Archive for the ‘Philosophy’ Category

Engels: The Principles of Communism! (4)


Principles Of Communism! P4: (網友提供; 如有錯誤, 請原諒!)

5) Under what conditions does this sale of the
labor of the proletarians
to the bourgeoisie take place?

Labor is a commodity, like any other,

and its price is therefore determined
by exactly the same laws that apply
to other commodities.

In a regime of big industry or of free competition

as we shall see,
the two come to the same thing:

the price of a commodity is, on the average,
always equal to its cost of production.

Hence, the price of labor is also equal
to the cost of production of labor.

But, the costs of production
of labor consist of precisely the quantity
of means of subsistence necessary

to enable the worker to continue working,
and to prevent the working class from dying out.

The worker will therefore get
no more for his labor than is necessary
for this purpose;

the price of labor, or the wage,
will, in other words, be the lowest,

the minimum, required for the maintenance of life.

However, since business is sometimes better
and sometimes worse,

it follows that the worker sometimes gets more
and sometimes gets less for his commodities.

But, again, just as the industrialist,
on the average of good times and bad,

gets no more and no less for his commodities
than what they cost,

similarly on the average the worker
gets no more and no less than his minimum.

This economic law of wages operates
the more strictly the greater the degree

to which big industry has taken possession
of all branches of production.





Read Full Post »

Engels: The Principles of Communism! (3)


Principles Of Communism! P3: (網友提供; 如有錯誤, 請原諒!)

4) How did the proletariat originate?

But at the same time,
they also fell into the hands of big capitalists,

and their workers were deprived
of whatever independence remained to them.

Gradually, not only genuine manufacture
but also handicrafts came within the province

of the factory system as big capitalists
increasingly displaced the small master craftsmen
by setting up huge workshops,

which saved many expenses
and permitted an elaborate division of labor.

This is how it has come about that
in civilized countries at the present time nearly

all kinds of labor are performed in factories

and, in nearly all branches of work,
handicrafts and manufacture have been superseded.

This process has, to an ever greater degree,
ruined the old middle class,

especially the small handicraftsmen;
it has entirely transformed the condition of the workers;

and two new classes have been created
which are gradually swallowing up all the others.

These are:

(i) The class of big capitalists,
who, in all civilized countries,

are already in almost exclusive possession
of all the means of subsistance

and of the instruments (machines, factories)
and materials necessary for the production
of the means of subsistence.

This is the bourgeois class, or the bourgeoisie.

(ii) The class of the wholly propertyless,
who are obliged to sell their labor

to the bourgeoisie in order to get,

in exchange, the means of subsistence
for their support.

This is called the class of proletarians,
or the proletariat.




Read Full Post »

Marx, Engels: The Communist Manifesto! (4)


Manifesto of the Communist Party 1848! P4:
(網友提供; 如有錯誤, 請原諒!)

We see, therefore,

how the modern bourgeoisie is itself
the product of a long course of development,

of a series of revolutions in the modes
of production and of exchange.

Each step in the development of the bourgeoisie
was accompanied by a corresponding political advance
of that class.

An oppressed class under the sway
of the feudal nobility,

an armed and self-governing association
in the medieval commune:

here independent urban republic
(as in Italy and Germany);

there taxable third estate
of the monarchy (as in France);

afterwards, in the period of manufacturing proper,
serving either the semi-feudal or the absolute monarchy

as a counterpoise against the nobility,
and, in fact, cornerstone
of the great monarchies in general,

the bourgeoisie has at last,
since the establishment of Modern Industry
and of the world market,

conquered for itself,
in the modern representative State,

exclusive political sway.

The executive of the modern state is but
a committee for managing the common affairs
of the whole bourgeoisie.

The bourgeoisie, historically,
has played a most revolutionary part.

The bourgeoisie,
wherever it has got the upper hand,

has put an end to all feudal,
patriarchal, idyllic relations.

It has pitilessly torn asunder
the motley feudal ties that bound man
to his “natural superiors",

and has left remaining no other nexus between man
and man than naked self-interest,

than callous “cash payment".

It has drowned the most heavenly ecstasies
of religious fervour,

of chivalrous enthusiasm,
of philistine sentimentalism,

in the icy water of egotistical calculation.

It has resolved personal worth
into exchange value,

and in place of the numberless indefeasible
chartered freedoms,

has set up that single,
unconscionable freedom — Free Trade.

In one word, for exploitation,
veiled by religious and political illusions,

it has substituted naked, shameless,
direct, brutal exploitation.

The bourgeoisie has stripped
of its halo every occupation hitherto honoured
and looked up to with reverent awe.

It has converted the physician, the lawyer,
the priest, the poet, the man of science,
into its paid wage labourers.




Read Full Post »

Marx, Engels: The Communist Manifesto! (3)


Manifesto of the Communist Party 1848! P3:
(網友提供; 如有錯誤, 請原諒!)

From the serfs of the Middle Ages sprang
the chartered burghers of the earliest towns.

From these burgesses the first elements
of the bourgeoisie were developed.

The discovery of America,
the rounding of the Cape, opened up fresh ground
for the rising bourgeoisie.

The East-Indian and Chinese markets,
the colonisation of America,

trade with the colonies,
the increase in the means of exchange
and in commodities generally,

gave to commerce, to navigation,
to industry, an impulse never before known,
and thereby,

to the revolutionary element
in the tottering feudal society, a rapid development.

The feudal system of industry,
in which industrial production was monopolised
by closed guilds,

now no longer sufficed for the growing wants
of the new markets.

The manufacturing system took its place.

The guild-masters were pushed on one side
by the manufacturing middle class;

division of labour between
the different corporate guilds vanished
in the face of division of labour in each single workshop.

Meantime the markets kept ever growing,
the demand ever rising.

Even manufacturer no longer sufficed.

Thereupon, steam and machinery
revolutionised industrial production.

The place of manufacture was taken by the giant,
Modern Industry;

the place of the industrial middle class
by industrial millionaires,

the leaders of the whole industrial armies,
the modern bourgeois.

Modern industry has established the world market,
for which the discovery of America paved the way.

This market has given
an immense development to commerce,

to navigation, to communication by land.

This development has, in its turn,
reacted on the extension of industry;

and in proportion as industry, commerce,
navigation, railways extended,

in the same proportion the bourgeoisie developed,
increased its capital,

and pushed into the background every
class handed down from the Middle Ages.




Read Full Post »

Friedrich Nietzsche: Twilight Of The Idols! (7)


HE PROBLEM OF SOCRATES: (網友提供; 如有錯誤, 請原諒!)

When one finds it necessary
to turn reason into a tyrant,

as Socrates did, the danger cannot
be slight that something
else will play the tyrant.

Rationality was then hit upon
as the savior;
neither Socrates nor his “patients" had

any choice about being rational:

it was de rigeur,
it was their last resort.

The fanaticism with which
all Greek reflection throws itself
upon rationality betrays a desperate situation;

there was danger,
there was but one choice:

either to perish or, to be absurdly rational.

The moralism of the Greek philosophers
from Plato on is pathologically conditioned;

so is their esteem of dialectics.


that means merely that
one must imitate Socrates and counter
the dark appetites with a permanent daylight!

the daylight of reason.

One must be clever, clear,
bright at any price: any concession to the instincts,

to the unconscious, leads downward.




Read Full Post »

Friedrich Nietzsche: Twilight Of The Idols! (6)


HE PROBLEM OF SOCRATES: (網友提供; 如有錯誤, 請原諒!)

But Socrates guessed even more.

He saw through his noble Athenians;
he comprehended that his own case,

his idiosyncrasy, was no longer exceptional.

The same kind of degeneration
was quietly developing everywhere:

old Athens was coming to an end.

And Socrates understood that
all the world needed him, his means,

his cure, his personal artifice of self-preservation.

Everywhere the instincts were
in anarchy everywhere one
was within five paces of excess:

monstrum in animo was the general danger.

The impulses want to play the tyrant;
one must invent a counter-tyrant who is stronger.

When the physiognomist had revealed
to Socrates who he was…

a cave of bad appetites…

the great master of irony let slip another word
which is the key to his character.

“This is true," he said,
“but I mastered them all."

How did Socrates become master over himself?

His case was, at bottom,
merely the extreme case,

only the most striking instance
of what was then beginning
to be a universal distress:

no one was any longer master over himself,
the instincts turned against each other.

He fascinated, being this extreme case;
his awe-inspiring ugliness proclaimed him
as such to all who could see:

he fascinated, of course,
even more as an answer,

a solution, an apparent cure of this case.




Read Full Post »

Rosa Luxemburg: Reform or Revolution! (4)


Reform or Revolution 1900! P4:
(網友提供; 如有錯誤, 請原諒!)

No coarser insult, no baser aspersion,

can be thrown against the workers
than the remarks:

Theocratic controversies are
only for academicians.

Some time ago Lassalle said:

Only when science and the workers,
these opposite poles of society,

become one, will they crush in their
arms of steel all obstacles to culture.

The entire strength of the modern labour
movement rests on theoretic knowledge.

But doubly important is this knowledge
for the workers in the present case,

because it is precisely they
and their influence in the movement
that are in the balance here.

It is their skin that
is being brought to market.

The opportunist theory in the Party,
the theory formulated by Bernstein,

is nothing else than an unconscious
attempt to assure predominance

to the petty-bourgeois elements
that have entered our Party,

to change the policy and aims
of our Party in their direction.

The question of reform or revolution,
of the final goal and the movement,

is basically, in another form,

but the question of the petty-bourgeois
or proletarian character of the labour movement.

It is, therefore, in the interest
of the proletarian mass of the Party
to become acquainted,

actively and in detail,

with the present theoretic knowledge remains
the privilege of a handful
of “academicians" in the Party,

the latter will face the danger of going astray.

Only when the great mass of workers take the keen
and dependable weapons of
scientific socialism in their own hands,

will all the petty-bourgeois inclinations,
all the opportunistic currents, come to naught.

The movement will then find itself on sure
and firm ground.

Quantity will do it!




Read Full Post »

Older Posts »