LENIN. — SYNOPSIS OF PLEKHANOV'S FIRST DRAFT.

[crises which] are inevitably caused by the aforementioned contradictions of capitalism in the absence of social control (planfulness) in production and with the continuously growing mutual rivalry of capitalist countries on the world market.
[crises] which are inevitably caused by the aforementioned contradictions of capitalism, the absence of planfulness in production, the growth of mutual rivalry of capitalist countries on the world market.
The poverty and destitution of the masses is supplemented by the dissipation of social wealth due to the impossibility of finding a market for the goods produced.
[continuously] growing [rivalry] of capitalist countries on the world market, the sale of goods necessarily lags behind their production.

Besides the synopsis of Plekhanov's draft given above, made by Lenin, Vladimir Ilyich compiled brief remarks on those points of Plekhanov's draft which aroused his doubts or objections. Vladimir Ilyich first numbered his "remarks", apparently placing corresponding "Nos." on Plekhanov's manuscript, and noted the pages of the latter. Then, after the "remark" marked No. 40, Vladimir Ilyich stopped numbering, leaving only a note of the corresponding page of Plekhanov's manuscript.
To facilitate study, we give parallel formulations of Plekhanov (from document No. 3?) and Lenin's remarks.

3.
LENIN.
REMARKS ON THE FIRST DRAFT
OF PLEKHANOV.

FORMULATIONS OF PLEKHANOV'S
ORIGINAL DRAFT.

I.
The main economic feature of modern society is the domination in it of capitalist production relations, i.e., the ownership of the means of production and circulation of goods by a class of capitalists very small in number, while the majority of the population consists of proletarians, who have nothing but their labour power and cannot exist otherwise than by its sale.

LENIN'S REMARKS.
No. 1 — capitalism is not a "feature" of modern society, but its economic system, structure, etc.
No. 2 — the means of production belong not only to capitalists, but also to landowners and small producers.
No. 3 — The proletariat is not the majority of the population in many countries.
No. 4 — The proletariat has some articles of consumption (and partly also means of production).

LENIN. — REMARKS ON PLEKHANOV'S FIRST DRAFT.

As a result of this it falls into the dependent position of wage-workers, who by their labour create the income of the capitalists.
II.
...the continuous improvement of technology increases the economic importance of large enterprises and thereby reduces the number of small independent producers, narrows their role in the economic life of society...
...directly turns them into wage-workers...
Page 2*) No. 5 + landowners.
No. 6. "and thereby"?? The growth of technology by itself cannot increase the economic importance of large enterprises.
The growth of technology (+ a series of economic transformations like conditions of sale etc.) leads to the displacement of small production by large.
No. 6 — 7: Capitalism does not always "reduce the number of small producers" (relative, and not necessarily absolute, especially in Russia).
Expropriates and leads to its oppression, impoverishment... [capitalism — of the small producer].
Page 2) No. 7.
Narrows the role of small = increases the economic importance of large (the same thing).
To page 2. Not the improvement of technology, but private property expropriates and verelendet [leads to impoverishment] the small producer.
No. 8 — directly — cross out...
The process of separation of the producer from the means of production is not indicated.
* Here, as in subsequent instances, the pages of Plekhanov's manuscript are indicated, as was already mentioned in the introductory remark.
Ed.

III.
Capitalist relations of production press more and more heavily upon the working class in proportion as technical progress, increasing the productivity of labour, not only gives the capitalists the material possibility to raise the level of exploitation of the workers, but also turns this possibility into reality, causing a relative decrease in the demand for labour power simultaneously with a relative and absolute increase in its supply.
IV. The development of the productivity of labour not only does not raise the price of labour power, but, on the contrary, very often is the direct cause of its reduction. Thus technical progress, meaning an increase in social wealth, causes in capitalist society a growth of social inequality, an increase in the distance between the propertied and the propertyless, an intensification of the economic dependence of the workers upon the capitalists.
V. Under such a state of affairs in capitalist society and with the constantly growing mutual rivalry of capitalist countries on the world market, the sale of goods necessarily lags behind their production, and this periodically causes more or less acute industrial crises, accompanied by more or less prolonged periods of industrial stagnation, even more reducing the number and economic importance of small producers, even more increasing the dependence of wage labour upon capital, and more rapidly leading to a relative, and in places absolute, deterioration of the position of the proletariat and the small producers.
Page 3 of the original draft.
No. 9 + and upon the small producers (peasants in general should be specially mentioned).
No. 10 — causing or engendering.
Page 3 — expressed quite unpopularly, abstractly.
Much better in the Erfurt Programme
..."grows the army of redundant workers",—"grows the insecurity of existence".
Page 4 — "price of labour power" very often lowers (also expressed very abstractly; = growth of exploitation, oppression, poverty, degradation).
"Thus" causes growth of inequality. It turns out as if the growth of inequality is generated only by the growth (increase) of exploitation of the wage worker, whereas it is generated by: 1) expropriation of the small producer + 2) impoverishment of the small producer + 3) growth of exploitation + 4) growth of the reserve army.
Page 5).
Is it necessary in the programme to indicate the causes of crises? If yes, then the shortcoming is that 2 causes are indicated: 1) growth of social inequality ("under such a

LENIN. — REMARKS ON PLEKHANOV'S FIRST DRAFT.

state of affairs") + 2) growth of rivalry. The basic cause of crises = Planlosigkeit [absence of planfulness], private appropriation under social production, is not indicated.
Pages 5-6: reduction of "the economic importance of small producers" is too abstract a term.
Expropriates; = reduces the number?) and verelendet [leads to impoverishment].
Page 6 — wage "labour"? Would it not be better to say workers?
Page 6 — consequences of crises — relative and absolute deterioration of position. Would it not be better to indicate directly: unemployment, poverty of workers and small producers.
Page 7 — instead of discontent — indignation.
Page 7) spread of consciousness — 7) is placed alongside the growth of indignation — a) and aggravation of struggle — b).
But a and b are spontaneous, while 7) must be introduced by us.
Page 7) "only by their own efforts".
Better to express more generally: can only be the work of the working class, etc.
Pages 7-8.
...destruction of capitalist production relations, the transfer of the means of production and circulation of products into public ownership.
VIII. In order to replace capitalist production of goods with a socialist organisation of production of products for satisfying the needs of society and for ensuring the well-being of all its members... The proletariat must have political power in its hands, which will make it master of the situation and allow it ruthlessly to crush all those obstacles which it encounters on its path to its great goal. In this sense, the dictatorship of the proletariat constitutes the necessary political condition for the social revolution.
[Lenin's remarks:] replacement of commodity production by socialist; expropriation of the exploiters; transfer of means of production into public ownership? transformation of private property into public property.
Page 9. — "for satisfying (unclear) the needs of society and ensuring the well-being of all its members". This is not enough: (cf. Erfurt Programme: "the highest well-being and all-round harmonious perfection").
Page 9. "master of the situation", "ruthlessly crush", "dictatorship"??? We have had enough of social revolution.
Page 10 — nil.
XI. It pursues the same ultimate goal as the social-democrats of all other countries set themselves. It reveals to the workers the irreconcilable opposition of their interests to the interests of the capitalists, explains to them the historical significance, character and conditions of that social revolution which the proletariat is to accomplish, and organises their forces for the continuous struggle against their exploiters.
[Lenin's remarks:] Page 11. — "The same Endziel [ultimate goal]". Why repeat? Might it not be confused? Right there the task of the social-democratic party: 1) to reveal to the workers the irreconcilable opposition of their interests and the interests of the capitalists. 2) To explain to them the significance, character and conditions of the social revolution (+ the necessity of revolution?). The Germans put it more strongly: weisen naturnotwendiges Ziel [point out the natural and necessary goal]. 3) To organise their forces for the continuous struggle against their exploiters. (NB? + with the government?) + ? to lead the struggle of the proletariat. 1) is included in 2). 1) — too narrow. Should be: α indicate the ultimate goal, β create an organisation of revolutionaries for leading the struggle of the proletariat.
XII. ...the numerous remnants among us of the pre-capitalist — serf — social order lie as a terrible burden on the entire working population and constitute the strongest of all obstacles hampering the successes of the Russian working-class movement. The Russian social-democrats still have to achieve such legal institutions as... already exist in the advanced capitalist countries and are necessary for the full and all-round development of the class struggle of wage labour against capital. And since tsarist autocracy... is completely incompatible with these legal institutions... the Russian social-democrats set as their immediate political task the overthrow of the monarchy.
[Lenin's remarks:] Page 12. "Remnants of the serf order... lie as a terrible burden on the entire working population" (+ retardation of the development of productive forces; + deterioration of the situation...). ...legal relations, such as already exist (?) in the advanced countries. (Must be named more directly. Unpopular.)
Page 13 — wage labour? — of workers, of the struggle of the working class against the class of capitalists for its complete emancipation.
Page 13. Autocracy is incompatible with these legal institutions (with full freedom??).
Page 14. Since autocracy is incompatible — overthrow of the monarchy (lack of correspondence).