Vladimir Lenin
The Development of Capitalism in Russia
PREFACE TO THE FIRST EDITION
In the work here presented, the author has set himself the aim of examining the
question of how a home market is being formed for Russian capitalism. As we
know, he principal exponents of Narodnik views (chief among them being Messrs.
V. V. and N.-on [1] ), and it will be our task to criticise these views. We have
not considered it possible to limit ourselves in this criticism to examining the
mistakes and misconceptions in our opponents' views; in answering the question
raised it seemed to us that it was not enough to adduce facts showing the
formation and growth of a home market, for the objection might be raised that
such facts had been selected arbitrarily and that facts showing the contrary had
been omitted. It seemed to us that it was necessary to examine the whole process
of the development of capitalism in Russia, to endeavour to depict it in its
entirety. It goes without saying that such an extensive task would be beyond the
powers of a single person, were a number of limitations not introduced. Firstly,
as the title itself shows, we treat the problem of the development of capitalism
in Russia exclusively from the standpoint of the home market, leaving aside the
problem of the foreign market and data on foreign trade. Secondly, we limit
ourselves purely to the post-Reform period. Thirdly, we deal mainly and almost
exclusively with data concerning the interior, purely Russian, gubernias.
Fourthly, we limit ourselves exclusively to the economic aspect of the process.
But even with all the limitations indicated the topic that remains is an
extremely broad one. The author does not close his eyes at all to the
difficulty, and even the danger, of dealing with so broad a topic, but it seemed
to him that to elucidate the problem of the home market for Russian capitalism
it was absolutely necessary to show the connection between, and interdependence
of, the various aspects of the process taking place in all spheres of the social
economy. We therefore limit ourselves to an examination of the main features of
the process, leaving a more specific study of it to further investigations.
The plan of our work is as follows: in Chapter I we shall examine, as briefly as
possible, the basic theoretical propositions of abstract political economy on
the subject of the home market for capitalism. This will serve as a sort of
introduction to the rest of the work, the factual part of it, and will relieve
us of the need to make repeated references to theory in our further exposition.
In the three following chapters we shall endeavour to describe the capitalist
evolution of agriculture in post-Reform Russia, namely, in Chapter II we shall
examine Zemstvo statistical data on the differentiation of the peasantry; in
Chapter III data on the transitional state of landlord economy, and on the
replacement of the corvée system of this economy by the capitalist; and in
Chapter IV data on the forms in which the formation of commercial and capitalist
agriculture is proceeding. The next three chapters will be devoted to the forms
and stages of the development of capitalism in our industry: in Chapter V we
shall examine the first stages of capitalism in industry, namely, in small
peasant (known as handicraft) industry ; in Chapter VI data on capitalist
manufacture and on capitalist domestic industry, and in Chapter VII data on the
development of large-scale machine industry. In the last chapter (VIII), we
shall make an attempt to indicate the connection between the various aspects of
the process that have been described and to present a general picture of that
process.
P. S. To our extreme regret we have not been able to use for this work the
excellent analysis of "the development of agriculture in capitalist society"
made by K. Kautsky in his book Die Agrarfrage (Stuttgart, Dietz, 1899; I.
Abschn. "Die Entwicklung der Landwirtschaft in der kapitalistischen
Gesellschaft").
This book (which we received when the greater part of the present work had
already been set up in type) is, after Vol. III of Capital, the most noteworthy
contribution to recent economic literature. Kautsky investigates the "main
tendencies" in the capitalist evolution of agriculture; his purpose is to
examine the diverse phenomena in modern agriculture as "particular
manifestations of one general process" (Vorrede, VI). It is interesting to note
how far the main features of this general process in Western Europe and in
Russia are identical, notwithstanding the tremendous peculiarities of the
latter, in both the economic and non-economic spheres. For example, typical of
modern capitalist agriculture in general is the progressive division of labour
and the employment of machinery (Kautsky, IV, b, c), a phenomenon also
noticeable in post-Reform Russia (see later, Chapter III, §§ VII and VIII;
Chapter IV, particularly § IX). The process of the "proletarisation of the
peasantry" (the heading of Chapter VIII of Kautsky's book) is manifested
everywhere in the spread of wage-labour in every form among the small peasants
(Kautsky, VIII, b); we see the parallel of this in Russia in the formation of a
huge class of allotment-holding wage-workers (see later, Chapter II). The
existence of a small peasantry in every capitalist society is due not to the
technical superiority of small production in agriculture, but to the fact that
the small peasants reduce the level of their requirements below that of the
wage-workers and tax their energies far more than the latter do (Kautsky, VI, b;
"the agricultural wage-worker is better off than the small peasant," says
Kautsky repeatedly: S. 110, 317, 320); the same thing is also to be observed in
Russia (see later, Chapter II, § XI, C). It is natural, therefore, that
West-European and Russian Marxists should agree in their appraisal of such
phenomena as "agricultural outside employments," to use the Russian term, or the
"agricultural wage-labour of migratory peasants," as the Germans say (Kautsky,
S. 192; cf. later, Chapter III, § X); or of such a phenomenon as the migration
of workers and peasants from the villages to the towns and factories (Kautsky,
IX, especially S. 343; and many other places. Cf. later, Chapter VIII, § II);
the transplantation of large-scale capitalist industry to the rural districts
(Kautsky, S. 187. Cf. later, VII, § VIII). This is quite apart from the same
appraisal of the historical significance of agricultural capitalism (Kautsky,
passim, especially S. 289, 292, 298. Cf. later, Chapter IV, § IX), from the same
recognition of the progressive nature of capitalist relations in agriculture as
compared with pre-capitalist relations [Kautsky, S. 382: "The ousting des
Gesindes (of personally dependent farm labourers, servants) and der Instleute
("midway between the farm labourer and the tenant cultivator": the peasant who
rents land, making payment by labour-service) by day labourers who outside of
working hours are free men, would mark great social progress." Cf. later,
Chapter IV, § IX, 4]. Kautsky categorically declares that the adoption by the
village community of large-scale modern agriculture conducted communally "is out
of the question" (S. 338); that the agronomists in Western Europe who demand the
consolidation and development of the village community are not socialists at
all, but people representing the interests of the big landowners, who want to
tie down the workers by granting them patches of land (S. 334); that in all
European countries those who represent the landowners' interests want to tie
down the agricultural workers by allotting them land and are already trying to
give legislative effect to the appropriate measures (S. 162); that all attempts
to help the small peasantry by introducing handicraft industry
(Hausindustrie)-that worst form of capitalist exploitation-"should be most
resolutely combated" (S. 181). We consider it necessary to emphasise the
complete unanimity of opinion between the West European and the Russian
Marxists, in view of the latest attempts of the spokesmen of Narodism to draw a
sharp distinction between the two (see the statement made by Mr. V. Vorontov on
February 17, 1899, at the Society for the Promotion of Russian Industry and
Trade, Novoye Vremya [New Times ], No. 8255, February 19, 1899).
Footnotes
[1] V.V - pseudonym of V.P. Voronstov. N-on - pseudonym of Nikolai Danielson.
Both were prominent ideologists of liberal Narodism in the 1880s and 90s.-Ed.
Lenin Works Archive
Vladimir Lenin
The Development of Capitalism in Russia
PREFACE TO THE SECOND EDITION
This book was written in the period preceding the Russian Revolution, during the
slight lull that set in after the outbreak of the big strikes of 1895-1896. At
that time the working-class movement withdrew, as it were, into itself,
spreading in breadth and depth and paving the way for the beginning in 1901 of
the demonstration movement.
The analysis of the social-economic system and, consequently, of the class
structure of Russia given in this ...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Go to the beginning of the document
Go to previous page
Go to next page
Go to the end of document
