Marx’s comments on James Mill's book

product, and therefore to the product of the other. Each of us sees in

his product only the objectification of his own selfish need, and

therefore in the product of the other the objectification of a different

selfish need, independent of him and alien to him.

 As a man you have, of course, a human relation to my product: you

have need of my product. Hence it exists for you as an object of your

desire and your will. But your need, your desire, your will, are

powerless as regards my product. That means, therefore, that your

human nature, which accordingly is bound to stand in intimate

relation to my human production, is not your power over this

production, your possession of it, for it is not the specific character,

not the power, of man's nature that is recognised in my production.

They [your need, your desire, etc.] constitute rather the tie which

makes you dependent on me, because they put you in a position of

dependence on my product. Far from being the means which would

give you power over my production, they are instead the means for

giving me power over you.

 When I produce more of an object than I myself can directly use, my

surplus production is cunningly calculated for your need. It is only in

appearance that I produce a surplus of this object. In reality I produce

a different object, the object of your production, which I intend to

exchange against this surplus, an exchange which in my mind I have

already completed. The social relation in which I stand to you, my

labour for your need, is therefore also a mere semblance, and our

complementing each other is likewise a mere semblance, the basis of

which is mutual plundering. The intention of plundering, of deception,

is necessarily present in the background, for since our exchange is a

selfish one, on your side as on mine, and since the selfishness of each

seeks to get the better of that of the other, we necessarily seek to

deceive each other. It is true though, that the power which I attribute

to my object over yours requires your recognition in order to become

a real power. Our mutual recognition of the respective powers of our

objects, however, is a struggle, and in a struggle the victor is the one

who has more energy, force, insight, or adroitness. If I have sufficient

physical force, I plunder you directly. If physical force cannot be

used, we try to impose on each other by bluff, and the more adroit

overreaches the other. For the totality of the relationship, it is a matter

of chance who overreaches whom. The ideal, intended overreaching

takes place on both sides, i.e., each in his own judgment has

overreached the other.

 On both sides, therefore, exchange is necessarily mediated by the

object which each side produces and possesses. The ideal relationship

to the respective objects of our production is, of course, our mutual

need. But the real, true relationship, which actually occurs and takes

1844: Marx’s comments on James Mill's book

http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1844-mil/index.htm (18 of 22) [23/08/2000 18:56:15]

---

effect, is only the mutually exclusive possession of our respective

products. What gives your need of my article its value, worth and

effect for me is solely your object, the equivalent of my object. Our

respective products, therefore, are the means, the mediator, the

instrument, the acknowledged power of our mutual needs. Your

demand and the equivalent of your possession, therefore, are for me

terms that are equal in significance and validity, and your demand

only acquires a meaning, owing to having an effect, when it has

meaning and effect in relation to me As a mere human being without

this instrument your demand is an unsatisfied aspiration on your part

and an idea that does not exist for me. As a human being, therefore,

you stand in no relationship to my object, because I myself have no

human relationship to it. But the means is the true power over an

object and therefore we mutually regard our products as the power of

each of us over the other and over himself. That is to say, our own

product has risen up against us; it seemed to be our property, but in

fact we are its property. We ourselves are excluded from true property

because our property excludes other men.

 The only intelligible language in which we converse with one another

consists of our objects in their relation to each other. We would not

understand a human language and it would remain without effect. By

one side it would be recognised and felt as being a request, an

entreaty,  and therefore a humiliation, and consequently uttered with a

feeling of shame, of degradation. By the other side it would be

regarded as impudence or lunacy and rejected as such. We are to such

an extent estranged from man's essential nature that the direct

language of this essential nature seems to us a violation of human

dignity, whereas the estranged language of material values seems to

be the well-justified assertion of human dignity that is self-confident

and conscious of itself.

 Although in your eyes your product is an instrument, a means, for

taking possession of my product and thus for satisfying your need; yet

in my eyes it is the purpose of our exchange. For me, you are rather

the means and instrument for producing this object that is my aim, just

as conversely you stand in the same relationship to my object. But 1)

each of us actually behaves in the way he is regarded by the other.

You have actually made yourself the means, the instrument, the

producer of your own object in order to gain possession of mine; 2)

your own object is for you only the sensuously perceptible covering,

the hidden shape, of my object; for its production signifies and seeks

to express the acquisition of my object. In fact, therefore, you have

become for yourself a means, an instrument of your object, of which

your desire is the servant, and you have performed menial services in

order that the object shall never again do a favour to your desire. If

1844: Marx’s comments on James Mill's book

http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1844-mil/index.htm (19 of 22) [23/08/2000 18:56:15]

---