“the real degree of the exploitation (you must allow me this French word) of labour.”
- Marx, Value, Price, and Profit.
What’s wrong with that, lmao, was Engels going to censor that?
This is the best answer I could get out of the chatgpt:
“Exploitation” (English/French):
Connotation of severity: The term “exploitation” in English and French carries a connotation of a severe and unjust treatment of individuals. It suggests an oppressive and unfair relationship, where one party benefits at the expense of another. Historical associations: The term “exploitation” was widely used within French socialist discourse during Marx’s time. It had become associated with the analysis of capitalism and the relationship between capitalists and workers, as propagated by influential French socialist thinkers.
“Ausbeutung” (German):
Connotation of extraction: “Ausbeutung” in German is derived from the verb “ausbeuten,” which conveys the idea of extracting or utilizing resources. It emphasizes the act of taking advantage of something or someone for one’s own gain. Broader range of applications: While “Ausbeutung” can be used to describe the exploitation of labor under capitalism, it is not exclusively tied to the economic context. The term can also be used more broadly to describe the exploitation or utilization of resources in different contexts, such as natural resources or opportunities.
In essence, the “slightly different connotations” between “exploitation” and “Ausbeutung” can be summarized as follows: “exploitation” in English and French carries a stronger connotation of severity and injustice specifically within the economic and social context of capitalism, while “Ausbeutung” in German has a broader range of applications and emphasizes the extraction or utilization of resources more generally.
By using the term “exploitation,” Marx may have felt it better captured the specific nature of capitalist exploitation and the systemic injustice inherent in the relationship between capitalists and workers. It aligned with the established terminology within French socialist discourse and conveyed the severity of the exploitation more effectively to a broader international audience.
It’s still a fuckin problem today, lol. People get so worked up about semantics re: exploitation when he meant ruling class exploits labour HOW A FARMER EXPLOITS LAND. So people in real life will say “well, I don’t feel exploited my boss gives me a fair wage” cause they think exploitation == feels as bad and embodied as chattle slavery. And I guess just regular lib late capitalist brain worms too.
That is exactly the problem as I understand it, that “exploitation” is first understood as a negative description of an unjust situation, and secondarily as benefitting from the transfer of resources. While Marx does indeed believe that there is some injustice inherent in this situation, he is first and foremost trying to scientifically describe an economic process. And that’s been kind of an effective semantic attack used against Marxist theory: that it is just an emotional diatribe against perceived oppression, and glossing over the actual economics of what he’s describing.
I agree with you, but I’m a bit confused about what you mean?
Are you talking about language/context barriers when it comes to the terms we use to discuss theoretical concepts?
Vaguely related: to the best of my knowledge there is no word on English for exploitation that is not a loan word.
No, there isn’t a better English word which is why Marx used it. I wish we had one that was a little more neutral for the general audience, but that’s what we got.
Yeah, I meant in educating or “debating” people in real life. Telling people how they, as workers, are exploited by bosses is usually a tough sell unless they’re in the precariat or in the immigrant agricultural sector (cause then they can really feel it on a fundamental level). It can be hard to explain the theory because you have to, like, un-teach people some of their capitalist propoganda education especially on the semantics of words used by Marx.
“May Allah forgive me for uttering this word”
Seems that he preferred the French “exploitation” even though he was writing in German. German-language quote:
den wirklichen Grad der Exploitation (ihr müßt mir dies französische Wort gestatten) der Arbeit.
What confuses me slightly is that Value, Price, and Profit is apparently a transcript of an English-language lecture given by Marx, but is the English version translated from the German printing?
“The work, however, was not published either by Marx or Engels. It was found among Marx’s papers after Engels’ death and published by Marx’s daughter, Eleanor Aveling. In the English language it was published under the title of Value, Price and Profit, while the German translation bore the title of Wages, Price and Profit.” Intro to Value, Price, and Profit, 1865.
Likely I presume German, considering his mother tongue, and the fact that the work was personally with him for so long, even after death.
Yes, exactly. The primary text is the German one, if you look through it and similar works you will find that Marx used English, French, German and in parts other languages for his excepts. Those he would then comment (think like a reddit comment chain, by one person about the things people said). In this example he wants to highlight that he uses the french term for its meaning.
In proximity to that passage the “Essay on Trade is cited”
Quote From: An Essay on Trade and Commerce (1770)
I came across this wonderful passage from an anonymous work entitled An Essay on Trade and Commerce, Containing Observations of Taxes etc. published in London in 1770. The central argument the writer is engaging in is how (and if) workers should be made to work longer hours. It’s a wonderful piece, not because of how much has changed, but just how strikingly similar it is to the speeches and policies made by our current Tory led coalition:
“If the making of every seventh day an holiday is supposed to be of divine institution, as it implies the appropriating the other six days to labour surely it will not be thought cruel to enforce it .... That mankind in general, are naturally inclined to ease and indolence, we fatally experience to be true, from the conduct of our manufacturing populace, who do not labour, upon an average, above four days in a week, unless provisions happen to be very dear.... Put all the necessaries of the poor under one denomination; for instance, call them all wheat, or suppose that ... the bushel of wheat shall cost five shillings and that he (a manufacturer) earns a shilling by his labour, he then would be obliged to work five days only in a week. If the bushel of wheat should cost but four shillings, he would be obliged to work but four days; but as wages in this kingdom are much higher in proportion to the price of necessaries ... the manufacturer, who labours four days, has a surplus of money to live idle with the rest of the week . ... I hope I have said enough to make it appear that the moderate labour of six days in a week is no slavery. Our labouring people do this, and to all appearance are the happiest of all our labouring poor... but the Dutch do this in manufactures, and appear to be a very happy people. The French do so, when holidays do not intervene. But our populace have adopted a notion, that as Englishmen they enjoy a birthright privilege of being more free and independent than in any country in Europe. Now this idea, as far as it may affect the bravery of our troops, may be of some use; but the less the manufacturing poor have of it, certainly the better for themselves and for the State. The labouring people should never) think themselves independent of their superiors.... It is extremely dangerous to encourage mobs in a commercial state like ours, where, perhaps, seven parts out of eight of the whole, are people with little or no property. The cure will not be perfect, till our manufacturing poor are contented to labour six days for the same sum which they now earn in four days.”
To this end, and for “extirpating idleness debauchery and excess,” promoting a spirit of industry, “lowering the price of labour in our manufactories, and easing the lands of the heavy burden of poor’s rates,” our “faithful Eckart” of capital proposes this approved device: to shut up such labourers as become dependent on public support, in a word, paupers, in “an ideal workhouse.” Such ideal workhouse must be made a “House of Terror,” and not an asylum for the poor, “where they are to be plentifully fed, warmly and decently clothed, and where they do but little work.”
Quoted in Marx’s Capital Vol 1, pages 387-8
I was under the impression that Marx never really mastered English, despite spending a good while in England. May just be a misconception I picked up then.
Marx did read English proficiently and did write some academics in English, but in his excerpts he would use German as main language. Marx would however often work together with people of whose the first language was English or French etc. when translation something.
Marx bewegte sich ziemlich sicher nebst der deutschen Muttersprache im Englischen, Französischen und Spanischen. Es wird ihm von Zeitgenossen für diese Sprachen grammatische Korrektheit nachgesagt. Es wird ihm freilich auch seine mangelhafte Aussprache vor allem des Spanischen angekreidet
Marx was very secure in English, French and Spanish in addition to his German mother tongue. He is said by contemporaries to be grammatically correct for these languages. Of course, he is also blamed for his poor pronunciation, especially of Spanish
