ON S. BULGAKOV’S BOOK,
CAPITALISM AND AGRICULTURE,
VOLS. I AND II, PUBLISHED IN 190058
Bulgakov
I. “From the author” “essay on the theory (?) of
agrarian development in connection with the general development of capitalism”
—
“slavishly dependent on the material”....
1. Chapter I, §1: “Law of diminishing returns”....
2. Note: “In industry man wields (!?) the forces of
nature”, but in agriculture adapts himself (?)
13. Note. Marx denies this law, but accepts Ricardo’s
theory of rent, which is based on it (??). (III, 2, 277?)59
16. “Increasing difficulties of existence”....
17. —“An evident truth”, which needs merely to be
stated (?)
—although agrarian progress temporarily nullifies the tendency indicated by this law.
18. The law of diminishing returns is of universal
significance—the social question is essentially bound up with it.
20. The agrarian crisis is a direct consequence of the
law of diminishing returns (?)
21. In agriculture, man is a “slave” to the laws of
nature, in industry, he is master (“basic distinction”).

V. I. LENIN

25. Agriculture does not obtain the benefits latent
in co-operation.
26-27. Marx’s unhappy example (on co-operation)....
29-30. “Absolutely inapplicable to agriculture” ( the law of rent ) [Skvortsov] idem 52.
31. Holds forth on trifles—about machines....
32. “Particular case of law of diminishing returns—§§
labour with intensification of agriculture.
34. “The despotism of nature”... labour and its productivity....
35. “The economy of low wages”... “the economy of
high wages is not applicable in agriculture”.
37. Anyone will do for agriculture: the Russian
no < than the Englishman.
38. — ...“even centaurs”... Con II 433
43. The agricultural machine does not revolutionise production, does not create confidence
or precision of work... in the hands of Mother
Nature.... (Empty phrase!)
44. The machine cannot convert the worker into its
adjunct.
45. “The plough stops at the will of the driver”...
(sic!)
46. “The role of the machine is not exceptional
(distortion and rubbish).
48. “I am sufficiently free from the Marxist prejudice” that any machine means progress.... Sometimes agricultural machines are reactionary (!!)
49. “Naïve” comparison between American and
European agricultural machines.
50. Development of agriculture tends to narrow
down the field of application of machinery....
51. “It makes no difference from the technical
standpoint” whether labour is manual or machine.
51 and 52. Theusefulnessofthethresheris doubtful (!!)....
55. A loaf defies telling who produced it ... Mother
Nature is above such distinctions....


59-60. Small farms also make use of machines: they hire them!
64. In agriculture, there are two elements beyond
human control: the forces of nature (!!) and the social forces (!!)
67. Backhaus welcomes the division of labour in
agriculture (Bulgakov—con).
76. The decisive instance is the theory of cognition
(in the question of value).
82. The price of grain is determined not by the last
application of labour and capital, but by the average.
87. Marx adds nothing to Ricardo (on differential
rent)
—absolute rent is a specific instance of differential rent.
90. “The limited productivity of the land”
92. “Grain has no value” (!)
95-96. Marx’s unhappy example of the waterfall
—Marx’s fetishism ... (idem 105)
98. Agricultural capital takes no part in determining the rate of profit.
104. Petitio principii = absoluterent....
105. Rent is “not a material thing” but a “concept”,
106. The concept of value is an “aerial bridge” (?)
107. Marx’s theory of rent: obscure, contradictory,
nothing new, etc.
111. “Pursuing their own path”, “by their own efforts”
(“have failed to find a material definition of rent”)
113. Rent is not surplus-value—it is paid out of
non - agricultural labour.
(Bulgakov has forgotten the history of rent)....
116. Brentano’s “remarkable” Agrarpolitik....
120. There is no “English rent” in other countries.
—Agricultural profit is divided between the landowner, the
farmer and the labourer.
{defeats himself}
125. Rent (in a landed estate)—not an English one??

V. I. LENIN

131. “In Britain grain is more expensive than on the
continent” (?).
139. “The mystical law of concentration” is “a Marxist
prejudice”
 ...“Hertz’s remarkable work”....
142. “The peasant economy is not going down at all”....
143. Marx vs. Marx: the dualism of the politician
and the researcher.
146-147. Marx “obscures”—according to the law of culture,
the peasant’s requirements are growing....
148. Bulgakov himself keeps comparing the peasant
with capital....
154. The peasant economy—“the most profitable
for society”.
176. Hasbach: “The industry and thrift” of the small
owner.
214. “Pre-capitalist overpopulation”....
237-238. The progress of English agriculture from 1846 to 1877.
239. The growth of bigger farms
...“not the result of conflict between small- and large-scale production”??...
239-240. Once farming is run on capitalist lines, it is
indisputable that within certain limits the large is superior to the small (!!! N.B. !!)
242-243. Tendency to concentration 1 8 5 1-1861-1871 until
1 8 8 0 ... in Britain....
246. The scourge of competition strained all the
productive skill ... but this did not refute the law of diminishing returns....
251. Under a pastoral economy the capital per area
unit increases (> capital-intensive)....
252. Growth in the number of agricultural machines
1855—1861—1871—1880


1,205 2,160 4,22260
252. Reduction in the number of agricultural labourers ... 1851-1871 (and 1881-1891).


255. What explanation? Overpopulation
i n theprecedingperiod.
& also the consolidation of land holdings (!!)
& also the introduction of farming machines
260. Marx (and Hasbach) regards this as confirming the law of concentration, the growth
of large-scale farming. (Bulgakov con!)
262. English population by occupations 1851-1881.
268. Basic cause of the crisis: the law of diminishing
returns....
273. Per-acre productivity in Britain is not declining.
—Dairy farming, vegetable gardening, etc., have been developing.
279. Rent has suffered most of all (from the crisis)....
293. The labourer’s wages and welfare are growing....
301. The agricultural labourers’ movement has never
been socialist.
303: “Large-scale production in agriculture has no positive social consequences” (there is not
even a rudimentary trade union movement among agricultural labourers) (?).
306. Small farmers < stable
308-309. Distribution of farms and area in Britain
1 8 8 0 - 1 8 8 5 - 1 8 9 5
311. The crisis most severely affected the small
farmers.
312. Engels’s “fantastic construction”.
313: Many small holders were ruined at the beginning of the 19th century....
316. The condition of the yeomen is worse than
that of the labourers....
318-319. Small holders have suffered >, their condition is
3   0 - 3   1. worse than that of the labourers, it is terribly
hard....
325. Efforts to create a small peasantry. Small Holdings Act61 1892.
328 and 331. Small Holdings Act was not widely applied.
Small Holdings Act was of no practical importance.
´
´
(
)

V. I. LENIN

333. Bulgakov’s conclusions: > ruin of small farms
does not prove (!!!) their unviabili- ty.... (!!!)
338. “The final result”: restoration of the peasantry.
“A verdict against the capitalist organisation of agriculture.”
II*
12. Three-field system prevailed from the 9th to the
first third of the 19th century.
17. Insts62 are diminishing....
30. Communist Manifesto gives a wrong picture of
reality (“prophecy”).
41. Prussia of the 1840s—general overpopulation.
44. Progress
of
German agriculture
1800-1850 (> than in 1,000 years) ??... “direct outcome of
the growth of population” and “natural consumption”
45. Emancipation of peasants is the basis of capitalist agriculture.
46. Progress in agriculture is seen mainly on the
big farms (that is, the exchange farms).
49. The crisis of the 1830s—capitalist baptism.
50. Small farms were being ruined....
56. Big farms grow faster than small ones.
57. 1852 and 1858. Distribution of farms and area.
62. A mass of small farms have been ruined...
(since 1802)
63. “Flourishing of the large-scale economy” (distillation)
....
76. Growth in the soil’s productivity and technical
progress — — — mainly in the large-scale economy... (“apparently”)
79. Quarter century of agricultural improvement—
nil for the agricultural labourers.
80. ...“fatal
feature”: lack of economy of high wages
89. Growth of rentals 1849-1869-1898....
* Vol. II of the summarised book.—Ed.
´
´


89-90. The peasant economy was the first to feel the brunt of the crisis. It soon turned out that it
was most destructive for the large-scale economy.
103.
The steam thresher was undoubtedly an evil for the labourers. This is also pointed out by
Holtz; a utopian idea: to limit its use.
10 . The number of Insts diminishes with an increase of free
labourers.
104. Labourers prefer > free status.
103. “Capitalist reorganisation of the labourers’ old
condition” !!
105. It is utopian to set up wage labourers
with land allotments. Cf. II 255.
106. Own farm is the ideal of all agricultural labourers.
106. Reduction in the number of Insts. 1882-1895
number of labourers with land — ”
”
”
without ”
&
106. Growth in the number of persons (agricultural
labourers) for whom agriculture is a side line....
114. Number of agricultural machines in 1882 and
1895 by types.
116-117. Number of farms combined with industries...
(figures interesting but obscure)....
117. “The crisis has not deprived the economy of the
possibility of progress.”
115. Large-scale farming is always more capitalintensive than small-scale, and therefore, n a-
trally gives preference to the mechanical factors of production over live labour (!!)...
((the understating of the superiority of the big farms is interesting!))
115-116. “The reference to the supplanting of labourers
by machines is quite groundless.”
116. On the strength of what has been said the condition of the big farms is critical (!)...
118. To hold its ground, large-scale production must
!
show progress: income is derived only by those farms which are up to the technical standard.
119. With small farms, the price of land is higher—
ergo, big farms give away to small ones.
N.B.
!

V. I. LENIN

119. Tendency: disintegration of the big farms into
small ones ... and good luck!!
120. 1882 and 1895 statistics: supplanting of big farms
and in rather considerable proportions. (!!?)
126. Middle peasant farming has grown stronger at the
expense of the parcels and the big farms (5-
20 hectares).
126. The growth of latifundia is a sign of decline (for
intensiveness must lead to disintegration!!!)...
127. The increase (?) in farm employees. (?).
131. The growth of agricultural production,
especially of the area under root crops and beet root
132-133. Prussian agriculture is developing, and rural population? ∫ & 4. 5% (135)
133. “Unremitting and even dissipating labour on
own farms” (N.B.)
135. Increase in the number of machines notonly
on the big but also on the medium-big farms.
135. Increase in artificial fertilisers (note).
135-136. How is progress possible when prices are falling?
(contrary to normal conditions*)....
136. Germany owes her current progress above all to
peasantfarming ... (!!)...
138. Policy: to establish asolid peasantry (“The
way German Social-Democracy must take!!”)
“Possibility of establishing independent farms”....
141. There is no denying the beneficial effect of the
corn tariffs
143. —“the tariffs cannot evoke unconditional censure”.
144. Holtz is right: labourers (!!) as well as producers.
145. ... “compromise” is the only way.
148. The technical progress of large-scale farming
is highly doubtful, its historical role is played out (!)
159. France at the end of the 18th century: “A naturaleconomy overpopulation.”
* The word “conditions” is not in the MS., and has been inserted according
to the meaning.—Ed.
N.B.


168. Growth in the urban and industrial population
of France.
171. Area under large-scale farming in the 19th century
was relatively larger than in the 18th....
172-173. Distribution of côtes foncières* 1884 (  types
of data).
173-174. “Absolute fantasy” (“stemming from his prejudice”) Marx’s assertion (1850) concerning the
indebtedness of the
French peasant.
174. §§ Growing number of côtes
Con Souchon, p. 87, since ’83 öö **
176. “The peasantry is divided into a proletariat
and small holders” (after the revolution).
179. “Hands are rare” = employers are finding wages
high (Vicomte d’Avenel).
181. The market is the power behind progress in
France. Which class? (? bigcapitalists& peasantowners).
185. In France, there is an especial growth in the
area under root crops and in the cattle population.
187. Rural population, 1882 and 1892.
188. Distribution of farms, 1882 and 1892.
190. Conclusion: “strengthening of peasant farms”
and “latifundia degeneration” (!)
191. “Statistical sages” say §§ under-1-hectare farms
owing to increase in workers. Con: in these departments > peasant farms.
193. There are fewer farms than plots. “Of course,
?(!!)
there is no reason to assume that many big estates are concentrated in the hands of one
individual ... there are only  2 per cent of them”
193. In wine-growing < 1 hectare may take up all
the working time.
194. Growth in the number of farms with managers
(patently capitalist)
Decline in the number of day-labourer farmers.
195. —refutation of “the fantastic assertion”.
* An individual land holding in a commune in France.—Ed.
** See p. 171.—Ed.

V. I. LENIN

195. Growth in leases (“undoubtedly, small
ones”)?
196. Reduction in the number of agricultural labourers.
207. French farm labourer is being transformed (??)
into apeasant.
210. France owes her progress to small-scale farming
(??)
211. Despite the progress of French agriculture, the
rural population has dwindled....
212. Agricultural machines (? Answer: “excess population disappearing”)
213. “We have seen that small-scale farming is ahead”
(!!)
213 and 215. Eulogy of peasant farming.
214. There has been no concentration: the third
estate bought its lands before the revolution....
“The expropriation of a section of the peasant- ry ....
217. Population is limited by the means of subsistence....
218. Bulgakov “long” tended to underestimate Malthus (“invaluable work”)
220. Population increase tends to stimulate the
transition to new economic forms.
221. ... Some of the poverty “undoubtedly” springs
from “absolute overpopulation”....
221. Overpopulation used to be more common in
the past (?)...
223. Overpopulation is not a social but “merely”
an “economic” theory.
223. opop = “special problem” (opop = overpopulation)
224. “Neo-Malthusianism”, deliberate adaptation of
the birth-rate....
225. Dühring (Lange): capacity of territory.
229. Capitalism is inevitable with a higher density
of population... (Struve (Lange))


231. “The old political economy.” Verelendungstheorie,* etc.
233. “Emptiness” of Marx’s concept of stationary overpopulation....
237. “The peasants are not so hard hit by the crisis.”
237. “Rural overpopulation”....
247. Peasant farming, having least capital at its
disposal, is naturally less stable (but this has nothing to do with the question of its viability).
249. “Keeping within the territory’s capacity” is the
main negative condition of prosperity.
251. ... One way... of thinning out the population
(cf. note).
253. Artisan-farmers in Germany.
255. Development of vegetable plots (among industrial
workers) should be welcomed (!!) Cf. II 105
259. A kulak section, starvation leases, etc., tend
to grow on the basis of overpopulation (!!)
259. N.B.: Who takes over from the ruined peasants?
The peasants themselves.
260. “Illusions’ on the part of “conservative Marxists”
that large-scale production is a vehicle of progress.
261. “Boundless lust”....
263. ...“Depravity rather than increase in the poor
population” ....
265. The problem of population is the main difficulty
N.B.: of collectivism....
266. Individual landownership is the supreme commandment.
271. The fatal indebtedness of the peasantry is
a myth....
272. Indebtedness. Figures. Not high on peasant
farms.
280. Kautsky’s “fantasy”, “pathetic effort to stretch
a point” to prove that small farms furnish hired labour for big ones.
(There is no interlocking of big and small farms)
* Theory of impoverishment.—Ed.

V. I. LENIN

280. Chronic Marxist prejudice that the peasantry is
incapable of technical progress.
[Tables prove nothing]
282. Progress of peasant farming: The Condition of
the Peasants
I 72, 276
II 222
282-283. Peasant farming is naturally > labour-intensive
than large-scale farming....
284-285. Peasant co-operatives (“and the big farms, of course”.)
287. It is short-sighted and utopian to regard the
peasant association as a step forward to socialism (“Hertz is too closely tied to the opinion of
his party”) “Narrowness” of collectives....
288. Socialisation in industry
individualism in agriculture.
The “slogan” of democratic development.
288. The peasant is no less a working man than the
proletarian....
289. Against “peasantophobia”....
“Thereisnoroom in the villages for theclassstruggle” ... “no educational
influence of this struggle” ... (bis) ...
290. The peasant has fewer political interests, as
compared with the townsman....
311. Ireland—overpopulation.
323. Two views of Ireland: the Malthusian, and that
of agrarian relations.
324. Bulgakov: some of the evil is the fault of landlordism....
331. Middlemen63, like the kulaks, are not an inevitable concomitant of peasant farming.
339. Leasehold interest is of subordinate significance....
340. Against Manuilov.
346. Dispossession of land would have occurred even
without the landlords, in virtue of overpopulation.
351. The famine of 1846 was beneficial. There
is no reason for connecting evictions and emigration (tableprovestheopposite).
(
)
(!)


352. “Diminution of the population is the cause of
Irish progress”....
358. Growth in potato patches (up to 1 hectare: held
by rural labourers, among others) in Ireland.
357. In Ireland there is no reduction of area under
crop (thanks to peasant farming!)
359. Farms in Ireland by size (and 3 6  ) (consolidation ).
360. Capitalist
agriculture is developing in Ireland.
361. In time of crisis capitalist agriculture in Ireland
tends to regress (??)
1) farmer capital < (! by 0.06%!)
2) “fragmentary evidence”.
363. “Latifundia degeneration” (!)
30-200 acres — 1200 and > acres &
365. Marx is “tendentious” about Ireland, gives
“a chaotic heap of figures”....
369-370. Progress used to come from capitalist farming,
and latterly > from the peasants (!!)...
371. Development of co-operatives in Ireland.
375. “Welfare is spreadingwidelyamong
the lower orders” (loan and savings banks)....
379. Marx’s “tendentious distortion of reality”....
380. Now there is overpopulation once again.
384. History of Ireland: importance of the population
adapting itself to the capacity of the territory....
385. Law of diminishing returns is the scourge of
mankind ....
386. Marx gave Wakefield an unfair and biased
assessment.
393. —in Wakefield’s assessment, Marx is an economic
reactionary. (“The idea of putting capitalism in place of the savage does not deserve condemnation.”)
396. North American population by occupations....
398-399. American industry 1850-1860-1870-1880-1890....
!
!

V. I. LENIN

412. Millionaires and paupers have made their appearance in America.
414. Farm area 1850-1890 ( §§ )
422-423. Division of labour in American agriculture (rapaciousness).
425. Crisis in the Eastern States.
429. Dairy farming and market gardening in the
Eastern States.
433 : “Naïveté” about machine farming in North
America.
435-436. Distributionoffarms
438. No concentration (con the “overjoyed Marxists”).
445. In 1896 I “did not deny” Zusammenbruchs
theorie*... (“I would have made deletions”)...
449. The growing prevalence of the internal market.
454. Urban civilisation would have come up against
the lawofdiminishingreturns.
455. The grain problem is > terrible
than (!)
thesocialone.
456. Marx is quite wrong about agriculture.
456.
N.B.
It is not true that capitalism leads to collectivism.
456. Solid
peasant farming is supplanting large-scale farming (“democratic tide”).
457. Marx’s prediction—“short-sightedness turned to
ridicule by history”, “the self-conceit of scientific socialism”.
457. ... “over-estimation of social cognition ”....
....
458. “Sorcery and fraud” — — — — ignoramus.
Written in June-September 1901
First published in 1932
Printed from the original in Lenin Miscellany XIX
* The collapse theory.—Ed.

PLAN OF OBJECTIONS TO BULGAKOV’S BOOK
Note especially α) law of diminishing returns; β) theory of rent;
γ) refutation of α in Britain, Germany, France, Ireland and
America; δ) on agricultural machines; ε) “solid peasantry” and the agrarian on the question of
labourers (vegetable plots), machines and taxes; “latifundia degeneration”
II, 126, 190, 363 (con—Hertz 15*)
(Ad ε: cf. II 375)
ζ) complete break with socialism. II. 287, 266, 288
— co-operatives
— class struggle
II 289
— capitalism does not lead to collectivism. II 456
Written in June-September 1901
First published in 1932
Printed from the original in Lenin Miscellany XIX
* See p. 98.—Ed.
PNMNQ
PNMNQ