The bourgeoisie and poverty
The bourgeoisie and poverty
Attention! Automatic translation
Bourgeois "fight against poverty" - a vile lie and Pharisees ploy of the ruling class. Like all grandiloquent bourgeois stereotypes, it has a totally different meaning than that which is stated. The purpose of this "struggle" - does not eradicate poverty, and to keep it. Save deceiving the poor, pretending that they are cared for and that their poverty, "struggling."
Let's see, who are struggling with poverty? Statements made in this spirit that "society should fight poverty," or that "the state is struggling with poverty."
But one member of the society and who owns the state? The state belongs to the ruling class of the rich and has one goal - to defend their interests. A company, if it has a rich and poor, is self-evident, is made up of rich and poor.
So who are struggling with poverty - poor or rich? Can poverty (as a social phenomenon) to fight the poor themselves? Naturally, no. How can fight poverty, social worker, janitor, nurse, who get five and a half thousand a month? If they just do all my life, that are struggling with their own poverty (tripled in the second or third job, keep the garden, not having children, etc.)?
Do the poor have opportunities to fight poverty as a social phenomenon, that is, to influence society - if they relate to social and lows do not have the slightest power? Obviously, no. It is understood that poverty must fight people very different walks of life - the officials (who have an income of twenty - fifty, or even a thousand times more than the worker, janitor, and a nurse), members (in which only the salary of one hundred to two hundred times more than the poor, not to mention other income) and the capitalists, the top layer which receives the income, it is comparable to the state budgets of the poorest countries in the world.
So - poverty must fight the rich. That is - those who are the cause of poverty. Those who are vital to poverty because they can not exist without it.
On this occasion, you can give a very filthy and cunning anti-Soviet anecdote that our restructuring deafened. And this vile anecdote played a role in helping fooling Soviet citizens.
Here he is:
"1917, October. In his own house on Nevsky sitting lady, granddaughter of the Decembrists. Hearing the noise in the street asks his janitor's see what happens there.
- Madame, there is a revolution! - Returns to the janitor.
- Oh, how wonderful! - Enjoys a lady - my grandfather dreamed of a revolution! And go, my dear, and see what are the revolutionaries want ?!
- Madame, they want to avoid the rich - says returning, the janitor.
- Strange - says thoughtfully lady - and my grandfather wanted to avoid the poor! "
This anecdote cowardly liberals and cleverly denigrate the revolution and socialist society. It was a grimace yet concealed hatred, poison spitting in the direction of the Soviet power by hiding and waiting in the wings of the bourgeoisie.
What inspires this anecdote? He scoffs at the "idiots-Bolsheviks", who struggled not to be rich (hence the logic of this anecdote, for everyone to be poor). And those who invented and spread dirty anecdote, presented the matter as - as if they are something to aspire to a society where there is poor, where all the rich.
Soviet man in the street, do not bother to study the development of society and the laws of dialectical logic, the logic of the joke - in fact the sophist logic seemed certain. But in reality it was a subtle manipulation, calculated on the political ignorance of the people. And this manipulation worked, as our citizens, in their naivety graciously listens and hears this kind of jokes, then do not understand where all the wealth is taken and how it is formed.
But the question is - is it possible a society in which all have a high level of material well-being? Is such a society where satisfied with the material and spiritual needs of all its citizens?
Scientific Communism answers it without hesitation - yes, maybe, and that the construction of such a society is our goal, and that is for the sake of our struggle.
Communists have always maintained - that after the beginning of the industrial development and productivity has reached the highest level, unprecedented in the previous era - made possible full satisfaction of the material and spiritual needs of people. It is realized only in a society where there are no antagonistic classes. The class of exploiters, on the one hand, who owns the property of the means of production - and therefore has the ability to expose the exploitation of those who are deprived of property assigns the fruits of others' labor, and concentrated in their hands a huge part of the material wealth of society. And the class of the exploited, on the other hand, who does not have ownership of the means of production, and therefore exploited, deprived of the fruits of their labor, and does not own any material wealth.
That is - a fair distribution of public wealth, which gives a high level of well-being of all citizens - is possible only in a socialist society where the means of production are owned vobschenarodnoy, where there is no private ownership of the means of production, and therefore there is no exploitation and antagonistic klassov.Sovetskomu society largely managed to achieve this. About Soviet citizens can say that they were really rich. Each of them belonged to the whole vast and rich country with all its property. The world did not have such rich oligarchs, comparable in its wealth with any Soviet oligarch grazhdaninom.Ni on the globe, and to this day can not even dream of what was the Soviet people, and that it seemed to them a way of life - for free education of the highest quality; a free and high-class medicine with its unique areas such as the prevention of diseases; the endless opportunities to develop their creative abilities and instincts that enable a person to implement them fully, and for the benefit of all, not only to himself; a sincere honor and respect of the whole society and the entire nation; . Of disinterested and not purchased for the money of love, friendship and comradely mutual assistance, etc. Yes, Soviet citizens were indeed so rich - a society in which all have a high level of material well-being, perhaps. But those who told similar stories - dreamed just did not know. They only pretended to aspire to a society where "all rich." In fact, they dreamed of a society where the rich are they alone, as all the other bedny.Ne chance that they sample a society where supposedly "all the rich" - exposed the Western capitalist countries.
They knew very well that the lie that in Western countries there is a huge social inequalities that there with the greatest wealth coexists terrible poverty and misery. But story-tellers of anecdotes that's about it and dreamed. They cleverly concealed from the Soviet people the real situation, deceiving them pictures of the capitalist "paradise". In these pictures they showed gullible Soviet citizens, they live in the West is exploiting classes who have the privilege of robbing the other layers of the population - and claimed that because the West live vse.Put same, which would lead the Soviet citizens for such a society where all are rich , according to the narrator - the market economy and private property. They declare and promise to Soviet citizens that if you go this way, if you enter the market and give the whole people the means of production in private hands - and then we will find ourselves in a society where all bogaty.Rasskazchiki unheard anecdotes very well again, knew that the lie. They knew perfectly well that will actually, if you destroy the planned economy, to enter the market and make the means of production, private property. They know that soon all the Soviet people's wealth, all the factories will be in the hands of a few, privileged minority, and a minority force to work on most - deceived and robbed of Soviet citizens and at their expense will make profit and grow rich, and most will peter out and nischat.Chto and published in itoge.
Sovetskie citizens believe storytellers of jokes. Heirs of the Great October Revolution the latter fools gladly ran to the promised society a market economy, where supposedly all the rich - and ended up in a capitalist society where the rich just one, and all the others they robbed and enslaved - in the realm of oligarchs and beggars in the cesspool of the most cynical and screaming social nespravedlivosti.Teper we can see what we were naive fools, and the hard to comprehend the simple and obvious thing for the Bolsheviks, if there are rich - it means, look around, and you will certainly see millions of poor. To someone had everything - others should be deprived of it all, that someone had too much - the rest have to take neobhodimoe.Ved quite clear: if, for example, Prokhorov has palaces, yachts, airplanes, its own island - all this It did not fall from the sky. All this must be somewhere to take. And where it can take? Prokhorov, again, does not live on Mars and on Earth, in a country called Russia, including Russian citizens. Only they have it and can take - because there is no place better. To gather in their hands such a crazy wealth, he was subjected to monstrous plunder their fellow citizens, rob society enormously. Its yachts, airplanes and villas - is stolen we have free health care, free education stolen, stolen from us closed hospitals, schools, maternity homes, children's holiday camps, palaces kultury.A to Prokhorov was able to use his time as he pleases , to fly to the resorts, have fun at banquets, etc. - It needs to thousands of people just did in this life to have worked on it and create their work emupribyl. Or, to put it in a Marxist way: luxury items due to poverty of the majority, leisure and idleness few at the cost of excessive toil all ostalnyh.Prohorovu and so it is absolutely necessary that the absolute majority of Russian citizens were just absolutely poor, so they had nothing but their hands. Because only in this case, in order not to starve to death, they will work for him by selling him on starvation wages their labor silu.A if we take, for example, that the mistress of the joke (supposedly granddaughter Decembrist) - we will see that she cleverly lies and hypocrisy. She has no interest in the fact that all have become as rich as she is. From anecdote we learn that she has a private house on Nevsky.
This is not a pound of raisins. The then Nevsky Prospect - all the same that the current Ruble. And their own houses on the Nevsky Capital had only known, to which, consequently, belongs to "the granddaughter of the Decembrist" .Mozhno assume that her husband - a big landowner, has more than one hundred acres of land, which is leased by farmers. More probably, it is not the last person in any department, ministry or the police department, and receives (such as current officials) are very tasty morsels from the ruling class, for the fact that watches over its interests and helps keep the poor in obedience narod.Nu, and now - what will happen to our mistress, if not around to be poor? Who will rent the land from her husband, if at all there will be hundreds of tithes? In the ladies there, as we have seen, the janitor, who ministered to her. There is no doubt that it also has a maid and a cook, and a cook and driver. Well, if you will not be poor - who will go to her servants? Then our mistress will have the most to earn a living, wash, cook and wash. And it is absolutely not necessary. She was so used zhit.Tak that cunning "granddaughter of the Decembrists." She does not need to avoid the poor. She needed it to be rich and the majority poor and remained poor and worked for nee.Chtoby existed bourgeoisie - the bourgeoisie proletariat.Poetomu must exist as they start to exist, always and everywhere has one main concern - to turn the majority of the population in the proletariat, totally deprive his property, just razorit.Vot writes about Marx in "Capital": "in the history of the epoch of primitive accumulation make revolutions, which serve as a lever for the emerging capitalist class, and, above all, those moments when great masses of people suddenly and forcibly torn by means of its existence, and thrown into the labor market in the form of outlawed proletarians ". Potryasayuschy, a classic example of how the bourgeoisie ensures its existence, deliberately ruining and making most of the population in the" outlawed proletarians "- it is a policy in enclosures England 15-16 centuries. and laws against brodyazhnichestva.V England since the end of the fifteenth and sixteenth century the whole, carried out a special policy has received in the history of the name "policy enclosures." Then it began to flourish woolen manufactory. needed for the production of woolen fabrics, firstly, a large number of sheep wool. And secondly - working hands, which should have its obrabatyvat.Proizvodstvo wool promised huge profits.
English land-lords, taking advantage of their right to the land owners, farmers refused to use the land, and passed them on to farmers (capitalist entrepreneurs), which were grown on sheep for them by shersti.Takim solved two problems at once. Firstly - the production of sufficient raw materials for the wool industry. And secondly - the "production" of those most proletarians, without which there can be no industry and no bourgeoisie. And it was deprived of land and houses, ruined, left without means of subsistence peasants were to be proletariyami.Eti these processes have been beneficial and necessary right industrialists, owners of manufactories: "The capitalists, the bourgeoisie patronized this operation the way to turn the land into an object free trade, to expand the scope of a large agricultural production, increase the tide of the village is supplied by the proletarians of the law" and all the tasks have been solved brilliantly:" in this way, managed to win the field for capitalistic agriculture, to give the land in the power of capital and to create a city of industry necessary flow outlawed proletariat" and that's what happened next:" the people who are persecuted ... and get off the ground and then repeated, violent expropriation - the outlawed proletariat absorbed by the nascent textiles is not so fast, with which he is born. On the other hand, people are suddenly taken out of the usual rut of life, could not as suddenly get used to his new discipline obstanovki.Oni masses turned into beggars, robbers, vagabonds ... at the end of XV and during the XVI century in all Western European countries published bloody laws against vagrancy. Fathers of the present working class were especially punished for having them turned into vagabonds and paupers. The law considers them as "voluntary" criminals, on the assumption that, if desired, they could continue to work under the old, no longer existing conditions. ...
More workable for vagrants of whipping and imprisonment. They should be tied to a wheelbarrow and scourged until the blood will stream through the body, and then were to take with them an oath to return home or to the place where they have spent the last three years, and "take up the work" ... At relapse vagrancy flogging repeated except cut half of the ear; if tramp comes the third time, it will be executed as a grave criminal and enemy obschestva.Eduard VI in 1547 - the first year of his reign - publishes a law under which any deviation from work is given as a slave to the person who will carry him as a vagrant. The owner must provide his slave bread and water, stew meat and such dregs of what he pleases. He has the right by flogging and shackling force him to any work, however disgusting it was.