Key Arguments

• Marx notes that for necessary labour-time to fall from 10 to 9 hours (in his 12‑hour example), 'the value of labour-power had to fall in fact by one-tenth', which 'implies, however, that the same means of subsistence formerly produced in 10 hours can now be produced in 9 hours.'
• He insists this is 'impossible without an increase in the productivity of labour', illustrating with the cobbler who could only make two pairs of boots in 12 hours instead of one if his productivity is doubled through changes in tools or working methods.
• He defines this productivity increase as 'an alteration in the labour process of such a kind as to shorten the labour-time socially necessary for the production of a commodity, and to endow a given quantity of labour with the power of producing a greater quantity of use-value.'
• He stresses that for relative surplus-value, capital cannot just extend an inherited labour process: 'it by no means suffices for capital to take over the labour process in its given or historically transmitted shape, and then simply to prolong its duration. The technical and social conditions of the process and consequently the mode of production itself must be revolutionized before the productivity of labour can be increased.'
• Once productivity rises, 'the value of labour-power will fall, and the portion of the working day necessary for the reproduction of that value will be shortened.'
• Marx specifies the sectors that must be seized: 'the rise in the productivity of labour must seize upon those branches of industry whose products determine the value of labour-power, and consequently either belong to the category of normal means of subsistence, or are capable of replacing them.'
• Because commodity values also include the labour in instruments and materials, 'a fall in the value of labour-power is also brought about by an increase in the productivity of labour, and by a corresponding cheapening of commodities in those industries which supply the instruments of labour and the material for labour, i.e. the physical elements of constant capital which are required for producing the means of subsistence.'

Source Quotes

Given the length of the working day, the prolongation of the surplus labour must of necessity originate in the curtailment of the necessary labour-time; the latter cannot arise from the former. In the example we chose, the value of labour-power had to fall in fact by one-tenth in order for the necessary labour-time to be diminished by one-tenth, i.e. from 10 hours to 9, and for the surplus labour to consequently be prolonged from 2 hours to 3. A fall of this kind in the value of labour-power implies, however, that the same means of subsistence formerly produced in 10 hours can now be produced in 9 hours.

In the example we chose, the value of labour-power had to fall in fact by one-tenth in order for the necessary labour-time to be diminished by one-tenth, i.e. from 10 hours to 9, and for the surplus labour to consequently be prolonged from 2 hours to 3. A fall of this kind in the value of labour-power implies, however, that the same means of subsistence formerly produced in 10 hours can now be produced in 9 hours. But this is impossible without an increase in the productivity of labour.

Hence the conditions of production of his labour, i.e. his mode of production, and the labour process itself, must be revolutionized. By an increase in the productivity of labour, we mean an alteration in the labour process of such a kind as to shorten the labour-time socially necessary for the production of a commodity, and to endow a given quantity of labour with the power of producing a greater quantity of use-value. Hitherto, in dealing with the production of surplus-value in the above form, we have assumed that the mode of production is given and invariable.

Hitherto, in dealing with the production of surplus-value in the above form, we have assumed that the mode of production is given and invariable. But when surplus-value has to be produced by the conversion of necessary labour into surplus labour, it by no means suffices for capital to take over the labour process in its given or historically transmitted shape, and then simply to prolong its duration. The technical and social conditions of the process and consequently the mode of production itself must be revolutionized before the productivity of labour can be increased.

But when surplus-value has to be produced by the conversion of necessary labour into surplus labour, it by no means suffices for capital to take over the labour process in its given or historically transmitted shape, and then simply to prolong its duration. The technical and social conditions of the process and consequently the mode of production itself must be revolutionized before the productivity of labour can be increased. Then, with the increase in the productivity of labour, the value of labour-power will fall, and the portion of the working day necessary for the reproduction of that value will be shortened.

The technical and social conditions of the process and consequently the mode of production itself must be revolutionized before the productivity of labour can be increased. Then, with the increase in the productivity of labour, the value of labour-power will fall, and the portion of the working day necessary for the reproduction of that value will be shortened. I call that surplus-value which is produced by the lengthening of the working day, absolute surplus-value.

In contrast to this, I call that surplus-value which arises from the curtailment of the necessary labour-time, and from the corresponding alteration in the respective lengths of the two components of the working day, relative surplus-value. In order to make the value of labour-power go down, the rise in the productivity of labour must seize upon those branches of industry whose products determine the value of labour-power, and consequently either belong to the category of normal means of subsistence, or are capable of replacing them. But the value of a commodity is determined not only by the quantity of labour which gives it its final form, but also by the quantity of labour contained in the instruments by which it has been produced.

But the value of a commodity is determined not only by the quantity of labour which gives it its final form, but also by the quantity of labour contained in the instruments by which it has been produced. For instance, the value of a pair of boots depends not only on the labour of the cobbler, but also on the value of the leather, wax, thread, etc. Hence a fall in the value of labour-power is also brought about by an increase in the productivity of labour, and by a corresponding cheapening of commodities in those industries which supply the instruments of labour and the material for labour, i.e. the physical elements of constant capital which are required for producing the means of subsistence. But an increase in the productivity of labour in those branches of industry which supply neither the necessary means of subsistence nor the means by which they are produced leaves the value of labour-power undisturbed.

Key Concepts

• In the example we chose, the value of labour-power had to fall in fact by one-tenth in order for the necessary labour-time to be diminished by one-tenth, i.e. from 10 hours to 9, and for the surplus labour to consequently be prolonged from 2 hours to 3.
• A fall of this kind in the value of labour-power implies, however, that the same means of subsistence formerly produced in 10 hours can now be produced in 9 hours.
• By an increase in the productivity of labour, we mean an alteration in the labour process of such a kind as to shorten the labour-time socially necessary for the production of a commodity, and to endow a given quantity of labour with the power of producing a greater quantity of use-value.
• it by no means suffices for capital to take over the labour process in its given or historically transmitted shape, and then simply to prolong its duration.
• The technical and social conditions of the process and consequently the mode of production itself must be revolutionized before the productivity of labour can be increased.
• Then, with the increase in the productivity of labour, the value of labour-power will fall, and the portion of the working day necessary for the reproduction of that value will be shortened.
• the rise in the productivity of labour must seize upon those branches of industry whose products determine the value of labour-power, and consequently either belong to the category of normal means of subsistence, or are capable of replacing them.
• a fall in the value of labour-power is also brought about by an increase in the productivity of labour, and by a corresponding cheapening of commodities in those industries which supply the instruments of labour and the material for labour

Context

Still in the first half of Chapter 12, where Marx analyses what conditions must obtain for necessary labour-time and the value of labour-power to fall, thereby enabling relative surplus-value, and introduces the need for a transformed mode of production and productivity increases in wage-goods and their constant-capital sectors.