s e a r c h , ' ed. by W i l l i a m Domhoff, I n s u r g e n t S o c i o l o g i s t , Spring.

K a r l Marx and F. Engels (19481, The C o m u n i s t Manifesto, N e w York: I n t e r n a t i o n a l Pub-

lishers.
R. Miliband (19731, " P o u l a n t z a s on t h e capi.. t a l i s t s t a t e , " N e w L e f t R e v i e w , p. 8 i .

B e r t e l l Ollman (1968), "Marx's u s e o f 'class'," American J o u r n a l o f Sociology, March.

(1971) , A l i e n a t i o n : Marx's concept i o n o f Man i n C a p i t a l i s t s o c i e t y , Cambridge U.P.

John Mollenkorpf ( 1 9 7 5 ) , "Theories o f t h e s t a t e and power s t r u c t u r e r e s e a r c h , " i n ' N e w D i r e c t i o n s i n Power S t r u c t u r e Re-

James O'Connor ( 1 9 7 4 ) , The C o r p o r a t i o n and t h e State, New York: Harper Colophon.

THE MARXIAN THEORY OF THE STATE David Harvey Johns Hopkins University
INTRODUCTORY REMdRKS

L a r r y Wolf's p a p e r raises a v a r i e t y o f q u e s t i o n s a b o u t t h e role o f t h e S t a t e i n r e l a t i o n t o c a p i t a l i s t economic development. Some o f t h e q u e s t i o n s are p r a c t i c a l and concern e x a c t l y how and i n what ways w e can a n t i c i p a t e t h e i n t e r v e n t i o n of t h e State i n t h e American economy over t h e n e x t few y e a r s . A s i n t h e 1930's, a n o t h e r t i m e o f economic t r o u b l e s , t h e p o s s i b i l i t y o f c e n t r a l i z e d n a t i o n a l economic p l a n n i n g is b e i n g a c t i v e l y c o n s i d e r e d ( t o g e t h e r w i t h a more b r u t a l r e t u r n t o " p u r e market f o r c e s " ) as a means t o r a t i o n a l i z e an economic o r d e r t h a t h a s o b v i o u s l y become unbalanced and, how close perhaps, p e r i l o u s l y close w e w i l l probably n e v e r know to being t o t a l l y unhinged. Q u i t e p r o p e r l y , Wolf sees t h e move towards n a t i o n a l economic p l a n n i n g as c r e a t i n g new o p p o r t u n i t i e s as w e l l as new problems f o r t h e r a d i c a l L e f t . Q u i t e p r o p e r l y too, he a r g u e s t h a t t h e manner i n which t h e move i s made w i l l have an e f f e c t upon t h e outcomes. But t h e i s s u e i s perhaps more complex t h a n t h a t . Given t h e p r e s e n t power s t r u c t u r e I a m n o t as sanguine a b o u t even t h e p o t e n t i a l outcomes as he i s . I f e e l I am watching a re-run of a t i r e d movie of t h e 1930's, w i t h as shades o f t h e 1 8 9 0 ' ~ ~ g o a l s s u c h as " s o c i a l j u s t i c e " and " c o n s e r v a t i o n " are gradually converted i n t o g o a l s of e f f i c i e n c y and market r a t i o n a l i t y kinged w i t h not a l i t t l e socialism f o r t h e r i c h , f i n a n c i a l s u p p o r t f o r shaky c o r p o r a t i o n s and f i n a n c i a l i n s t i t u t i o n s , and t h e l i k e . I n each of t h e s e t w o p r e c e e d i n g eras a whiff o f n a t i o n a l economic p o l i c y making was q u i c k l y combined w i t h t h e d r i v e t o r a t i o n a l i z e t h e market system t o c r e a t e t h e very problems it w a s designed t o get r i d of on a h i g h e r p l a n e and i n more concent r a t e d form i n t h e l o n g run.

---

Some o f t h e q u e s t i o n s which W o l f raises are t h e o r e t i c a l , however, and concern t h e f o r m u l a t i o n o f an a p p r o p r i a t e c o n c e p t u a l framework f o r t h i n k i n g a b o u t s t a t e i n t e r 80

ventionism i n g e n e r a l . I n t h e c o u r s e o f t h e s e remarks Wolf t a k e s a few s h i e s a t "dogmatic Marxists" and t h o s e who would reduce t h e S t a t e t o a " m e r e s u p e r s t r u c t u r a l " form, t o a mere m a n i f e s t a t i o n o f " t h e economic basis". While t h e s e views are n o t unknown among M a r x i s t s , I have t h e d i s t i n c t i m p r e s s i o n t h a t t h e y are f r e q u e n t l y figments of b o u r g e o i s s c h o l a r s h i p , designed t o discourage people f r o m t r y i n g t o understand M a n i n a l l h i s complexity. Thus w e f i n d Marx f r e q u e n t l y p o r t r a y e d a s d e p i c t i n g men and women as dominated by r a t i o n a l economic c a l c u l a t i o n when it w a s e x a c t l y Marx's p o i n t t h a t it i s t h e c a p i t a l i s t mode o f p r o d u c t i o n which forces s u c h r a t i o n a l i t y upon us a a i n s t a l l o f t h e e v i d e n c e as t o what uman b e i n g s are r e a l l y a l l a b o u t . W e f i n d Marx p o r t r a y e d as an economic determ i n i s t when it w a s p r e c i s e l y Marx's p o i n t t h a t t h e realm of freedom b e g i n s where t h e realm o f n e c e s s i t y e n d s and t h a t it i s o n l y through s t r u g g l e , p o l i t i c a l and p e r s o n a l , t h a t w e can a c h i e v e t h e command over o u r social and p h y s i c a l e x i s t e n c e which w i l l y i e l d u s t h a t freedom. And so it i s w i t h Marx's a n a l y s i s o f t h e S t a t e . The e s s a y t h a t follows (which i s drawn f r o m a book t h a t seems t o t a k e an i n t e r m i n a b l e time t o f i n i s h ) a t t e m p t s t o s o r t o u t some of t h e i s s u e s c o n c e r n i n g t h e conception o f t h e S t a t e i n c a p i t a l i s t s o c i e t y . The e s s a y is r a t h e r a b s t r a c t i n n a t u r e and f o r t h i s I a p o l o g i s e , p a r t i c u l a r l y t o t h o s e who p r e f e r immediate "down-to-earth" a n a l y s e s o r c r u s h i n g exposees. But I believe t h a t t h e p r a c t i c a l q u e s t i o n s t o which Wolf a l l u d e s can be understood o n l y a g a i n s t some a d e q u a t e c o n c e p t u a l and t h e o r e t i c a l background. F u r t h e r , t h e t h e o r y h a s t o be r o b u s t enough t o h e l p u s u n d e r s t a n d t h e b e h a v i o u r o f t h e S t a t e under a w i d e v a r i e t y o f economic, s o c i a l and p o l i t i cal c i r c u m s t a n c e s i n o t h e r words, t h e theory has t o h e l p us i n Spain, France, B r i t a i n , Sweden, A r g e n t i n a , C h i l e , Port u g a l etc., as w e l l as i n t h e United States.

--

For this reason it i s necessary t o resort t o a r a t h e r abstract mode of a n a l y s i s and t o l e t concrete i n v e s t i g a t i o n s t a k e up t h e matter of how t h e theory works i n a c t u a l
h i s t o r i c a l s i t u a t i o n s . Obviously, t h e theory remains a mere a b s t r a c t i o n u n t i l it is p u t t o work. A l l I can s a y i s t h a t t h e t h e o r e t i c a l statement which follows has been y h e l p f u l t o m e i n m s t u d i e s of t h e urbani z a t i o n process i n B r i t a i n and t h e United S t a t e s and t h a t I have a l s o found i t h e l p f u l a s a means t o t h i n k about t h e pros p e c t s f o r S t a t e a c t i o n i n t h e p r e s e n t state of c a p i t a l i s t development. I offer the piece i n t h e hope t h a t o t h e r s may s i m i l a r l y f i n d it u s e f u l and a s a p a r t i a l r e b u t t a l and p a r t i a l commentary on Wolf's remarks on t h e Marxist theory of t h e S t a t e i n general.

as "an independent form" which emerges o u t of "a c o n t r a d i c t i o n between t h e i n t e r e s t of the i n d i v i d u a l and t h a t of t h e community." T h i s c o n t r a d i c t i o n i s "always based" i n t h e social s t r u c t u r e and i n p a r t i c u l a r "on t h e classes, a l r e a d y determined by t h e d i v i s i o n of labour and of which one dominates a l l o t h e r s . " Frau t h i s i t follows " t h a t a l l s t r u g g l e s are merely t h e within t h e State. i l l u s o r y forms i n which t h e real s t r u g g l e s o f the d i f f e r e n t classes are fought o u t among one another." Engels summarized t h i s view o f the S t a t e many y e a r s l a t e r i n an oft-quoted passage (which Lenin regarded a s fundamental t o Marxist orthodoxy) :

...

..

THE MARXIAN THEORY OF STATE

Marx intended t o w r i t e a s p e c i a l treatise on t h e S t a t e b u t never even began t h e p r o j e c t . H i s views on t h e S t a t e are scatt e r e d throughout h i s works and, w i t h t h e h e l p of Engels's more voluminous w r i t i n g s , it i s p o s s i b l e t o r e c o n s t r u c t , a s , f o r example, Chang (1931) has done, a v e r s i o n of t h e Marxian theory of t h e S t a t e . Apart from Lenin's (1949 e d i t i o n ) f i e r c e advocacy of what might be c a l l e d an "orthodox" Marxist p o s i t i o n and G r a m s c i ' s ( 1 9 7 1 e d i t i o n ) p e r c e p t i v e a n a l y s e s , few Marxists paid a t t e n t i o n t o t h e m a t t e r u n t i l r e c e n t l y , when works by Miliband (19691, Poulantzas (1973; 1975; 19761, O f f e (19731, A l t v a t e r (19731, O'Connor (19731, Laclau (1975) and o t h e r s , p u t t h e q u e s t i o n of t h e S t a t e back i n t o t h e f o r e f r o n t of Marxist a n a l y s i s . These c o n t r i b u t i o n s have r e c e n t l y been reviewed by Gold, Lo & Wright (1975). This r e v i v a l of i n t e r e s t i n t h e State has been long overdue, There i s s c a r c e l y any a s p e c t of production and consumption which i s n o t now deeply a f f e c t e d , d i r e c t l y o r i n d i r e c t l y , by State p o l i c i e s . But it would be incorrect t o maintain t h a t t h e State has only r e c e n t l y become a c e n t r a l p i v o t t o t h e functioning o f c a p i t a l i s t s o c i e t y . It has always been t h e r e only i t s forms and modes of f u n c t i o n i n g have changed as c a p i t a l i s m has matured. I n t h i s e s s a y I w i l l t r y to lay a theoretical basis for understanding t h e r o l e of t h e S t a t e i n c a p i t a l i s t societies and show how t h e S t a t e m u s t , o f necessiey, perform c e r t a i n b a s i c minimum t a s k s i n support o f a c a p i t a l i s t m a d e of production.

The s t a t e is t h e r e f o r e by no means a power imposed on s o c i e t y f r o m w i t h o u t ; j u s t a s l i t t l e is i t Ifthe r e a l i t y o f t h e moral i d e a , " " t h e image and t h e r e a l i t y o f r e a s o n , " a s Regel m a i n t a i n s . Rather, i t i s a product o f s o c i e t y a t a p a r t i c u l a r s t a g e of development; i t is t h e admiasion t h a t t h i s s o c i e t y has i n v o l v e d i t s e l f in u n s o l u b t e s e l f c o n t r a d i c t i o n and is c l e f t i n t o i r r e c o n c i l a b l e antagonisms w h i c h i t is p o w e r l e s s t o e x o r c i s e . But i n o r d e r t h a t t h e s e antagonisms, c l a s s e s w i t h c o n f t i c t Q n g economic i n t e r e s t s , s h a l l not consume t h e m s e l v e s and s o c i e t y i n f r u i t l e s s s t r u g g l e s , a power, a p p a r e n t l y s t a n d i n g above s o c i e t y , has become n e c e s s a r y t o moderate t h e c o n f l i c t and keep it w i t h i n t h e bounds of and t h i s power, a r i s i n g o u t of s o c i e t y , b u t p l a c i n g i t s e l f above it and i n c r e a s i n g l y a l i e n a t i n g i t s e l f from i t , is t h e s t a t e . " (Origin o f t h e Family. p . 1551.

. .,

--

Most of Marx's e a r l y w r i t i n g s on t h e S t a t e are s p e c i f i c a l l y d i r e c t e d towards a r e f u t a t i o n of Hegel's p h i l o s o p h i c a l i d e a l i s m by t h e c o n s t r u c t i o n of a m a t e r i a l i s t i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of the S t a t e as "the active, conscious and o f f i c i a l e x p r e s s i o n (of) t h e p r e s e n t s t r u c t u r e of s o c i e t y ' (Collected Works, 3, p. 1 9 9 ) . This m a t e r i a l i s t i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f t h e State broadens somewhat i n The German Ideoloqy (pp. 53-41 t o a g e n e r a l conception i n which t h e S t a t e is regarded 81

The c o n t r a d i c t i o n between p a r t i c u l a r and cornunity i n t e r e s t s g i v e rise, o f n e c e s s i t y , t o t h e S t a t e . But p r e c i s e l y because t h e S t a t e must assume an 'independent" existence i n o r d e r t o guarantee t h e communal i n t e r e s t , it becomes t h e locus of an " a l i e n power" by means of which i n d i v i d u a l s and groups can be domin a t e d (The Geman Ideology, p. 54). I n t h e same way t h a t t h e laborer, through work, c r e a t e s c a p i t a l as an instrument for h i s or h e r own domination, so human beings create i n t h e form of the S t a t e an instrument f o r t h e i r own domination ( c f . O l b a n , 1971, p. 216). These various i n particular instruments of domination t h e l a w , t h e power t o t a x and t h e power can be transformed by p o l i t i t o coerce cal s t r u g g l e i n t o instruments f o r c l a s s domination. Engels summarizes Marx's view s u c c i n c t l y :

--

--

As t h e s t a t e a r o s e from t h e need t o keep c l a s s antagonisms in check, b u t a l s o a r o s e in t h e t h i c k of t h e f i g h t between t h e c Z a s s e s , it is normally t h e s t a t e o f t h e most p o w e r f u l , eco-

nornicalty r u l i n g c l a s s , which by i t s means becomes a l s o t h e p o l i t i c a l l y r u l i n g c l a s s , and s o a c q u i r e s new means of holding down and exp l o i t i n g t h e oppressed c t a s s e s . The a n c i e n t s t a t e was, above a l l , t h e s t a t e of t h e slaveowners f o r holding down t h e s t a v e s , j u s t a s t h e f e u d a l s t a t e was t h e organ of t h e n o b i l i t y f o r holding down t h e peasant s e r f s and bondsmen, and t h e modern representative s t a t e i s the instrument f o r e x p l o i t i n g wage-labour by c a p i t a l . Exceptional p e r i o d s , however, occur when t h e warring c l a s s e s are so n e a r l y equal i n f o r c e s t h a t t h e s t a t e power, as apparent mediator, a c q u i r e s f o r t h e moment a c e r t a i n independence i n r e l a t i o n t o b o t h . tori& of t h e Family. p . 157).

order t o c a r r y through i t s aim, t o represent i t s i n t e r e s t s as the common i n t e r e s t o f a l l t h e members of s o c i e t y . .it has t o g i v e i t s i d e a s t h e form o f u n i v e r s a l i t y , and r e p r e s e n t them ae t h e only rational, universally valid ones. The c l a s s making a r e v o l u t i o n appears from t h e very s t a r t . n o t a s a c t a e s b u t as t h e represent a t i v e of t h e whole of s o c i e t y . (The German Ideotogx, p p . 6 5 - 6 ; cf. C o l l e c t e d Works, 3, p p . 184-5).

..

Marx and Engels i n g e n e r a l h e l d t h a t t h e r u l i n g class:

r u l e a l s o a s t h i n k e r s , as producers of i d e a s , and r e g u l a t e t h e production and d i s t r i b u t i o n of t h e i d e a s o f t h e i r age: t h u s t h e i r i d e a s a r e t h e r u l i n g i d e a s o f t h e epoch." (The German I d e c l o u y , p . 6 5 ) . But i f t h e s e r u l i n g i d e a s are t o g a i n acceptance as r e p r e s e n t i n g t h e "common i n t e r e s t " t h e y have t o be p r e s e n t e d as abstract i d e a l i z a t i o n s , as u n i v e r s a l t r u t h s f o r a l l t i m e . Consequently, t h e s e i d e a s have t o be p r e s e n t e d as i f they have an autonomous e x i s t e n c e of t h e i r own. Not i o n s o f " j u s t i c e " , " r i g h t " , "freedom" are p r e s e n t e d as i f t h e y have a meaning independent of any p a r t i c u l a r class i n t e r e s t . The r e l a t i o n s h i p between t h e r u l i n g i d e a s and t h e r u l i n g class i s rendered opaque by a s e p a r a t i o n and an i d e a l i z a t i o n which, i n t u r n , has t h e pot e n t i a l t o create a f u r t h e r c o n t r a d i c t i o n . Once m o r a l i t y i s u n i v e r s a l i z e d as "abs o l u t e t r u t h " , f o r example, it i s p o s s i b l e f o r t h e State, and even t h e whole mode of production, t o b e judged immoral ( c f . C o l l e c t e d Works, 3 , p. 1 0 8 ) . By t h e same token, i f t h e S t a t e can be repr e s e n t e d as an abstract i d e a l i z a t i o n o f t h e common i n t e r e s t , t h e n t h e S t a t e can i t s e l f become an a b s t r a c t i n c a r n a t i o n o f a "moral" p r i n c i p l e (nationalism, p a t r i o t i s m , fascism, a l l appeal t o t h i s t o some d e g r e e ) . The connections between t h e formation of a dominant ideology, t h e d e f i n i t i o n of t h e " i l l u s o r y common i n t e r e s t " i n t h e form of t h e S t a t e and t h e very s p e c i f i c i n t e r e s t s of t h e r u l i n g class or classes are as s u b t l e as they are complex. Y e t , u n t i l r e c e n t l y and w i t h t h e n o t a b l e exception of G r a m s c i ' s q u i t e profound i n s i g h t s , t h e real r e l a t i o n s h i p s have remained as opaque t o a n a l y s i s as they are i n d a i l y l i f e . W e can r e v e a l t h e b a s i s of t h e s e r e l a t i o n s h i p s most e a s i l y , however, by analyzing t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p between t h e S t a t e and t h e f u n c t i o n i n g of a c a p i t a l i s t mode of production.
(1)

. .,

The use of t h e S t a t e as an instrument of class domination creates a f u r t h e r cont h e r u l i n g class has t o tradiction exercise i t s power i n i t s own class i n t e r e s t a t t h e same t i m e as it maintains t h a t i t s a c t i o n s are f o r t h e good of a l l (The German Ideology, p. 106). T h i s c o n t r a d i c t i o n can i n p a r t be r e s o l v e d by t h e employment o f t w o s t r a t e g i e s . F i r s t , those charged w i t h e x p r e s s i n g t h e r u l i n g w i l l and t h e i n s t i t u t i o n s through which t h a t w i l l is expressed, must a t o be independent and autonomous i n t e i r functioning. The o f f i c i a l s of t h e State t h e r e f o r e have t o " p r e s e n t themselves as organs of s o c i e t y s t a n d i n g above s o c i e t y . Representatives o f a power which e s t r a n g e s them from s o c i e t y , they have t o b e given p r e s t i g e by means of special d e c r e e s , which i n v e s t them w i t h a p e c u l i a r s a n c t i t y and i n v i o l a b i l i t y . Consequently, even " t h e lowest p o l i c e o f f i c e r " h a s an "aut h o r i t y " which o t h e r members of s o c i e t y do n o t possess. Vesting s t a t e o f f i c i a l s w i t h such "independent a u t h o r i t y " poses a f u r t h e r problem. W e have t o e x p l a i n how state power can have a l l t h e appearances of autonomy vis-a-vis t h e dominant classes a t t h e same t i m e as it e x p r e s s e s t h e u n i t y o f class power of t h o s e classes ( c f . Poulantzas, 1973, p. 281). The q u e s t i o n of the " r e l a t i v e autonomy" of t h e s t a t e has consequently been a matter of i n t e n s e debate among Marxists.

--

-F=

..

A second s t r a t e g y f o r r e s o l v i n g t h e c o n t r a d i c t i o n b u i l d s upon t h e connection between ideology and t h e S t a t e . Specif i c a l l y class i n t e r e s t s can b e transformed i n t o " t h e i l l u s o r y g e n e r a l i n t e r e s t " provided t h a t t h e r u l i n g class can successf u l l y u n i v e r s a l i z e i t s i d e a s as t h e " r u l i n g ideas". That t h i s w i l l l i k e l y be t h e case results from t h e very process of class domination:

Each new c t a s s which p u t s i t s e l f i n t h e place o f one r u l i n g b e f o r e i t , i s compelled, merely i n

82

The Theory o f t h e S t a t e i n R e l a t i o n t o t h e Theory o f t h e C a p i t a l i s t Mode o f Production

The famous Marxist dictum t h a t " t h e e x e c u t i v e o f the modern S t a t e i s b u t a committee f o r managing t h e common a f f a i r s of t h e whole bourgeoisie" (Communist Manif e s t o , p. 44) w a s i n f a c t meant as a poleresponse t o the widespread i l l u s o r y claim t h a t t h e S t a t e expressed t h e common i n t e r e s t s of a l l . But it i s h a r d l y s a t i s f a c t o r y as a b a s i s for understanding t h e real r e l a t i o n s between t h e S t a t e and capitalism. W e can begin t o b u i l d such a b a s i c understanding by showing how the S t a t e must of n e c e s s i t y f u l f i l l c e r t a i n b a s i c f u n c t i o n s i f c a p i t a l i s m i s t o be reproduced as an on-going system.

and f r e e d o m . As p u r e i d e a s t h e y are merely the i d e a l i z e d express i o n of t h i s b a s i s ; a s d e v e l o p e d i n juridical, political, social r e l a t i o n s , t h e y a r e mereZy t h i s b a s i s t o a h i g h e r power (% p . 2451.
The exchange r e l a t i o n s embedded i n t h e c a p i t a l i s t mode o f production t h e r e f o r e g i v e rise t o s p e c i f i c n o t i o n s concerning " t h e i n d i v i d u a l " , 'freedom", " e q u a l i t y " , " r i g h t s " , ' j u s t i c e " , and t h e l i k e . Marx observed t h a t such concepts t y p i c a l l y provide t h e i d e o l o g i c a l r a l l y i n g cries of a l l bourgeois r e v o l u t i o n s and he w a s a c o n s i s t e n t c r i t i c of t h o s e who sought t o formulate a r e v o l u t i o n a r y working class p o l i t i c s i n tenus o f " e t e r n a l j u s t i c e " and "equal r i g h t s " s i n c e t h e s e w e r e concepts r e f l e c t i v e of bourgeois social r e l a t i o n s of exchange (see, f o r example, C r i t i q u e of t h e Gotha Programme). ConceDts o f t h i s s o r t are more than mere i d e o l b g i c a l t o o l s , however. They connect t o t h e State by becoming embedded formally i n t h e system of bourgeois l a w . The c a p i t a l i s t S t a t e must, of n e c e s s i t y , support and e n f o r c e a system of l a w which embodies concepts of p r o p e r t y , t h e i n d i v i d u a l , e q u a l i t y , freedom and r i g h t which correspond t o t h e social r e l a t i o n s of exchange under c a p i t a l i s m . The b a s i c paradox which Marx seeks t o unravel i n C a p i t a l is how a ' s y s t e m of exchange of commodities based i n freedom and e q u a l i t y can g i v e rise t o a r e s u l t charact e r i z e d by " i n e q u a l i t y and unfreedom" (Grundrisse, p. 249; C a i t a l , 1, c h a p t e r 5 and p. 684). The exp a n a t i o n l i e s , of course, i n t h e c l a s s c h a r a c t e r of t h e c a p i t a l i s t r e l a t i o n s of production which a r o s e o u t of a long h i s t o r i c a l p r o c e s s i n which l a b o r power became divorced from c o n t r o l over t h e means of produztion which then became t h e e x c l u s i v e p r e s e r v e of t h e c a p i t a l i s t class. Once c r e a t e d , t h e s e r e l a t i o n s o f production and accumulation must n e c e s s a r i l y be f o s t e r e d , supported and enforced by t h e use o f S t a t e power. P r i v a t e p r o p e r t y r i g h t s over t h e c o m o d i t i e s being exchanged must be guaranteed so t h a t "no one s e i z e s hold of a n o t h e r ' s p r o p e r t y by f o r c e " and so t h a t "each d i v e s t s himself from h i s prop e r t y v o l u n t a r i l y " (Grundrisse, p. 243) Labor power i s a commodity which means t h a t i t i s also a form of p r i v a t e prop e r t y over which t h e laborer h a s exclus i v e r i g h t s of d i s p o s a l . Money provides t h e v e h i c l e f o r accumulation; it perm i t s t h e individual t o carry "his s o c i a l power, as w e l l as h i s bond w i t h s o c i e t y , i n h i s pocket." p. 157). C a p i t a l i s nothing more, of course, than money p u t back i n t o production and c i r c u l a t i o n t o y i e l d more money. I f money i s t o repr e s e n t real v a l u e s t h e same kind of S t a t e r e g u l a t i o n o f money supply and c r e d i t is c a l l e d f o r . Also, i f t h e p r o f i t rate is

The s o c i a l r e l a t i o n s of exchange and exchange value which l i e a t t h e h e a r t o f t h e c a p i t a l i s t mode o f production presuppose : (1) t h e concept o f a " j u r i d i c a l person" or " i n d i v i d u a l " (Grundrisse, pp. 24361, s t r i p p e d of a l l t i e s o f p e r s o n a l dependence (such as t h o s e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of s l a v e r y o r t h e f e u d a l era) and each and a l l apparently "free" t o " c o l l i d e with one a n o t h e r and t o engage i n exchange w i t h i n this freedom" ( E 163-4); pp. ,

(2) a system of p r o p e r t y r i g h t s which ensures t h a t i n d i v i d u a l s can g a i n comand over use v a l u e s o n l y through ownership o r exchange:
( 3 ) a common s t a n d a r d o f value i n exchange ( t h e o b j e c t i f i c a t i o n o f which i s money) so t h a t only t h e exchange of equival e n t s i s involved which means t h a t i n d i v i d u a l s approach each o t h e r i n the market p l a c e e s s e n t i a l l y as e q u a l as f a r as t h e measure of exchange i s concerned p. 241). Money is, i n s h o r t , t h e g r e a t leveller.

(w,

-4--

(4) a c o n d i t i o n of r e c i p r o c a l dependence i n exchange (as opposed t o p e r s o n a l dependence) which r e s u l t s from the f a c t t h a t "each i n d i v l d u a l ' s production i s dependent on t h e production. .and consumpt i o n of a l l o t h e r s " p. 156 and pp. 242-5). The c o n d i t i o n s of " f r e e i n d i v i d u a l i t y and e q u a l i t y " are t h e r e f o r e "soc i a l l y determined" they can be achieved "only w i t h i n t h e c o n d i t i o n s l a i d down by s o c i e t y and w i t h t h e means provided by s o c i e t y ; hence ( t h e y are) bound t o t h e reproduction of t h e s e c o n d i t i o n s and means" p. 156). From t h i s arises t h e s e p a r a t i o n of p r i v a t e i n t e r e s t s from s o c i a l n e c e s s i t i e s , t h e l a t t e r appearing as an " a l i e n power" ( t h e S t a t e ) over t h e i n d i vidual.

(w,

--

(e,

Marx d e r i v e s a fundamental i n s i g h t from these p r o p o s i t i o n s :

(m,

E q u a l i t y and f r e e d o m a r e t h u s n o t o n l y r e s p e c t e d i n exchange b a s e d on exchange v a l u e s b u t , a l s o , t h e exchange o f exchange uaZues i s t h e productive real basis f o r a l l equality
83

to be equalized then both c a p i t a l and l a b o r m u s t be highly mobile which means that the S t a t e must a c t i v e l y remove b a r r i e r s t o mobility when necessary. I n general, the S t a t e , and t h e system of l a w i n p a r t i c u l a r , has a c r u c i a l xole t o play i n s u s t a i n i n g
and guaranteeing the s t a b i l i t y of these basic r e l a t i o n s h i p s . The guarantee of p r i v a t e property r i g h t s i n means of product i o n and labor power, the enforcement of contracts, t h e p r o t e c t i o n of the mechanisms f o r accumulation, t h e elimination of barriers t o mobility of c a p i t a l and labor and the s t a b i l i z a t i o n of the money system ( v i a c e n t r a l banking, f o r example), a l l f a l l within the f i e l d of a c t i o n of the State. I n a l l of these r e s p e c t s the c a p i t a l i s t S t a t e becomes "the form of organization which t h e bourgeois n e c e s s a r i l y adopt f o r i n t e r n a l and external purposes, f o r the mutual guarantee of their - property and i n t e r e s t s " (The German Ideology, p. 8 0 ) . The c a p i t a l i s t State cannot be anything o t h e r than an instrument of class domination because i t i s organized t o s u s t a i n the b a s i c r e l a t i o n between c a p i t a l and labor. I f i t w e r e otherwise, then c a p i t a l i s m could not f o r long be sustained. And because c a p i t a l i s fundamentally a n a t a g o n i s t i c t o labor, Marx regards the bourgeois State as n e c e s s a r i l the v e h i c l e by means e c t i v e violence of t h e of which bourgeois class i s v i s i t e d upon labor. The c o r o l l a r y is, of course, t h a t the bourgeois s t a t e must be destroyed i f a c l a s s l e s s s o c i e t y i s t o be achieved.

d i s t r i b u t i o n , t h e s u r p l u s acquired through c a p i t a l i s t production i s s p l i t into industrial profit, interest t o f i nance c a p i t a l , and r e n t t o landlords. The homogeneity within the c a p i t a l i s t class breaks down i n t o f r a c t i o n s of c a p i t a l which are p o t e n t i a l l y i n conf l i c t with each o t h e r . Other fragmenbetween merchant c a p i t a l and tations can i n d u s t r i a l c a p i t a l , f o r example a r i s e o u t of t h e d i v i s i o n s of function within the c a p i t a l i s t system. These fragmentations lead t o c o n f l i c t s of i n t e r e s t within the c a p i t a l i s t class as a whole. Factional s t r u g g l e s which from t i m e t o t i m e may become highly d e s t r u c t i v e are t h e r e f o r e t o be expected within the c a p i t a l i s t class. The State here plays t h e role of an a r b i t e r among these c o n f l i c t i n g i n t e r e s t s . The State need n o t be n e u t r a l i n t h e s e c o n f l i c t s because it may be taken over by a fract i o n of c a p i t a l under c e r t a i n circumstances.

--

--

C a p i t a l i s t production and exchange are inherently "anarchistic". Individuals, each i n p u r s u i t of h i s o r h e r p r i v a t e i n t e r e s t s , cannot possibly take "the common even of t h e c a p i t a l i s t class interest" i n t o account i n their a c t i o n s . Thus, the c a p i t a l i s t S t a t e has a l s o t o function as a vehicle through which t h e class i n t e r e s t s of t h e c a p i t a l i s t s are expressed i n a l l f i e l d s of production, c i r c u l a t i o n and exchange. I t plays an important r o l e i n reg u l a t i n g competition, i n r e g u l a t i n g t h e e x p l o i t a t i o n of labor (through, f o r example, l e g i s l a t i o n on minimum wages and maximum hours of employment) and generally i n placing a f l o o r under the processes of c a p i t a l i s t e x p l o i t a t i o n and accumulation. The State m u s t a l s o play an important r o l e i n providing "public goods" and s o c i a l and physical i n f r a s t r u c t u r e s which are necessary p r e r e q u i s i t e s f o r c a p i t a l i s t production and exchange but which no i n d i v i d u a l c a p i t a l i s t would f i n d i t possible t o provide a t a p r o f i t . And t h e State i n e v i t a b l y becomes involved i n crisis management and i n count e r i n g the tendency f o r t h e r a t e of p r o f i t t o f a l l . State i n t e r v e n t i o n is necessary i n a l l of these respects because a syst e m based on individual s e l f - i n t e r e s t and competition cannot otherwise express a collective class interest.

--

--

W e have so f a r shown that Marx's a n a l y s i s of t h e c a p i t a l i s t mode of production can be p a r a l l e l e d a t each s t e p by a t h e o r e t i c a l d e r i v a t i o n of c e r t a i n the equality minimal S t a t e functions and freedom of exchange must be preserved, property r i g h t s must be protected and c o n t r a c t s enforced, mobility preserved, the " a n a r c h i s t i c " and d e s t r u c t i v e aspects of c a p i t a l i s t competition must be regulated, and t h e c o n f l i c t s of i n t e r e s t between f r a c t i o n s of c a p i t a l m u s t be a r b i t r a t e d f o r the "common good" of c a p i t a l as a whole. S t r i c t l y speaking, w e cannot go much f u r t h e r than t h i s i n deriving a theory of the c a p i t a l i s t State. B u t i t i s useful t o consider two f u r t h e r general p o i n t s about the State under capitalism, even though w e d e p a r t from a t h e o r e t i c a l d e r i v a t i o n .

--

W can take this kind of a n a l y s i s one e s t e p f u r t h e r . I n the Marxian theory of

84

F i r s t , it is easy t o see t h a t a what w e p a r t i c u l a r form of the S t a t e may c a l l bourgeois s o c i a l democracy i s p a r t i c u l a r l y well-equipped t o m e e t the formal requirements of t h e c a p i t a l i s t mode of production. I t embodies a s t r o n g i d e o l o g i c a l and l e g a l defense of e q u a l i t y , mobility and freedom of i n d i v i d u a l s a t t h e same time a s it i s highly p r o t e c t i v e of property r i g h t s and t h e b a s i c r e l a t i o n between c a p i t a l and labor. A c a p i t a l i s t market exchange economy c h a r a c t e r i s t i c a l l y thrives on a double-edged freedom which includes freedom of conscience, speech and employment a t t h e same time a s it incorporates freedom t o e x p l o i t , t o gain p r i v a t e p r o f i t a t p u b l i c expense and t o monopolize t h e means of production. The committment of bourgeois democracy t o freedom i s i n fact a c o m i t t m e n t t o a l l of these d i f f e r e n t kinds of freedom simultaneously (cf. Polanyi, 1968, p. 7 4 ) . Under bourgeois democracy too, t h e separat i o n between p r i v a t e i n t e r e s t s and comunal needs as represented by t h e S t a t e is typic a l l y accomplished by a separation between

--

--

economic and p o l i t i c a l power. P r i v a t e p r o p e r t y r i g h t s form the b a s i s of economic power b u t under u n i v e r s a l s u f f r a g e t h e p r i v i l e g e s of p r i v a t e p r o p e r t y are r e p l a c e d by one-person-one v o t e which forms t h e immediate basis of p o l i t i c a l power. Under t h e s e c o n d i t i o n s t h e relat i o n s h i p s between class i n t e r e s t s , economically conceived, and t h e State as a p o l i t i c a l e n t i t y are rendered pecul i a r l y opaque which, o f course, i s advantageous because it is t h e n much easier f o r t h e S t a t e t o maintain t h e appearance of a n e u t r a l arbiter amongst a l l i n t e r e s t s . Under t h e s e c o n d i t i o n s also, w e a l t h h a s t o employ its power i n d i r e c t l y . Engels argued that:
I t d o e s t h i s i n two w a y s : b y p l a i n c o r r u p t i o n of o f f i c i a l s , of w h i c h America i s t h e c l a s s i c examp l e , and b y an a l l i a n c e b e t w e e n t h e government and t h e s t o c k exchange p . 157). ( O r i g i n of t h e F a m i l y .

b a s i c conception:

The dominant group i s c o o r dinated c o n c r e t e l y o i t h t h e general i n t e r e s t s of t h e s u b o r d i n a t e g r o u p s , and t h e l i f e of t h e S t a t e i s conc e i v e d of as a c o n t i n u o u s p r o c e s s of f o r m a t i o n and s u p e r s e d i n g of uns t a b l e e q u i l i b r i a (on t h e j u r i d i c a l p l a n e ) b e t w e e n t h e i n t e r e s t s of t h e fundamentat group and t h o s e of t h e s u b o r d i n a t e group8 equilib r i a i n which t h e i n t e r e s t s of t h e dominant group p r e v a i l , b u t o n l y up t o a c e r t a . t n p o i n t , i . e . s t o p p i n g s h o r t of narrow2y c o r p o r a t e economic p . 1821. interests

--

(w

..

The mechanisms f o r class domination o f t h e bourgeois democratic s t a t e are, as Gramsci (1971 e d i t i o n ) and Miliband (1969) p o i n t o u t , somewhat more p e r v a s i v e and s u b t l e than t h i s . Also, t h e fragmentation of the State i t s e l f i n t o separate i n s t i t u t i o n s -- Miliband (1969, p. 50) lists, f o r example, the government, t h e administrat i v e bureaucracy, t h e military p o l i c e , t h e j u d i c i a l branch, s u b - c e n t r a l government and parliamentary assemblies make it p a r t i c u l a r l y d i f f i c u l t f o r any one f r a c t i o n of c a p i t a l t o g a i n complete c o n t r o l o f a l l of t h e i n s t r u m e n t s o f class domination (although t h e e x i s t e n c e of a s t a n d i n g army and police f o r c e opens t h e way t o m i l i t a r y d i c t a t o r s h i p ) . The formal s e g a k a t i o n o f powers between e x e c u t i v e , legislature and j u d i c i a r y w r i t t e n i n t o t h e American c o n s t i t u t i o n ,for example, w a s s p e c i f i c a l l y designed as a system of checks and balances t o prevent t h e concentration of p o l i t i c a l power i n the hands o f any one sub-group. Such a s t r u c t u r e e n s u r e s t h a t t h e State can act as an e f f e c t i v e a r b i t e r between t h e various f r a c t i o n a l i n t e r e s t s within t h e c a p i t a l i s t class ( i n t h i s r e s p e c t t h e t h e o r y of p o l i t i c a l p l u r a l i s m c a t c h e s one a s p e c t of t h e t r u t h about bourgeois p o l i t i cal s t r u c t u r e s ) .

--

A c o n s i d e r a t i o n of t h e r e l a t i o n s between economic and p o l i t i c a l power l e a d us t o a second p o i n t which G r a m s c i h a s done much t o e l u c i d a t e . The r u l i n g class h a s t o e x e r c i s e i t s hegemony over t h e S tate through a p o l i t i c a l system which it can c o n t r o l only i n d i r e c t l y . I n t h e context of bourgeois democracy t h i s h a s c e r t a i n important consequences. I n o r d e r t o pres e r v e i t s hegemony i n t h e p o l i t i c a l s p h e r e , t h e r u l i n g class may make concessions which are n o t i n i t s own immediate economic i n t e r e s t . Gramsci argues, however, t h a t " t h e r e i s a l s o no doubt t h a t such sacrifices and such compromise cannot touch t h e H e t h u s a r r i v e s a t t h e following essential.
85

Bourgeois democracy can s u r v i v e only w i t h t h e consent of t h e m a j o r i t y of t h e governed while it must a t t h e same t i m e express a d i s t i n c t i v e r u l i n g class i n t e r e s t . T h i s c o n t r a d i c t i o n can be r e s o l v e d only i f the State becomes a c t i v e l y involved i n g a i n i n g t h e consent o f t h e subordin a t e classes. Ideology provides one important c h a r n e l and State power is consequently used t o i n f l u e n c e e d u c a t i o n and t o c o n t r o l d i r e c t l y o r i n d i r e c t l y , t h e flow of i d e a s and information. The r e l a t i o n s h i p between t h e ideology of t h e c a p i t a l i s t class and t h a t o f administrat o r s and b u r e a u c r a t s a l s o becomes of g r e a t s i g n i f i c a n c e (Miliband, 1969) More i m p o r t a n t l y , t h e State may i n t e r n a l i z e w i t h i n i t s e l f p o l i t i c a l mechanisms which reflect t h e class s t r u g g l e between c a p i t a l and l a b o r . Therefore, a key f u n c t i o n i s t o organize and d e l i v e r c e r t a i n b e n e f i t s and g u a r a n t e e s t o l a b o r (minimum l i v i n g s t a n d a r d s and work c o n d i t i o n s f o r example) which may n o t be, s t r i c t l y speaking, i n t h e immed i a t e economic i n t e r e s t of t h e c a p i t a l i s t class. I n r e t u r n , t h e State r e c e i v e s t h e g e n e r a l a l l e g i a n c e o f t h e subordin a t e classes, And, w e may nota paranthet i c a l l y , S t a t e power can t h e n be used t o c o n t r o l t h e o r g a n i z a t i o n of consumption which can be advantageous t o t h e c a p i t a l i s t class i n t h e long run because it s t a b i l i z e s the market and accumulation. P o l i c i e s which simultaneously s u p p o r t t h e dominant ideology and provide material b e n e f i t s are doubly a p p r o p r i a t e of course. W e can understand S t a t e p o l i c i e s towards working-class homeonwership, f o r example, as simultaneously i d e o l o g i c a l ( t h e p r i n c i p l e of p r i v a t e p r o p e r t y r i g h t s g a i n s widespread s u p p o r t ) and economic (minimum s t a n d a r d s of s h e l t e r are provided and a new market f o r c a p i t a l i s t production is opened u p ) .

Under t h e s e c o n d i t i o n s , t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p s between t h e S t a t e and t h e class s t r u g g l e become somewhat ambiguous; it is c e r t a i n l y inappropriate, therefore, t o r e g a r d t h e c a p i t a l i s t S t a t e as nothing more t h a n a v a s t c a p i t a l i s t conspiracy f o r t h e e x p l o i t a t i o n of workers. Furt h e r , as G r a m s c i ( , = p. 182) p o i n t s

out, " i n t e r n a t i o n a l r e l a t i o n s i n t e r t w i n e with these i n t e r n a l r e l a t i o n s of nations t a t e s , c r e a t i n g new, unique and h i s t o r i c a l l y concrete combinations". I t i s i n t h i s context, that t h e r o l e of t h e s t a t e i n r e l a t i o n to imperialism, becomes very important. I n response t o t h e organized power of labor within i t s borders, a part i c u l a r n a t i o n - s t a t e may seek t o export t h e worst elements of c a p i t a l i s t exploit a t i o n through imperialist domination of o t h e r countries. I m p e r i a l i s t domination facilitating has o t h e r functions a l s o c a p i t a l export, preserving markets , maint a i n i n g access t o an i n d u s t r i a l reserve army, and t h e l i k e . B these means a y nation state may purchase t h e a l l e g i a n c e of elements of the working c l a s s within its borders a t t h e expense of labor i n dependent countries a t t h e same time 88 it gains i d e o l o g i c a l leverage by disseminating t h e notions of n a t i o n a l pride, empire and chauvinism which t y p i c a l l y accompany i m p e r i a l i s t policies ( c f . Lenin, 1949 e d i t i o n ) .

i n e q u a l i t y v i a accumulation. Marx (Theories of Surplus V a l u e , I, pp. 365-7) regarded Locke's p o l i t i c a l t h e o r i e s very s p e c i f i c a l l y as an i d e o l o g i c a l and p o l i t i c a l r e f l e c t i o n of t h e evident needs of a nascent c a p i t a l i s t s o c i e t y . Locke:
llchampioned t h e new b o u r g e o i s i e

i n e v e r g w a g , t a k i n g t h e s i d e of
t h e i n d u s t r i a l i s t s againat t h e oorki n g c l a s s and a g a i n s t t h e p a u p e r s , t h e merchants a g a i n s t t h e o l d fashioned u ~ u r e r s , the f i n a n c i a l a r i s t o c r a c y a g a i n s t t h e governments t h a t were i n d e b t , and he e v e n d e m o n s t r a t e d i n one of h i 8 b o o k s t h a t t h e b o u r g e o i s way o f t h i n k i n g w a s t h e normal one f o r human b e i n g s " (Theories of Surplus Value, 3 , p .
502).

--

S t r i c t l y speaking, these l a s t observations apply t o an understanding of t h e actual h i s t o r y of t h e S t a t e , and of bourgeois social democracy i n p a r t i c u l a r , i n the context of c a p i t a l i s t s o c i a l fonnat i o n s . But t h e o r e t i c a l and concrete analyses have t o be i n t e g r a t e d a t some p o i n t and t h e r e l a t i o n between exchange and production under c a p i t a l i s m and t h e general characteristics of t h e p o l i t i c a l system we c a l l bourgeois democracy seems an e x c e l l e n t point t o begin upon such an i n t e g r a t i o n . The advantage of a purely t h e o r e t i c a l approach t o the State under the c a p i t a l i s t mode of production is t h a t it helps us t o d i s t i n g u i s h , a s G r a m s c i p u t s it, between what i s "organic" (necessary) and what i s "conjunctural" ( a c c i d e n t a l ) about t h e p a r t i c u l a r form assumed by the S t a t e i n a p a r t i c u l a r h i s t o r i c a l s i t u a t i o n . And there i s clearly a sense i n which the capit a l i s t m o d e of production and bourgeois democracy a r e organic t o each o t h e r rather than = r e l y conjuncturally related. I n t h e i r o r i g i n s , a t l e a s t , the r e l a t i o n s between the two are not as mysterious as they now seem. The p o l i t i c a l theory of Locke, f o r example, which l i e s a t t h e r o o t of t h e American c o n s t i t u t i o n and which provides a broad i d e o l o g i c a l b a s i s f o r most modern forms of bourgeois s o c i a l democracy, has a d e f i n i t e economic b a s i s , as MacPherson (1962) has b r i l l i a n t l y demonstrated. W e do not have t o delve too f a r i n t o Locke t o see the nature of t h i s economic basis we f i n d , f o r example, the lineaments of a labor theory of value, a d e f i n i t e p r i n c i p l e that only the laborer has the r i g h t t o dispose of h i s o r h e r labor power, a defense of property r i g h t s accompanied by a moral imperative t o u s e the products of labor f o r productive purposes and even a recognition that it i s money which permits what Locke hypothesised as a " n a t u r a l state" of e q u a l i t y t o be transformed i n t o a morally j u s t i f i a b l e

I n s o f a r as Locke's p o l i t i c a l theory provided the ideology f o r bourgeois democracy and became incorporated i n t h e s u p e r s t r u c t u r a l forms of t h e c a p i t a l i s t s t a t e , t o that degree t h e bourgeois s t a t e champions e x a c t l y those same interests. While c a p i t a l i s m can survive under a v a r i e t y of p o l i t i c a l i n s t i t u t i o n a l arrangements q u i t e w e l l , i t appears that bourgeois democracy is a unique product of t h e economic r e l a t i o n s presupposed i n t h i s p a r t i c u l a r mode of production.
12)

The S t a t e in C a p i t a l i s t S o c i e t y

W e have so f a r considered t h e S t a t e i n abstraction, relating t o the c a p i t a l i st mode of production i n p a r t i c u l a r . A l though it i s h e l p f u l t o consider t h e S t a t e i n such a manner, it i s dangerous t o project such understanding i n t o concrete h i s t o r i c a l analyses u n c r i t i c a l l y . The danger l i e s i n t h e tendency t o p o s i t t h e State as some mystical autonomous e n t i t y and t o ignore t h e i n t r a c a c i e s and subleties of i t s involvement w i t h o t h e r f a c e t s of s o c i e t y . I n t h e C r i t i q u e of t h e Gotha Pro ranrme (pp. 17-18), Marx complains fob t h e " r i o t o u s misuse" which t h e program m a k e s of t h e words "present-day s t a t e " . Marx maintains t h a t s u c h a conception is a mere " f i c t i o n " because the s t a t e "is d i f f e r e n t i n t h e Prusso-German empire from what it i s i n Switzerland, it i s d i f f e r e n t i n England from what it i s i n the United States." H e does go on t o p o i n t o u t , however, t h a t :

--

"The d i f f e r e n t s t a t e s o f t h e d i f f e r e n t civi l i a e d c o u n t r i e s , i n s p i t e of t h e i r m a n i f o l d d i v e r s i t y of form, a l l have t h i s i n common, t h a t t h e y ape b a s e d on mod e r n b o u r g e o i s s o c i e t y , o n l y one more o r l e s s c a p i t a l i s t i c a l l y d e v e l o p e d . They h a v e , t h e r e f o r e , also certain essential features i n common. I n t h i s s e n s e i t is p o s s i b l e t o speak of the "presentday-state," i n contrast t o the f u t u r e i n which i t s p r e s e n t r o o t ,
86

b o u r g e o i s s o c i e t y , W i l l have d i e d away.
I t is i n t h i s l a s t s e n s e t h a t w e have so f a r been c o n s i d e r i n g t h e S t a t e i n r e l a t i o n t o c a p i t a l i s m . But as w e move, as Marx would p u t it, from t h e a b s t r a c t and g e n e r a l t o the c o n c r e t e and p a r t i c u l a r , so we have t o a d a p t our m o d e of t h i n k i n g and a n a l y s i s . Even t h e o r e t i c a l l y it i s important t o recognize that:

"the s t a t e i s n o t a t h i n g . i t d o e s n o t , a8 such, e x i s t . What ' t h e s t a t e ' stands f o r i s a number of p a r t i c u l a r i n s t i t u t i o n s which, together, constitute i t 8 r e a l i t y , and which i n t e r a c t a8 p a r t 8 of what may be c a l l e d the s t a t e 8 y 8 tern." ( M i t i b a n d , 1 9 6 9 , p . 4 6 ) .

..

speak of it i s an abstract category, which may be a p p r o p r i a t e f o r g e n e r a l i zing about t h e c o l l e c t i v i t y of processes whereby power is e x e r c i s e d and f o r c o n s i d e r i n g t h a t c o l l e c t i v e l y withi n the t o t a l i t y o f a s o c i a l formation. But t h e S t a t e is n o t an a p p r o p r i a t e C a t e gory f o r d e s c r i b i n g t h e a c t u a l p r o c e s s e s whereby power is exeltcieed. To appeal t o t h e c a t e g o r y " t h e S t a t e " as a "moving f o r c e " i n t h e course of c o n c r e t e h i s t o r i cal a n a l y s i s i s , i n s h o r t , t o engage i n a mystification. The conception of t h e State as a s u p e r s t r u c t u r a l form which h a s i t s b a s i s i n a p a r t i c u l a r mode of product i o n ( i n t h i s case, ' c a p i t a l i s m ) is perf e c t l y a p p r o p r i a t e f o r purposes o f theor e t i c a l a n a l y s i s , b u t such a conception i s s i n g u l a r l y i n a p p r o p r i a t e when n a i v e l y p r o j e c t e d i n t o t h e study o f t h e h i s t o r y of a c t u a l c a p i t a l i s t societies. The bourgeois S t a t e d i d not arise as some automatic r e f l e c t i o n of t h e growth of c a p i t a l i s t s o c i a l r e l a t i o n s . State i n s t i t u t i o n s had t o be p a i n f u l l y cons t r u c t e d and a t each s t e p along t h e way power could be and w a s e x e r c i s e d through them t o h e l p create t h e very r e l a t i o n s which s t a t e i n s t i t u t i o n s w e r e u l t i mately t o r e f l e c t . Marx p l a i n l y a i d n o t regard t h e State as a p a s s i v e element i n h i s t o r y . The i n s t r u m e n t a l i t i e s of t h e S t a t e (some o f which w e r e f e u d a l i n o r i g i n ) w e r e used t o g r e a t e f f e c t i n t h e e a r l y development of c a p i t a l i s m . S t a t e power was used t o f r e e i n d u s t r i a l c a p i t a l from usurious i n t e r e s t rates (Theories of Surplus Value, 3, pp. 468-91, t o provide many o f t h e "necessary prer e q u i s i t e s " i n t h e form of f i x e d c a p i t a l i n t h e b u i l t environment docks, harbors, t r a n s p o r t systems, and t h e l i k e (Ca i t a l 2, p: 233: Grundrisse, pp. 5 30-3 3 * provide mechanisms f o r c o n c e n t r a t i o n of wealth through t h e m e r c a n t i l e form of imperialism ( C a i t a l , 1, c h a p t e r 31 and '3, c h a p t e r 2 0 h S t a t e power w a s used i n d i s c r i m i n a t e l y and i n many i n s t a n c e s q u i t e b r u t a l l y t o create t h e b a s i c rel a t i o n between c a p i t a l and l a b o r . Primit i v e accumulation, t h e i n i t i a l d i v o r c e o f l a b o r from t h e means of production and from t h e land,was accomplished by f o r c e o r through t h e l e g a l i z e d violence of t h e State v i a , f o r example, t h e enc l o s u r e acts i n England c h a p t e r 2 8 ) . Labor l a w s of i n s t i t u t i o n a l r e p r e s s i o n f o r c e d t h e d i s p o s s e s s e d l a b o r i n t o t h e work f o r c e and helped t o impose t h e work d i s c i p l i n e necessary f o r c a p i t a l i s m (Ca i t a l , 1, p. o% 271). Even whole s e c t o r s 7 p r o u c t i o n w e r e organized through t h e e x e r c i s e of State power i n t h e e a r l y s t a g e s of c a p i t a l i s t development ( t h i s w a s t h e case i n n i n e t e e n t h c e n t u r y Germany and i s epitomized by t h e B r a z i l i a n case i n modern t i m e s )

S t r i c t l y speaking, Miliband i s i n c o r r e c t i n t h i s d e s i g n a t i o n . The S t a t e should i n f a c t be viewed, l i k e c a p i t a l , as a r e l a t i o n (Ollman, 1971, chapt e r 30) or as a p r o c e s s i n t h i s case a process of e x e r c i s l n g power v i a cert a i n i n s t i t u t i o n a l arrangments. It i s , f o r example, t h e a p p l i c a t i o n and enforcement of t h e l a w which i s of real material s i g n i f i c a n c e r a t h e r than t h e s t r u c t u r e of l a w i t s e l f . But Miliband i s q u i t e c o r r e c t when he argues t h a t the S t a t e is much more than t h e e x e r c i s e of power by a government and t h a t it h a s t o i n c l u d e a l l avenues whereby power can be exercised. I n t h i s t h e p a r t i c u l a r s t r u c t u r e of i n s t i t u t i o n s i s important (though n o t primary). And it i s u s e f u l t o have some way of c a t e g o r i z i n g t h e s e "State i n s t i t u t i o n s " i f only t o draw a t t e n t i o n t o t h e d i v e r s e channels through which power can be e x e r c i s e d the judiciary, the executive branch of government, t h e a d m i n i s t r a t i o n and bureaucracy, t h e l e g i s l a t u r e , t h e m i l i t a r y and p o l i c e , and so on, form v a r i o u s components w i t h i n t h i s system. And t h e fragmentations can c e n t r a l versus l o c a l be taken f u r t h e r governments , departmental r i v a l r i e s and hierarchical s t r u c t u r e s within the bureaucracy, and t h e l i k e , a l l have t h e i r p a r t t o play. Many of t h e s e f e a t u r e s may be purely c o n j u n c t u r a l , b u t t h e n e t e f f e c t of t h e fragmentation of i n s t i t u t i o n s i s probably t o make i t easier t o achieve " t h e formation and s u p e r s e s s i o n of u n s t a b l e e q u i l i b r i a " between f r a c t i o n s of c a p i t a l and between t h e dominant and t h e dominated It is h a r d l y s u r p r i s i n g , t h e r e f o r e , t o f i n d contemporary p o l i t i c a l s c i e n t i s t s focussing a t t e n t i o n on t h e p r o c e s s e s of exchange w i t h i n b u r e a u c r a c i e s , between bureacracies and l e g i s l a t u r e s a t t h e same t i m e as they f i n d i t a p p r o p r i a t e t o analyse c o l l e c t i v e a c t i o n and p o l i t i c a l l i f e i n terms o f m a r k e t r a t i o n a l i t y .

--

--

--

--

The p o i n t t o be emphasized h e r e , of course, i s t h a t t h e S t a t e as w e u s u a l l y

87

Reading Marx, i t i s very d i f f i c u l t to imagine t h e b i r t h o f c a p i t a l i s m without t h e e x e r c i s e of S t a t e power and t h e creat i o n o f S t a t e i n s t i t u t i o n s which prepared t h e ground f o r the emergence of f u l l - f l e d g e d c a p i t a l i s t s o c i a l r e l a t i o n s . Y e t w e are so l u l l e d by the imaqe of an economic b a s i s and a s u p e r s t r u c t u r e which m e r e l y r e f l e c t s i n t h e b a s i s , t h a t we t e n d t o t h i n k of the S t a t e i n a p u r e l y p a s s i v e r o l e i n r e l a t i o n t o c a p i t a l i s t h i s t o r y . The celeb r a t e d s t a t e m e n t i n A Contribution t o t h e C r i t i q u e of P o l i t i c a l Economy (p. 2 1 ) t h a t "changes i n t h e economic foundation l e a d sooner o r l a t e r t o the trahsforma'tion of t h e whole immense S u p e r s t r u c t u r e " appears p a r t i c u l a r l y misleading i f taken a t i t s f a c e value and a p p l i e d t o t h e State i n relation t o c a p i t a l i s t history. B u t even i n t h i s passage Marx q u i c k l y counters by p o i n t i n g o u t t h a t it i s i n t h e " l e g a l , p o l i t i c a l , r e l i g i o u s , art i s t i c o r philosophic" realms t h a t "men become conscious of c o n f l i c t and f i g h t i t o u t , " The "economic basis" and t h e s u p e r s t r u c t u r e come i n t o being simultaneously and n o t s e q u e n t i a l l y -- t h e r e i s a d i a l e c t i c a l i n t e r a c t i o n between them. W have been misled, t o o , i n t o t h i n k i n g e t h a t State i n t e r v e n t i o n i s m i s e x c l u s i v e l y some would say, a phenomenon of l a t e decadent capitalism. "State capitalism" w a s i n f a c t very p r e v a l e n t i n t h e e a r l y y e a r s of c a p i t a l i s t s o c i a l formations. Once c a p i t a l i s m matures, of course, and once a l l the necessary s t a t e i n s t i t u t i o n s have been c r e a t e d , t h e l a w s w r i t t e n , t h e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s o f l a w e s t a b l i s h e d by precedent, then t h e q u e s t i o n of t h e S t a t e appears to fade more i n t o t h e background simply because bourgeois s o c i a l r e l a t i o n s have become one with i t . Indeed, t h e r e may be a movement towards t h e p r i v a t i z a t i o n of p u b l i c f u n c t i o n s . But t h e movement towards l a i s s e r - f a i r e has always been more i d e o l o g i c a l than r e a l . I t merely amounted t o t h e i n s i s t e n c e t h a t c e r t a i n f u n c t i o n s of t h e market should be allowed t o o p e r a t e f r e e l y . It w a s very e a s y t o demand " f r e e t r a d e " i n n i n e t e e n t h century B r i t a i n when t h a t country w a s a t t h e c e n t e r of c a p i t a l accumulation and possessed t h e i n d u s t r i a l c a p a c i t y t o domin a t e t h e world market. But even a t t h e h e i g h t of l a i s s e r - f a i r e , any challenge t o the b a s i c capital-labor r e l a t i o n was q u i c k l y m e t with coercion and r e p r e s s i o n a s t h e B r i t i s h l a b o r movement q u i c k l y found o u t i n t h e y e a r s of C h a r t i s t a g i t a t i o n . I t may w e l l be, of course, t h a t t h e S t a t e has changed its f u n c t i o n s with t h e growth and maturing of c a p i t a l i s m . B u t t h e n o t i o n t h a t c a p i t a l i s m e v e r functioned without the c l o s e and s t r o n g involvement of t h e S t a t e i s a myth t h a t deserves t o be c o r r e c ted.

--

--

The rise of c a p i t a l i s m w a s accompanied and i n some r e s p e c t s preceeded by t h e creat i o n o f , and t r a n s f o r m a t i o n o f , S t a t e i n s t i t u t i o n s and f u n c t i o n s t o meet t h e s p e c i f i c
88

needs of c a p i t a l i s m . The bourgeois s t a t e emerged o u t of a t r a n s f o r m a t i o n of t h e f e u d a l s t a t e . The forms of t h e f e u d a l s t a t e v a r i e d a great d e a l and because they were, i n e f f e c t , t h e r a w materials o u t of which t h e bourgeois s t a t e s w e r e fashioned, they have l e f t t h e i r mark upon contemporary state forms. There are, of course, some important exceptions. The United S t a t e s , Canada, A u s t r a l i a and New Zealand had no f e u d a l s o c i e t y t o overcome ( a l though c e r t a i n f e u d a l i n s t i t u t i o n s w e r e t r a n s p l a n t e d ) and t h e s e s t a t e s d i f f e r q u i t e s u b s t a n t i a l l y from Europe (where v a r i o u s forms of f e u d a l s t a t e e x i s t e d ) and L a t i n America (where a c u r i o u s h y b r i d form o f f e u d a l capitalism w a s implanted by t h e Spanish and Portuguese s e t t l e m e n t ) . Within Europe t h e r e were s u b s t a n t i a l d i f f e r e n c e s i n f e u d a l s t r u c t u r e . The power of t h e peasant "estate" i n Sweden and t h e power of a g r i c u l t u r a l and merchant c a p i t a l i n England a f t e r the Dissolut i o n gave t o both of t h e s e c o u n t r i e s a f a r broader base f o r p o l i t i c a l power than w a s p o s s i b l e i n , s a y , Spain o r P r u s s i a . And t h e process of t r a n s f o r m a t i o n i t s e l f d i f f e r e d markedly from p l a c e t o p l a c e . The v i o l e n t process of t r a n s f o r m a t i o n i n France e f f e c t i v e l y e l i m i n a t e d t h e f e u d a l a r i s t o c r a c y . The slow process of t r a n s formation i n England a f t e r t h e c i v i l w a r r e s u l t e d i n t h e s t e a d y i n t e g r a t i o n of a r i s t o c r a c y and landowners f i r s t i n t o c a p i t a l i s t a g r i c u l t u r e and l a t e r , during t h e nineteenth century, i n t o the i n d u s t r i a l power s t r u c t u r e . I n both cases t h e c h a r a c t e r o f t h e t r a n s i t i o n has placed an i n d e l i b l e stamp upon t h e subsequent q u a l i t y of p o l i t i c a l l i f e . The p o l i t i c a l d i f f e r e n c e s between t h e s e c o u n t r i e s have t o be understood a g a i n s t t h e background of t h e s e q u i t e d i f f e r e n t h i s t o r i c a l exp e r i e n c e s and t h e c u l t u r a l and p o l i t i c a l t r a d i t i o n s t o which t h e y have given b i r t h . W e have a l s o t o see t h e i n s t i t u t i o n s of t h e S t a t e and t h e r e l a t i o n s which are expressed through t h e s e i n s t i t u t i o n s as c o n s t a n t l y i n t h e p r o c e s s of being reshaped and re-fashioned. In c e r t a i n of h i s h i s t o r i c a l s t u d i e s , the E i hteenth Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte i h a r , Marx provides us with examples of t h i s process a t work. W e are s u r e l y o b l i g a t e d t o understand t h i s a s p e c t t o t h e S t a t e i n t h e same manner. Y e t i n t h e midst of a l l of t h e c o m p l e x i t i e s , a c c i d e n t a l e v e n t s , f l u i d and u n s t a b l e i n t e r a c t i o n s , which surround p o l i t i c a l , l e g a l , adminis t r a t i v e and b u r e a u c r a t i c l i f e , w e cannot a f f o r d t o l o s e s i g h t of t h e e s s e n t i a l Marxian i n s i g h t s . Somehow o r o t h e r , t h e c a p i t a l i s t s t a t e has t o perform i t s b a s i c f u n c t i o n s . Should i t f a i l t o do so, t h e n i t must e i t h e r be reformed o r e l s e c a p i t a l i s m must i t s e l f g i v e way t o some o t h e r method of organizing m a t e r i a l production and d a i l y l i f e .
I t i s perhaps u s e f u l t o conclude this d i s c u s s i o n by posing t h r e e unresolved

questions q u e s t i o n s which w i l l l i k e l y be r e s o l v e d as much through c o n c r e t e material i n v e s t i g a t i o n s of h i s t o r y as through f u r t h e r theoretical analysis.

--

Lenin, V . , 1949, The S t a t e and Revol u t i o n (New York)

(1) To what d e g r e e do t h e v a r i o u s aspects and i n s t r u m e n t a l i t i e s o f S t a t e power y i e l d t o t h e S t a t e a r e l a t i v e l y autonomous f u n c t i o n i n r e l a t i o n s h i p t o t h e p a t h of

c a p i t a l i s t development and t o what d e g r e e can s t a t e f u n c t i o n a r i e s act as p u r e l y n e u t r a l o r even s e l f - s e r v i n g arbiters i n class and intra-class c o n f l i c t ? These q u e s t i o n s have been i n t h e f o r e f r o n t o f much of P o u l a n t z a s I s r e c e n t work.

McPherson, C.B., 1962, The P o l i t i c a l Theory o f P o s s e s s i v e I n d i v i d u a l i s m : Hobbes t o Locke (New York).

Marx,, K., 1938, C r i t i q u e o f t h e Gotha P r o ramm (New Yor &Capital York - 3 Volumes).

-- 1967; 1968 and 1972, T h e o r i e s o f S u r p l u s Value (Moscow - 3 V o l u m e s ) . -- 1970, A C o n t r i b u t i o n t o t h e C r i t i q u e of Political Economv INew York). __ -- 1973, Grundrisse- (New York) 1
~

( ~ L.w
.

~-

( 2 ) To what d e g r e e can t h e c a p i t a l i s t S t a t e vary i t s forms and s t r u c t u r e s t o g i v e t h e appearance o f q u i t e s u b s t a n t i a l d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n amongst t h e c a p i t a l i s t nations while f u l f i l l i n g t h e basic function of s u s t a i n i n g a c a p i t a l i s t s o c i e t y and ensuring the reproduction of t h a t society? I n o t h e r words, what v a r i e t y o f i n s t i t u t i o n s i s p o s s i b l e g i v e n t h e assumption o f a b a s i c u n d e r l y i n g purpose t o s t a t e action.
( 3 ) Which s t r u c t u r e s and f u n c t i o n s w i t h i n t h e S t a t e are " o r g a n i c " t o t h e c a p i t a l i s t mode o f p r o d u c t i o n and t h e r e fore b a s i c t o t h e s u r v i v a l o f c a p i t a l i s t s o c i a l f o r m a t i o n s and which are, i n G r a m sci's phrase, purely conjunctural? These q u e s t i o n s are n o t u n r e l a t e d t o each o t h e r and t h e y l i e a t t h e h e a r t o f any u n d e r s t a n d i n g as t o how S t a t e power can be and i s used i n a s o c i e t y which remains b a s i c a l l y c a p i t a l i s t w h i l e c o n s t a n t l y s h i f t i n g and changing i t s i n s t i t u t i o n a l forms.

Marx, K . and Engels, F., 1952, The Communist Manifesto (Moscow)

--

--

1970, The German Ideology (New York) 1974-, C o l l e c t e d Works (New York 4 volumes t o d a t e ) .

Miliband, R., 1969, The S t a t e i n C a p i t a l i s t S o c i e t y (London)

O'Connor, J., 1973, The F i s c a l C r i s i s o f t h e S t a t e ( N e w York). O f f e , K . , 1973, "The a b o l i t i o n of m a r k e t c o n t r o l and t h e problem o f l e g i t i m a c y " , K a p i t a l i s t a t e , Nos. 1 and 2 . Ollman, B . , 1971, A l i e n a t i o n : Marx's Conc e p t i o n of Man i n C a p i t a l i s t S o c i e t y (New York)

P o l a n y i , K., 1968, P r i m i t i v e , Archaic and Modern Economies: Essays o f K. P o l a n y i (Boston; e d . G. D a l t o n ) . P o u l a n t z a s , N . , 1973, P o l i t i c a l Power and S o c i a l Classes (London). s e i n contemporary
Ca italism(London).

REFERENCES
(N.B., t h e works o f Marx and Engels are ref e r r e d t o by t i t l e r a t h e r t h a n by a u t h o r i n the text)

+The capitalist s t a t e : a r e p l y t o Miliband and Laclau", New L e f t R e v i e w , 95, pp. 63-83.

A l t v a t e r , E., 1973, "Notes on some problems of state interventionism", Kapitalist a t e , N o s . 1 and 2 . Chang, S . , 1931, The Marxian Theory of t h e S t a t e (Philadelphia). Engels, F., 1941, O r i g i n o f t h e Family, P r i v a t e P r o p e r t y and t h e S t a t e (New York).
Gold, D, Lo, C. and Wright, E., 1975, "Re. c e n t develoDments i n M a r x i s t t h e o r i e s o f t h e c a p i t a l i s t state", Monthly Review, 27, N o s . 5 and 6. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8.

G r a m s c i , A., 1971, S e l e c t i o n s from t h e P r i s o n Notebooks (London).

Laclau, E . , 1975, "The s p e c i f i c i t y o f t h e p o l i t i c a l : around t h e Poulantzas-Miliband d e b a t e " , Economy and S o c i e t y , 5, No. 1.

9. 10. 1 . 1 12.
89

Lenin 13. Hegel 14. Proudhon 15. Marx 16. Marcuse 17. Stalin 18. 19. Che Guevara Engels 20. Bakunin 21. Lukacs 22. Ho-Chi Minh 23. Plekhanov 24. 25. K i s s i n g e r ( !)

Trotsky M o Tse Tung a Gandhi Castro Russell Bebel Sartre Luxemburg Yat-sen Toynbee Kropotkin Gramsci