这同一规律还有另一种形式。随着劳动生产力的发展，即使工资的水平相当高，资本的积累也会越来越快。因此，可以推论，像亚．斯密──在他的那个时代，近代工业还很幼稚──那样推论，资本的这种加速积累，能保证对劳动需求的增长，所以必然会对工人有利。现代许多著作家同意这种观点，他们对最近20年英国资本的增加比人口的增加更迅速，而工资却没有很大的提高，感到诧异。但是随着积累的进展，资本的构成也发生递增的变化。资本中包含固定资本即机器、原料和各种生产数据的这一部分，比用于支付工资或购买劳动的那一部分，总是逐渐递增的。这一规律已经由巴顿、李嘉图、西斯蒙第、理查德．琼斯教授、拉姆赛教授、舍尔比利埃等人多少确切地阐明了。
如果资本中这两个部分的比例原来是1:1，这个比例就会因工业的发展而变成五比一，等等。如果总资本为600，其中300用于工具和原料等，其余300用于支付工资，那么总资本只增加一倍，就能造成对600工人而不是对300工人的需求。但是，如果总资本600中，500用于机器和原料等，只有100用于支付工资，为了造成对600工人而不是对300工人的需求，这同一资本就要从600增至3600。因此，在工业发展的进程中，对劳动的需求总是赶不上资本的积累。这一需求是在增加，但是与资本的增加相比，不过是在递减的比例上增加的。
以上所说的这几点足以表明，现代工业的发展一定会越来越有利于资本家而有害于工人，所以资本主义生产的总趋势不是提高而是降低工资的平均水平，在或大或小的程度上使劳动的价值降到它的最低限度。这种制度下的实际情况的趋势既然如此，那么，这是不是说，工人阶级应当放弃对资本的掠夺行为的反抗，停止利用偶然的时机使生活暂时改善的尝试呢？如果他们这样做，他们就会沦为一群听天由命的、不可挽救的可怜虫。我想我已经说过：他们争取工资水平的斗争，同整个雇佣劳动制度有密切的联系；他们为提高工资的努力，在一百回中有99回都只是为了维持现有的劳动价值；他们必须与资本家争论劳动价格，因为他们已经把自己当作商品出卖了。他们在和资本的日常冲突中如果畏缩让步，他们就没有资格发动更大的运动。
同时，即使不谈雇佣劳动制度中所包含的一般奴隶状态，工人阶级也不应夸大这一日常斗争的最终效果。他们不应当忘记：在日常斗争中他们反对的只是结果，而不是产生这种结果的原因；他们延缓下降的趋势，而不改变它的方向；他们服用止痛剂，而不袪除病根。
现在我提出下面的决议案来结束我的报告：
（1）工资水平的普遍提高，会引起一般利润率的降低。但整个说来并不影响商品的价格。
（2）资本主义生产的总趋势不是提高工资的平均水平，而是降低这个水平。
（3）工联作为抵制资本进攻的中心，工作颇有成效。它们遭到失败，部分是由于不正确地使用自己的力量。总的说来，它们遭到失败是因为它们只限于进行游击式的斗争以反对现存制度所产生的结果，而不同时努力改变这个制度，不运用自己有组织的力量作为杠杆来最终解放工人阶级，也就是最终消灭雇佣劳动制度。
关于沃勒斯坦的现代世界体系
The Modern World System: Capitalist Agriculture and the Origins of the European World Economy in the Sixteenth Century, Immanual Wallerstein develops a theoretical framework to understand the historical changes involved in the rise of the modern world. The modern world system, essentially capitalist in nature, followed the crisis of the feudal system and helps explain the rise of Western Europe to world supremacy between 1450 and 1670. According to Wallerstein, his theory makes possible a comprehensive understanding of the external and internal manifestations of the modernization process during this period and makes possible analytically sound comparisons between different parts of the world.
MEDIEVAL PRELUDE
Before the sixteenth century, when Western Europe embarked on a path of capitalist development, "feudalism" dominated West European society. Between 1150-1300, both population as well as commerce expanded within the confines of the feudal system. However, from 1300-1450, this expansion ceased, creating a severe economic crisis. According to Wallerstein, the feudal crisis was probably precipitated by the interaction of the following factors:
Agricultural production fell or remained stagnant. This meant that the burden of peasant producers increased as the ruling class expanded.
The economic cycle of the feudal economy had reached its optimum level; afterwards the economy began to shrink.
A shift of climatological conditions decreased agricultural productivity and contributed to an increase in epidemics within the population.
THE NEW EUROPEAN DIVISION OF LABOR
Wallerstein argues that Europe moved towards the establishment of a capitalist world economy in order to ensure continued economic growth. However, this entailed the expansion of the geographical size of the world in question, the development of different modes of labor control and the creation of relatively strong state machineries in the states of Western Europe. In response to the feudal crisis, by the late fifteenth and early sixteenth centuries, the world economic system emerged. This was the first time that an economic system encompassed much of the world with links that superseded national or other political boundaries. The new world economy differed from earlier empire systems because it was not a single political unit. Empires depended upon a system of government which, through commercial monopolies combined with the use of force, directed the flow of economic goods from the periphery to the center. Empires maintained specific political boundaries, within which they maintained control through an extensive bureaucracy and a standing army. Only the techniques of modern capitalism enabled the modern world economy, unlike earlier attempts, to extend beyond the political boundaries of any one empire.
The new capitalist world system was based on an international division of labor that determined relationships between different regions as well as the types of labor conditions within each region. In this model, the type of political system was also directly related to each region"s placement within the world economy. As a basis for comparison, Wallerstein proposes four different categories, core, semi-periphery, periphery, and external, into which all regions of the world can be placed. The categories describe each region"s relative position within the world economy as well as certain internal political and economic characteristics.
---The Core
The core regions benefited the most from the capitalist world economy. For the period under discussion, much of northwestern Europe (England, France, Holland) developed as the first core region. Politically, the states within this part of Europe developed strong central governments, extensive bureaucracies, and large mercenary armies. This permitted the local bourgeoisie to obtain control over international commerce and extract capital surpluses from this trade for their own benefit. As the rural population expanded, the small but increasing number of landless wage earners provided labor for farms and manufacturing activities. The switch from feudal obligations to money rents in the aftermath of the feudal crisis encouraged the rise of independent or yeoman farmers but squeezed out many other peasants off the land. These impoverished peasants often moved to the cities, providing cheap labor essential for the growth in urban manufacturing. Agricultural productivity increased with the growing predominance of the commercially-oriented independent farmer, the rise of pastoralism, and improved farm technology.
---The Periphery