a brief look at merchants capitalism

Right across the world some of the biggest well known brand names including Nike, Apple, Benetton, Gap and others have huge power now with allot of them acting under a merchant capitalist mode of production. What I mean is that the likes of Nike and Apple do not produce anything at all. They do not produce any surplus value to speak of the sub contract all their work out to companies in Asia or Central America where the rate of exploitation is huge. This means that the merchant capitalist such as Nike does not have to enter into labour negotiations rather rather it is the sub contractor who deals with labour negotiations which usually means not recognising unions and making their workers work in some of the worst conditions known to man on the planet all in the pursuit of profit for themselves but also Nike or whoever is the merchant capital putting their capital into circulation in the homeland. It is a quite strange thing to say thing to say when you say Apple doesn’t actually produce anything at all but it is the case all of their products are made in China with the likes of Foxcom who saw huge workplace riots just last year due to Apples drive for lower wages and harder and harder rates of exploitation. Due to the huge demand for their commodities their products in other words in the western world their workers who are sub contracted not actually employed by Apple as such but Apple do extract the mass of surplus value or a cut of that value for their own profitable ends. As Karl Marx wrote in capital volume 3 “Hitherto we have considered merchant's capital merely from the standpoint, and within the limits, of the capitalist mode of production. However, not commerce alone, but also merchant's capital, is older than the capitalist mode of production, is, in fact, historically the oldest free state of existence of capital.” “Since merchant's capital is penned in the sphere of circulation, and since its function consists exclusively of promoting the exchange of commodities, it requires no other conditions for its existence — aside from the undeveloped forms arising from direct barter — outside those necessary for the simple circulation of commodities and money. Or rather, the latter is the condition of its existence. No matter what the basis on which products are produced, which are thrown into circulation as commodities — whether the basis of the primitive community, of slave production, of small peasant and petty bourgeois, or the capitalist basis, the character of products as commodities is not altered, and as commodities they must pass through the process of exchange and its attendant changes of form. The extremes between which merchant's capital acts as mediator exist for it as given, just as they are given for money and for its movements. The only necessary thing is that these extremes should be on hand as commodities, regardless of whether production is wholly a production of commodities, or whether only the surplus of the independent producers' immediate needs, satisfied by their own production, and is thrown on the market. Merchant's capital promotes only the movements of these extremes, of these commodities, which are preconditions of its own existence.” Understanding merchant’s capitalism is quite important as I believe and as I’ve understood laid the basis for capitalism to develop on a larger scale. It is the point in which capital is put into motion by those financial capitalists with the capital to invest in new areas of industry to socialise more labour power to then convert this into greater and greater surplus value. Being such an old system it is interesting to look into the ways merchant capital progressed. Merchant capitalism is a term used by economic historians to refer to the earliest phase in the development of capitalism as an economic and social system. Early forms of merchant capitalism were developed in the medieval Islamic world from the 9th century, and in medieval Europe from the 12th century. In Europe, merchant capitalism became a significant economic force in the 16th century, depending on point of view. The mercantile era drew to a close around 1800, giving way to industrial capitalism. However, merchant capitalism remained entrenched in some parts of the West well into the 19th century, most notably the Southern United States, where the plantation system constrained the development of industrial capitalism (limiting markets for consumer goods) whose political manifestations prevented Northern legislators from passing broad economic packages (e.g. monetary and banking reform, a transcontinental railroad, and incentives for settlement of the American west) to integrate the states' economies and spur the growth of industrial capitalism.[4] Merchant capitalism is distinguished from the mature variety by the lack of industrialization and commercial finance. Merchant houses were backed by relatively small private financiers acting as intermediaries between simple commodity producers and by exchanging debt with each other. Thus, merchant capitalism preceded the capitalist mode of production as a form of capital accumulation. The transformation of merchant capitalism into industrial capitalism necessitated, according to Karl Marx, a process of primitive accumulation of capital, upon which commercial finance operations could be based and making application of mass wage labor and industrialization possible. This period was also more commonly known as Mercantilism a primititive stage in capitalist production. With extracts from Wickepedia and Karl Mars’s volume 3 by penguin books.

Socialism will be accessible for all

As a disabled person a person who has been registered blind now for a number of years I know how difficult life can be. Life is not accessible to us and is a constant struggle. This post isn’t meant as a blind person rant or an I cant cope an I need help kind of post but I would like to say that we as disabled people face incredible challenges day in day out. Many disabled people do not work as either they can’t or work is simply not practical for them. It’s not as the right wing media would have you believe we can live an easier life on benefits as I can tell you right now living on benefits is no life at all. Even as a disabled person with incapacity benefit as it used to be known its no walk in the park ok I used to get £210 every two weeks but that for me just got me by the price of living now would mean that would just about cover my expenses to get to the shops, buy my weekly shop, pay for taxi’s, pay for any doctors or hospital appointments which disabled people often have to attend to receive treatment or medicine and your looking at the bulk of that money being spent. Not just spent but reinvested into the wider economy we use taxi’s we are contributing to a hard working taxi drivers living, we attend a hospital we are providing in a round about way a doctor or nurse a job and a living if not a great one. So in a way life is not a breeze for us I work 2 days a week part time but many do not and this is through no fault of their own it can be for many many different reasons which I cant go into here but each person has their own difficulties and challenges they overcome everyday. Just getting out of bed each day is an achievement for some and that should be recognised. I think personally and many socialists share this view that capitalism has no time for disabled people as the reemploy factory situation showed if disabled members of society can’t work like other workers, i.e. for awful wages with poor conditions being driven into the ground they are no good to them. They have no problem with throwing disabled workers on to the scrap heap if it means their profit margins are looking healthy. You may think I’m giving the rich, the capitalists a hard time and in a way you’d be right, but it’s not without reason. Pushing disabled people and the poorest in society some of the most vunerable people in society into harsh conditions and poverty type conditions is not something to be proud of. If this is all in the name of the pursuit for profit I wish to be counted out. I feel under capitalism we will never achieve equality why do we still have to fight for a living wage, why do we have to fight for our dignity as disabled people? Under socialism there will be choice, more choice but not for the price of exploitation but of the bettering of society, Choice under capitalism means the driving down of workers wages and conditions and the choice of the gutter under socialism people will be free to decide if they wish to work and help better society or help in other ways. Apples I phone is a big step forward under capitalism for the first time blind people can buy a phone with a screen reader which helps us use a mainstream phone with no extra cost or software for the first time. This is ground breaking but this is all too rare under capitalism and the price is huge. In a socialist society this will be standard when products for society are produced the thought that blind or disabled people may be using them will not be a after thought but fundamental in the production process of all products, transportation, housing, living conditions and everything you can possibly think of. The fact that the drive for profit will be gone for good will allow society to plan production and the economy to meet the true needs of the people not just the few but for everyone, disabled or not.