production was no longer
"large enough" to contain the productive forces. But Marx is
trapped in an ambiguity. He thinks that the human being is a
to and that the human being
as a to its development as power. Marx also
suggests that capital can escape from the human barrier. He is
led to postulate a self-negation of capital. This self-negation
takes the form of crises which he perceived either as
moments when capi tal i s restructu red (a regenerati on carri ed
out by the destructi on of products i nhi bi ti ng the process:
another reason why capi tal i sm must di sappear) , or as the
actual moment when capi tal i s destroyed.
I n other words, whi l e provi di ng the el ements necessary
for u nderstandi ng the real domi nati on of capi tal over soci ety,
Marx di d not devel op the concept; he di d not recogni ze the
run-away of capi tal . For Marx, gol d remai ned a barri er to
capi tal , the contradi cti on between val ori zati on and de
val ori zati on remai ned i n force, and the pl u nder and estrange
ment of prol etari ans remai ned an obstacl e to the evol uti on of
capi tal.
" I n the devel opment of productive forces there comes
a stage when producti ve forces and means of i nter
course are brought i nto bei ng, whi ch, u nder the
exi sti ng rel ati onsh i ps, onl y cause mi sch i ef, and are no
l onger producti ve but destructive forces ( mach i nery
and money) . . .
( Before conti nu i ng the ci tati on, we shou l d menti on the
retardati on of those who procl ai m that capi tal now devel ops
onl y destructive forces. It tu rns out that for Marx, i n 1847,
capi tal i s destructi on; he conti nued to hol d thi s vi ew. )
1 8
" ... and connected with this a class is called forth,
which has to bear all the burdens of society without
enjoying its advantages, which, ousted from society, is
forced into the most decided antagonism to all other
classes; a class which forms the majority of all
members of society, and from which emanates the
consciousness of the necessity of a fundamental revolu
tion, the communist consciousness, which may, of
course, arise amor]g the other classes too through the
contempl ation of the situation of this c1ass."
11
The prol etariat is the great hope of Marx and of the
revolutionaries of his epoch. This is the class whose struggle
for emancipation wil l liberate al l h umanity. Marx's work is at
once an analysis of the capitalist mode of production and of
the proletariat's role within it. This is why the theory of
va l ue and the theory of the proletariat are connected, though
not directly:
"The alove appl ication of the Ricardian theory, that
the entire social product belongs to the workers as
their product, because they are the sol e real producers,
l eads directl y to communism. But, as Marx i ndicates
t oo in the above-quoted passage, formally it is
economical ly i ncorrect, for it is simpl y an application
of moral ity to economics. Accordi ng to the laws of
bourgeois economics, the greatest part of the product
does not bel ong to the workers who have produced it.
If we now say: that is u njust, that ought not to be so,
t h e n that has nothi ng immediately to do with
economics. We are merel y sayi ng that this economic
fact is in contradiction to our sense of morality. Marx,
11
Engel s, Marx, The German Idelogy, [Moscow, 1964, p. 85.|
1 9
therefore, never based his communist demands upon
this, but upon the inevitable collapse of the capitalist
mode of production which is daily taking place before
our eyes to an ever greater degree
_
"
12
Marx did not develop a philosophy of exploitation, as
Bordiga often recalled. How will the capitalist mode of pro
duction be destroyed, and what does the "ruin" consist of?
( Engel s, i n 1 884, provi ded arguments for those who today
speak of the decadence of capi tal i sm.) Thi s i s not speci fi ed.
After Marx the prol etari at was retai ned as the cl ass necessary
for the fi nal destructi on, the defi ni tive abol i ti on of capi ta l
i sm, and it was taken for granted that the prol etari at wou l d
be forced to do thi s.
Bernstei n grasped thi s aspect of Marx's theory, and
appl i ed hi msel f to demonstratirg that there were no contra
di cti ons push i ng toward di ssol uti on.
1
3
But thi s l ed Bernstei n
to become an apol ogi st for the ol d bourgeoi s soci ety whi ch
capi tal was about to destroy, especi al l y after 1 91 3; con
sequentl y hi s work does not i n any way cl ari fy the present
si tuati on.
Marx l eft us materi al wi th whi ch to overcome the
theory of val ue, and al so materi al neessary for overcomi ng
t he theory of the prol etari at. The two theor i es ar e rel ated,
and justi fy each other. I n the IuDdItssa, Marx prai ses the
}
1
2
Engels, "Preface" to The Povert of Phiosphy by Marx,
Ne York: 1 963, p. 1 1 .
1 3
See particularl y "The Movement of I ncome in Modern
S
ciety" and "Crises and Possibilities of Adaptation" in Preupposi
tions of Scialism and the Tass of Social Democracy, Rowohlt Verlag,
pp. 73ft.
20
capitalist mode of production, which he considers revolu
tionary. What is not stated explicitly is that the proletariat
has this attribute to the extent that it carries out the internal
laws of capitalism. The proletariat is present in the analysis.
Marx postulates that the proletariat's misery will necessarily
push it to revolt, to destroy the capitalist mode of produc
tion and thus to liberate whatever is progressive in this mode
of production, namely the tendency to expand productive
forces.
I n Capital the prol etariat is no l onger treated as the
cl ass that represents the dissol ution of society, as negation at
work. The cl ass in question here is the working c l ass, a cl ass
which is more or l ess i ntegrated in society, which is engaged
in revol utionary reformism: struggl e for wage increases,
struggl e against heavy work i mposed on women and chi l dren,
struggl e for the shorteni ng of the worki ng day.
At the end of the fi rst vol ume, Marx expl ains the
dynamic which l eads to the expropriation of the ex
propriators, 10 the increase of misery
1
4
which wil l force the
prol etariat to rise agai nst capital .
1
5
I n the third vol u me, and al so in the Critique of the
Gotha Programme, Marx does not descri be a real dis
conti nuity between capital ism and communism. Productive
forces conti nue to grow. The disontinu ity l ies in the fact
that the goal of production is inverted (after the revol ution;
i. e. , the disconti nuity is temporal ). The goal ceases to be
weal th, but human bei ngs. However, if there is no real dis-
1 4
Here we should be careful , as Bordiga justly observed, not to
reduce this to an economic concept.
1 5
Marx, Capital, Vol. I, New York: Random House, pp.
835-
837.
21
continuity between capitalism and communism, human
beings must be wilfully transformed; how else could the goal
be inverted? This is Marx's revolutionary reformism in its
greatest amplitude. The dictatorship of the proletariat, the
transitional phase (in the Grundrisse it is the capitalist mode
of production that constitutes this transitional phase: this is
obviously extremely relevant to the way we define com
munism today) is a period of reforms, the most important
bei ng the shorteni ng of the working day and use of the l abor
voucher. What we shou l d note here, though we cannot i nsi st
on i t, i s the connecti on between reformi sm and di ctatorship.
The prol etari at seems to be needed to gu i de the de
vel opment of producti ve forces away from the pol e of val ue
toward t he pol e of humani ty. I t may happen that the pro
l etari at i s i ntegrated by capi tal , but-and thi s i s abused by
vari ous Marxi sts-cri ses destroy the prol etari at's reserves and
reinstate i t i nto i ts revol uti onary rol e. Then the i nsu rrecti on
agai nst capi tal i s possi bl e agai n.
Thus Marx's wor k seems l argel y t o be the authenti c
consci ousness of th" capi tal i st mode of producti on. The
bourgeoi si e, a nd the capi ta l i sts who fol l owed, were abl e to
express onl y a fal se consci ousness with the hel p of thei r
vari ous theori es. Further more, t he capi tal i st mode of pro
ducti on has real i zed Marx's prol etari an proj ect. By remai ni ng
on a narrowl y Marx i st terrai n, the prol etari at and i ts theoreti
ci ans were outfl anked by the fol l owers of capi tal . Capi tal ,
havi ng achi eved real domi nati on, rati fi es t he val i di ty of
Marx' s