Workmen's advocate. (New Haven, Conn.) 1883-1891, 1890-03-22

est senteLce of our science in the lang
uage of every day life, and render them
comprehensive to John, Dick and Harry.
Hon! now understand!
Prof.-You do2
H-perfectly!
Profit seems to me you indulge in
big words
H.-What else can you expect, seeing
that | have understood you, while Mr..
Van Rensselaer, himself failed to do so.
81 was abst mt minded for a moment.
You should have greater respect for sci
ence, Sir. Surely you do not imagine
that the profoundest conceptions of sci.
ence should be made easy as pie to every
uncultured MANI
III notice. Sir, that, here and there
you too seem to have understood. Yet,
seeing that neither of you choose to ans
wer my question, you will allow me to
do so myself. The $4,000, Mr.. Van
Rensselaer,, are produced by your work.
ingmen.
S-Do not blaspheme against existing
institutions!
H-But even though capital could
produce exchange values, that could
only take place on account of the Ca,
fitdiiotb having dppioPiiutou w thcu-
selves natural forces intended for all and
which from that moment became a
source for private enrichment. In fact,
however, capital produces no exchange
value; it only appropriates 20 itself the
exchange values produced by labor.
81 wish you would say less about
exchange values.
Prof-Let us break off!
H.-The present conditions are easily
described. This is the great secret of the
society of to-day: Those who are in pos.
session of the money, the food, and the
implements of production in country,
i. e., the capitalists, buy in the labor
power of the property-less as they do all
other merchandise at the price requisite
to reproduce it. This it is that fixes the
purchase price, or wages, of the mer-
chandise labor. But the merchandise
labor power, when set in operation by
the capitalist, and is made to render Ia
Dor, produces by it's labor larger guam
tity of values, than is paid for it in
wages. Capital, consequently, becomes
productive only in so Tar as it subjects
to its rule the productivity of labor. The
difference between the serfs of the
middle ages and that of modern labor
for wages is SIMPLY this: The serf could
labor 3 days in the week for himself,
and was forced to labor days for his
master; while in our own days, when
about ~ hours constitute a working day,
the laburer probably produces during
the first 6 hours enough values to com.
pensate for the wages paid to him; in
other words, he works 6 hours for himself,
and during the remaining 6 produces tho
surplus values out of which rent and
profit are derived, or in other words,
works for another-the capitalist.
S-This is incredible! Are you not
ashamed to talk such stuff?
H-Even then it might not be quite
uncomfortable did but wages cover the re-
qulsites of life. But how often must we
not go hungry.
Stop your inflammatory Grafton!
FL Tt is not my grafton, but the pres
ent social condition that is infamma-
tory. The labor question is above all
question of the stomach.
S.-A question of the stomach? Do
not unchain that beast!
H,-Have you no stomach?
S,-What stupid question! Of course
| have stomach!
H. (asid0 Then you are beast your
self.
Sid you say anything?
H-Only to myself. Let us return to-
our subject.
Prof.-Until now i have allowed you to-
speak without interruption; but only in
order to annlhilate you with one blow;
only to show you once for ali into what
foolish and senseless frame of mind you
have drifted. shall now put question
to you.
FL. What is your question?
Pry.-Have you never heard of bus
mess going bad, nay of it even being
conducted at loss?
III have so!
S.-This was well asked, my dear Pro-
fessor.
h0f-Do you not see that so long as
you work for Mr.. Van Rensselaer,, your
wages are certain, while, on the con-
trary, Mr. Van Renselaer's profits are far
from being certain, and at times he may
even have to sustain losses. Do you not
see, in short, that, when Mr.. Van Rense.
Iaer earns more than you such earnings
are only compensation for the risk he
incurs2
H-Yes, yes, Professor. But do we
Socialists wage war against Mr.. Van
Rensselaer,, or against any other indivi-
dual? Is not our warfare directed against
the present social system and its institu-
tions in general? And if you look at So
ciety in its Wilderness, if you place on
one side the entire class of the property
less, and on the other the entire capital
list class, would you then deny that the
| p,,,or olacS tS lyray fnnnA in ny
owing to the scantiness of its wages,
while on the other side the capitalist
class wallows in all the amenities of life
| and in sI,ifa of Ii all Nunxns rinhar 4 an