Peaceful coexistence is not simply an official policy of the socialist countries but an important principle of the communist movement as a whole. “The Communist parties regard the struggle for peace as their foremost task,” said the 1957 Declaration. Guided by the lofty principles of humanism in the fight for peace the Communists act in full accord with the class interests of the working-class movement. The growing interdependence of the struggle for peace and for the class interests of the working people is an essential feature of the anti-war movement of today. That is why Communists are confident that the lessening of tension and the ending of the cold war help the working class to fight with greater success for both its immediate and long- term aims. Is this confidence well placed? The answer to this question can be found in the results and the nature of the activities of the Communist parties in the capitalist countries to put into effect the ideas and principles of the 1957 Declaration. Representatives of these parties said at the Bucharest meeting that their parties, being the most consistent and resolute organizers of their peoples’ fight for an international understanding, for peaceful coexistence, had improved their contact with the masses, had gained still greater influence and prestige. The same conclusion was confirmed by the decisions taken by the C.C. meetings of many parties held after the Bucharest meeting.
In the past few decades the world has undergone a radical change . The general crisis of capitalism has deepened . There has emerged and is growing the world system of socialist states . The disintegration of the colonial system is nearing completion . The new balance of forces is no longer giving imperialism a favourable nod . All this has had telescopic and deep going effects on US imperialism . The bungling , the mistakes .
In studying capitalist society we encounter first of all the concept of capital . What is capital ? What do we imply by this term ? There are many concrete manifestations of capital . In any bourgeois country capital may be money , machinery , build ings , ready – made goods , etc. The first conclusion that can therefore be drawn is that capital is value . However , not every value is capital . A worker’s wages are paid in money , but this does not mean that the worker has capital . A peasant has a house and agricultural implements , but this property is not capital either . Money , like any other value , becomes capital only when it increases its value , i.e. , when it produces surplus value . We can therefore extend the first conclusion by defining capital as value which produces surplus value . intrinsic Bourgeois science asserts that profit is an property of capital . However , capital cannot of itself pro duce surplus value . Capital increases its value only when it unites with labour , i.e. , in the process of production . Capital exploits the worker who by his labour creates surplus value which in its turn increases capital . It follows that capital is value which produces surplus value by exploiting wage – workers . Whatever its concrete form , capital is not merely a thing . Capital embodies certain production relations between the capitalist class and the class of wage – workers , and these relations are expressed in exploitation of man by man . In defining capital bourgeois economists usually imply by it the means of production . This view was held by Adam Smith and David Ricardo , representatives of English classical bourgeois political economy . Ricardo , for example , regarded as capital the stone and stick , i.e. , the primitive tools of primitive man . Bourgeois science still continues to identify capital with the means of production . It strives to represent capital as the eternal and natural condition of any produc tion . The ” finding ” of capital in primitive society serves precisely this purpose . The ” theory of eternal existence ” of capital is supposed to confirm the ” theory of eternal existence ” of capitalism . Bourgeois economists misrepresent the history of the origin of capitalism and of the formation of classes in capitalist society . According to them , hard – working and thrifty people became capitalists , while the lazy people who had squan dered all their property became workers . These fabrica tions have nothing in common with historical truth . Primary accumulation of capital was marked not by thrift , but by real plunder of the colonies , forcible dispossession of peasants , and rigid laws against the poor in order to create a capitalist labour discipline .In studying capitalist society we encounter first of all the concept of capital . What is capital ? What do we imply by this term ? There are many concrete manifestations of capital . In any bourgeois country capital may be money , machinery , build ings , ready – made goods , etc. The first conclusion that can therefore be drawn is that capital is value . However , not every value is capital . A worker’s wages are paid in money , but this does not mean that the worker has capital . A peasant has a house and agricultural implements , but this property is not capital either . Money , like any other value , becomes capital only when it increases its value , i.e. , when it produces surplus value . We can therefore extend the first conclusion by defining capital as value which produces surplus value . intrinsic Bourgeois science asserts that profit is an property of capital . However , capital cannot of itself pro duce surplus value . Capital increases its value only when it unites with labour , i.e. , in the process of production . Capital exploits the worker who by his labour creates surplus value which in its turn increases capital . It follows that capital is value which produces surplus value by exploiting wage – workers . Whatever its concrete form , capital is not merely a thing . Capital embodies certain production relations between the capitalist class and the class of wage – workers , and these relations are expressed in exploitation of man by man . In defining capital bourgeois economists usually imply by it the means of production . This view was held by Adam Smith and David Ricardo , representatives of English classical bourgeois political economy . Ricardo , for example , regarded as capital the stone and stick , i.e. , the primitive tools of primitive man . Bourgeois science still continues to identify capital with the means of production . It strives to represent capital as the eternal and natural condition of any produc tion . The ” finding ” of capital in primitive society serves precisely this purpose . The ” theory of eternal existence ” of capital is supposed to confirm the ” theory of eternal existence ” of capitalism . Bourgeois economists misrepresent the history of the origin of capitalism and of the formation of classes in capitalist society . According to them , hard – working and thrifty people became capitalists , while the lazy people who had squan dered all their property became workers . These fabrica tions have nothing in common with historical truth . Primary accumulation of capital was marked not by thrift , but by real plunder of the colonies , forcible dispossession of peasants , and rigid laws against the poor in order to create a capitalist labour discipline .In studying capitalist society we encounter first of all the concept of capital . What is capital ? What do we imply by this term ? There are many concrete manifestations of capital . In any bourgeois country capital may be money , machinery , build ings , ready – made goods , etc. The first conclusion that can therefore be drawn is that capital is value . However , not every value is capital . A worker’s wages are paid in money , but this does not mean that the worker has capital . A peasant has a house and agricultural implements , but this property is not capital either . Money , like any other value , becomes capital only when it increases its value , i.e. , when it produces surplus value . We can therefore extend the first conclusion by defining capital as value which produces surplus value . intrinsic Bourgeois science asserts that profit is an property of capital . However , capital cannot of itself pro duce surplus value . Capital increases its value only when it unites with labour , i.e. , in the process of production . Capital exploits the worker who by his labour creates surplus value which in its turn increases capital . It follows that capital is value which produces surplus value by exploiting wage – workers . Whatever its concrete form , capital is not merely a thing . Capital embodies certain production relations between the capitalist class and the class of wage – workers , and these relations are expressed in exploitation of man by man . In defining capital bourgeois economists usually imply by it the means of production . This view was held by Adam Smith and David Ricardo , representatives of English classical bourgeois political economy . Ricardo , for example , regarded as capital the stone and stick , i.e. , the primitive tools of primitive man . Bourgeois science still continues to identify capital with the means of production . It strives to represent capital as the eternal and natural condition of any produc tion . The ” finding ” of capital in primitive society serves precisely this purpose . The ” theory of eternal existence ” of capital is supposed to confirm the ” theory of eternal existence ” of capitalism . Bourgeois economists misrepresent the history of the origin of capitalism and of the formation of classes in capitalist society . According to them , hard – working and thrifty people became capitalists , while the lazy people who had squan dered all their property became workers . These fabrica tions have nothing in common with historical truth . Primary accumulation of capital was marked not by thrift , but by real plunder of the colonies , forcible dispossession of peasants , and rigid laws against the poor in order to create a capitalist labour discipline .In studying capitalist society we encounter first of all the concept of capital . What is capital ? What do we imply by this term ? There are many concrete manifestations of capital . In any bourgeois country capital may be money , machinery , build ings , ready – made goods , etc. The first conclusion that can therefore be drawn is that capital is value . However , not every value is capital . A worker’s wages are paid in money , but this does not mean that the worker has capital . A peasant has a house and agricultural implements , but this property is not capital either . Money , like any other value , becomes capital only when it increases its value , i.e. , when it produces surplus value . We can therefore extend the first conclusion by defining capital as value which produces surplus value . intrinsic Bourgeois science asserts that profit is an property of capital . However , capital cannot of itself pro duce surplus value . Capital increases its value only when it unites with labour , i.e. , in the process of production . Capital exploits the worker who by his labour creates surplus value which in its turn increases capital . It follows that capital is value which produces surplus value by exploiting wage – workers . Whatever its concrete form , capital is not merely a thing . Capital embodies certain production relations between the capitalist class and the class of wage – workers , and these relations are expressed in exploitation of man by man . In defining capital bourgeois economists usually imply by it the means of production . This view was held by Adam Smith and David Ricardo , representatives of English classical bourgeois political economy . Ricardo , for example , regarded as capital the stone and stick , i.e. , the primitive tools of primitive man . Bourgeois science still continues to identify capital with the means of production . It strives to represent capital as the eternal and natural condition of any produc tion . The ” finding ” of capital in primitive society serves precisely this purpose . The ” theory of eternal existence ” of capital is supposed to confirm the ” theory of eternal existence ” of capitalism . Bourgeois economists misrepresent the history of the origin of capitalism and of the formation of classes in capitalist society . According to them , hard – working and thrifty people became capitalists , while the lazy people who had squan dered all their property became workers . These fabrica tions have nothing in common with historical truth . Primary accumulation of capital was marked not by thrift , but by real plunder of the colonies , forcible dispossession of peasants , and rigid laws against the poor in order to create a capitalist labour discipline .
As the role of money increased , not only the working . masses , but the feudal lords as well found it increasingly necessary to borrow funds . This brought about the appearance of a stratum of individuals who amassed large sums of money and loaned it out at greato interest . In this instance money also turned into money capital , but this was usurious capital . The formula of its circulation is expressed as M – M ‘ , where M ‘ is also greater than M. Merchants could not do without loans , either . This brought about the development of credit and mortgage operations and the establishment of banks . Banks first appeared in the north of Italy , where commodity – money relations were highly developed in the 13th – 14th centuries . The very word ” bank ” comes from the Italian word ” banca ” ( money – changer’s table ) . The word ” bankruptcy ” comes from the expression ” banca rota ” ( the money – changer’s overthrown table ) , for if a usurer was found to be bankrupt , his table was overturned . The banker – usurers also offered their ” aid ” to needy crafts men , thus speeding the impoverishment of many .
THE PRODUCTIVE FORCES DURING THE FORMATION OF HUMAN SOCIETY
The progressive development of mankind was determined by the further advance of the productive forces and , primarily , by the perfection of the instruments of labour . The remains of tools of fossil man were discovered in China , India , Ceylon , Burma , Algeria , Kenya , Uganda , Tanganyika and other regions of South Africa and Europe . In the U.S.S.R. the remains of fossil man and his tools were discovered in Armenia , the Crimea , along the Black Sea Coast of the Caucasus , in Central Asia and along the Dniester River .
Articulate human speech evolved in the processes of labour . Human thought and consciousness have the quality of abstract thinking , i.e. , a generalised reflection of reality in concepts , expressed in words . This capacity for abstract thought made it possible to express an idea , a sum of impressions in words , and with their aid man could inform other human beings of his impressions . However , this ability to communicate his thoughts to another human being through the aid of words was insufficient to stimulate speech . What was lacking was the necessity to communicate one’s thoughts to another . This necessity arose and developed in the process of man’s conscious labour . Labour was always a social activity . The work of a single human being was an integral part of the life of the human community . The unity of a commune of human beings in productive labour resulted in the fact that the individual in his mind , thoughts and actions regarded himself as a member of the commune , as subservient to it . That is why in the process of collective labour people felt the need to com municate with each other , to speak to each other . In the beginning , various shouts and cries used in the process of labour and arising from various actions were the sole means of communication . These cries gradually became established and remembered . This , in turn , brought about a change in the corresponding human organs . Under the in fluence of the pressing need to communicate in the process of common labour , the undeveloped throat was gradually transformed into an organ capable of producing articulate sounds . Thus , as a result of collective labour over a great period of time , articulate speech gradually evolved as a means of exchanging thoughts , as a means of human associa tion . Speech was of tremendous significance in the further development of society , since it helped to unite man’s efforts in labour as well as in organising collective labour ; speech made it possible for man to retain and pass on to coming generations his labour experience . Since the history of primitive society is a history of small , isolated human communities , the language of each such com munity developed independently and was unlike the language of other communities .
Tiahuanaco Tiahuanaco ,erroneously referred to as the Inca Empire , was the largest slave state of America . The history of Tiahuanaco has been grossly distorted . In a number of Latin American and other countries the theory of the ” socialist ” , or even ” communist ” system of Tiahuanaco is taught in the schools and universities . It is not difficult to see through these class – inspired allegations . LuisBoudin of France , one of the chief proponents of this theory , has writ ten the following : ” in this practically socialist system it is often difficult to draw the line between a freeman and a slave . What was the social system of the Incasreally like ? Tiahuanaco encompassed all of present – day Peru and Equador and a great part of Bolivia , Argentina and Chile . The Inca tribe considered themselves to be descendents of the Sun and the Moon and were the ruling tribe of the state . They were headed by a supreme ruler , the Sapa Inca ( Only Inca ) , or Inca . The Inca ruled over millions of his subjects , over peoples and tribes . He was the defender of the slave – own ing class , which consisted of the Inca warrior chieftains , officials and priests . The Incas waged constant wars , subjugating the neighbouring Indian tribes and peoples . They resettled some of them in other lands and turned them into slaves ( ” black people ” ) . According to ancient legend , six thousand Indians were first turned into slaves for taking part in an uprising against the SapaInca . The children of slaves were born into slavery . The commune was the social and economic unit of society . but , as in the countries of Asia and Africa , the status of a freeman in the Inca slave state was not much different from that of a slave . The freemen were compelled to give one third of their harvest to the Inca and another third to the Sun ( the priests ) ; besides , they had to support the local chieftains . Thus , the tiller could retain less than a third of what he produced . The communes were charged with keep ing the irrigation systems in good repair , with building new canals , providing workers for the mines , road repair and construction . Freemen were not allowed to trayelfreely , they were only permitted to eat the foods the officials and chieftains decreed they could and had to wear a specific type of clothing . The Sapa Inca , the Inca nobility , the priests and the nobility of the tribes that had voluntarily accepted Inca rule lived in glittering splendour in magnificent palaces and temples lavishly adorned with gold and precious stones and built by slaves and freemen . A staggering amount of material values created by the freemen and slaves and appropriated by the slave – owning Inca state was used for the upkeep of the great army and state apparatus . The history of Tiahuanaco is full of incidents reflecting a bitter class struggle . One such incident was the mutiny of the conquered tribes against the despotion .The Tiahuanaco civilisation was very advanced for its time . Irrigated agriculture was the basis of the Inca economy . There were numerous canals , the mountain slopes were trans formed into vast irrigated terraces by the skilful hands of the labourers . There is indication , that the inhabitants of Tiahaanacoeven watered their meadows . The Incas raised numer ous vegetables , among them maize and manioc , several varie ties of potatoes , pepper , medicinal herbs , etc. They used guano for fertiliser . Unlike the various other regions of America , animal hus bandry was widely developed , with the llama and similar breeds most popular : there were also several varieties of domestic fowl . The majority of llama herds were the sole . inviolable property of the Sapa Inca . The Incas used their great herds of llamas as beasts of burden : like the other peoples of America , they did not know the use of the wheel , though they did know the geometric representation of a circle . The Inca weavers , builders , potters and smelters were exquisite masters of their trade . Inca buildings were all but indestructible . The Incas reduced and refined gold , copper , lead and tin . Existing data lead us to believe that they knew how to smelt meteorite iron ore and were about to produce their first iron from ore . The vast territory of the Inca state was criss – crossed by broad ( 5-6 metres ) roads . There were bridges , most of which were suspension bridges . across the rivers and .gorges that crossed the roads . Water transport was one of the major means of transporta tion . There were skilfully made dug – outs and sailing boats . as well as rafts which sailed up and down the rivers and lakes . The Incas also embarked on distant sea voyages on their great rafts . There is good reason to believe that Inca seafarers reached Central America and Mexico . Though these voyages were aimed at extending trade , both home and foreign trade was at a low level of development . Barter was the chief farm of trade . The monetary unit in use was a The Incas , as the Mayas , had a hieroglyphic system of weiting . However , it was known only to the Sapa Inca and a small number of high officials and priests . There were various commonly known means of transmitting informa tion and keeping accounts , and the most widely accepted system was the so called knotted cord writing known asquipu . . There were oral literary works and the dance , music , and sculpture were all highly developed . Dramatic presentations were very popular . The Inca calendar had 365 days and was divided into 12 months , each of which was divided into four ” weeks ” . The year began with the December opposition . Tiahuanaco and its flourishing civilisation fell victim to the Spanish invaders who profited by the lack of unity among the various Indian tribes . Equally important was the suprem acy of Spanish arms . The Indians had never seen firearms or horses and during the first battles especially both wrought terror in the Indian camp .
The bourgeois revolutions on the European continent led feudal fetters were torn off the capitalist production rela to the downfall of feudalism in a number of countries . The tions and the way for their rapid development was cleared . In the countries where the first bourgeois revolutions occurred , and under their influence in other countries , as the capitalist relations matured , capitalist industry rapidly developed . This development did not consist in a mere increase in the number of enterprises employing wage workers or in a mere increase in the volume of production . The character of this development and its results were of much greater significance to society . The bourgeois revolutions destroyed the obstacles to the development of the productive forces , and considerably accelerated the growth of these forces and brought about a revolution in technology , i.e. , the invention of the machine . The development of capitalist industry , consequently , meant the replacement of manual labour , which predominated in the capitalist manufactories , by machine labour . The change from the manufactory stage of capitalism with its manual technology to the machine industry is called the industrial revolution . In this case the term ” revolution ” is used because the replacement of manual labour with machine labour considerably influenced the development of the socio – economic relations of the time , which in a certain measure determined the fate of capitalism .
The import of large quantities of goods to the oppressed countries enlivened the commodity – money relations in them . The local feudal lords and tribal chiefs began to use the market increasingly more often . The result of that was an intensified exploitation of the peasantry , its pauperisation and often ruination . Under the direct pressure of foreign capital ists , the colonial administration and the country’s own feudal lords , middlemen and usurers , peasants had to produce raw materials and foodstuffs for the capitalist market and sell them at uncommonly low prices . The slightest fluctuation in the capitalist market affected the conditions of the peasants in the colonies and semicolonies . The flooding of the colonies and semicolonies with large quantities of industrial commodities from the parent states which were , of course , unable to compete with the industries led to a decline of the local handicrafts and manufactories of the advanced countries . Thus the marketing of the articles manufactured in the parent states impeded the industrial declined together with the handicrafts . Not only the peasants development of Asia , Africa and Latin America . Local trade and handicraftsmen , but even the local bourgeoisie was becoming impoverished , except the part of the bourgeoisie which began to play the role of an intermediary in the trade between the colonialists and the subjugated peoples ( the so – called comprador bourgeoisie ) . ” Free trade ” was the main , but not the only method of exploiting the colonies . Capitalism also developed a system of plantation economy ( West – Indies , Indonesia , India , etc. ) and organised land plunder of the colonies and their settle ment by way of ” free ” colonisation ( Algeria , South Africa , etc. ) . In the countries of plantation economy the English and French colonialists had to abolish slavery which had completely outlived itself , was unproductive and was incapable of making the plantations more profitable . But even after the abolition of slavery the former slaves and the new contract workers from China and India were subjected to monstrous exploitation , continued to live under inhuman conditions and died en masse of starvation and disease . Whereas after abolition of slavery the English and French planters used a system of labour contracts , the Dutch colonialists in Indonesia , where the local population was employed as labour power , introduced a system of forced labour . Usually 5-10 villages were attached to an enterprise which processed raw material . The population was forced to supply the enterprise with raw material and labour power . During the period of pre – monopoly capital , when the main form of economic relations between the parent states and the colonies was ” free trade ” , capitalist relations did not as yet develop in the colonies . At the same time , having been drawn into world trade , the colonies were becoming an exploited part of the forming world capitalist system .
The second way of development of capitalism in agriculture is slower and harder for the peasants . In this case the landowners remain the dominant force in the countryside and , as a rule , in the whole of the country . The greater part of the land is owned by landowners , while the peasants are transformed from serfs into farm hands or tenants . Only a negligible number of rich peasants embark on the path of capitalist exploitation and use hired labour . This way of capitalist development in agriculture is connected with the existence of reactionary political systems , domination of the landowners ‘ class . The most typical of this way of capitalist development in agriculture were Germany , especially Prussia , and tsarist Russia . Neither in Germany nor in Russia ( until 1917 ) was the agrarian problem solved in a revolutionary way . That is why the development of bourgeois relations in the agriculture of these countries was the result not of a revolutionary over throw of feudalism , but of a slow and tormenting for the peasantry development of serf forms of exploitation into capitalist forms . In Prussia serfdom was abolished in 1806 , but the feudal obligations actually existed until the middle of the 19th century . A law on redeeming the feudal obligations was passed only in 1850 , and the peasants paid the land owners 1,000 million marks . These enormous sums received by the landowners from the peasants accelerated the trans formation of the landowners ‘ estates into capitalist farms and at the same time ruined many peasants . A similar picture was observed in Russia after the ” emancipation ” of the peasants in 1861 . The landowners ‘ way of development of capitalism in agriculture means persistence of the survivals of feudalism in the economy and the political system of the state . Elimina tion of these survivals becomes one of the objectives of the revolutionary movement .
Capitalism Society 