|
|
|
| On the Boundary and Pathways to Transcendence of Technological Innovation under the Logic of Capital: Research Based on the Thought of Technological Innovation in Capital |
| Fan Yuxian1, Jian Rongyu1, Wang Chen2 |
1.School of Marxism, Xi’an Jiaotong University, Xi’an 710049, China
2.School of Marxism, Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084, China |
|
|
|
|
Abstract Marx developed the ideological system of technological innovation by analyzing the capitalist mode of production and the corresponding production and exchange relations, and the study of technological innovation runs through Capital. Under the capitalist system, technological innovation serves capitalist reproduction, and machine production has become the most suitable mode of production for capitalist industry. From the perspective of laws of motion of capitalist production, the organic composition of capital tends to rise continuously, and capitalists must continuously engage in the technological innovation in order to capture more surplus value. However, after the first Industrial Revolution, amidst the general trend of technological innovation, Marx observed certain circumstances that “hindered the application of machinery” and pointed that there lies a boundary in technological innovation.From a comprehensive point of view, the capitalist system establishes an inherent boundary for technological innovation: its development remains contingent upon its capacity to produce surplus value. This constraint materializes in the productive sphere as a quantitative imperative: the labor expended in manufacturing machinery must remain substantially below the labor-power it displaces in application. Furthermore, the general trend and essential characteristics of capital’s pursuit of surplus value also implicitly imposes dual boundaries at the level of labor and demand, requiring technological innovation to reduce necessary labor time asymptotically toward zero to cater to the market demands. The boundaries of technological innovation constitute a flexible and compressible range, as capital relentlessly seeks to maximize the exploitation of living labor while reducing labor costs to the possible lowest level, thereby contracting these limits to their narrowest feasible extent. It can be said that the technological innovation serves as a means for capital to extract surplus value and achieve value augmentation, and the boundary is an inevitable outcome of capitalist production relations: the inherent nature of capital’s pursuit of surplus value sets the boundary for technological innovation, the expansion of capital intensifies the boundary and extends it globally, while patent systems and technological blockade, among other forms of knowledge monopolies, create the artificial boundary for technological innovation. Under the constraints of technological innovation, capital responds according to its inherent logic and purpose of value augmentation, thereby exerting corresponding impacts on human society; on the one hand, to meet the demands for continued capital accumulation in new business paradigms, capitalists innovate technologies that are conducive to capturing surplus value, but due to the inability to break through the inherent contradictions of capitalism, capital falls into a triple antinomy of liberating labor and exploiting labor, stimulating social demand and shrinking social payment capacity, and adjusting social production relations and causing economic crises, setting obstacles for the development of capitalism; furthermore, capitalists lack the incentive to promote technological innovation in fields that do not contribute to surplus-value production and realization, and even if technology is innovated, capitalists will strictly control the pace of innovation and the scope of the applications, resulting in technological gaps in the fields of public health, infrastructure construction, and ecological protection, ultimately leaving human developmental needs unfulfilled. In response to the logic of capital, it is necessary to leverage the institutional advantages of China’s socialist system to transcend the limitations imposed by capital logic on technological innovation. This paper proposes three suggestions: firstly, it is crucial to harness and amplify the unique advantages of China’s public ownership economy and encourage state-owned capital to become the “soulmate” of technological innovation; secondly, there is a need to value the private economy and leverage the role of private capital in technological innovation; thirdly, the government should fulfill its supervisory and regulatory functions, guiding technological innovation to steer towards a human-centered logic, with the aspiration to meet the people’s longing for a better life as the ultimate value orientation.
|
|
Received: 13 August 2024
|
|
|
|
1 王程：《〈资本论〉中技术创新思想的辩证法》，《江苏社会科学》2021年第6期，第146-154，243页。
2 德］马克思：《资本论》第一卷，见中共中央马克思恩格斯列宁斯大林著作编译局编译：《马克思恩格斯文集》第5卷，北京：人民出版社，2009年。
3 德］马克思：《资本论》第三卷，见中共中央马克思恩格斯列宁斯大林著作编译局编译：《马克思恩格斯文集》第7卷，北京：人民出版社，2009年。
4 肖峰：《从机器悖论到智能悖论：资本主义矛盾的当代呈现》，《马克思主义研究》2021年第7期，第104-114，164页。
5 王俊：《新工业革命与当代资本主义的技术创新悖论》，《求实》2015年第9期，第78-85页。
6 朱晓彤：《数字技术资本主义应用的限度及其扬弃——兼论中国发展数字经济的制度优势》，《学术探索》2023年第4期，第94-103页。
7 刘同舫：《技术的当代哲学视野》，北京：人民出版社，2017年。
8 德］马克思：《〈政治经济学批判（1861—1863年手稿）〉摘选》，见中共中央马克思恩格斯列宁斯大林著作编译局编译：《马克思恩格斯文集》第8卷，北京：人民出版社，2009年。
9 龚嘉琪：《资本的时间特性及其内在限度》，《经济学家》2022年第3期，第35-42页。
10 薛秀军、常培文：《资本的三重界限及其内在矛盾——基于〈1857—1858年经济学手稿〉的思考》，《南京大学学报（哲学·人文科学·社会科学）》2020年第2期，第16-23页。
11 陈曦：《论技术创新与专利制度的辩证关系》，《知识产权》2019年第4期，第79-87页。
12 张斌：《数字资本主义的批判性考察》，2023年10月11日，http：//marxism.cass.cn/mksjbyl/202312/t20231213_5710486.shtml，2024年11月24日。
13 沙烨：《数字财富鸿沟：数字控制与资本控制的叠加效应》，《文化纵横》2021年第5期，第84-93页。
14 加］尼克·斯尔尼塞克：《平台资本主义》，程水英译，广州：广东人民出版社，2018年。
15 奥］维克托·迈尔-舍恩伯格、［德］托马斯·拉姆什：《数据资本时代》，李晓霞、周涛译，北京：中信出版集团，2018年。
16 王水兴、刘勇：《智能生产力与当代资本主义生产关系新变化》，《世界社会主义研究》2024年第1期，第80-91，123-124页。
17 德］马克思：《哲学的贫困》，见中共中央马克思恩格斯列宁斯大林著作编译局编译：《马克思恩格斯文集》第1卷，北京：人民出版社，2009年。
18 比］欧内斯特·曼德尔：《资本主义发展的长波：马克思主义的解释》，南开大学国际经济研究所译，北京：商务印书馆，1998年。
19 徐志向：《论当代资本主义经济危机的演变逻辑》，《当代经济研究》2021年第5期，第11-18页。
20 法］热拉尔·迪梅尼尔、多米尼克·莱维：《新自由主义的危机》，魏怡译，北京：商务印书馆，2015年。
21 李凌：《资本主义公共卫生危机的“工业病理学”考察》，《马克思主义研究》2022年第3期，第148-154页。
22 美］约翰·贝拉米·福斯特：《生态危机与资本主义》，耿建新、宋兴无译，上海：上海译文出版社，2006年。
23 李楠、李昀励：《探寻与驾驭：社会主义市场经济条件下资本的逻辑理路》，《福建论坛（人文社会科学版）》2024年第2期，第72-86页。
24 何自力：《科学认识社会主义市场经济条件下资本的性质和作用》，《世界社会主义研究》2023年第11期，第4-11，109页。
25 郗戈：《“驾驭资本”与中国式现代化的理论思考》，《中国社会科学》2023年第12期，第4-18，199页。
26 卢福财、王守坤：《历史脉络与实践视野下的有为政府——中国特色社会主义政治经济学的核心命题》，《管理世界》2021年第9期，第77-90页。 |
|
|
|
2025, Vol. 55 
