Buy now, pay later: The great unravelling of the commodity-form

Abstract

In this article, I analyze theoretically Marx’s commodity-form in connection with the latest phase of capitalism, which I refer to as the “phase of consumerism.” I will use an approximation to Kozo Uno’s and Tom Sekine’s three levels of analysis, but will oppose their three phases of capitalism (mercantilism, liberalism, and imperialism) with a fourth—the phase of consumerism—which developed primarily in the United States after World War II and reached its golden age between 1947 and 1970. Since the 1970s, capitalism has been moving gradually toward a phase of transition, during which it is becoming less and less capitalist. Coming to conclusions about just how capitalist the global economy still is must remain arguable. For example, should we label the existing economic order “neoliberalism,” “capitalism,” or something that it is moving toward, such as “populism” or “socialism”? Is it clear at this moment which concept best fits the directions of the global economy? It is a rapidly deteriorating capitalism with some fascist tendencies, tendencies that I will not discuss in this article but may be clear to those familiar with fascism.

Keywords:

• Capitalism
• phases of capitalism
• commodity
• consumerism
• levels of analysis

Notes

Notes

1 My interpretation of Capital is strongly influenced by Tom Sekine, who in turn was influenced by Kozo Uno.

2 One can find numerous quotations in Marx that make clear capital’s indifference towards use-values. For example, “capitalist production as such is indifferent to the particular use-values it produces….All that matters in any sphere of production is the production of surplus-value” (Marx 1981, 297, Vol. 3).

3 The “Value/Use-value” distinction is crucial to clarifying the three levels of analysis.

4 Sekine’s dialectical theory of Capital has three basic parts. Paralleling Hegel’s Logic (Being, Essence, Notion) are Sekine’s: (Circulation, Production, Distribution).

5 England was the only country with widespread capitalist agriculture when Marx was writing. For Marx capitalist agriculture was a three class system: Landlords, Capitalist Farmers, and Workers.

6 Because of unfortunate baggage accompanying “stage”, I have converted “stage” to “phase.”

7 Sekine’s use of “pure capitalism” parallels similar usages in Marx. For example, Marx uses: “necessary inner connections”, “inner logic”, “fully developed,” “phenomenon in their pure shape”, “pure form,” “inner nature of capital”, “immanent laws, etc.”

8 Marx 1981 Capital Vol. III, p. 752–3.

9 While it is not our intention here to consider the way in which the immanent laws of capitalist production manifest themselves in the external movement of the individual capitals…scientific analysis of competition is possible only if we can grasp the inner nature of capital….” Marx 1976, p. 433.

10 Marx 1981 p. 752–3; Grundrisse 1993, p. 539. “Thus, while capital must on one side strive to tear down every spatial barrier to intercourse, i.e., to exchange and conquer the whole earth for its market, it strives on the other side to annihilate this space with time, i.e. to reduce to a minimum the time spent in motion from one place to another. The more developed the capital, therefore, the more extensive the market over which it circulates, which forms the spatial orbit of its circulation, the more does it strive simultaneously for an even greater market and for greater annihilation of space by time.”