第24章

Butthepossibilityitselfisconditionedbysubjectiveandobjectivenaturalcircumstances。Andheretooliesnothingatallmysterious。Shouldlabour-powerbeminute，andthenaturalconditionsoflabourscanty，thenthesurplus-labourissmall，butinsuchacasesoarethewantsoftheproducersontheonehandandtherelativenumberofexploitersofsurplus-labourontheother，andfinallysoisthesurplus-product，wherebythisbarelyproductivesurplus-labourisrealisedforthosefewexploitinglandowners。

Finally，labourrentinitselfimpliesthat，allothercircumstancesremainingequal，itwilldependwhollyupontherelativeamountofsurplus-labour，orenforcedlabour，towhatextentthedirectproducershallbeenabledtoimprovehisowncondition，toacquirewealth，toproduceanexcessoverandabovehisindispensablemeansofsubsistence，or，ifwewishtoanticipatethecapitalistmodeofexpression，whetherheshallbeabletoproduceaprofitforhimself，andhowmuchofaprofit，i。e。，anexcessoverhiswageswhichhavebeenproducedbyhimself。Renthereisthenormal，all-absorbing，sotosaylegitimateformofsurplus-labour，andfarfrombeingexcessoverprofit，whichmeansinthiscasebeingaboveanyotherexcessoverwages，itisratherthattheamountofsuchprofit，andevenitsveryexistence，depends，othercircumstancesbeingequal，upontheamountofrent，i。e。，theenforcedsurplus-labourtobesurrenderedtothelandowners。

Sincethedirectproducerisnottheowner，butonlyapossessor，andsinceallhissurplus-labourdejureactuallybelongstothelandlord，somehistorianshaveexpressedastonishmentthatitshouldheatallpossibleforthosesubjecttoenforcedlabour，orserfs，toacquireanyindependentproperty，orrelativelyspeaking，wealth，undersuchcircumstances。However，itisevidentthattraditionmustplayadominantroleintheprimitiveandundevelopedcircumstancesonwhichthesesocialproductionrelationsandthecorrespondingmodeofproductionarebased。Itisfurthermoreclearthathereasalwaysitisintheinterestoftherulingsectionofsocietytosanctiontheexistingorderaslawandtolegallyestablishitslimitsgiventhroughusageandtradition。Apartfromallelse，this，bytheway，comesaboutofitselfassoonastheconstantreproductionofthebasisoftheexistingorderanditsfundamentalrelationsassumesaregulatedandorderlyforminthecourseoftime。Andsuchregulationandorderarethemselvesindispensableelementsofanymodeofproduction，ifitistoassumesocialstabilityandindependencefrommerechanceandarbitrariness。

Thesearepreciselytheformofitssocialstabilityandthereforeitsrelativefreedomfrommerearbitrarinessandmerechance。Underbackwardconditionsoftheproductionprocessaswellasthecorrespondingsocialrelations，itachievesthisformbymererepetitionoftheirveryreproduction。

Ifthishascontinuedonforsometime，itentrenchesitselfascustomandtraditionandisfinallysanctionedasanexplicitlaw。However，sincetheformofthissurplus-labour，enforcedlabour，isbasedupontheimperfectdevelopmentofallsocialproductivepowersandthecrudenessofthemethodsoflabouritself，itwillnaturallyabsorbarelativelymuchsmallerportionofthedirectproducer抯totallabourthanunderdevelopedmodesofproduction，particularlythecapitalistmodeofproduction。Takeit，forinstance，thattheenforcedlabourforthelandlordoriginallyamountedtotwodaysperweek。Thesetwodaysofenforcedlabourperweekaretherebyfixed，areaconstantmagnitude，legallyregulatedbyprescriptiveorwrittenlaw。Buttheproductivityoftheremainingdaysoftheweek，whichareatthedisposalofthedirectproducerhimself，isavariablemagnitude，whichmustdevelopinthecourseofhisexperience，justasthenewwantsheacquires，andjustastheexpansionofthemarketforhisproductandtheincreasingassurancewithwhichhedisposesofthisportionofhislabour-powerwillspurhimontoagreaterexertionofhislabour-power，wherebyitshouldnotbeforgottenthattheemploymentofhislabour-powerisbynomeansconfinedtoagriculture，butincludesruralhomeindustry。

Thepossibilityisherepresentedfordefiniteeconomicdevelopmenttakingplace，depending，ofcourse，uponfavourablecircumstances，inbornracialcharacteristics，etc。

III。RENTINKIND

Thetransformationoflabourrentintorentinkindchangesnothingfromtheeconomicstandpointinthenatureofground-rent。Thelatterconsists，intheformsconsideredhere，inthatrentisthesoleprevailingandnormalformofsurplus-value，orsurplus-labour。Thisisfurtherexpressedinthefactthatitistheonlysurplus-labour，ortheonlysurplus-product，whichthedirectproducer，whoisinpossessionofthelabourconditionsneededforhisownreproduction，mustgiveuptotheowneroftheland，whichinthissituationistheall-embracingconditionoflabour。

And，furthermore，thatlandistheonlyconditionoflabourwhichconfrontsthedirectproducerasalienproperty，independentofhim，andpersonifiedbythelandlord。Towhateverextentrentinkindistheprevailinganddominantformofground-rent，itisfurther-morealwaysmoreorlessaccompaniedbysurvivalsoftheearlierform，i。e。，ofrentpaiddirectlyinlabour，corvé；e-labour，nomatterwhetherthelandlordbeaprivatepersonorthestate。Rentinkindpresupposesahigherstageofcivilisationforthedirectproducer，i。e。，ahigherlevelofdevelopmentofhislabourandofsocietyingeneral。Anditisdistinctfromtheprecedingforminthatsurplus-labourneedsnolongerbeperformedinitsnaturalform，thusnolongerunderthedirectsupervisionandcompulsionofthelandlordorhisrepresentatives:thedirectproducerisdrivenratherbyforceofcircumstancesthanbydirectcoercion，throughlegalenactmentratherthanthewhip，toperformitonhisownresponsibility。Surplus-production，inthesenseofproductionbeyondtheindispensableneedsofthedirectproducer，andwithinthefieldofproductionactuallybelongingtohim，uponthelandexploitedbyhimselfinsteadof，asearlier，uponthenearbylord抯estatebeyondhisownland，hasalreadybecomeaself-understoodrulehere。Inthisrelationthedirectproducermoreorlessdisposesofhisentirelabour-time，although，aspreviously，apartofthislabour-time，atfirstpracticallytheentiresurplusportionofit，belongstothelandlordwithoutcompensation；exceptthatthelandlordnolongerdirectlyreceivesthissurplus-labourinitsnaturalform，butratherintheproducts？naturalforminwhichitisrealised。Theburdensome，andaccordingtothewayinwhichenforcedlabourisregulated，moreorlessdisturbinginterruptionbyworkforthelandlord(seeBuchI，Kap。VIII，2)[EnglisheditionChX，2——Ed](”ManufacturerandBoyard”)stopswhereverrentinkindappearsinpureform，oratleastitisreducedtoafewshortintervalsduringtheyear，whenacontinuationofsomecorvé；e-laboursidebysidewithrentinkindtakesplace。Thelabouroftheproducerforhimselfandhislabourforthelandlordarenolongerpalpablyseparatedbytimeandspace。Thisrentinkind，initspureform，whileitmaydragfragmentsalongintomorehighlydevelopedmodesofproductionandproductionrelations，stillpresupposesforitsexistenceanaturaleconomy，i。e。，thattheconditionsoftheeconomyareeitherwhollyorfortheoverwhelmingpartproducedbytheeconomyitself，directlyreplacedandreproducedoutofitsgrossproduct。Itfurthermorepresupposesthecombinationofruralhomeindustrywithagriculture。Thesurplus-product，whichformstherent，istheproductofthiscombinedagriculturalandindustrialfamilylabour，nomatterwhetherrentinkindcontainsmoreorlessoftheindustrialproduct，asisoftenthecaseintheMiddleAges，orwhetheritispaidonlyintheformofactualproductsoftheland。Inthisformofrentitisbynomeansnecessaryforrentinkind，whichrepresentsthesurplus-labour，tofullyexhausttheentiresurplus-labouroftheruralfamily。Comparedwithlabourrent，theproducerratherhasmoreroomforactiontogaintimeforsurplus-labourwhoseproductshallbelongtohimself，aswellastheproductofhislabourwhichsatisfieshisindispensableneeds。Similarly，thisformwillgiverisetogreaterdifferencesintheeconomicpositionoftheindividualdirectproducers。Atleastthepossibilityforsuchadifferentiationexists，andthepossibilityforthedirectproducertohaveinturnacquiredthemeanstoexploitotherlabourersdirectly。This，however，doesnotconcernushere，sincewearedealingwithrentinkindinitspureform；justasingeneralwecannotenterintotheendlessvarietyofcombinationswhereinthevariousformsofrentmaybeunited，adulteratedandamalgamated。Theformofrentinkind，bybeingboundtoadefinitetypeofproductandproductionitselfandthroughitsindispensablecombinationofagricultureanddomesticindustry，throughitsalmostcompleteself-sufficiencywherebythepeasantfamilysupportsitselfthroughitsindependencefromthemarketandthemovementofproductionandhistoryofthatsectionofsocietylyingoutsideofitssphere，inshortowingtothecharacterofnaturaleconomyingeneral，thisformisquiteadaptedtofurnishingthebasisforstationarysocialconditionsaswesee，e。g。，inAsia。

Here，asintheearlierformoflabourrent，ground-rentisthenormalformofsurplus-value，andthusofsurplus-labour，i。e。，oftheentireexcesslabourwhichthedirectproducermustperformgratis，henceactuallyundercompulsionalthoughthiscompulsionnolongerconfrontshimintheoldbrutalform——forthebenefitoftheownerofhisessentialconditionoflabour，theland。Theprofit，ifbyerroneouslyanticipatingwemaythuscallthatportionofthedirectproducer抯labourexcessoverhisnecessarylabour，whichheretainsforhimself，hassolittletodowithdeterminingrentinkind，thatthisprofit，onthecontrary，growsupbehindthebackofrentandfindsitsnaturallimitinthesizeofrentinkind。Thelattermayassumedimensionswhichseriouslyimperilreproductionoftheconditionsoflabour，themeansofproductionthemselves，renderingtheexpansionofproductionmoreorlessimpossibleandreducingthedirectproducerstothephysicalminimumofmeansofsubsistence。Thisisparticularlythecase，whenthisformismetwithandexploitedbyaconqueringcommercialnation，e。g。，theEnglishinIndia。

IV。MONEY-RENT

Bymoney-rent——asdistinctfromindustrialandcommercialground-rentbaseduponthecapitalistmodeofproduction，whichisbutanexcessoveraverageprofit——weheremeantheground-rentwhicharisesfromamerechangeinformofrentinkind，justasthelatterinturnisbutamodificationoflabourrent。Thedirectproducerhereturnsoverinsteadoftheproduct，itspricetothelandlord(whomaybeeitherthestateoraprivateindividual)。

Anexcessofproductsintheirnaturalformnolongersuffices；itmustbeconvertedfromitsnaturalformintomoney-form。Althoughthedirectproducerstillcontinuestoproduceatleastthegreaterpartofhismeansofsubsistencehimself，acertainportionofthisproductmustnowbeconvertedintocommodities，mustbeproducedascommodities。Thecharacteroftheentiremodeofproductionisthusmoreorlesschanged。Itlosesitsindependence，itsdetachmentfromsocialconnection。Theratioofcostofproduction，whichnowcomprisesgreaterorlesserexpendituresofmoney，becomesdecisive；

atanyrate，theexcessofthatportionofgrossproducttobeconvertedintomoneyoverthatportionwhichmustserve，ontheonehand，asmeansofreproductionagain，and，ontheother，asmeansofdirectsubsistence，assumesadeterminingrole。However，thebasisofthistypeofrent，althoughapproachingitsdissolution，remainsthesameasthatofrentinkind，whichconstitutesitspointofdeparture。Thedirectproducerasbeforeisstillpossessorofthelandeitherthroughinheritanceorsomeothertraditionalright，andmustperformforhislord，asownerofhismostessentialconditionofproduction，excesscorvé；e-labour，thatis，unpaidlabourforwhichnoequivalentisreturned，intheformofasurplus-producttransformedintomoney。Ownershipoftheconditionsoflabourasdistinctfromland，suchasagriculturalimplementsandothergoodsandchattels，istransformedintothepropertyofthedirectproducerevenundertheearlierformsofrent，firstinfact，andthenalsolegally，andevenmoresoisthisthepreconditionfortheformofmoney-rent。Thetransformationofrentinkindintomoney-rent，takingplacefirstsporadicallyandthenonamoreorlessnationalscale，presupposesaconsiderabledevelopmentofcommerce，ofurbanindustry，ofcommodity-productioningeneral，andtherebyofmoneycirculation。Itfurthermoreassumesamarket-priceforproducts，andthattheybesoldatpricesroughlyapproximatingtheirvalues，whichneednotatallbethecaseunderearlierforms。InEasternEuropewemaystillpartlyobservethistransformationtakingplacetinderourveryeyes。HowunfeasibleitcanbewithoutacertaindevelopmentofsociallabourproductivityisprovedbyvariousunsuccessfulattemptstocarryitthroughundertheRomanEmpire，andbyrelapsesintorentinkindafterseekingtoconvertatleastthestatetaxportionofthisrentintomoney-rent。

Thesametransitionaldifficultiesareevidenced，e。g。，inpre-revolutionaryFrance，whenmoney-rentwascombinedwithandadulteratedby，survivalsofitsearlierforms。

Money-rent，asatransmutedformofrentinkind，andinantithesistoit，is，nevertheless，thefinalform，andsimultaneouslytheformofdissolutionofthetypeofground-rentwhichwehaveheretoforeconsidered，namelyground-rentasthenormalformofsurplus-valueandoftheunpaidsurplus-labourtobeperformedfortheowneroftheconditionsofproduction。

Initspureform，thisrent，likelabourrentandrentinkind，representsnoexcessoverprofit。Itabsorbstheprofit，asitisunderstood。Insofarasprofitarisesbesideitpracticallyasaseparateportionofexcesslabour，money-rentlikerentinitsearlierformsstillconstitutesthenormallimitofsuchembryonicprofit，whichcanonlydevelopinrelationtothepossibilitiesofexploitation，beitofone抯ownexcesslabourorthatofanother，whichremainsaftertheperformanceofthesurplus-labourrepresentedbymoney-rent。Shouldanyprofitactuallyarisealongwiththisrent，thenthisprofitdoesnotconstitutethelimitofrent，butratherconversely，therentisthelimitoftheprofit。However，asalreadyindicated，money-rentissimultaneouslytheformofdissolutionoftheground-rentconsideredthusfar，coincidingprimafaciewithsurplus-valueandsurplus-labour，i。e。，ground-rentasthenormalanddominantformofsurplus-value。

Initsfurtherdevelopmentmoney-rentmustlead——asidefromallintermediateforms，e。g。，thesmallpeasanttenantfarmer——eithertothetransformationoflandintopeasants？freehold，ortotheformcorrespondingtothecapitalistmodeofproduction，thatis，torentpaidbythecapitalisttenantfarmer。

Withmoney-rentprevailing，thetraditionalandcustomarylegalrelationshipbetweenlandlordandsubjectswhopossessandcultivateapartoftheland，isnecessarilyturnedintoapuremoneyrelationshipfixedcontractuallyinaccordancewiththerulesofpositivelaw。Thepossessorengagedincultivationthusbecomesvirtuallyameretenant。Thistransformationservesontheonehand，providedothergeneralproductionrelationspermit，toexpropriatemoreandmoretheoldpeasantpossessorsandtosubstitutecapitalisttenantsintheirstead。Ontheotherhand，itleadstotheformerpossessorbuyinghimselffreefromhisrentobligationandtohistransformationintoanindependentpeasantwithcompleteownershipofthelandhetills。

Thetransformationofrentinkindintomoney-rentisfurthermorenotonlyinevitablyaccompanied，butevenanticipated，bytheformationofaclassofproperty-lessday-labourers，whohirethemselvesoutformoney。Duringtheirgenesis，whenthisnewclassappearsbutsporadically，thecustomnecessarilydevelopsamongthemoreprosperouspeasantssubjecttorentpaymentsofexploitingagriculturalwage-labourersfortheirownaccount，muchasinfeudaltimes，whenthemorewell-to-dopeasantserfsthemselvesalsoheldserfs。Inthisway，theygraduallyacquirethepossibilityofaccumulatingacertainamountofwealthandthemselvesbecomingtransformedintofuturecapitalists。Theoldself-employedpossessorsoflandthemselvesthusgiverisetoanurseryschoolforcapitalisttenants，whosedevelopmentisconditionedbythegeneraldevelopmentofcapitalistproductionbeyondtheboundsofthecountry-side。Thisclassshootsupveryrapidlywhenparticularlyfavourablecircumstancescometoitsaid，asinEnglandinthe16thcentury，wherethethenprogressivedepreciationofmoneyenrichedthemunderthecustomarylongleasesattheexpenseofthelandlords。

Furthermore:assoonasrentassumestheformofmoney-rent，andtherebytherelationshipbetweenrent-payingpeasantandlandlordbecomesarelationshipfixedbycontract——adevelopmentwhichisonlypossiblegenerallywhentheworld-market，commerceandmanufacturehavereachedacertainrelativelyhighlevel——theleasingoflandtocapitalistsinevitablyalsomakesitsappearance。Thelatterhithertostoodbeyondtherurallimitsandnowcarryovertothecountrysideandagriculturethecapitalacquiredinthecitiesandwithitthecapitalistmodeofoperationdeveloped——i。e。，creatingaproductasamerecommodityandsolelyasameansofappropriatingsurplus-value。Thisformcanbecomethegeneralruleonlyinthosecountrieswhichdominatetheworld-marketintheperiodoftransitionfromthefeudaltothecapitalistmodeofproduction。Whenthecapitalisttenantfarmerstepsinbetweenlandlordandactualtillerofthesoil，allrelationswhicharoseoutoftheoldruralmodeofproductionaretornasunder。Thefarmerbecomestheactualcommanderoftheseagriculturallabourersandtheactualexploiteroftheirsurplus-labour，whereasthelandlordmaintainsadirectrelationship，andindeedsimplyamoneyandcontractualrelationship，solelywiththiscapitalisttenant。Thus，thenatureofrentisalsotransformed，notmerelyinfactandbychance，asoccurredinpartevenunderearlierforms，butnormally，initsrecognisedandprevailingform。Fromthenormalformofsurplus-valueandsurplus-labour，itdescendstoamereexcessofthissurplus-labouroverthatportionofitappropriatedbytheexploitingcapitalistintheformofprofit；justasthetotalsurplus-labour，profitandexc