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

THE DEVELOPMENT OF CAPITALISM IN RUSSIA
that the “kulak” and the “usurer” have nothing in common
with the “enterprising muzhik.” On the contrary, the threads
both of merchant’s capital (the loaning of money on the
security of land, the buying-up of various products, etc.)
and of industrial capital (commercial agriculture with the
aid of wage-workers, etc,.) merge in the hands of the peasant
bourgeoisie. It depends on surrounding circumstances, on
the greater or lesser degree to which the Asiatic way of life
is eliminated and culture is widespread in our countryside
as to which of these forms of capital will develop at the
expense of the other.
Let us examine, finally, the position of the middle group
(cultivating from 10 to 25 dess. per household, with an average
of 16.4 dess.). Its position is a transitional one: its
money income from agriculture (191 rubles) is somewhat
lower than the sum annually spent by the average Tauridian
(200 to 250 rubles). Here draught animals work out at
3.2 head per household, whereas for a full team 4 are required.
Hence the position of the middle peasant’s farm is an unstable
one, and to till his land he has to resort to “yoking.”* 45
The cultivation of the land on a “yoking” basis is, it goes
without saying, less productive (time lost in moving from
place to place, shortage of horses, etc.), so that in one
village, for example, Mr. Postnikov was informed that
“yokers often scarify no more than one dessiatine per day,
which is half the normal rate.”** If to this we add that in
the middle group about 5 of the households have no ploughing
implements, that this group provides more workers
than it hires (according to Mr. Postnikov’s calculations),
its unstable character and its transitional position between
* In Melitopol Uyezd, out of 13,789 households in this group
only 4,218 till their land with their own animals; 9,201 “yoke.” In
Dnieper Uyezd, out of 8,234 households, 4,029 till the land with their
own animals, and 3,835 “yoke.” See Zemstvo statistical returns for
Melitopol Uyezd (p. B. 195) and for Dnieper Uyezd (p. B. 123).
** In the above-mentioned article Mr. V. V. argues a great deal
about yoking being the “principle of co-operation,” etc. It is really
so simple to hush up the fact that the peasantry are breaking up into
sharply distinct groups, that yoking is the co-operation of tottering
farms which are being ousted by the peasant bourgeoisie, and then
to talk in general about the “principle of co-operation”—probably
co-operation between the rural proletariat and the rural bourgeoisie!
79