МАРГИНАЛИЈЕ УЗ ДВЕ РЕДАКЦИЈЕ "ТЕОРИЈА О ВИШКУ ВРЕДНОСТИ" КАРЛА МАРКСА
MARGINAL NOTES ON TWO EDITIONS OF KARL MARX&S "THEORY OF SURPLUS VALUE"

Summary/Abstract: Subject of the work is a comparison of two redactions of the well-known Marx's work: "Theories of the surplus of the value". The first edition of this work has been arranged after the Marx's death, by Karl Kautsky. The second redaction of the "Theories" has been arranged by the Marxism—Leninism Institute with the CC SUCP and is now accessible to the public in Russian language as the Volume 26/I- 26/II and 26/III of a second edition of the Marx's and Engels's works. Those two redactions differ, however, somewhat one from the other. As Marx himself did not prepare the manuscript of this work for publication, Kautsky made therein some alternations which refer first of all to the omission of some parts of the manuscript and to a different disposition and succession of the matter. In the introduction to the Soviet edition it is pointed out that the redaction arranged by Kautsky was unsatisfactory and somewhere even corrupt. Kautsky is specially censured for having not .published the work as the IV. volume of the "Capital" as Marx had originally the intention, and for considering the "Theories" not as a continuation, but as a work which goes parallelly with the "Capital". The author of the article, making use of what the redactors themselves have written thereon, endeavoured to demonstrate that Kautsky was aware. of the difficulties concerning the redaction, as well as that the circumstances in which the first redaction had been prepared were, in political as well as technical way, different than 50 years later and that there is no doubt that Kautsky endeavoured intentionally to corrupt the Marx's work. The author point out that the faculty to' make any alteration in the manuscript would have no one but Marx and that it would probably be the most, correct if there could be secured a "facsimile" edition of the "Theories" for that would exclude the possibility of any suspicion as to the correctness of the redaction of ihis work.

• Details
• Contents