lenin cw-vol. 40

7/27/2019 Lenin CW-Vol. 40

1/561

7/27/2019 Lenin CW-Vol. 40

2/561

7/27/2019 Lenin CW-Vol. 40

3/561

7/27/2019 Lenin CW-Vol. 40

4/561

7/27/2019 Lenin CW-Vol. 40

5/561

W O R K E R S O F A L L C O U N T R I E S , U N I T E!

LENINCOLLECTED WORKS

0

A

7/27/2019 Lenin CW-Vol. 40

6/561

7/27/2019 Lenin CW-Vol. 40

7/561

THE RUSSIAN EDITION WAS PRINTEDIN ACCORDANCE WITH A DECISION

OF THE NINTH CONGRESS OF THE R.C.P.(B.)AND THE SECOND CONGRESS OF SOVIETS

OF THE U.S.S.R.

7/27/2019 Lenin CW-Vol. 40

8/561

CTTT C p K KCC

B. n. l d H n H E

a u m p m o e

M

7/27/2019 Lenin CW-Vol. 40

9/561

V. I.LENI N

cOLLEcTED WORKS

V OLUME

0Notebookson the Agrarian Question1m001m1

PROGRESS PUBLISHERSM O S C O W

7/27/2019 Lenin CW-Vol. 40

10/561

TRANSLATED FROM THE RUSSIANBY Y U R I S D O B N I K O V

First printing 1968Second printing 1974

Printed in the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics

From Marx to Mao

M

L

Digital Reprints2013

www.marx2mao.com

7/27/2019 Lenin CW-Vol. 40

11/561

7

CONTENTS

Preface . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

I

PLANS AND OUTLINES OF WORKSON THE AGRARIAN QUESTION

PLAN OF THE AGRARIAN QUESTION AND THE CRITICSOF MARX . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

CONTENTS OF THE AGRARIAN QUESTION AND THECRITICS OF MARX. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .CONTENTS OF CHAPTERS V- IX OF THE AGRARIANQUESTION AND THE CRITICS OF MARX . . . . . . . . .

MARXIST VIEWS OF THE AGRARIAN QUESTION IN EUROPEAND RUSSIA. Outline of Lectures . . . . . . . . . . . .

First Variant . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Second Variant . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

THE AGRARIAN PROGRAMME OF THE SOCIALIST-REVOLU-TIONARIES AND OF THE SOCIAL-DEMOCRATS . Outl ineof Lectures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

First Variant . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Second Variant . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Plans and Outlines of Concluding Speech . . . . . .

Preliminary Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Summary of Preliminary Plan . . . . . . . . . .

Resum of Lecture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Plan of Lecture Resum . . . . . . . . . . . .Resum of Lecture . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

THE PEASANTRY AND SOCIAL-DEMOCRACY . . . . . . . . .

13

29

38

39

40

4044

53

53596464646567

6769

Page

7/27/2019 Lenin CW-Vol. 40

12/561

CONTENTS8

II

CRITIQUE OF BOURGEOIS LITERATUREAND ANALYSIS OF MASSIVE AGRARIAN STATISTICS

1900 -1903

CRITICAL REMARKS ON S. BULGAKOVS BOOK, CAPITAL-ISM AND AGRICULTURE, VOLS. I AND II , PUBLISHEDIN 1900 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

PLAN OF OBJECTIONS TO BULGAKOVS BOOK . . . . . . .

CRITICAL REMARKS ON THE WORKS OF S. BULGAKOV ANDF. BENSING . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF F. HERTZS BOOK, THE AGRARIANQUESTIONS IN RELATION TO SOCIALISM . . . . . . . .

Plans of Objections to F. Hertzs Book . . . . . . .ANALYSIS OF DATA FROM O. PRINGSHEIM S ARTICLE,AGRICULTURAL MANUFACTURE AND ELECTRIFIED AGRI-CULTURE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

CRITICAL REMARKS ON E . DAVID S ARTICLE, THEPEASANT BARBARIANS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

ANALYSIS OF DATA FROM M. HECHT S BOOK, THREEVILLAGES IN THE HARD OF BADEN . . . . . . . . . .

ANALYSIS OF MATERIAL FROM H. AUHAGENS ARTICLE,ON LARGE- AND SMALL-SCALE PRODUCTION IN AGRI -CULTURE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

CRITICAL REMARKS ON K. KLAWKIS ARTICLE, THE COM-PETITIVE CAPACITY OF SMALL-SCALE PRODUCTION INAGRICULTURE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

BRASE AND OTHERS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .a. Analysis of Data from Brases Article, Study of

the Influence of Farm Debt on Farming . . . . .b. Bibliographical Notes and Annotations . . . . . .

CRITICAL REMARKS ON A . SOUCHONS BOOK, PEASANTPROPERTY. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

CRITICAL REMARKS ON F . MAURICES BOOK, AGRICUL-TURE AND THE SOCIAL QUESTION. AGRICULTURAL ANDAGRARIAN FRANCE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

REMARKS ON A. CHAPOWO-CHAPOWSKIS BOOK, AGRI-CULTURE IN BELGIUM IN THE 19TH CENTURY. . . . . .

REMARKS ON THE MATERIAL OF THE BADEN INQUIRY . . . .

73

87

88

96

104

107

1 1 1

116

126

138

160

160168

170

173

178

180

7/27/2019 Lenin CW-Vol. 40

13/561

9CONTENTS

FROM MARX

TO MAO

NOT FOR

COMMERCIAL

DISTRIBUTION

REMARKS ON M . E. SEIGNOURETS BOOK, ESSAYS ONSOCIAL AND AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS . . . . . . . .

FROM GERMAN AGRARIAN STATISTICS . . . . . . . . . .

ANALYSIS OF DATA FROM THE BOOK, AG RICULTURALSTATISTICS OF FRANCE, GENERAL RESULTS OF THE 189DECENNIAL INQUIRY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

SUMMARISED DATA ON FARMS IN GERMANY , FRANCE ,BELGIUM , BRITAIN , U .S .A. AND DENMARK FROM THECENSUSES OF THE 1880s AND 1890s . . . . . . . . . . . .

FROM THE DUTCH AGRICULTURAL INQUIRY OF 1890 . . . .

REMARKS ON E. STUMPFES WORKS . . . . . . . . . . .

A. An Analysis of Data from Stumpfes Article, Onthe Competitiveness of Small and Medium LandHoldings as Compared with Large Land Holdings

B. Remarks on E . Stumpfes Book , SmallHoldings and Grain Prices . . . . . . . . . .

REMARKS ON G. FISCHERS WORK, THE SOCIAL IMPOR-TANCE OF MACHINERY IN AGRICULTURE . . . . . . . .

NOTE ON P. TUROT S BOOK, AGRICULTURAL INQUIRY1866-1870 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

REMARKS ON H . BAUDRILLARTS BOOK, THE AGRICUL-TURAL POPULATION OF FRANCE. PART III. THE POPU-LATION OF THE SOUTH. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

REMARKS ON E. COULETS BOOK, THE SYNDICALIST ANDCO-OPERATIVE MOVEMENT IN FRENCH AGRICULTURE.THE AGRICULTURAL FEDERATION . . . . . . . . . . . .

REMARKS ON G. ROUANETS ARTICLE, ON THE DANGERAND THE FUTURE OF AGRICULTURAL SYNDI CATES . . . .

ANALYSIS OF DATA FROM NOSSIGS BOOK, REVISION OFSOCIALISM. VOL. I I. THE CONTEMPORARY AGRARIANQUESTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

CRITICAL REMARKS ON E. DAVIDS BOOK, SOCIALISM ANDAGRICULTURE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

A . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .B . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

EXTRACTS FROM THE BOOK, HAND AND MACHINE LABOR

ANALYSIS OF L. HUSCHKE S DATA (ON SMALL-SCALEAGRICULTURE) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

186

189

218

224

226

231

231

240

248

257

258

260

261

263

265

265281

282

287

7/27/2019 Lenin CW-Vol. 40

14/561

CONTENTS10

III

MATERIAL FOR A STUDY OF THE CAPITALIST ECONOMYOF EUROPE AND THE UNITED STATES

1910 -1916

GERMAN AGRARIAN STATISTICS (1907) . . . . . . . . . . .

PLAN FOR PROCESSING THE DATA OF THE GERMANAGRICULTURAL CENSUS OF JUNE 12, 1907 . . . . . . . . .

DANISH STATISTICS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

AUSTRIAN AGRICULTURAL STATISTICS . . . . . . . . . .

REMARKS ON SCHMELZLE S ARTICLE , DISTRIBUTIONOF RURAL LAND HOLDINGS , ITS INFLUENCE ON THEPRODUCTIVITY AND DEVELOPMENT OF AGRICULTURE . . . .

REMARKS ON E. LAURS BOOK, STATISTICAL NOTES ONTHE DEVELOPMENT OF SWISS AGRICULTURE OVER THELAST 5 YEARS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

REMARKS ON E. JORDIS BOOK, THE ELECTRIC MOTOR INAGRICULTURE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

CAPITALISM AND AGRICULTURE IN THE UNITED STATES

OF AMERICA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Outl ine of Introduct ion . American Agricul tural Censuses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Variants of Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Variants of Title . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Extracts from Different Variants . . . . . . . . .Variants of Contents . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

REMARKS ON AMERICAN AGRICULTURAL STATISTICS . . . .AMERICAN AGRICULTURAL STATISTICS . . . . . . . . . .

Notes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Index of Sources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Name Index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

297

372

376

383

397

402

406

408

408

408

4 1 1

412

414

416421

489

519

539

7/27/2019 Lenin CW-Vol. 40

15/561

11CONTENTS

I L L U S T R A T I O N S

Lenins manuscript, Contents of The Agrarian Questionand the Critics of Marx.Earlier than February 1906. . . .

Lenins manuscript, The Peasantry and Social-DemocracyNot earlier than September 1904 . . . . . . . . . . . .

Pages 8 and 9 of Lenins manuscript, German AgrarianStatistics (1907). September 1910-1913 . . . . . . . . . .

Page 12 of Lenins manuscript, American AgriculturalStatistics. Between May 5 (18), 1914 and December 29, 1915(January 11, 1916). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

38-39

68-69

298-299

426-427

7/27/2019 Lenin CW-Vol. 40

16/561

7/27/2019 Lenin CW-Vol. 40

17/561

13

PREFACE

The present volume contains Lenins Notebooks on the

Agrarian Question, which is preparatory material for hisworks analysing capitalist agriculture in Western Europe,Russia and the United States, and criticising bourgeoisand petty-bourgeois theories, and reformism and revisionismin the agrarian question.

The material in this volume relates to the period from1900 to 1916. In the new conditions, with capitalism atits highest and final stagethe stage of imperialismLeninworked out and substantiated the agrarian programme and

agrarian policy of the revolutionary proletarian party, andtook Marxist theory on the agrarian question a step forwardin its view of classes and the class struggle in the country-side, the alliance of the working class and the peasantryunder the leadership of the proletariat, and their jointstruggle against the landowners and capitalists, for demo-cracy and socialism. The success of the revolution dependedon whom the peasantry would follow, for in many Europeancountries it constituted the majority or a sizable section

of the population. In order to win over the peasantry, asan ally of the proletariat in the coming revolution, it wasnecessary to expose the hostile parties which claimed leader-ship of the peasantry, and their ideologists.

In the new epoch, these questions became especiallypressing and acquired international significance. That iswhy bourgeois economists, reformists and revisionistsfiercely attacked Marxism. It was subjected to crit-icism by bourgeois apologists, the ideologists of petty-

bourgeois parties, and opportunists among the Social-Democrats. They all rejected Marxs theory of ground-rent,

7/27/2019 Lenin CW-Vol. 40

18/561

PREFACE14

and the law of concentration of production in agriculture,and denied the advantages of large- over small-scale produc-tion; they insisted that agriculture developed according

to special laws, and was subject to the inexorable law ofdiminishing returns. They said it was not human labourand the implements of labour, but the elemental forces ofnature that were decisive in agriculture. These criticsof Marx juggled with the facts and statistics, in an effortto show that the small-scale peasant economy was stableand had advantages over large-scale capitalist production.

Lenins great historical service in working out the agra-rian question lies in the fact that he defended Marxs revolu-

tionary teaching against the attacks of his critics, andfurther developed it in application to the new historicalconditions and in connection with the working out of the pro-gramme, strategy and tactics of the revolutionary proletarianparty of the new type; he proved the possibility, and thenecessity, of an alliance between the working class and thepeasantry under the leadership of the proletariat at thevarious stages of the revolution, and showed the conditionsin which this could be realised.

It was of tremendous importance to produce a theoreticalelaboration of the agrarian question so as to determinethe correct relations between the working class and thevarious groups of peasantry as the revolutionary strugglewent forward. Under capitalism, the peasantry breaks up intodifferent class groups, with differing and antithetical inter-ests; the erosion of the middle peasantry yields a numer-ically small but economically powerful rich peasant (kulak)top section at one pole, and a mass of poor peasants, rural

proletarians and semi-proletarians, at the other. Leninrevealed the dual nature of the peasant as a petty commo-dity producerthe dual nature of his economic andpolitical interests: the basic interests of the toiler sufferingfrom exploitation by the landowner and the kulak, whichmakes him look to the proletariat for support, and theinterests of the owner, which determine his gravitationtowards the bourgeoisie, his political instability and vacilla-tion between it and the working class. Lenin emphasisedthe need for an alliance between the working class and thepeasantry, with the leading role belonging to the proletariat,

7/27/2019 Lenin CW-Vol. 40

19/561

15PREFACE

as a prerequisite for winning the dictatorship of the prole-tariat and building socialism through a joint effort by theworkers and peasants.

* * *The first part of the volume contains the plans and out-

lines of Lenins writings on the agrarian question, the mainbeing the preparatory materials for The Agrarian Questionand the Critics of Marx (see present edition, Vols. 5and 13). The variants of the plan for this work give a goodidea of how Lenin mapped out the main line and the con-crete points for his critique of reformist bourgeois theories

and of revisionism. Lenin defined a programme for processingthe relevant reliable material from numerous sources torefute the arguments of the critics of Marx concerningthe dubious law of diminishing returns and the Malthu-sian explanation of the root causes of the working mansplight, and to ward off their attacks on the Marxist theoryof ground-rent, etc.

In preparing The Agrarian Question and the Critics ofMarx and his lectures on the agrarian question, Lenin

made a thorough study of the most important sources, andutilised European agrarian statistics to give Marxistagrarian theory a sound basis. He verified, analysed andsummed up a mass of statistical data, and drew up tablesgiving an insight into the deep-going causes, nature andsocial significance of economic processes. Lenins analysisof agrarian statistics shows their tremendous importanceas a tool in cognising economic laws, exposing the contra-dictions of capitalism, and subjecting it and its apologists

to scientific criticism.The writings in the first part of the volume show the

direct connection between Lenins theoretical inquiry,his elaboration of Marxist agrarian theory and the practicalrevolutionary struggle of the working class.

The preparatory materials for his lectures on the MarxistViews of the Agrarian Question in Europe and Russia,and on The Agrarian Programme of the Socialist-Revolu-tionaries and of the Social-Democrats, both included inthis volume, are a reflection of an important stage of Leninsstruggle against the petty-bourgeois party of Socialist-
http://lenin%20cw-vol.%205.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%205.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%205.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%205.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%2013.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%2013.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%205.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%205.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%205.pdf/

7/27/2019 Lenin CW-Vol. 40

20/561

PREFACE16

Revolutionaries and opportunists within the Social-Demo-cratic movement, in working out and substantiating a trulyrevolutionary agrarian programme and tactics for the

Marxist working-class party in Russia.Russia was then on the threshold of her bourgeois-demo-cratic revolution. In Russia, capitalism had grown intoimperialism, while considerable survivals of serfdom stillremained in the countrys economy and the political systemas a whole. The landed estates were the main relicts of pre-capitalist relations in the economy; the peasant allotmentland tenure, adapted to the landowners corve system,was also shackled with relicts of serfdom. These tended

to slow down the development of the productive forcesboth in Russias industry and agriculture, widen the tech-nical and economic gap separating her from the leadingcapitalist countries of the West, and create the conditionsfor indentured forms of exploitation of the working classand the peasantry. That is why the agrarian question was

basic to the bourgeois-democratic revolution in Russia anddetermined its specific features.

Lenin laid special emphasis on the importance of theory

in working out the Party programme: In order to makea comparison of the programmes and to assess them, it is nec-essary to examine the principles, the theory, from which theprogramme flows (see p. 53). Lenins theoretical analysisof the economic nature of the peasant economy enabledhim to determine correctly the community or the distinctionof class interests between the proletariat and the varioussections of the peasantry in the bourgeois-democratic revo-lution, and to map out the Partys policy towards the

peasantry. The main task of the agrarian programme duringthe bourgeois-democratic revolution was to formulate thedemands that would secure the peasantry as the proletariatsally in the struggle against tsarism and the landowners. Themeaning of our agrarian programme: the Russian prole-tariat (including the rural) must support the peasantryin the struggle against serfdom (see p. 62). Lenin subjectedthe agrarian programme of the Socialist-Revolutionariesto withering criticism and proved that their theoreticalunscrupulousness and eclecticism had induced them to saynothing of the historical task of the perioddestruction of the

7/27/2019 Lenin CW-Vol. 40

21/561

17PREFACE

relicts of serfdomto deny the stratification of the peasantryalong class lines, and the class struggle in the countryside,to invent all manner of projects for socialisation of land,

equalisation, etc.While Lenin aimed his criticism against the Socialist-Revolutionaries, he also exposed the anti-Marxist standon the agrarian issue in Russia and the peasantry taken

by P. P. Maslov, A. S. Martynov, D. B. Ryazanov andother Mensheviks-to-be, who denied that the peasantryhad a revolutionary role to play, and who regarded it asa solid reactionary mass. By contrast, Lenin emphasisedthe dual nature of Narodism: the democratic side, inasmuch

as they waged a struggle against the relicts of serfdom,and the utopian and reactionary side, expressive of theurge on the part of the petty bourgeois to perpetuate hissmall farm. In this context, Lenin pointed to the need totake account of the two sides of Narodism in evaluatingits historical importance.

The first part ends with two plans for The Peasantryand Social-Democracy (see pp. 69-70). These plans warrantthe assumption that Lenin had the intention of writing

a special work on the subject to sum up his studies of agrar-ian relations and the experience gained by socialist partiesabroad in working out agrarian programmes, and to sub-stantiate the R.S.D.L.P.s policy towards the peasantry.With his usual insight, he points to the practical impor-tance of the agrarian question in the possibly near future(see p. 70), and notes the specific nature of class relationsin the Russian countryside, and the need for the ruralproletariat to fight on two flanks: against the landowners

and the relicts of serfdom, and against the bourgeoisie.Lenin marked out the guiding principles which were toserve the Marxist party as a beacon in the intricate condi-tions of the class struggle in the countryside: Togetherwith the peasant bourgeoisie against the landowners. To-gether with the urban proletariat against the peasant

bourgeoisie (see p. 69).The writings in the second part of the present volume

are a reflection of his critical processing of a great massof facts and statistical data from bourgeois and petty-

bourgeois agrarian works and official sources. Of special

7/27/2019 Lenin CW-Vol. 40

22/561

PREFACE18

interest in this part is the material on the study and proc-essing of the results of special statistical inquiries intothe state of agriculture, especially the peasant economy,

in a number of European countries.Lenin gives a model of scientific analysis of agrarianrelations, application of the Marxist method in processingsocial and economic statistics, and critical use of bourgeoissources and writings. Lenin adduces reliable data to refutethe assertions of bourgeois economists, reformists and revi-sionists, and shows that in agriculture as well large-scalecapitalist production is more effective than small-scaleproduction and tends inevitably to supplant it, that small

peasant farms are being expropriated by big capital, andthat the toiling peasantry is being ruined and proletarised.That is the general law governing the development of agri-culture on capitalist lines, although it may differ in formfrom country to country.

In his critical remarks on the works of S. Bulgakov,F. Hertz, M. Hecht, E. David, and K. Klawki, Lenin refutesthe bourgeois reformist theories which extol small farmingand assert that it is superior to large-scale production.

He exposes the tricks used by bourgeois and petty-bourgeoiseconomists to minimise the earnings of the big farms andexaggerate those of the small. Lenin counters the false eulo-gies to the viability of the small farmsdue allegedlyto the small farmers industry, thrift and hardiness, byshowing that small-scale production in agriculture is sus-tained by the back-breaking toil and poor nutrition of thesmall farmer, the dissipation of his vital forces, the deterio-ration of his livestock, and the waste of the soils productive

forces.Lenin has some particularly sharp words for the reformists

and revisionists who fool others by styling themselvessocialists, and put more into prettifying capitalist realitythan the bourgeois apologists themselves. Lenin makesa detailed analysis of E. Davids Socialism and Agriculturethe main revisionist work on the agrarian questionandshows it to be a collection of bourgeois falsehood and biaswrapped up in socialist terminology.

At the same time, Lenin takes pains to sift and examineany genuine scientific data and correct observations and

7/27/2019 Lenin CW-Vol. 40

23/561

19PREFACE

conclusions which he finds in bourgeois sources and writings.He makes the following extract from O. Pringsheimsarticle: Modern large-scale agricultural production should

be compared with the manufacture (in the Marxian sense)(see p. 108), and repeatedly makes such comparisons in hisworks (see present edition, Vol. 5, p. 141 and Vol. 22,p. 99). On F. Maurices book, Agriculture and the SocialQuestion. Agricultural and Agrarian France, Lenin makesthis remark: The author has the wildest ideas of the mostprimitive anarchism. There are some interesting factualremarks (see p. 173).

Lenin devotes special attention to an analysis of statis-

tics on the agrarian system in Denmark, which the apolo-gists of capitalism liked to present as the ideal countryof small-scale peasant production. He exposes the trickeryof bourgeois economists and revisionists and demonstratesthe capitalist nature of the countrys agrarian system. The

basic fact which bourgeois political economists and revision-ists try to hush up is that the bulk of the land and thelivestock in Denmark is in the hands of landowners runningfarms on capitalist lines (see p. 225 and pp. 376-82). The

basis of Danish agriculture is large-scale and mediumcapitalist farming. All the talk about a peasant countryand small-scale farming is sheer bourgeois apologetics,a distortion of the facts by various titled and untitled ideolo-gists of capital (see present edition, Vol. 13, p. 196). Lenincastigates the socialists who try to obscure the fact thatproduction is being concentrated and that the petty produceris being ousted by the big producer, and the fact that theprosperity of capitalist agriculture in Denmark is based

on the massive proletarisation of the rural population.The third part of the volume contains material for a study

of the capitalist agriculture of Europe and the UnitedStates from 1910 to 1916, including the material relatingto Lenins New Data on the Laws Governing the Devel-opment of Capitalism in Agriculture. Part One. Capitalismand Agriculture in the United States of America.

In this work, Lenin stresses that the United States,a leading country of modern capitalism, was of especialinterest for the study of the social and economic structureof agriculture, and of the forms and laws of its development
http://lenin%20cw-vol.%205.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%205.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%2022.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%2022.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%2013.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%2013.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%2022.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%2022.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%205.pdf/

7/27/2019 Lenin CW-Vol. 40

24/561

PREFACE20

in modern capitalist conditions. In America, agriculturalcapitalism is more clear-cut, the division of labour is morecrystallised; there are fewer bonds with the Middle Ages,

with the soil-bound labourer; ground-rent is not so burden-some; there is less intermixing of commercial agricultureand subsistence farming (see p. 420). The important thingis that the United States is unrivalled in the vastness ofterritory and diversity of relationships, showing the greatestspectrum of shades and forms of capitalist agriculture.

Bourgeois economists, reformists and revisionists distortthe facts in an effort to prove that the U.S. farm economyis a model of the non-capitalist evolution of farming, where

the small family farm is allegedly supplanting large-scale production, where most farms are family-labourfarms, etc. N. Himmer, who gave his views in an articleon the results of the U.S. Census of 1910, epitomises thosewho believe that agriculture in capitalist society developsalong non-capitalist lines. Lenin makes this note: Himmeras a collection of bourgeois views. I n t h i s r e s p e c t ,his short article is worth volumes (see p. 408). The opponentsof Marxism based their conclusions on facts and figures,

major and minor, which were isolated from the generalcontext of politico-economic relations. On the strengthof massive data provided by the U.S. censuses, Lenin givesa complete picture of capitalism in American agriculture(present edition, Vol. 22, p. 18). Lenin notes that throughtheir agricultural censuses, bourgeois statisticians collectan immense wealth of complete information on each enter-prise as a unit but because of incorrect tabulation andgrouping it is reduced in value and spoiled; the net result

is meaningless columns of figures, a kind of statisticalgame of digits.

Lenin goes on to work the massive data of agriculturalstatistics into tables on scientific principles for groupingfarms. The summary table compiled by Lenin (pp. 440-41)is a remarkable example of the use of socio-economic statis-tics as an instrument of social cognition. He brings outthe contradictions and trends in the capitalist developmentof U.S. agriculture through a three-way grouping of farms:

by income, that is, the value of the product, by acreage,and by specialisation (principal source of income).
http://lenin%20cw-vol.%2022.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%2022.pdf/

7/27/2019 Lenin CW-Vol. 40

25/561

21PREFACE

Lenins analysis of the great volume of facts and massiveagrarian statistics proves that U.S. agriculture is developingthe capitalist way. Evidence of this is the general increase

in the employment of hired labour, the growth in the num-ber of wage workers, the decline in the number of independentfarm owners, the erosion of the middle groups and the consol-idation of the groups at both ends of the farm spectrum,and the growth of big capitalist farms and the displacementof the small. Lenin says that capitalism in U.S. agriculturetends to grow both through the faster development of thelarge-acreage farms in extensive areas, and through theestablishment of farms with much larger operations on

smaller tracts in the intensive areas. There is growing con-centration of production in agriculture, and the expropriationand displacement of small farmers, which means a declinein the proportion of owners.

In his book, Lenin shows the plight of the small andtenant farmers, especially Negroes, who are most ruthlesslyoppressed. For the emancipated Negroes, the AmericanSouth is a kind of prison where they are hemmed in, isolatedand deprived of fresh air (present edition, Vol. 22, p. 27).

Lenin notes the remarkable similarity between the economicstatus of the Negroes in America and that of the one-timeserfs in the heart of agricultural Russia.

An indicator of the ruin of small farmers in the UnitedStates is the growth in the number of mortgaged farms,which means that the actual control over them is transferredto the capitalists. Most farmers who fall into the clutchesof finance capital are further impoverished. Those whocontrol the banks, directly control one-third of Americas

farms, and indirectly dominate the lot (ibid., pp. 92, 100).Lenins study of the general laws governing the capitalist

development of agriculture and the forms they assumedin the various countries shed a strong light on the wholeprocess of displacement of small-scale by large-scale pro-duction. This complex and painful process involves notonly the direct expropriation of toiling peasants and farmers

by big capital, but also the ruin of the small farmers anda worsening of conditions on their farms that may go onfor years and decades (Vol. 22, p. 70), a process whichmay assume a variety of forms, such as the small farmers
http://lenin%20cw-vol.%2022.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%2022.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%2022.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%2022.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%2022.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%2022.pdf/

7/27/2019 Lenin CW-Vol. 40

26/561

PREFACE22

overwork or malnutrition, heavy debt, worse feed andpoorer care of livestock, poorer husbandry, technical stag-nation, etc.

Lenin analysed the capitalist agriculture of Europeand the United States decades ago. Since then, considerablechanges have taken place in the agriculture of the capitalistcountries. However, the objective laws governing capitalistdevelopment are inexorable. The development of capitalistagriculture fully bears out the Marxist-Leninist agrariantheory, and its characteristic of classes and the class strugglein the countryside. The Programme of the CommunistParty of the Soviet Union emphasises that the agriculture

of the capitalist countries is characterised by a furtherdeepening of the contradictions inherent in the bourgeoissystem, namely, the growing concentration of production,and ever greater expropriation of small farmers and peasants.The monopolies have occupied dominant positions in agri-culture as well. Millions of farmers and peasants are beingruined and driven off the soil.

In the decades since Lenin made his analysis, there havebeen major changes in the technical equipment of agricul-

tural production. But, as in the time of Marx and Lenin,the machine not only raises the productivity of human labourbut also leads to a further aggravation of the contradictionsin capitalist agriculture.

The mechanisation of production on the large capitalistfarms is accompanied by intensification of labour, worseningof working conditions, displacement of hired labour andgrowing unemployment. At the same time, there is increasingruin of small peasants and farmers, who are unable to buy

and make rational use of modern machinery, and who aresaddled with debts and taxes; the small and middle farmerswho are supplanted by the large farms, become tenants, orwage workers; and the dispossessed tenant farmers aredriven off the land. This is borne out by the massive statis-tics furnished by agricultural censuses in the United States,Canada, France, the Federal Republic of Germany andother capitalist countries.

But in the teeth of these facts present-day bourgeoiseconomists, reformists and revisionists of every stripekeep coming up with the theories long since refuted by

7/27/2019 Lenin CW-Vol. 40

27/561

23PREFACE

Marxism-Leninism and upset by practice itselfassertingthat under capitalism the small farm is stable, that itoffers advantages over the large farm, and that under

capitalism the toiling peasant can enjoy a life of prosperity.Modern reformists and revisionists try to revive the oldtheories of the non-capitalist evolution of agriculturethrough the co-operatives. However, the marketing co-oper-atives extolled by the bourgeoisie and their socialistservitors fail to save the small farmers from privation andruin. Modern reality fully bears out Lenins analysis ofco-operatives under capitalism. Lenin adduced concretefacts on associations for the marketing of dairy produce in

a number of capitalist countries to show that these consistmainly of large (capitalist) farms, and that very few smallfarmers take part in them (see pp. 207, 209-10). In thecapitalist countries today, co-operative societies, whichare under the control of banks and monopolies, are alsoused mainly by capitalist farmers and not by the smallfarmers.

Lenins critique of bourgeois reformist and revisionistviews on the agrarian question is just as important today

as a brilliant example of the Party approach in science,and of irreconcilable struggle against a hostile ideology,bourgeois apologetics, and modern reformism and revision-ism. With capitalism plunged in a general crisis, andclass contradictions becoming more acute, the bourgeoisieand its ideologists have been trying very hard to win overthe peasantry, by resorting to social demagogy, propoundingreformist ideas of harmonised class interests, and promisingthe small farmer better conditions under capitalism. Lenin s

guiding statements on the agrarian question teach theCommunist and Workers Parties of the capitalist andcolonial countries to take correct decisions on the working-class attitude towards the peasantry as an ally in the revo-lutionary struggle against capitalism and colonialism, fordemocracy and socialism.

Lenin stressed that, in contrast to those bourgeois punditswho sow illusions among the small peasants about thepossibility of achieving prosperity under capitalism, theMarxist evaluation of the true position of the peasantry inthe capitalist countries inevitably leads to the recognition

7/27/2019 Lenin CW-Vol. 40

28/561

PREFACE24

of the small peasantrys blind alley and hopeless position(hopeless, outside the revolutionary struggle of the prole-tariat against the entire capitalist system) (present edition,

Vol. 5, p. 190).The historic example of the Soviet Union and other social-ist countries has shown the peasants of the world the advan-tages of the socialist way of farming; they are coming torealise that only the establishment of truly popular powerand producers co-operatives can rid the peasants of povertyand exploitation, and assure them of a life of prosperity andculture. The experience of the U.S.S.R. and the PeoplesDemocracies has toppled the theories spread by the servants

of the bourgeoisie which say that the peasantry is basicallyhostile to socialism. There is now practical proof of thecorrectness of the Marxist-Leninist proposition that thepeasant economy must and can be remodelled on socialistlines, and that the toiling peasants can be successfullyinvolved in the construction of socialism and communism.

* * *

The bulk of the material contained in the present volumewas first published from 1932 to 1938, in Lenin MiscellaniesXIX, XXXI and XXXII. Seven writings were first publish-ed in the Fourth Russian edition, among them: remarkson M. E. Seignourets book, Essays on Social and Agricul-tural Economics; a manuscript containing an analysis of datafrom the Agricultural Statistics of France; remarks onG. Fischers The Social Importance of Machinery in Agri-culture; a manuscript containing extracts from Hand andMachine Labor; and remarks on E. Jordis Electric Motorin Agriculture.

The publishers have retained Lenins arrangement of thematerial, his marks in the margin and underlinings in thetext. The underlinings are indicated by type variations:a single underlining by italics, a double underlining bys p a c e d i t a l i c s, three lines by heavy Roman type,and four lines by s p a c e d h e a v y R o m a n t y p e.

A wavy underlining is indicated by heavy italics, if dou-bleby s p a c e d h e a v y i t a l i c s.
http://lenin%20cw-vol.%205.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%205.pdf/

7/27/2019 Lenin CW-Vol. 40

29/561

25PREFACE

In the Fourth Russian edition the entire text of thisvolume was verified once again with Lenins manuscriptsand sources.

All statistical data were checked again, but no correc-tions were made where the totals or percentages do not tally,because they are the result of Lenins rounding off the figuresfrom the sources.

The present volume contains footnote references toLenins The Agrarian Question and the Critics of Marxand New Data on the Laws Governing the Developmentof Capitalism in Agriculture. This has been done to showthe connection between the preparatory material and the

finished works, and to give an idea of how Lenin made useof his notes.Institute of Marxism-Leninismunder the C.P.S.U. Central

Committee

7/27/2019 Lenin CW-Vol. 40

30/561

7/27/2019 Lenin CW-Vol. 40

31/561

I

PLANSAND OUTLINES OF WORKS

ON THEAGRARIAN QUESTION

7/27/2019 Lenin CW-Vol. 40

32/561

7/27/2019 Lenin CW-Vol. 40

33/561

29

PLAN OF

THEAGRARIAN QUESTIONAND THE CRITICS OF MARX1

F I R S T V A R I A N T

Perhaps the following division:A. Some of Bulgakovs general propositions and theoriesB. Factual data against the critics

M. Hecht*Baden Inquiry (connect with Winzer)**Solid peasantryK. Klawki***The Condition of the Peasants2(Hertz****, 15) Baudrillart3French statistics. (Souchon and Maurice)*****German statistics****** (connect with co-operatives)Belgium (Vandervelde, Ch/apowski*******?).

C. Class struggle o r co -operation?Distortion of Engels.4

Overall data on employers and wage workers. Capi -talist system.Bttger.5[Bulgakovs greater consistency]

D. Russian agrarian program me in No. 3 of I s k r a 6.

* See pp.116 -25.Ed .** Wine grower. See pp . 180 -85.Ed .

*** See pp. 138 -59 .Ed .**** See pp. 96 -106.Ed .

***** See pp. 170 -77.Ed .****** See pp. 189 -217 .Ed .******* See pp. 178 -79 .Ed.

7/27/2019 Lenin CW-Vol. 40

34/561

V. I. LENIN30

S E C O N D V A R I A N T

A. Bulgakov on the law of diminishing returns(cf. Maslov, who is not quite right7).

A. Bulgakov on big and small farms.((To B?))Bulgakov on co -operation and individualism in

agriculture.B. Baden data (in connection with Hecht).B. Baudrillart....B. The Condition of the Peasants....C) ... Bttger....C) Distortion of Engels and Marx.

(The Peasant Question)B. Moritz Hecht.B) Co-operatives. (Cf. German statistics on dairy

farms)C) Overall data on rural labourers and rural employ-

ers.D) Russian agrarian programme in No. 3 of Iskra.B. K. Klawki.B. French data on holders and proletariat in agricul-

ture.(To A?) Electric power in agriculture

Pringsheim*Mack8Kautsky9

T H I R D V A R I A N T

CRITICS IN THE AGRARIAN QUESTION

A) 1. Introduction. Breach in orthodox Marxism(Chernov No. 4, 12710).

I 2. General methods of the critics theory . Bulgakov:law of diminishing returns (cf. Maslov)

3. Bulgakovs own data in refutation of it.4. Theory of rent (cf. Maslov).5. Malthusianism: cf. Ireland.11

* See pp. 107-10.Ed.

P

NNNMNNNQ

7/27/2019 Lenin CW-Vol. 40

35/561

31PLANS AND OUTLINES OF WORKS ON THE AGRARIAN QUESTION

II 6. Hertz (& Bulgakov). Agricultural machinery,large- and small-scale production (Bulgakov* Hertz: **). ConBulgakov I, 240, II, 115, 133.

7. Hertz. Definition of capitalism (and Chernov)8. mortgages (and Chernov). Cf. Bulgakov onsavings banks II, 375.

9. Engels on America12 (Idem Chernov).Bulgakov II, 433 (cf. I, 49)

Electric power in agriculture (Pringsheim, Mack,K. Kautsky).

III 10. Chernov. Kautsky is annihilated (A6 Chernov13).Ibidem Kautsky on usury, Kautsky on the dis-

tinguishing characteristics of the proletariat.Voroshilov.11. Voroshilov about N. on and others. (A1

Chernov13)12. form and content of capitalism

B)) IV 1. M. Hecht (Blondel,14 Hertz, David, Chernov).2. K. Klawki (against Auhagen) (Bulgakov)

V 3. The Condition of the Peasants (Quotations fromHertz and Bulgakov)15

4. Baden Inquiry.5. Conclusions on s o l i d p e a s a n t r y (Bul-

gakov .*** Hertzp. 6 N.B. Hertz .****Chernov on petty-bourgeois peasantry. ChernovNo. 7, 163; No. 10, 240).

VI 6. Baudrillart (Hertz p. 15 et al., Bulgakov II, 282)7. Souchon and Maurice.

VII 8. French statistics. (Property and farm operations,cf. Hertz: no proletarisation at all p. 59. Em-ployers and labourers establishments with hiredlabour) .

VIII 9. German statistics. Latifundia. (Cf. Hertz andBulgakov).

9 bis. German statistics... .***** (Cf. BulgakovII, 106).

* See p. 87.Ed.** See p. 104Ed.

*** See p. 87.Ed.**** See p. 104 .Ed.***** Several words illegible.Ed.

7/27/2019 Lenin CW-Vol. 40

36/561

V. I. LENIN32

10. German statistics. Industrialisation of rural indus-try (Bulgakov and Hertz, p. 88).

11. German statistics. C o-o p e r a t i v e s.

Cf. Baden data on the Winzers.IX 12. Belgium. (Vandervelde, Ch/apowski).C)) X 1. Overall data on employers and labourers.

(C a p i t a l i s t system)2. Nonsense about peasantry.3. Distortion of Engels (The Peasant Question).

(Hertz, Chernov.)4. Bulgakov (more consistent).5. Class struggle o r co -operation.

6. B t t g e r.D) XI Russian agrarian programme and No. 3 of Iskra.I s k r as a p p r o a c h to the question.Objections of 2a3b16The pros and cons .

F O U R T H V A R I A N T

CRITICS IN THE AGRARIAN QUESTION

I1. Introduction. Agrarian questionbreach (first one)in orthodox Marxism. (Chernov No. 4, 127; No. 8,0 4).

2. General theoretical propositions and reasoning of critics(Bulgakov, Hertz and Chernov). Bulgakov: law of dimin-ishing returns (cf. Maslov). Bulgakovs phrases: I, 2,13, 1 7 , 18, 20, 21 (29 -30 especially), 34, 35, 64 andmany others. (Cf. K. Kautsky versus Brentano. Nowonder Bulgakov is delighted with Brentano. I, 116.)

3. Refutation of this law with Bulgakovs own data: inBritain: I, 242, 260; in Germany: II, 132-33. In FranceII, 213.

4. T he or y o f rent . (Cf. Maslov.) Bulgakov I, 92, 1 0 5.111-1 3.

5. Malthusianism. Bulgakov I, 214,255. II, 41 etc. II, 212 (FranceN.B.) cf. II, 159.Especially II, 221, et seq. 223,237 and 233, 49 , 6 5 N.B.(and 261). Ireland II, 351, 384.

Bulgakov aboutHertz I, 139(remarkable).

7/27/2019 Lenin CW-Vol. 40

37/561


II6. Bulgakov & Hertz. Agricultural

machinery Bulgakov I, 43-51.

Hertz pp. 40, 60-65. Reactionaryattitude towards agricultural ma-chinery: Hertz, 65; Bulgakov I,51-5; II, 103 .Con on machines. Hertz 36(America); 43-44; 15 (latifun-dia), 124 (steam plough). Bulga-kov I, 240; II, 115, 133.

7. Bulgakov & Hertz. Large- and

small-scale production. BulgakovI, 142, 154; II, 135; 280 (Cf.282-83).ConBulgakov I, 39-40. Hertz52, 81. (Machines on smallfarms). Con 74 (small farms> labour); 89-90 (peasantslabour rent); 91-92 (collateralemployment).

Bulgakov II, 247 (small farms damaged.I, 333 (in Britain?their (small farms)unviability has not

been proved?)

France II, 188-89.(reduction in the

number of mediumfarmsBulgakovs

dodges) II, 213(small farms in

the vanguard ??).

Ireland II,359-60

7/27/2019 Lenin CW-Vol. 40

38/561

V. I. LENIN34

III11. ChernovForm and content of

capitalism: No. 6, 209; No. 8,

228.12. Chernov about Russian Marxists:No. 4, 139; No. 4, 141; No. 8,238; No. 10, 213; No. 11, 241and No. 7,166 (who are their com-rades?) eulogises Nikolaionand Kablukov: No. 10, 237.

13. Chernov. Kautsky is annihilated: have even failed tograsp what Marx says (No. 7 ,169)idem in the collectionAt the Glorious Post on usury, on the distinguishingcharacteristics of the proletariat.Voroshilov: No. 8, 229. (Cf. K. Kautsky).

IV14. M. Hecht (Blondel, p. 27, Hertz 68, 79; Chernov

No. 8, 206. David).15. K. Klawki (Bulgakov I, 58). A couple of words

about Auhagen. Hertz 70 and Bulgakov I, 58. (Cf. Hertz66; crops in Prussia and Southern Germany.)

16. T h e C o n d i t i o n o f t h e P e a s a n t s . (Quo-tations by Bulgakov and Hertz.)

V

17. B a d e n I n q u i r y (Hertzsespecially); and Bulgakov passim:

18. VII Conclusions on the s o l-i d p e a s a n t r y (Bulga -kov II, 1 3 8 N.B. and 456),on the peasant's attitude to theworker (Bulgakov II, 288;Hertz 4-15; 9. Hertz, 6 (with1-2 hired labourers) and 5.Chernov No. 7, 163 (petty -

Distortion of Marx-ism: International:No. 5, 35. Marx onagriculture No. 6,216, 31 and manyothers. Engels onBelgium, No. 10,

234.

The journal NachaloI, pp. 7 and 13.

references 68, 7 9especially II, 272).Bulgakov II, 289( peasantophobia).Bulgakov II, 176(the French peas-antry split up intothe proletariat and

the proprietors)Bulgakov II, 118

7/27/2019 Lenin CW-Vol. 40

39/561


bourgeois); No. 10, 240 (peas-ant = working man)).

VI

19. B a u d r i l l a r t (Hertz, 15 etseq., 5 6 -5 8 ; Bulgakov II, 282).

Cf. Bulgakov II, 208from Baudrillart, Vol. 1

Souchon and Maurice. (Cf. Bul-gakov II, 280 on hired labour -ers on small farms).

VII

20. French statistics. Distributionof rural population. Hertz 55;Bulgakov II, 195-97 and Hertz59 and 6 0 : (no pauperisation).

Employers and workers (cf.Bulgakov II, 191).Establishments with hired la -

bourers.

VIII

21. German statistics.Acreage statistics.Fewer labourers owning land

(Bulgakov II, 106).Latifundia. (Cf. Hertz 15;Bulgakov II, 126, 190, 363).Industrialisation (Bulgakov II,116; Hertz 88).

Co-operatives (cf. Baden dataon the Winzers). Hertz 120.

(solid peasants&technically

advanced big ones).

Souchon on the needof big and smallfarms. Cf. Bulga-kov I, 338 (Britain:verdict of historyfor small farms)

Cf. Rentenguter.18

Hertz p. 55 andp. 140 on the migra-tion of peasanthired labourers from

the North to theSouth of France. (Cf.Bulgakov II, 191.)

Bulgakov II, 260

illusion that thebig farm is vehi-cle of progress.

Hertz 21, 89(Thechieftaskof

socialism).

7/27/2019 Lenin CW-Vol. 40

40/561

V. I. LENIN36

IX22. Belgium. (Vandervelde. Subsi-

diary earnings. Ch/apowski. The

state of small-scale productionCollateral earnings).

X23. Overall data on owners and

labourers in European agricul-ture (C a p i t a l i s t system).(Cf. Maurice on concentration.Hertz 82 and 55 (1)).

24. Nonsense about the concept ofpeasantry. (Cf. Russian statis-tics. Its advantages.)

25. Distortion of Engels (The Peas-ant Question) on the questionof co-operatives. Hertz 122(Chernov No. 5, 42; No. 7, 157)

26. Bulgakov> consistent (II, 287,266, 288). Hertz on socialism :

pp. 7, 14, 10, 72-73, 123, 76,93, 105.On socialism: Bulgakov II, 289,4 5 6 , 2 6 6 [denial of classstruggle: cf. also Bulgakov I,303 and 301.Britain].

27. Class struggle o r co-opera-tion. Hertz 21, 89. (The chieftask of socialism.) (Cf. Cher-

nov . Non-capitalist evolutionNo. 5, 47; No. 10, 229, 243 -44.)

Chernov in the collection.At the Glorious Post 1 9 5,185, 188, 196.

Cf. Bulgakov II, 455(the grain prob -lem > terrible thanthe social one)

Antithesis of townand country. Hertz

7

6Bulgakov inN a c h a l o

Class struggle oradaptation to theinterests of the big

and petty bourgeoi-sie.

(Is the money econo-my the best way?Hertz 20).[Bulgakov versussocialism, see 26].Bulgakov II, 255(in favour of vege-table plots: cf, II,105. Agrarian.

7/27/2019 Lenin CW-Vol. 40

41/561


Idem on corn taxes.II, 141-48).

28. Bttger (Cf. K. Kautsky) (Quoted by Chernov No.)

XI29. Russian agrarian programme and No. 3 of Iskra.

A p p r o a c h1) class struggle2) its two forms

30. Objections of 2a3b (cut-off lands).The pros and cons .

Written in June-September 1901First published in 1932 Printed from the originalinLeninMiscellany XIX

! !

7/27/2019 Lenin CW-Vol. 40

42/561

38

CONTENTS

OF THE AGRARIAN QUESTIONAND THE CRITICS OF MARX

I. (Law of diminishing returns) pp. 2 - 27II. (Theory of rent) pp. 27 - 48

III. (Machines) pp. 48 - 73IV. (Town and country) pp. 74 - 101V. (Hecht) pp. 102 - 117

VI. (Klawki) pp. 118 - 144

VII. (Baden Inquiry) pp. 144 - 168VIII. (German statistics) pp. 168 - 189IX. (idem) pp. 189 -222

Written in June-September 1901First published in 1932 Printed from the original

in LeninMiscellany XIX

7/27/2019 Lenin CW-Vol. 40

43/561

7/27/2019 Lenin CW-Vol. 40

44/561

Lenins manuscript,ContentsofTheAgrarianQuestion

and the Critics of Marx.Earlier than February 1906

7/27/2019 Lenin CW-Vol. 40

45/561

39

CONTENTS OF CHAPTERS V-IXOF THEAGRARIAN QUESTION

AND THE CRITICS OF MARX19

(V) pp. 1 -16 (102-117).Hecht*) VI) pp. 17-39 (118-).AuhagenandKlawki.

VI pp. 39-43 Mr.Bulgakovs Concen-quotationsfrom tratedTheConditionof feedthePeasants

VII 43 -56 (Baden Inquiry)VII 56 -67 Meaning of the disintegration

of the peasantry and Bulgakovsignoring of this.

VIII 67-89 Results of German statistics

(1) increase of small farms(2) meaning of latifundia(3) increase of medium farms:

worsening of draught animals.IX 89-121 Overal l German s tat is t ics

89-94 livestock in various groups of farms94-98 industries

tobacco-growing98-108 dairy farming &wine-growing

108-112 co-operatives

112-121 rural population with and without land

*) rapid silent readingabout half an hour

120 pages?about 2 hours20

Written be fore February 1906First published in 1938 Printed from the original

in Lenin Miscellany XXXI

PMQ

PP

NNMMNNQQ

7/27/2019 Lenin CW-Vol. 40

46/561

40

MARXISTVIEWS OF THEAGRARIAN QUESTIONIN EUROPEAND RUSSIA21

OUTLINE OF LECTURES


M A R X I S T V I E W S O F T H E A G R A R I A NQ U E S T I O N

I N E U R O P E A N D R U S S I A

A. General Theory of the Agrarian Question.1. Growth of commercial agriculture.Phases of proc-

ess.Formation of market: towns.Peasant-industrialist (Capital, III, 2?).22Remnants of natu-ral economy.Degree of peasants subordinationto market.Free competition in agriculture. Forhow long?

N.B. Decline of natural peasant household industries

K. Kautsky and Engels.23

Need of money (Usurers. T a x e s).2. Law of diminishing returns. RicardoMarx (Bulgakov

and Maslov lately).3. Theory of rent. RicardoMarx: differential and abso -

lute rent. (Maslovs mistake.)3a. S e p a r a t i o n o f t o w n f r o m co u n t r y (cf.

Bulgakov and Hertz. Zarya No. 2-3.24 Nossig*).4. Present agricultural crisis. (Parvus).

Inflation and consolidation of rent. Burden of rent.* See pp. 263-64.Ed.

K K

7/27/2019 Lenin CW-Vol. 40

47/561


5. The mission of capital in agriculture1) separation of landownership from Production2) socialisation

3) rationalisationB. Small-Scale Production in Agriculture (1-4one lecture; 5-6, another).

1. Technical superiority of large-scale production. Statistics.Machines. (Large-scale economy and large-scale land-ownership.)

2. Displacement , proletarisation of the peasantry. Flightto towns.Handicraft industries.Collateral em-ployment.

3. Worsening of draught animals. German statistics.Use of cow as draught animal.

A d d i t i o n . Baudrillart, Souchon, Ch/apowski

4. Co-operatives. German statistics25 (Hertz, David, etc.)5. Comparison of profitability of big and small man

farms. Klawki,* Stumpfe. Cf. Hecht, The cattleCondition of the Peasants. land

6. South-

German Inquiries. Baden, Bavaria, Wrttem-berg.26C. S t a t e m e n t s o f P r i n c i p l e s b y M a rx i s t s i n

t h eW e s t .

Transfer to end? of Section IV (D)T h e A g r a r i a n P r o g r a m m e o f W e s t -E u r o p e a n a n d R u s s i a n

S o c i a l -D e m o c r a t s

1. Marx and Engels in the 1840s. The Communist Man-ifesto.Neue Rheinische Zeitung27Marx on Americanagriculture in the 1840s.28

2. Resolutions of the International,29 Engels in 1874, hisprogramme.30

3. The agrarian debates of 1895.31 Engels in Die NeueZeit on the French and German programmes.N.B. Social -Democrats in the Countryside .

(Bttger Hugo).* See pp. 138-59.Ed.

T N N N N N N N N N N N M N N N N N N N N N N N U

T N N N N N N N N N N N M N N N N N N N N N N N U

PMQ

PMQ

PMQ

PMQ

TNON

U

7/27/2019 Lenin CW-Vol. 40

48/561

V. I. LENIN42

4. K. Kautsky in Soziale Revolution.[A from D to this point? Principles of the Russianagrarian programme.]*

D. T h e A g r a r i a n Q u e s t i o n i n R u s s i a .To D. Russias agricultural decline. Stagnation.

F a m i n e s. C o l l a p s e o r t r a n s i t i o n t o c a p i - t a l i s m ?

1. Commune. Fiscal nature ig- Flight fromNarod- nored. Isolation ignored. peoples pro-

nik 2. People s production. Cherny- duction in thethe- shevsky.... (V. V., N.on). central areas to

ories 3. No soil for capitalism. No the capital andinternal market. Decline. the border areas.

4. Historical significance of Narodnik theories.5. Disintegration of the peasantry . Overall data. Results.

Meaning (=petty bourgeoisie)6. Class struggle in the countryside . Formation of an

agricultural proletariat. Transition from the corvesystem to the capitalist economy.

7. Growth of commercial and capitalist farming.8. Struggle against the relicts of serfdom. Freedom ofmovement (Maslov).32 Withdrawal from commune.Freedom to alienate land.

9. Agrarian programme of the Social-Democrats. Cut-off lands.

Essay II33 (agrarian statistics)

1. Hecht &B a v a r i a nInquiry2. (Auhagen) Klawki &Wrttemberg Inquiry3. The Condition of the Peasants &Stumpfe4. Baden Inquiry.5. German agrarian statistics

small-scale economylatifundiamiddle peasantry. Worsening of animals.

6. Livestock. Industries.* Section C crossed out in MS.Ed.

N.B.PNM

NQ

7/27/2019 Lenin CW-Vol. 40

49/561


7. Dairy farming (tobacco-growing, wine-growing).8. Co-operatives.9. Rural population by status.

Rent34

A. 1 dessiatine 80 poods.40 rubles of investedcapital & 8 rubles ofprofit = 48 rubles80 = 60 kopeks 51.2r. (64 k.) 3.2r.

B. 1 dessiatine75 poods.

40 rubles of investedcapital & 8 rubles ofprofit = 48 rubles75 = 64 kopeks 48 r. (64 k.)

A) 64 r. 16 r.B) 60 r. 12 r.C) 1 dessiatine60 poods.

40 rubles of investedcapital & 8 rubles ofprofit = 4860 = 80 kopeks 48 r.

Written be fore February 10 (23 ),1903

First published in 1932 Printed from the originalin LeninMiscellany XIX

7/27/2019 Lenin CW-Vol. 40

50/561

V. I. LENIN44


M A R X I S T V I E W S O F T H E A G R A R I A NQ U E S T I O N

I N E U R O P E A N D R U S S I A

A. G e n e r a l T h e o r y o f t h e A g r a r i a nQ u e s t i o n.(One lecture for A)1. Theory implies capitalist agriculture = commodity

production &wage labour.Growth of commercial agriculture: formation of market

towns (in Europe and in Russia)

industrial development (Parvus)international grain trade.Forms of commercial agriculture: example of concen-

its areas tration of dairyspecialisation farming on farmsindustries with up to 2 hec-

tares: p. 103 of thearticle*

David, p. 152, note: On David (and K. Ka-

the whole, it is small-scale N.B. utsky) on market-! production that is prosper- gardening

ing in vegetable- and fruit-growing as well as in agri -culture. According to 1895industrial statistics, of32,540 fruit and vegetablefarms,

40 per cent had an acreage of lessthan 20 ares,

* See present edition, Vol. 5, p. 212.Ed.

||

||

||

||
http://lenin%20cw-vol.%205.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%205.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%205.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%205.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%205.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%205.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%205.pdf/

7/27/2019 Lenin CW-Vol. 40

51/561


25 per cent from 20 to 50 ares,and only 6 per cent more

than 2 hectares.

Degree of the peasants subordination to the marketneed percentage of cash budget.Usurers. Taxes.

money Decline of patriarchal household industries(K. Kautsky and Engels)Peasant = half industrialist and half merchant(Capital, III, 2, 346,35 Development of Capital-ism, 100*))

Formation of a class of farmers and a class of agricultural

hired labourers is the start of the process (K. Kautsky.P. 27.36 Capital, III, 2, 332.37Development of Capital-ism 118**)diverse forms of agricultur- cf. article pp. 68-al wage labour (Develop- 70 on the depend-ment of Capitalism 120***) ent and inde-

pendent nature ofsmall farmers****

(non)influence of the form fragmentation,par-

of landownership (Develop- N.B. cellisation of peas-ment of Capitalism 242*****) ant holdings.2. Theory of rent.Marxs theory of value. Rent can come only from surplus

value, that is from surplus profit.Profit (=surplus value: Capital). Average profit

(K. Kautsky, 67).Surplus profit comes from the d i f f e- Differentialr e n c e s i n f e r t i l i t y rent

Differential Rent I.The price of grain is determined by the worstproduction

limited quantity of landgrowth of market

Differential Rent II: additional investment(expenditure) of capital into the land.

* See present edition, Vol. 3, pp 155-56 .Ed .

** Ibid., p. 176 .Ed .*** Ibid., pp . 178 -79.Ed .**** Ibid., Vol. 5, pp. 195 -96 .Ed .

***** Ibid., Vol. 3, pp. 323 -24 .Ed .

! !

PMQ

PMQ
http://lenin%20cw-vol.%203.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%203.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%203.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%203.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%203.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%203.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%203.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%203.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%203.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%203.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%203.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%203.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%203.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%203.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%203.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%203.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%205.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%205.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%205.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%205.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%205.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%205.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%205.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%205.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%203.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%203.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%203.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%203.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%203.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%203.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%203.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%203.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%203.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%203.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%203.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%203.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%205.pdf/

7/27/2019 Lenin CW-Vol. 40

52/561

V. I. LENIN46

Differential Rent grows in a mass of (most) combinations.Differential Rent originates from capitalist e n t e r-

p r i s e on the land

it comes from the difference in the quantity of p r o-

d u c e .M o n o p o l y of private ownership of land. Absolute

rentA b s o l u t e r e n tor = monopoly price

(absolute rent) = or = from the l o w e s t composition ofagricultural capital

Absolute rent does not come from Price

capitalist enterprise on the land of landbut from the private o w n e r-s h i p of land

it does not originate from thequantity of produce, but is atribute

A tribute fixed in the price of land.Price of land= capitalised rent. Removal of capital from

agriculture

Fixing of high prices.3. Role of rent and capitalism in agriculture.Rent prevents grain prices from Role

falling (P a r v u s) ofrent

cf. Capital, III, 2, ?38

Rent t a k e s a w a y all agricultural improvementsall profits over and above the average.

(Nationalisation of land would do away with absoluterent.)Agrarian crisis does away with absolute rent.

competition between lands without rentand lands with rent.

Two forms of levying rent: Formsofthe farmer system(K. Kautsky, 85) levying rentthemortgage system (K. Kautsky87-89. Development of Capitalism ,

442*)* See present edition, Vol. 3, p. 555.Ed.

!!
http://lenin%20cw-vol.%203.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%203.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%203.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%203.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%203.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%203.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%203.pdf/

7/27/2019 Lenin CW-Vol. 40

53/561


Both processes =(1) separation of the landowner from agriculture. In

this context, deal with the role of capitalism in

agriculture.(2) rationalisation of agriculture (competition)(3) its socialisation(4) elimination of indenture and labour service.

4. [3]. Law of diminishing returns.Ricardo (and West) . M a r x s c o r r e c t i o n.Zarya No. 2-3, p.*Bulgakov: the difficult problem of grain production.Refutation. Zarya No. 2-3, p.**

M a s l o vcon: on the one hand, against Bulgakovon the other, admission of > productivity of extensive

farming. Maslov pp. 7, 83 et al. Especially 7.ConMarx III, 2, 21039 E x t r a c t(Development of Capitalism, 186 from Marxand 1 87 ***) on R. Jones40

concentrate all agriculture on 1 dessiatineMaslov, pp. 79 and 110 (without the law there would

have been no differential rent)p. 86 (incontrovertible fact of diminishing returns)Conp. 1 1 4 (there are different cases!)

Maslov p. 7. Economists denying the law labour undera misunderstanding.1 1 0 : productivity of labour may grow, but the lawremains. (No proof!)130-31: con Marx (denial of absolute rent).

N.B. 1 0 9 : he does not explain competition by the level

of rent but vice versa.=Meaning of Maslovs mistake.O b s c u r e s t r i b u t e (rent) by means of ostensiblyn a t u r a l c a u s e s , as the costof producing grain .

5. Contradictions of agricultural capitalism: rationalisa-tion of agricultureand plunder of the soilMeaning of separation of town from country (Bulgakovand Hertz and Chernov and Zarya No. 2-3, p.*)Nossig, p. 103: extracts

* See present edition, Vol. 5, p. 110.Ed.** Ibid. , pp. 114-19.Ed.*** See present edition, Vol. 3, pp. 257-59.Ed.
http://lenin%20cw-vol.%205.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%205.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%205.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%205.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%205.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%205.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%205.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%205.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%205.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%205.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%205.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%205.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%203.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%203.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%203.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%203.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%203.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%203.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%203.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%203.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%203.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%203.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%203.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%205.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%205.pdf/

7/27/2019 Lenin CW-Vol. 40

54/561

V. I. LENIN48

Elimination of indentureand the debasement of theagricultural hired labourer and small peasant.

Development of the productive forcesand the growth of

tribute, the rent, which prevents the lowering ofprices and investment of capital into agriculture.S u p e r i o r i t y o f t h e b i g f a r m (as capitalism de-

velops).To A . 1) K. Kautsky, 2) Development of Capitalism;

3) Zarya (2-3) 4) Maslov 5) Parvus 6) Extracts fromNossig.

B. S m a l l- a n d l a r g e - s c a l e p r o d u c t i o ni n a g r i c u l t u r e . (Two lectures for B.)**

1. The approach to the question as an isolated one isincorrecteverything within the framework of capitalism.The important thing is not the displacementof small-scale farming but the w h o l e s a l ecapitalist transformation of agriculture.

2. Technical superiority of large-scale production. Ma-chines. Zarya No. -3*** (objections of Bulgakov,Hertz, David, etc.)

Commercial cost-cuttingmachines() fertilisers

drainage

division of labour co-operatives

() buildingsimplements

() marketing and purchasing3. Diverse forms of d i s p l a c e m e n t and d e c l i n e

of small farms: household industriesoutside seasonal workwage labourworsening of nutritionmore work

* See present edition, Vol. 5, pp. 146 -59 .Ed .

** Points 1, 2 and 3 of Section B in the manuscript are crossed out inplain pencil by means of two vertical lines, apparently in the process or aneditorial reading.Ed.

*** See present edition,Vol . 5, pp. 130 -46 .Ed.

K K

!
http://lenin%20cw-vol.%205.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%205.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%205.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%205.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%205.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%205.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%205.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%205.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%205.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%205.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%205.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%205.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%205.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%205.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%205.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%205.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%205.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%205.pdf/

7/27/2019 Lenin CW-Vol. 40

55/561


worsening of animals land (plunder)debts

etc.4. D e t a i l e d s t u d i e s .(2nd agrarian article)Hecht N.B. N.B.

Auhagen &Bavarian &BaudrillartKlawki &Wrttem- &SouchonTheConditionofthe berg

PeasantsBaden Inquiry &Stumpfe &Ch/apowski

N.B. N.B.Result: (1) man(2) cattle(3) land

5. Overall data of German agrarian statistics:(1) small farms(2) latifundia(3) medium farms. Worsening of animalsDistribution of animals. Industries.

Dairy farming (tobacco-growing, wine-growing)6. Co-operatives7. Loss of land and proletarisation.

Distribution of rural populationby land holdings.

C. T h e A g r a r i a n Q u e s t i o n i n R u s s i a(1 lecture for C).1. Old views = Narodism E s s e n c e

Peasantry = peoples produc- o f N a r o d i s mtion (not petty bourgeoisie)Commune = rudiments of com-munism (not fiscal)no soil for capitalism: no inter-nal market, peasantry is thegreatest antagonist, no classstruggle in agriculture.

2. This is a whole world outlook, a g r a r i a nstarting from Herzen and end- d e m o c r a c y.ing with N.on.41 A vast Its historical mean-stretch of social thinking. ing

P

MQ

P

MQ

PPN N

NNNNNNNNNNM MNNNNNNNNNN

PMQ

PMQ

KPNNMNN

Q

PNNMNN

Q

K

7/27/2019 Lenin CW-Vol. 40

56/561

V. I. LENIN50

I t s h i s t o r i c a l m e a n -i n g: i d e a l i s a t i o n of s u r v i v a l sthe struggle against serfdom and a m o n g S o c i a l-

its relicts (Agrarische Demo- i s t-

R e v o l u-

kratie) Marx t i o n a r i e sElements of d e m o c r a c y& utopian socialism&petty-bourgeois reforms& reactionary nature of thepetty bourgeois.Separate wheat from c h a f f.

3. Central question: d i s i n t e- d i s i n t e g r a-

g r a t i o n of peasantry, its t i o n o f transformation into p e t t y p e a s a n t r yb o u r g e o i s i e , c l a s s the mistakes t r u g g l e i n t h e ofthe Davids)c o u n t r y s i d e

D i s i n t e g r a t i o n o f p e a s a n t r y .Ways of studying it (i n s i d e commune).Principal symptoms of it: Development of Capitalism8 1

(14 symptoms, 2 and 12 &)*Analysis of each symptom with a few examples.(E x t r a c t from Maslov on the buying of land bypeasants.)ConVikhlyaev p. 108.42 Loss of horses, statics anddynamics.Conclusions = p e t t y b o u r g e o i s i e . (Devel-opment of Capitalism, 1 1 5, 2**)Overall results from data of horse census (Developmentof Capitalism , 92***).A r e a s of disintegration: South of Russia, dairyfarming, Amur (Maslov 324), Orenburg (Maslov 325),S i b e r i a n b u t t e r- m a k i n g.there is disintegration wherever the peasant is ina better positioni n t e r n a l tendencies to disintegration

* See present edition, Vol. 3, p. 129.Ed.** Ibid., pp. 172-73.Ed.*** Ibid., p. 144.Ed.

K K

PMQ

PMQ

NNQQ
http://lenin%20cw-vol.%203.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%203.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%203.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%203.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%203.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%203.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%203.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%203.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%203.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%203.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%203.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%203.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%203.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%203.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%203.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%203.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%203.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%203.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%203.pdf/

7/27/2019 Lenin CW-Vol. 40

57/561


The agrarian system of Russia. There would be noneed for an agrarian programme, if it were a question ofcapitalism alone: (Engels. Bttger). Butthe r e l-i c t s of serfdom.

Delays in disintegration:labour servicehigh taxes

N.B. no freedom of movement(Maslov on commune:e x t r a c t).usurers capital

4. Transition from the corve systemto the capitalist economy.trans- Labour service system.itional (Development of Capi-system talism, 133, 135*)

cut-off lands, etc.C l a s s of hired labourersin agriculture: 3.5 million a t

l e a s t.5. Migration of workers in Russia

as summarised development ofcapitalismf l e e i n g f r o m p e o-p l e s p r o d u c t i o n(Development of Capitalism4 6 6-4 6 9 ).**

Hence, the essence of the present

moment in the economic evolu-tion (and the whole history) ofRussia.

=Elimination of the relicts of serf-dom

= freedom of capitalist develop-ment

= freedom of proletariats classstruggle

* See present edition, Vol. 3, pp. 197-98, 199-200.Ed.** Ibid. , pp. 585-88.Ed.

K Krelictsof

serfdom

MigrationofworkersinRussiaKK
http://lenin%20cw-vol.%203.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%203.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%203.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%203.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%203.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%203.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%203.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%203.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%203.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%203.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%203.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%203.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%203.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%203.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%203.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%203.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%203.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%203.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%203.pdf/

7/27/2019 Lenin CW-Vol. 40

58/561

V. I. LENIN52

FROM MARX

TO MAO

NOT FOR

COMMERCIAL

DISTRIBUTION

A totally diffe- Stagnation,

rent agrarian famines. Dec-

question (than line? o r free-

in Europe) dom for capi-talism

There is the nucleus of Narodism, itsrevolutionary-democratic nucleus

Rich peasantry already there

Diverse forms 10millionof hired labour Development

ofCapitalism4 6*

elimination of the relicts ofserfdom will formalise and en -hance its power

higher living standards willexpand the internal market,and develop industry

development of the proletariat

and the c l a s s s t r u g g l ef o r s o c i a l i s m.

Written before February 10 (23 ), 1903First published in 1932 Printed from the original

inLenin Miscel lany XIX

* See present edition, Vol. 3, p. 581.Ed.** See p. 61.Ed.

Essenceofouragrarian

programme

Failure of the So-cialist-Revolutio-naries and theRyazanovs to under-stand the agrarianprogrammeRudins theses**Moderate nature

of cut -off lands.Empty talk:co-operation & so-cialisation &expropriationitis neither agrariannor a programme

PNM

NQ

PM

Q

PM

Q

PNM

NQ
http://lenin%20cw-vol.%203.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%203.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%203.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%203.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%203.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%203.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%203.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%203.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%203.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%203.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%203.pdf/http://lenin%20cw-vol.%203.pdf/

7/27/2019 Lenin CW-Vol. 40

59/561

53

THEAGRARIAN PROGRAMMEOF THE SOCIALIST-REVOLUTIONARIES

AND OF THE SOCIAL-DEMOCRATS43

OUTLINE OF LECTURE


T H E A G R A R I A N P R O G R A M M EO F T H E S O C I A L I S T-R E V O L U T I O N A R I E S 44

A N D O F T H E S O C I A L-D E M O C R A T S

In order to make a comparison of the programmes andto assess them, it is necessary to examine the principles, thetheory, from which the programme flows.

A) Attitude of the S.R.s to the Narodniks.45

1. S.R.s are neither for noragainst.

2. Rudin46 29: valuable leg-acy (the purified!?)

3. Rudin denies differentia-tion Rudin 1. (!)

4. Bashful concealment ofNarodism.

5. And failure to understand itshistorical significance (the initialform of democracy agrarischeDemokratie).

6. Deviation: the orthodox,the dogmatists start from Rus-sian relations and data, where-as the heirs of the Narodnikshave

nothing to say about this,

but then they travel all overBelgium &Italy.

Already land insome parts of Russia

! is flowing from c a p-i t a l t o labourNo. 8, p. 847

Revolutsionnaya RossiyaNo. 11 , pp. 8 -9: Davidand K. Kautsky andGuesde and Jaurs andBelgium and Italy!!Trying to draw inthe peas-ant . I n t o w h a t ?

KK

7/27/2019 Lenin CW-Vol. 40

60/561

V. I. LENIN54

B) Failure to Understand the Whole of the Historical andEconomic Evolution of Russia.

1. Sitting between two stools;

between the Narodniks and Marx-ism.Vestnik Russkoi Revolutsii

No. 1 the creative side of !!!capitalism.(quotation in Zarya No. 1, edi-torial).

!

2. Failure to understand thetotal change of the two struc-

tures of life in Russia (the patriar-chal structure based on serfdom !and the capitalist)

See:3. Are there any relicts of

serfdom? Is there a task todevelop capitalism?No: Revolutsionnaya RossiyaNo. 8, p. 4. Yes: RevolutsionnayaRossiya , No. 15, 6.

The 1861 reforms have clearedthe way (!) and given full (!!!)scope to the development ofcapitalism.

4. Cut-off landsindenture.Lets assume thats so (Rudin14). But not widely compre-hensive Rudin 14 (!)

Revolutsionnaya RossiyaNo. 1, 6: the peasantservant and masterlives a life based on the

law of l a b o u rThe class struggle in thecountryside (Revolutsi-onnaya Rossiya No. 11) .We do not agree thatthe peasantry belongsto the p e t t y - b o u r-geois sections.(A centre of Narodismand Marxism!)family and bourgeois-capitalist economies

Revolutsionnaya RossiyaNo. 11, p. 9: they

failed to see that thecreative role of capital-ism in agriculture givesway to the destructiveone, the d i s o r g a n-

i s i n g one.

Revolutsionnaya RossiyaNo. 15, 6: if the peas -

antry is demanding anequalisation of landthere are only two ways:(1) transfer to individualownership or (2) tocol lec t ive ownership,

s o c i a l i s a t i o n.

PN

NNMNNNQ

||||||

||||

||||

!!

7/27/2019 Lenin CW-Vol. 40

61/561


This fails to give a b r o a d !!provision of land (Rudin 14).Give more, promise more!!

5. Mr. Rudins two theses (17)() Allotment of land will help thepeasant to fight capitalism!

() it will slow down the capital-!isation of large-scale farming,

(a process!!) which isg r i n d i n g s l o w a s i t i sPerhaps&thesis () the blunt-ing of the class struggle (17).

!

C. Failure to Understand the Class Struggle and Efforts to

Obscure It.1. The peasantry will not stopat the cut-off lands. Rudin 18.

2. The peasantrylabourprinciple

(and not class struggle?)Rudin 1 8.

3. W ha t wi ll h ap pe n a f t e rthe cut-off lands? Consequent onthe cut-off lands? (Class struggle.)

Dont analyse! What

for? What does thepeasant want? a d d i-t i o n o f l a n d !!Revolutsionnaya RossiyaNo. 8, p. 7?we do not count on thewell-to-do peasants, forthis is the start of thesocialist movement

Revolutsionnaya RossiyaNo. 13, p. 5: no doubtthat the peasant move-ment is not socialist.But from half-socialistideas the propagandistmay arrive at purelysocialist conclusions.

The poor versus

the rich, whereasI l y i n speaks ofthe merger of the

bourgeois and theproletarian ele-ments in the move-ment

Half-socialist pro-gramme of the peasants.Revolutsionnaya Ros-s iya No. 8, p. 3/1.Labour principle.

TNNNNMNNNNU

TNNNNMNNNNU

T

NNNMNNNU

T

NNNMNNN

U

TNMNU

7/27/2019 Lenin CW-Vol. 40

62/561

V. I. LENIN56

Hence:*E. Failure to Understand the Russian Revolution.

1. Is i t bourgeois o r democratic? Revolutsionnaya

Rossiya No. 8 , p. 3/ and Revolutionary Adventurism.Sowing illusions.2. Vulgar socialism: private property must not be defend-

ed. Revolutsionnaya Rossiya No. 13, pp. 5 and 6. Revolutsion-naya Rossiya No. 15, 6.

(Socialistsvehicles of the bourgeois spirit!)Con Marx in 1848.3. The peasants equality (To All the Russian Peasantry,

p. 8, 1).48and denial of the right to dispose of the land.4. Freedom of movementand the commune T o A l l

t h e R u s s i a n P e a s a n t r y, p. 8, 1.(Maslov s data)

F. The Social-Democratic Agrarian Programme.

1. Unfeasible? Wevouch

2. Its principles () Serfdom() Classstruggle() Socialism.

3. Its meaning = the rural prole-tariat must help the rich and well-to-dopeasant to fight serfdom.

5. What are we going to tell thepeasant?

*) Revolutsionnaya Rossiya No. 8 , p. 7 , 1: p e t t y-b o u r g e o i s s e c t i o n s a l w a y s i n g e n e r a lh o l d o n t o t h e e x i s t i n g o r d e r (Sic!)

* Lenin indicated a switch of points by means of a bracket in blue pencil,but failed to alter the alphabetical order of the points. They are given as indi-cated.Ed.

MartynovFearful for Marty-

nov Rudin 6.Quote from Marty-nov.49

Rudin not all thepeasants are hostileto the old*) re-gime 15-16 .

Against: q u o t e f r o m En g e l-h a r d t 50

Agrarian system( 1 0 : 12262 )51

(!)

] ] ] ] ] ]

}

7/27/2019 Lenin CW-Vol. 40

63/561


4. The question of reviewingthe peasant reform has been raised

by all the progressive (= lib-

eral) intelligentsia of Russia.Q u o t e f r o m V . V. 52

Hence:

D. Vulgarised Petty-Bourgeois Narodism&BourgeoisCriticism

1. Between the orthodox andthe critics (Vestnik Russkoi Re-volutsiiNo. , p. 57). The smallis growing.

2. New Way to SocialismRevolutsionnaya Rossiya.

3. Game: distortion of Engels(extracts). Revolutsionnaya Ros-siya No. 14, p. 6 and Rudin 1.

4. Attitude to the small peasant on the part of our pro-gramme and the whole working-class = Social-Democraticsocialism.

5. Co -operatives. Revolutsionnaya Rossiya No. 8, p. 11(all possible types).

in general!(Levitsky)Bourgeois and socialist co-operatives

German and Russian data! GermanRocquigny53

Russian

G. Unprincipled Stand of the Socialist-Revolutionaries

1. Man without convictionsparty without principles.2. Rudin 16 : the future will clarify.3. Ibid: try to prevail upon the farm hand (!!)4. N o p r o g r a m m e ! ConRudin, 4

Revolutsionnaya Rossiya also boasts in No. 11, p . 6 (Ourprogramme has been put forward) (?)

Cf.Ireland .1) agrarian non-capital-

ist struggle.

2) buying out now.3) the Narodniks draw acomparison betweenRussia and Ireland.

Unprincipled attacks(wails) against thed o g m a t i s t s etc.Revolutsionnaya RossiyaNo. 8 passim.

Engels supplemented byBttger: Engelss predic-tion is coming true.

TNN

MNNU

7/27/2019 Lenin CW-Vol. 40

64/561

V. I. LENIN58

Thus,H. Universal men

We have seen the co -opera-

tives, but aboutS o c i a l i s a t i o n .

Four meanings:1) = nationalisation.

Revolutsionnaya Rossiya No. 8,p. 11.(economic association et al.).

2)= socialist revolution (To

All the Russian Peasantry)p. 31 , 1. (minimum?)3)= commune. Popular anarchy. Revolutsionnaya Rossiya

No. 8, pp. 4, .The peasantry proclaims the equalisation principle.We are free from idealisation, but it is easier to start

from the traditions of communal management. Supersti-tious hostility to the communal principle.

Colossal organisation of the communal peasantry

No. 8, p. 9.!! no other class is so impelled to political struggle. Ibidem,p. 8use on labour and equal lines to be implemented to theend No. 8, p. 8.

(Equalisation?between communes?)

4.= Dutch meaning Revolutsionnaya RossiyaNo. 15,p. 8, the Dutch type is most suitable*), i.e., communalisa-tion

(petty-bourgeois triviality)Universal men indeed!

Written before February 18(March 3), 1903

First published in 1932 Printed from the originalin Lenin MiscellanyXIX

*) Dutch: extension of the communes rights in taxing,

buying out and expropriating land. Revolutsionnaya RossiyaNo. 15, 7.

Fellows, theres moreland to be had!

Revolutsionnaya RossiyaNo. 8, p. 7.

stressing this to be aminimum!

socialisation = i.e.,transfer to the owner-ship of society and the

use of the workingpeople?

PNNMN

NQ

7/27/2019 Lenin CW-Vol. 40

65/561



T H E A G R A R I A N P R O G R A M M E O F T H E

S O C I A L I S T-R E V O L U T I O N A R I E SA N D O F T H E S O C I A L - D E M O C R A T S

Three main themes: I. The Basic Principles of an AgrarianProgramme. II. The Agrarian Programme of the Social-Democrats. III. The Agrarian Programme of the Socialist-Revolutionaries .

I. T h e B a s i c P r i n c i p l e s o f a n A g r a r i a n P r o g r a m m e (= the views of

Russian socialists of the agrarian question in Russia).1. Narodismthe of the old socialist views of theagrarian question. The w h o l e history of Russian social-ist thinking on the agrarian question is a history of Narod-ism and its struggle against Marxism.

2. S.R.s neither here nor there.On the one handthe creative side of capitalism (Vestnik

Russkoi Revolutsii No. 1, p. )n o t saying: We are Narodist Socialists.

On the other handthey do not recognise thepetty-bourgeois nature of the peasantry (R e v o l u-t s i o n n a y a R o s s i y a N o. 1 1, p. 7)family and bourgeois-capitalist economiesi b i d e mR u d i n (21) denies the d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n

(Rudin 21) already l a n d i n s o m e p a r t s i sf l o w i n g from c a p i t a l to labour (RevolutsionnayaRossiya No. 8, p. 8).

the peasantlaw of labour, servant and master(Revolutsionnaya Rossiya No. 12, 6).

7/27/2019 Lenin CW-Vol. 40

66/561

V. I. LENIN60

3. Equivocation. War on the dogmatists, the orthodox,and at the same time avoidance of a straightforward stand onquestions of Russian socialism, and travel all over Belgi -

um &Italy!Between the critics and the orthodoxDavid and K. Kautsky etc. etc.Jaurs and GuesdeCompare Vestnik Russkoi Revolutsii No. , p. 57; (K. Kaut-

sky and critics)4. Game: quotations from Engels . Agreeing with

Liebknecht, and with Marx and with Engels!!Revolutsionnaya Rossiya N o . 1 4 , p. , quotations from

Engels (idem Rudin briefly 21)(total distortion of Engels)Extracts from Engels.Enge ls supplemented by Bttger. (The prediction is

coming true.)

5. An instance of confusion in Russian issues: arethere any relicts of serfdom? N o: R e v o l u t s i o n-n a y a R o s s i y a N o . 8, p. 4.

Full scope given!!!1Y e s , not juridical but economic. R e v o l u-

t s i o n n a y a R o s s i y a No. 1 5, 6.{No straightforward answer!! No principle at all!!}

In the event, our agrarian programme or the cut -offlands c a n n o t be understood!!

Nothing can be understood without clarifying your atti-tude to the relicts of serfdom and to the w h o l e change,all the post-reform economic evolution.

6. Socialists can never stand up for private p r o p e r t y :socialists are vehicles of the bourgeois spirit. R e v o-l u t s i o n n a y a R o s s i y a No. 1 3, 5 and 6, N o. 1 5, 6.

they have adopted the slogans of the bourgeois camp, etc.introduction of the bourgeois spirit into the programme.

Revolutsionnaya Rossiya No. 1 5, p. 7.(vulgar socialism)ConMarx in 1848

** In the MS., Point 6 is crossed out in plain pencil.Ed .

!

7/27/2019 Lenin CW-Vol. 40

67/561


e x t r a c t s

7. Failure to understand (1) relicts of serfdom

(2) historical significance ofsmal l p r i v a t e f r e eproperty leads to total in-comprehension of the cut-off lands.

Instead of assessing the h i s t o r i c a l significancethey make an assessment in general in the sense of p r o v i-s i o n. R u d i n 1 4 : it involves indenture, etc., but notwidely comprehensive!! ( ther

lenin cw-vol. 40

Documents