{"resolved":true,"match_type":"uuid","source_type":"original_book","book_id":"b1ad407a-d523-4f8b-bd50-238767f146d6","title":"Marx and the Concept of Historical Time","author":null,"edition":null,"publisher":null,"year":null,"isbn":null,"requested_by":"printed_page","book":{"source_type":"original_book","book_id":"b1ad407a-d523-4f8b-bd50-238767f146d6","id":"b1ad407a-d523-4f8b-bd50-238767f146d6","uuid":"b1ad407a-d523-4f8b-bd50-238767f146d6","title":"Marx and the Concept of Historical Time","normalized_title":"marxandtheconceptofhistoricaltime","author":null,"edition":null,"publisher":null,"year":null,"isbn":null,"isbns":[],"parsed":true,"ai_readable":true,"document_type":"book","page_count":200,"navigation_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/ai/book/b1ad407a-d523-4f8b-bd50-238767f146d6","title_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/ai/title/Marx%20and%20the%20Concept%20of%20Historical%20Time","fixed_page_url_template":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/ai/book/b1ad407a-d523-4f8b-bd50-238767f146d6/page/{printed_page}","path_api_url_template":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/api/ai/book/b1ad407a-d523-4f8b-bd50-238767f146d6/page/{printed_page}","read_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/api/ai/read/b1ad407a-d523-4f8b-bd50-238767f146d6","page_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/api/ai/books/b1ad407a-d523-4f8b-bd50-238767f146d6/page","search_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/api/ai/books/b1ad407a-d523-4f8b-bd50-238767f146d6/search"},"page":{"printed_page":188,"pdf_page":192,"physical_index":192,"physical_index_base":0,"printed_page_status":"recognized","page_sha256":"87c2fbbf7b7ffe1c3a63f9d31d7314cab7f442682f6ff8e3c1343df1c5222566"},"chapter":"第四章《资本论》:思考历史的条件","content":"在《资本论》第二卷中，后来在《资本论》第三卷中具体化。20\n\n然而——这一点指导了本结论的第二部分——“资本的历史时间”——由于社会总资本而存在的历史和历史时间的概念——是不可能脱离马克思的危机概念而孤立地想象的。正如托姆巴佐斯所描述的那样，资本是一个“丰富而复杂的节奏组织”，也正因为如此，它同样是危机的永久趋势，因此，它的节奏统一性在其内部包含着一种“心律失常”的永久可能性……一种对系统一致性的短暂干扰。21一般来说，我们必须注意“危机”在马克思著作中运作的三个不同层面，但是，当它们作为一个整体放在一起时，对马克思对危机的理解的统一性产生了相当大的怀疑，以至于人们是否能在马克思中识别出危机的“概念”是值得怀疑的。22前两个层次是资本主义所固有的。它们从马克思的立场出发，即危机的核心是资本不可根除的矛盾的表现:它们将“生产力自由发展”的障碍(Schranken）“暴露出来”，这些障碍“包含在资本主义内部”。23这开始于一一这是第一个层面—一危机的潜力是价值形式本身所固有的这一事实。即使是商品最简单的变形，在时间和空间上，它的购买和销售之间的持续分离24，在其内部也包含着危机的种子，因为当“缺乏内部独立性”的两个过程的“外部独立性的断言/äußerliche Verselbstständigung]”进行到一个\n\n20 Tombazos’ s organic time’ is the comprehensive concept of the third and final section of is Time in Marx. It is the culminating conceptual formulation which unites the time of production' and the time of circulation' as, respectively, a 'linear time' and cyclical time'. The problems with this reading aside, we must note that it goes hand-in-hand with a systematic lack of an aņalysis of the concept of need, a fact which results in the separation, for Tombazos, of the logical' and historical' time of capital.\n\n21 Tombazos, Time in Marx, 145.\n\n22 Much of the discussion that follows is inebted to Peter Osborne’ s recent article A sudden topicality: Marx, Nietzsche and the politics of crisis' , Radical Philosophy 160 (March/April 2010), 19-26, which proceeds from the premise that whereas Marx is undoubtedly a thinker of crisis, it is unclear whether he is a theorist of crisis, whether, that is to say, he propound[s] soething that might legitimately be called a \"crisis theory\".' Ibid. 19. This dovetails with Tombazos' s argument that Marx only analyses periodical crises linked to the industrial cycle, which are therefore “normal\" , necessary and inevitable moments of capitalist production' , but leaves unanalysed the structural crises that are abnormal or extraordinary in that they cannot be overcome by the spontaneous or endogenous mechanisms of the system.’ Tombazos, Time in Marx, 274. However, what Tombazos calls a ‘structural crisis' is not the same thing as what Osborne calls the all-pervasive, general-historical character of the concept of crisis in its modern form' , a concept of crisis which Tombazos leaves unanalysed and with which, as we will learn, the concept of istorical time must reckon. See Osborne, A sudden topicality: Marx, Nietzsche and the politics of crisis’ , 20.\n\n23 Karl Marx, Economic Manuscripts of 1861-63 (Continuation), in MECW, Volume 32, Marx: 1861-1863, trans. Renate Simpson (Moscow: Progress Publishers, 1989), 157. See also Karl Marx, Theories of Surplus-Value, Part 2 [1861-63], trans. Renate Simpson (London: Lawrence & Wishart, 1969), 528.\n\n24Marx, Economic Manuscripts of 1861-63 (Continuation), in MECW, Volume 32, 140, 145.\n\n188","previous_page":187,"next_page":189}