the moscow census-第20节

按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！


this　idea　is　as　just　as　that　every　governmental　regulation　is　the
result　of　a　compact　（contrat　social）。

Every　one　likes　to　think　that　money　is　only　a　medium　of　exchange　for
labor。　　I　have　made　shoes；　you　have　raised　grain；　he　has　reared
sheep：　　here；　in　order　that　we　may　the　more　readily　effect　an
exchange；　we　will　institute　money；　which　represents　a　corresponding
quantity　of　labor；　and；　by　means　of　it；　we　will　barter　our　shoes　for
a　breast　of　lamb　and　ten　pounds　of　flour。　　We　will　exchange　our
products　through　the　medium　of　money；　and　the　money　of　each　one　of　us
represents　our　labor。

This　is　perfectly　true；　but　true　only　so　long　as；　in　the　community
where　this　exchange　is　effected；　the　violence　of　one　man　over　the
rest　has　not　made　its　appearance；　not　only　violence　over　the　labors
of　others；　as　happens　in　wars　and　slavery；　but　where　he　exercises　no
violence　for　the　protection　of　the　products　of　their　labor　from
others。　　This　will　be　true　only　in　a　community　whose　members　fully
carry　out　the　Christian　law；　in　a　community　where　men　give　to　him　who
asks；　and　where　he　who　takes　is　not　asked　to　make　restitution。　　But
just　so　soon　as　any　violence　whatever　is　used　in　the　community；　the
significance　of　money　for　its　possessor　loses　its　significance　as　a
representative　of　labor；　and　acquires　the　significance　of　a　right
founded；　not　on　labor；　but　on　violence。

As　soon　as　there　is　war；　and　one　man　has　taken　any　thing　from　any
other　man；　money　can　no　longer　be　always　the　representative　of　labor；
money　received　by　a　warrior　for　the　spoils　of　war；　which　he　sells；
even　if　he　is　the　commander　of　the　warriors；　is　in　no　way　a　product
of　labor；　and　possesses　an　entirely　different　meaning　from　money
received　for　work　on　shoes。　　As　soon　as　there　are　slave…owners　and
slaves；　as　there　always　have　been　throughout　the　whole　world；　it　is
utterly　impossible　to　say　that　money　represents　labor。

Women　have　woven　linen；　sold　it；　and　received　money；　serfs　have　woven
for　their　master；　and　the　master　has　sold　them　and　received　the
money。　　The　money　is　identical　in　both　cases；　but　in　the　one　case　it
is　the　product　of　labor；　in　the　other　the　product　of　violence。　　In
exactly　the　same　way；　a　stranger　or　my　own　father　has　given　me　money；
and　my　father；　when　he　gave　me　that　money；　knew；　and　I　know；　and
everybody　knows；　that　no　one　can　take　this　money　away　from　me；　but　if
it　should　occur　to　any　one　to　take　it　away　from　me；　or　even　not　to
hand　it　over　at　the　date　when　it　was　promised；　the　law　would
intervene　on　my　behalf；　and　would　compel　the　delivery　to　me　of　the
money；　and；　again；　it　is　evident　that　this　money　can　in　no　wise　be
called　the　equivalent　of　labor；　on　a　level　with　the　money　received　by
Semyon　for　chopping　wood。　　So　that　in　any　community　where　there　is
any　thing　that　in　any　manner　whatever　controls　the　labor　of　others；
or　where　violence　hedges　in；　by　means　of　money；　its　possessions　from
others；　there　money　is　no　longer　invariably　the　representative　of
labor。　　In　such　a　community；　it　is　sometimes　the　representative　of
labor；　and　sometimes　of　violence。

Thus　it　would　be　where　only　one　act　of　violence　from　one　man　against
others；　in　the　midst　of　perfectly　free　relations；　should　have　made
its　appearance；　but　now；　when　centuries　of　the　most　varied　deeds　of
violence　have　passed　for　accumulations　of　money；　when　these　deeds　of
violence　are　incessant；　and　merely　alter　their　forms；　when；　as　every
one　admits；　money　accumulated　itself　represents　violence；　when　money；
as　a　representative　of　direct　labor；　forms　but　a　very　small　portion
of　the　money　which　is　derived　from　every　sort　of　violence；to　say
nowadays　that　money　represents　the　labor　of　the　person　who　possesses
it；　is　a　self…evident　error　or　a　deliberate　lie。

It　may　be　said；　that　thus　it　should　be；　it　may　be　said；　that　this　is
desirable；　but　by　no　means　can　it　be　said；　that　thus　it　is。

Money　represents　labor。　　Yes。　　Money　does　represent　labor；　but　whose？
In　our　society　only　in　the　very　rarest；　rarest　of　instances；　does
money　represent　the　labor　of　its　possessor；　but　it　nearly　always
represents　the　labor　of　other　people；　the　past　or　future　labor　of
men；　it　is　a　representative　of　the　obligation　of　others　to　labor；
which　has　been　established　by　force。

Money；　in　its　most　accurate　and　at　the　same　the　simple　application；
is　the　conventional　stamp　which　confers　a　right；　or；　more　correctly；
a　possibility；　of　taking　advantage　of　the　labors　of　other　people。　　In
its　ideal　significance；　money　should　confer　this　right；　or　this
possibility；　only　when　it　serves　as　the　equivalent　of　labor；　and　such
money　might　be　in　a　community　in　which　no　violence　existed。　　But　just
as　soon　as　violence；　that　is　to　say；　the　possibility　of　profiting　by
the　labors　of　others　without　toil　of　one's　own；　exists　in　a
community；　then　that　profiting　by　the　labors　of　other　men　is　also
expressed　by　money；　without　any　distinction　of　the　persons　on　whom
that　violence　is　exercised。

The　landed　proprietor　has　imposed　upon　his　serfs　natural　debts；　a
certain　quantity　of　linen；　grain；　and　cattle；　or　a　corresponding
amount　of　money。　　One　household　has　procured　the　cattle；　but　has　paid
money　in　lieu　of　linen。　　The　proprietor　takes　the　money　to　a　certain
amount　only；　because　he　knows　that　for　that　money　they　will　make　him
the　same　quantity　of　linen；　（generally　he　takes　a　little　more；　in
order　to　be　sure　that　they　will　make　it　for　the　same　amount）；　and
this　money；　evidently；　represents　for　the　proprietor　the　obligation
of　other　people　to　toil。

The　peasant　gives　the　money　as　an　obligation；　to　he　knows　not　whom；
but　to　people；　and　there　are　many　of　them；　who　undertake　for　this
money　to　make　so　much　linen。　　But　the　people　who　undertake　to　make
the　linen；　do　so　because　they　have　not　succeeded　in　raising　sheep；
and　in　place　of　the　sheep；　they　must　pay　money；　but　the　peasant　who
takes　money　for　his　sheep　takes　it　because　he　must　pay　for　grain
which　did　not　bear　well　this　year。　　The　same　thing　goes　on　throughout
this　realm；　and　throughout　the　whole　world。

A　man　sells　the　product　of　his　labor；　past；　present　or　to　come；
sometimes　his　food；　and　generally　not　because　money　constitutes　for
him　a　convenient　means　of　exchange。　　He　could　have　effected　the
barter　without　money；　but　he　does　so　because　money　is　exacted　from
him　by　violence　as　a　lien　on　his　labor。

When　the　sovereign　of　Egypt　exacted　labor　from　his　slaves；　the　slaves
gave　all　their　labor；　but　only　their　past　and　present　labor；　their
future　labor　they　could　not　give。　　But　with　the　dissemination　of
money　tokens；　and　the　credit　which　had　its　rise　in　them；　it　became
possible　to　sell　one's　future　toil　for　money。　　Money；　with　co…
existent　violence　in　the　community；　only　represents　the　possibility
of　a　new　form　of　impersonal　slavery；　which　has　taken　the　place　of
personal　slavery。　　The　slave…owner　has　a　right　to　the　labor　of　Piotr；
Ivan；　and　Sidor。　　But　the　owner　of　money；　in　a　place　where　money　is
demanded　from　all；　has　a　right　to　the　toil　of　all　those　nameless
people　who　are　in　need　of　money。　　Money　has　set　aside　all　the
oppressive　features　of　slavery；　under　which　an　owner　knows　his　right
to　Ivan；　and　with　them　it　has　set　aside　all　humane　relations　between
the　owner　and　the　slave；　which　mitigated　the　burden　of　personal
thraldom。

I　will　not　allude　to　the　fact；　that　such　a　condition　of　things　is；
possibly；　necessary　for　the　development　of　mankind；　for　progress；　and
so　forth；that　I　do　not　contest。　　I　have　merely　tried　to　elucidate
to　myself　the　idea　of　money；　and　that　universal　error　into　which　I
fell　when　I　accepted　money　as　the　representative　of　labor。　　I　became
convinced；　after　experience；　that　money　is　not　the　representative　of
labor；　but；　in　the　majority　of　cases；　the　representative　of　violence；
or　of　especially　complicated　sharp　practices　founded　on　violence。

Money；　in　our　day；　has　completely　lost　that　significance　which　it　is
very　desirable　that　it　should　possess；　as　the　representative　of　one's
own　labor；　such　a　significance　it　has　only　as　an　exception；　but；　as　a
general　rule；　it　has　been　converted　into　a　right　or　a　possibility　of
profiting　by　the　toil　of　others。

The　dissemination　of　money；　of　credit；　and　of　all　sorts　of　money
tokens；　confirms　this　significance　of　money　ever　more　and　more。
Money　is　a　new　form　of　slavery；　which　differs　from　the　old　form　of
slavery　only　in　its　impersonality；　its　annihilation　of　all　humane
relations　with　the　slave。

Moneymoney；　is　a　value　which　is　always　equal　to　itself；　and　is
always　considered　legal　and　righteous；　and　whose　use　is　regarded　as
not　immoral；　just　as　the　right　of　slavery　was　regarded。

In　my　young　days；　the　game　of　loto　was　introduced　into　the　clubs。
Everybody　rushed　to　play　it；　and；　as　it　was　said；　many　ruined
themselves；　rendered　their　families　miserable；　lost　other　people's
money；　and　government　funds；　and　committed　suicide；　and　the　game　was
prohibited；　and　it　remains　prohibited　to　this　day。

I　remember　to　have　seen　old　and　unsentimental　gamblers；　who　told　me
that　this　game　was　particularly　pleasing　because　you　did　not　see　from
whom　you　were　winning；　as　is　the　case　in　other　games；　a　lackey
brought；　not　money；　but　ch