The "Assoziation" (association) was an "alternative" conception of the social change that was propagated by the labour-movement in the German revolution of 1848-49. It gave workers a perspective of a new social system that was to be built on the co-operative societies. This paper is a study of the idea and the practice of the "Assoziation" in the revolution. 1. S. Born, the leader of the largest workers' organisation in the revolution, the "Allgemeine deutsche Arbeiterverbruderung", propagated the idea of the "association-socialism" that aimed at the overturn of the capitalitic system of production especially through the building of producer co-operatives. He knew that the realization of his idea was possible, only after the working class seized the political power. Therefore the criticism by Engels and others that Born could not understand the importance of political triumph as the condition of a radical social change is not correct. 2. The idea of the "Assoziation" found an echo among so many workers, though the "association-socialism" of Born was not always understood and accepted correctly. In spite of many difficulties the workers tried to build various co-operatives. One of the reasons for this echo was probably the "artisan"-mentality of the working men of this time. In the co-operatives they saw a good chance of independence in business. 3. The significance of the idea and the practice of the "Assoziation" is not to be estimated only by the economic success or failure of the co-operative societies. We should see the "Assoziation" as one of the elements of the labour-movement in the revolution. In a case-study of the labour-movement in Chemnitz we pointed out that the organisations of the workers intended to fulfill several functions at a time, e.g. political, educational, or as trade unions and co-operative societies. We also researched the relation of the "Innung" and the development of the labour movement from the period before the revolution.

View full abstract

This article aims to demonstrate the dominating position held by Katakura & Co., Ltd. and Gunze Silk Mfg. Co., Ltd., in other words the market monopoly by these two companies, in the high quality raw silk market (especially for stockings) in the 1930's. During the panic in the Showa era Katakura and Gunze accomplished high degrees of production centralization of top quality raw silks and subsequently the market monopoly based on the introduction of multi-ends reeling machines together with the monopolized supply of best cocoon secured by special contracts with farmers. After the panic period the two companies continued to dominate the raw silk market throughout 1930's. The following is a brief description of the development paths of these two companies in the 1930's. During the panic in the Showa era Katakura established a purchasing system of cocoons by special contracts and achieved a real mass production system by multi-ends reeling machines. On the other hand, at the beginning of the Showa era Gunze had already possessed both superb techniques and top quality cocoons. Then at the end of the panic period Gunze was quick to introduce multi-ends reeling machines into filatures and consequently it could further increase the production of high (especially best) quality raw silks. As a result, two markets, that is, W.14 d. high quality raw silk market for stockings and 21 d. high quality raw silk market for fabrics were monopolized by these two companies at the end of the panic in the Showa period. Among their monopolized markets, in particular, Katakura had its market power over the best quality raw silks of W.14 d. and W.21d., whereas Gunze had its competitiveness over the best quality raw silks of Y.21 d.. The monopolized markets, especially the high quality raw silk market for stockings, brought a large sum of premiums to both companies. And accordingly they could gain fast profits (-monopoly profits). After the panic era, Katakura and Gunze bred and distributed new and improved silkworw races to sericulturists with special contracts. On the one hand technical guidance to the sericulturists was reinforced and on the other hand inefficient sericulturists were dismissed. Moreover, they increased multi-ends reeling machines. Specialization in producing W.14 d. high quality raw silk and it further grading up were pursued by both companies. As a result, the two companies continued to monopolize the high quality raw silk market for stockings since the panic era. In this market, in particular, Gunze had its market power over the best quality raw silks and Katakura had its strength over the high quality raw silks of "3A-2A" grades. Gunze and Katakura monopolized the high quality raw silk market for stockings and consequently could receive a large sum of premiums. And accordingly they could gain fast profits (-monopoly profits).

View full abstract

"Scientific and Technological Revolution" and "Micro Electronic Revolution", which started after World War II and are developing today, seem, to be a epoch-making stage of development of the productiveness of labour in comparison with the stage of "Machinery and Great Industry", which was analyzed in detail in das Kapital. Nowadays for grasping the meaning of that revolutions, it is necessary to inqure into the historical significance and limitation of "Machinery and Great Industry". Marx analyzed "machinery" as primary substance of the industrial revolution, and gave a economic definition of "machinery" in das kapital. Marx's point of view in the analysis was focused on the change in organization mode of the three elements of the labour-process. And there was a primary element i.e. a pivot of the organization in the labour-process, regulating the other elements and changing from one to other in the historical development of production mode. In the industrial revolution, the pivot changed from worker's handicraft skill to machinery. Production was made free from worker's organic limitations, accordingly mechanical engineering was formed to be a productive force. The historical limitation of machinery was that it was the mechanism in which only simple and fixed movements of instruments were made. Namely machinery couldn't create complicated movement of instruments, which has remained as machinist's skill. And in order to increase productiveness, machinery was enlarged in scale and constructed for exclusive use more and more. But massive machinery for exclusive use was confronted by a limit of cost that couldn't be exeeded. Therefore, the essence of machinery should be prescribed as "Automatic Operation", in comparison with "Automatic Control" which is progressing today. In addition, the mechanical engineering was the application of the classical dynamics, which couldn't explain characters of materials deriving from the microstructure of them.

View full abstract