22.12.2012 Views

Collected Works of V. I. Lenin - Vol. 3 - From Marx to Mao

Collected Works of V. I. Lenin - Vol. 3 - From Marx to Mao

Collected Works of V. I. Lenin - Vol. 3 - From Marx to Mao

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

166<br />

Groups<br />

on personal<br />

consumption<br />

V. I. LENIN<br />

% <strong>of</strong> cash<br />

Cash expenditure per farm S a m e i n % part in<br />

(rubles) expenditure<br />

on<br />

on the farm<br />

on taxes<br />

and duties<br />

Total<br />

on personal<br />

consumption<br />

a) 39.16 7.66 15.47 62.29 62.9 12.3 24.8 100 49.8 50.6<br />

b) 38.89 24.32 17.77 80.98 48.0 30.0 22.0 100 39.6 41.7<br />

c) 76.79 56.35 32.02 165.16 46.5 34.1 19.4 100 34.0 46.4<br />

d) 110.60 102.07 49.55 262.22 42.2 39.0 18.8 100 30.7 45.8<br />

e) 190.84 181.12 67.90 439.86 43.4 41.2 15.4 100 38.0 52.0<br />

f) 187.83 687.03 84.34 959.20 19.6 71.6 8.8 100 35.4 70.3<br />

81.27 102.23 34.20 217.70 37.3 46.9 15.8 100 35.6 56.6<br />

Consequently, the transformation <strong>of</strong> the peasantry in<strong>to</strong><br />

a rural proletariat creates a market mainly for articles <strong>of</strong><br />

consumption, whereas its transformation in<strong>to</strong> a rural bourgeoisie<br />

creates a market mainly for means <strong>of</strong> production.<br />

In other words, among the bot<strong>to</strong>m groups <strong>of</strong> the “peasantry”<br />

we observe the transformation <strong>of</strong> labour-power in<strong>to</strong> a commodity,<br />

and in the <strong>to</strong>p ones the transformation <strong>of</strong> means<br />

<strong>of</strong> production in<strong>to</strong> capital. Both these transformations<br />

result in precisely that process <strong>of</strong> the creation <strong>of</strong> a home market<br />

which theory has established for capitalist countries<br />

in general. That is why F. Engels, writing on the famine<br />

<strong>of</strong> 1891, said that it signified the creation <strong>of</strong> a home market<br />

for capitalism 63 —a proposition that is unintelligible <strong>to</strong><br />

the Narodniks, who regard the ruin <strong>of</strong> the peasantry merely<br />

as the decay <strong>of</strong> “people’s production,” and not as the transformation<br />

<strong>of</strong> patriarchal in<strong>to</strong> capitalist economy.<br />

Mr. N. —on has written a whole book on the home market,<br />

without noticing the process <strong>of</strong> the creation <strong>of</strong> a home<br />

market by the differentiation <strong>of</strong> the peasantry. In his<br />

article “How Are We <strong>to</strong> Explain the Increase in Our State<br />

Revenues?” (Novoye Slovo [New Word], 1896, No. 5, February)<br />

he deals with this question in the following argument:<br />

the tables <strong>of</strong> the income <strong>of</strong> the American worker<br />

show that the lower the income, the larger is the relative<br />

expenditure on food. Consequently, with a decline in food<br />

on the farm<br />

on taxes<br />

and duties<br />

Total<br />

personal consumption<br />

the farm

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!