The accuracy of the assessment given here of sentimental Sismondi in relation to the scientifically "objective" Ricardo is fully confirmed by Marx's remarks in the second volume of *Theories of Surplus Value*, published in 1905 (*Theorien über den Mehrwert*, II. B., I. T., p. 304 et seq. "Remarks on the History of the Discovery of the So-called Ricardian Law" [101]). Contrasting Malthus, as a wretched plagiarist, a venal advocate of the propertied classes, a shameless sycophant, with Ricardo as a man of science, Marx says:

"Ricardo considers the capitalist mode of production as the most advantageous for production in general, as the most advantageous for the creation of wealth, and Ricardo is absolutely right for his epoch. He wants production for production's sake, and he is right. To object to this, as the sentimental opponents of Ricardo did, by pointing out that production as such is not an end in itself, means forgetting that production for production's sake is nothing other than the development of the productive forces of humanity, that is, the development of the wealth of human nature as an end in itself. If one opposes to this goal the welfare of individual persons, as Sismondi did, then this means asserting that the development of the entire human race should be arrested for the sake of ensuring the welfare of individual persons, which consequently means, for example, that no war whatsoever can be waged, since war leads to the destruction of individual persons. Sismondi is right only against those economists who obscure this antagonism, who deny it" (p. 309). From his point of view, Ricardo has every right to equate proletarians with machines, with commodities in capitalist production. "Es ist dieses stoisch, objektiv, wissenschaftlich," "this is stoicism, this is objective, this is scientific" (p. 313). It is clear that this assessment applies only to a definite epoch, to the very beginning of the nineteenth century.