David Harvey's Theory of Accumulation by Dispossession: A Marxist Critique

Raju Das Raju Das

doi:10.13169/worlrevipoliecon.8.4.0590

Abstract

David Harvey is well known for his extensive writings on accumulation by dispossession (ABD). ABD refers to “the continuation and proliferation of accretion practices” that Marx had designated as “primitive accumulation.” Harvey has sought to update Marx's theory of primitive accumulation to consider the ways in which dispossession occurs in present-day capitalism in its various forms. His theory of ABD is very problematic. Yet a comprehensive, critical assessment of Harvey's work on dispossession that considers its intellectual and political problems is missing. This article considers Harvey's ideas advanced since the 1980s to be problematic on multiple grounds. To begin, the concept of ABD itself is chaotic in the critical-realist philosophical sense: it includes processes which bear no internal relations, and it separates processes which should not be separated. He inflates the causal significance of the concept far too much, and mistakenly considers ABD to be the dominant moment of contemporary capitalism. He generally fails to connect ABD of producers to what I will call “accumulation by exploitation” of proletarians and semi-proletarians. His views on dispossession in the South with which he associates (new) imperialism are inadequate in part because he abstracts from the exploitative character of imperialism as it is rooted in production controlled by imperialist businesses. And the political implications of his theory, which significantly differ from the conclusions that Marx draws from his own analysis of dispossession in Capital vol. 1, and which have a dim view of the role of the working class in the anti-capitalist socialist movement, are reformist.

Highlights

In the last two decades or so, there has been a large body of writing that seeks to re-examine Marx’s theory of primitive accumulation, and shed light on the ways in which people are being subjected to dispossession.1 The writings of David Harvey are a very important part of this body of work
Harvey points to the slowing down of the economy since the 1970s leading to accumulation by dispossession (ABD) as a response, but what about the fact that capital seeks to counter that slowing down through increasing exploitation of the labor of men, women, and children in production, including that which happens following the transfer of assets to the hands of some capitalists via mergers and acquisitions?
If it is the case that according to Lenin there is no significant political-intellectual view placed between capitalist and socialist views, where does one place Harvey’s?14 With sympathy for the Occupy type movement, in spite of his occasional comments about the need to connect ABD struggles to struggles against expanded reproduction, it might not be too far-fetched to claim that Harvey occupies a middle ground between reactionary capitalism and revolutionary socialism

Summary

Introduction

In the last two decades or so, there has been a large body of writing that seeks to re-examine Marx’s theory of primitive accumulation, and shed light on the ways in which people are being subjected to dispossession.1 The writings of David Harvey are a very important part of this body of work. ABD refers to “the continuation and proliferation of accretion practices” that Marx had designated as “primitive accumulation.” Harvey has sought to update Marx’s theory of primitive accumulation to consider the ways in which dispossession occurs in present-day capitalism in its various forms.

Results

Conclusion