The subject of Capital, book II, "The Process of Circulation of Capital" is hitherto regarded on one side as the circulation process proper, and on the other side as the circular movement of capital which includes production and circulation. These two opinions have been opposed each other, in Japan. We stand by the latter basically, but we think it contains a weakness in it. Because it lumps production process with circulation process, so that the concept of circulation is obscure. Well, we believe we can solve this problem by inquiring into the process of formation of Capital. The theory of the circulation in Grundrisse (1857〜1858) was influenced by Adam Smith's category of "fixed capital" and "circulating capital", accordingly the process of circulation and the process of moving in circuits were jumbled together. In the manuscript (1861〜1863), Marx analyzed machinery in the direct process of production, based on the two-fold nature of labour. It laid a foundation for the Marxian economic system. On that foundation, Marx studied directly the reproduction of the aggregate social capital, without the investigation of the metamorphoses and turnover of capital. Therefore, between Grundrisse and Ms. (1861〜1863), we presume, there is a fault or a dislocation. This fault was repaired when the theory of "the metamorphoses of capital and their circuits" is almost carried out. In Capital, the subject of "The process of Circulation of Capital" is the circular movement of capital. But the term of "circulation" only means the circulation process proper. Capital's movement in circuits is the unity of circulation and production. And the process of reproduction of capital comprises the direct process of production as well as the circulation process proper.

View full abstract

As to the colonization in Korea by Japan from 1875 to 1910, it has been often pointed out that, under National Capital protection, Seisho-Zaibatsu had gone into the business of financial, shipping, railway and mining, and in connection with Japanese Industrialization, a system of the exchange of cotton goods for rice had been built. In opposition to this, a number of Japanese people in Korea, chiefly consisted of medium and smaller merchants has been neglected in spite of the importance. This paper aims to make clear the socio-economic background of Japanese expansionism into Korea, in the case of old Marifu-mura, Kumage-gun, Yamaguchi-ken. Then I would like to cover the black of the study and make clear one of the forms of the masses' correspondence under the reorganization of native industries. After the investigation of historical materials at Yamaguchi Prefectural Archives and the Office of old Marifu-mura, I concluded the following points; (1) The population in Korea from old Marifu-mura amounts to 40.7% of the legal residencial population in 1917. (2) The most frequent period of expansionism is the twenty years before and after Japanese and Sino-War. (3) Many of them are engaged in commerce, and the rest are other various jobs. (4) Most of them are householders and the eldest sons. (5) The greatest force that drove them to such expansionism is the affairs in connection with commerce-shipping which are caused by the economic fluctuations since the Meiji Restoration. The people engaged in commerce-shipping went into Korea to find a new stage of their activities. Of course we should not overlook the backup of Japanese government. But the main purpose is in the establishment of the political and strategical bridgehead.

View full abstract

From 1901 to 1926, the League of Silk Industry (Seishi-domei) in Suwa district had the institution of registering women labourers who worked in the industry there. Most students of the League have regarded this institution as perfectly functioning. According to them, labourers who were employed at one of the factories of the League could not move to another. But such a view is not correct. The fact was that not a few labourers neglected this institution and that the manufacturers could not or would not observe the rule strictly. This paper will clarify on the evidence to what extent this institution worked, and will suggest the problem of the making of labourers' spontaneous norm in Japan that one should not change one's employer.

View full abstract