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.

THE DEVELOPMENT OF CAPITALISM IN RUSSIA<br />

205<br />

cases, the old system merely implies stagnation in the forms<br />

<strong>of</strong> production (and, consequently, in all social relations),<br />

and the domination <strong>of</strong> the Asiatic way <strong>of</strong> life. In both<br />

cases, the new, capitalist forms <strong>of</strong> economy constitute<br />

enormous progress, despite all the contradictions inherent<br />

in them.<br />

IV. THE DECLINE OF THE LABOUR-SERVICE SYSTEM<br />

The question now arises: in what relation does the labourservice<br />

system stand <strong>to</strong> the post-Reform economy <strong>of</strong><br />

Russia?<br />

First <strong>of</strong> all, the growth <strong>of</strong> commodity economy conflicts<br />

with the labour-service system, since the latter is based on<br />

natural economy, on unchanging technique, on inseparable<br />

ties between the landlord and the peasant. That is why this<br />

system is <strong>to</strong>tally impracticable in its complete form, and<br />

every advance in the development <strong>of</strong> commodity economy<br />

and commercial agriculture undermines the conditions <strong>of</strong><br />

its practicability.<br />

Next we must take account <strong>of</strong> the following circumstance.<br />

<strong>From</strong> the foregoing it follows that labour-service, as practised<br />

in present-day landlord farming, should be divided<br />

in<strong>to</strong> two types: 1) labour-service that can only be performed<br />

by a peasant farmer who owns draught animals and<br />

implements (e.g., cultivation <strong>of</strong> “cycle dessiatine,” ploughing,<br />

etc.), and 2) labour-service that can be performed<br />

by a rural proletarian who has no implements (for example,<br />

reaping, mowing, threshing, etc.). It is obvious that for<br />

both peasant and landlord farming, the first and the second<br />

type <strong>of</strong> labour-service are <strong>of</strong> opposite significance, and that<br />

the latter type constitutes a direct transition <strong>to</strong> capitalism,<br />

merging with it by a number <strong>of</strong> quite imperceptible transitions.<br />

In our literature labour-service is usually referred<br />

<strong>to</strong> in general, without this distinction being made. Yet in<br />

the process <strong>of</strong> the elimination <strong>of</strong> labour-service by capitalism<br />

the shifting <strong>of</strong> the centre <strong>of</strong> gravity from the first type <strong>of</strong><br />

labour-service <strong>to</strong> the second is <strong>of</strong> enormous importance.<br />

Here is an example from Statistical Returns for Moscow<br />

Gubernia: “On the majority <strong>of</strong> the estates . . . the cultivation<br />

<strong>of</strong> the fields and the crops, i.e., the jobs on the careful

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

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!