ABSTRACT
Let us now consider the formula c + v + s as the expression of the social
product as a whole. Is it only a theoretical abstraction, or does it convey
any real meaning when applied to social life-has the formula any
objective existence in relation to society as a whole? It was left to Marx
to establish the fundamental importance of c, the constant capital, in
economic theory. Yet Adam Smith before him, working exclusively
with the categories of fixed and circulating capital, in effect trans-
formed this fixed capital into constant capital, though he was not aware
of having achieved this result. This constant capital comprises not only
those means of production which wear out in the course of years, but
also those which are completely absorbed by production in any one
year. His very dogma that the total value is resolved into v + s and his
arguments on this point lead Smith to distinguish between the two
categories of production-living labour and inanimate means of
production. On the other hand, when he tries to construe the social
process of reproduction on the basis of the capitals and incomes of
individuals, the fixed capital he conceives of as existing apart from
these, is, in fact, constant capital.
