Engels. letter to Conrad Schidt, 5 August 1890, Collected Corres. p 472
In message <Pine.GSU.4.02.9808142159350.24155-100000 at unicom.marin.cc.ca.
us>, Frank Scott <frank at marin.cc.ca.us> writes
>My old copy of "Marx & Engels on the Population Bomb" was put out by
>Ramparts Press, but I seem to remember seeing it in a library a couple of
>yeras ago. If you're in an area with a really good library, you might try
>that title.
>
> frank scott
>
I was surprised to read Louis P saying that Marx never took Malthus on
directly. I quick scan of my bookshelves showed that it was difficult to
get Marx (and Engels) off the subject. There is more than enough
material to fill Frank's collection.
In Capital Marx attacks the overpopulation thesis, showing that the law of surplus population is not a natural disproportion between means of consumption and numbers, but rather an artificially created disproportion between 'variable capital' (the wage fund) and the numbers of wage labourers. (Capital, vol I, p594, General law of capital accumulation, section 3 Progressive production of a relative surplus population).
In The Economic and Philosophical Manuscripts, Marx tells the theory of overpopulation dripping with sarcasm:
'Frugality as the principle of political economy is _most brilliantly_ shown in its _theory of population_. There are too _many_ people. Even the existence of men is a pure luxury.'
p 107
Marx deals at length (and a gret deal of subtlety) with Malthus entire economic theory in the Third Volume of the Theories of Surplus Value.
In the letter to Engels, 7 January 1851 Marx compares Malthus and Ricardo's theories of the declining fertility of the soil, commenting 'in spite of the fact that the general fertility of the soil increases as society develops' (p 30, Collected corres. ed Dona Torr, L&W 1934)
In a letter to Schweitzer 24 Jan 1865, Marx describes Malthus' On Population as 'this libel on the human race' (ibid. p170)
In his letter to FA Lange (29 March 1865), Engels writes 'but why is too little produced? not because the limits of production - even today and with present day means - are exhausted. No, but because the limits of production are not determined by the number of hungry bellies but by the number of purses able to buy and pay.' (ibid. p 199)
In his Outline of Political Economy, Engels ridicules the idea that the rate of increase of agricultural production must be limited: 'The productive power at mankind's disposal is immeasurable. The productivity of the soil can be increased ad infinitum by the application of capital, labour and science.' (p171)
Lenin collected citations from Marx about the productivity of capitalist agriculture in his polemic against the supporters of peasant production, in his book The Development of Capitalism in Russia (pp 326-8). Lenin quotes Marx as saying that
'The rationalising of agriculture, on the one hand, which makes for it for the first time capable of operating on a social scale, and the reduction ad absurdum of property in land, on the other, are the great achievements of the capitalist mode of production.'
and that it
'transforms agriculture from a mere empirical and mechanical self- perpetuating process employed by the least developed part of society into the conscious scientific application of agronomy, inso far as that is feasible under conditions of private property.'
Lenin adds 'One would think that after such categorical statements by Marx there could be no two opinions as to how he viewed the question of the progressive role of agricultural capitalism.' -- Jim heartfield