Jump to content

Page:The Theoretical System of Karl Marx (1907).djvu/138

From Wikisource
This page has been proofread, but needs to be validated.

end of their camp to the other, and it took its classic form in Böhm-Bawerk's, "Karl Marx and the Close of his System." The opponents of Marx were not, however, alone in this opinion. The discussion which has continued until the present day has shown that a good many Marxists, of different shades of orthodoxy, shared in this view. So much so, that a Russian Marxist of some prominence and of strict orthodox profession of faith, being unable to reconcile the doctrines laid down in the two volumes, respectively, denied, in his desperation, the genuineness of the "unfortunate" third volume! He claimed that because the third volume was published long after his death, and was compiled from unfinished manuscripts and random notes, Marx appears therein as saying things which he really never intended to say and which are in crass contradiction to his real views, which are contained only in the first volume. Engels' preface to the third volume is sufficient to show the absurdity of this last assertion. So that there was the great contradiction, which made plausible the assertion that Marx completely abandoned his own theory of value, laid down by him in the first volume, and returned to the theory of the cost of production, of the economists dubbed by him "vulgar." The half-and-half Marxists, à la Bernstein, would not go so far (timidity and eclecticism being their specialty), and they tried to minimize the discrepancies between the first and third volumes, claiming that Marx did not abandon his theory of value as laid down in the first volume, but merely modified it, on second thought, in the natural course of the evolution of his theory. Modification by evolution, or evolution in modification became their favorite theme.

In discussing Marx's philosophico-historic views we already had occasion to refer to this favorite theme of Revisionism. The burden of the song is that Marx's theoretical ideas had passed through an evolutionary process, the main tendency of which was from "unscientific," hard and fast monistic dogmas, at the outset, to mild and loose