SigPhiSigPhi

The Three Sources and Three Component Parts of Marxism

Vladimir Lenin

Language:
English
Status:
Complete work
Authorship:
Written by the author
Condition of the text:
No scanning noise detected (automatic measure over the whole text, not checked by hand)
Extent:
~2,320 words · 11 passages
Cite this work
  • APAVladimir Lenin. (n.d.). The Three Sources and Three Component Parts of Marxism. Digital reproduction: SigPhi. https://sigphiai.com/en/works/vladimir-lenin/the-three-sources-and-three-component-parts-of-marxism
  • MLAVladimir Lenin. The Three Sources and Three Component Parts of Marxism. Digital reproduction, SigPhi, https://sigphiai.com/en/works/vladimir-lenin/the-three-sources-and-three-component-parts-of-marxism.
  • ChicagoVladimir Lenin. The Three Sources and Three Component Parts of Marxism. Digital reproduction, SigPhi. https://sigphiai.com/en/works/vladimir-lenin/the-three-sources-and-three-component-parts-of-marxism.

Reference to the edition that SigPhi reproduces: SigPhi is its digital reproduction, not its publisher. The edition's year is not in the metadata (hence "n.d."), and the translator appears only when recorded.

What it is about

A 1913 article: Marxism comes from German philosophy, English economics and French socialism.

Context and history

Three pages that fixed how Marxism would be taught for seventy years. The brevity is the article's own: a popular piece, not a book. The original is in RUSSIAN. This is an English translation; for citation, the original.

Editorial context, not a citable source: unlike the passages of the work itself, these statements cannot be checked against the corpus.

How it begins
Where the bourgeois economists saw a relation between things (the exchange of one commodity for another) Marx revealed a relation between people. The exchange of commodities expresses the connection between individual producers through the market. Money signifies that the connection is becoming closer and closer, inseparably uniting the entire economic life of the individual producers into one whole. Capital signifies a further development of this connection: man’s labour-power becomes a commodity. The wage-worker sells his labour-power to the owner of land, factories and instruments of labour. The worker spends one part of the day covering the cost of maintaining himself and his family (wages), while the other part of the day he works without remuneration, creating for the capitalist surplus-value, the source of profit, the source of the wealth of the capitalist class. The doctrine of surplus-value is the corner-stone of Marx’s economic theory. Capital, created by the labour of the worker, crushes the worker, ruining small proprietors and creating an army of unemployed. In industry, the victory of large-scale production is immediately apparent, but the same phenomenon is also to be observed in agriculture, where the superiority of large-scale capitalist agriculture is enhanced, the use of machinery increases and the peasant economy, trapped by money-capital, declines and falls into ruin under the burden of its backward technique. The decline of small-scale production assumes different forms in agriculture, but the decline itself is an indisputable fact. By destroying small-scale production, capital leads to an increase in productivity of labour and to the creation of a monopoly position for the associations of big capitalists. Production itself becomes more and more social—hundreds of thousands and millions of workers become bound together in a regular economic organism—but the product of this collective labour is appropriated by a handful of capitalists.…

Read the full work →

← Back to Vladimir Lenin