いわゆる「潜在的失業」とマルクスの「潜在的過剰人口」概念について

概要

論文の詳細を見る
Past discussions and research on Marx's theory of relative surplus-population presented in Das Kapital have mostly been focused on the validity of the proof of progressive production of relative surplus-population. Although I myself have examined the theory of relative surplus-population from this perspective, the following question has always troubled me since first reading Marx's theory of relative surplus-population. If Marx's exposition of the "latent form" of relative surplus-population is viewed in the context of the purpose of Das Kapital as "we need present only the inner organization of the capitalist mode of production, in its ideal average, as it were," then is Marx's exposition a valid one? Marx's understanding was that the "latent form" of relative surplus-population existed only in agriculture. The two questions I wish to pose are: Can Marx's concept of "latent surplus-population" be useful in analyzing actual employment conditions? And, contrary to Marx's conceptual stipulation, is it possible that "latent surplus-population" exists and is being continuously generated outside of agriculture: namely, in the industrial sector? My doubts were reinforced by articles appearing in major Japanese newspapers on July 24, 2009 concerning current employment conditions in Japan. The articles were based on information from the Fiscal 2009 Whitepaper on the Japanese Economy and Public Finance (hereafter, Whitepaper). A keyword appearing in the Whitepaper was "employment hoarding," which was rendered in the newspaper articles as "in-house unemployment or labor hoarding within companies" and "latent unemployment." In particular, Mainichi Shimbun used the term "latent unemployment" in its headline. My first reaction to this headline was to wonder whether "latent" was being used to describe the same condition as was implied in Marx's use of "latent" in "latent surplus-population." To resolve this question, I carefully examined whether "employment hoarding" used in the Whitepaper (or "latent unemployment" and "in-house unemployment or labor hoarding within companies" used by the newspapers) was equivalent to surplus-population as used in "latent surplus-population" in Das Kapital. My inquiry has convinced me that "employment hoarding" as used in the Whitepaper ("latent unemployment," "latent unemployed") is extremely close to the concept of "latent surplus-population" in Das Kapital. If the concept of "latent surplus-population" were to be expanded along the lines that I have in mind, this would lead to the following conclusions. First, if labor that does not satisfy the "average needs of the self-expansion of capital" is being used not only in the agricultural sector but also in the industrial sector, it can be said that this corresponds to "employment hoarding" ("latent unemployment") as used in the Whitepaper. Regardless of whether this is occurring in agriculture or in industry, the fact that labor that does not satisfy the "average needs of the self-expansion of capital" is being used implies that such workers reflect "employment hoarding," "latent unemployment" and "latent surplus-population." Viewed from the perspective of capital, this situation can be described as follows. If capital is employing workers who do not satisfy the "average needs of the self-expansion of capital," then these workers represent "overmanning." From the perspective of capital, this implies a situation in which capital is unable to satisfy the "average needs of the self-expansion of capital." Thus, capital is employing a "latent surplus-population" that is unable to satisfy the "average needs of the self-expansion of capital." Finally, this capital represents a "latent form" of surplus-capital. Surplus-capital that employs "latent surplus-population" represents "latent" surplus-capital, which is one of the forms taken by "relative 'surplus-capital.'" If capital employs workers that it expects will not satisfy the "average needs of the self-expansion of capital," then those workers represent relative surplus-labor, and the capital represents surplus-capital. In this case, the workers that are employed represent "overmanning" and "latent surplus-population," while the capital represents "relative 'surplus-capital'" = a "latent form" of "real overproduction of capital" and "latent surplus-capital." If capital refrains from employing workers that are expected not to satisfy the "average needs of the self-expansion of capital," then those workers would naturally represent relative surplus-population, and capital would represent surplus-capital. In this situation, "revealed (clearly existing)" surplus-population would take the form of unemployment, and capital would be "revealed (clearly existing)" surplus-capital. Relative surplus-population can either be employed or not employed by capital. In the former case, the relative surplus-population takes the form of "latent surplus-population" or "overmanning." In the latter case, relative surplus-population reveals itself in the form of "unemployment" and would be expelled from the production process. Correspondingly, "relative 'overproduction of capital'" would take the form of "latent" "overproduction of capital" in the former case, and would take the form of "revealed (clearly existing)" "overproduction of capital" and "'unemployed' capital" in the latter case, and would be sent searching for other opportunities for investment of capital.
2010-06-15

著者

松尾純
桃山学院大学経済学部

いわゆる「潜在的失業」とマルクスの「潜在的過剰人口」概念について

スポンサーリンク

概要

著者

関連論文

スポンサーリンク