The philosopher of history, Keith Jenkins, portrayed in broad strokes the beginning of the decline of the working class in his book: "Rethinking History" . The old values \u200b\u200bthat sustained the social order of the ancien regime that shaped the natural law of things and the power of the nobility, are well known. The divine "forced" to perpetuate the kings their power, blood, the lineage of belonging to a race, were conditions that position the nobility in place over all others. Those values \u200b\u200bwere undergoing a revolution, still, if you know or at least overlapping replaced gradually in the process strengthening the market economy during the eighteenth century, through the pressure of an emerging bourgeoisie who demanded their place in the ranks power. From now on, the blood was no longer a prerequisite, but human beings respond to the concept of "utility." Men should constitute themselves. Therefore, those who were idle, living in the lethargy that has everything without doing anything, the nobility lost their old justifications for the values \u200b\u200bthey embody the concept of work. The effort to grow, develop ultimately materialized in the property. Paul Lafargue and talks about it in his treatise on the lazy, the bourgeois expresses its success based on the property, its realization was growing with the accumulation of capital. But that bourgeois who fought for their place in society, fighting with the privileges of birth, religion and the established order, eventually becoming a new economic elite. That phenomenon of accommodation, the p 
straightening, holidays, luxuries that made them sink into complacency and as the acquisition Marxist theories of labor for wages, destroyed its own justification. Will now coincide with the end of bourgeois development, when it came the turn of the working class. And what this group will base its moral social workers who had no access to property? Being poor, however they were not "idle", did not fall into the deslegitamación had now no longer only the nobility but also the bourgeoisie. Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, would find the moral justification. Marxism will represent the ultimate expression of this search for values, represents the theoretical justification equality and solidarity. As it says Jenkins, "If the property was cancer of this system, why not give it up? The whole world now suffers the problems of lack of access to property and not only understood as possession, but also wealth. But this is but a cause-effect of the problems that embodies the capitalist system. Still, this mode of production which ended with millions of lives in the fields of Vietnam, Korea and the jungles of Africa emerged victorious to the disaster of "real socialism" Soviet and division of labor struggle. The capitalism that destroys the left is the same just with Keynes and Milton Friedman hovers and the Chicago School. Is the same as with the grim nickname of Neoliberalism. Will be from 73 of the crisis that shook the West, they begin to implement these policies, however, fall into an error if we searched his home in amazing capacity for growth that will emerge from the destruction caused by World War II. It is in these decades of the 50 and 60 when they will emerge the moral self-justifications of the system. In the same way they did the bourgeoisie or the working class, now is the turn of the markets. These are justified by the fear and freedom. It seems contradictory but if we look at the evidence will prove to be very close indeed everyone. First, the fear is imposed from the dictatorship of the economy, manifested in fear to assert, to lose the job, they could not afford the mortgage, college for their children. In short, the fear of losing everything. On the other hand, society has been educated to believe that this is the only system capable of allowing complete freedom of human beings. But freedom is not only able to watch a TV channel or another, voting right, left or center, or why not have two vehicles. But involves issues such as access to housing, education or health. If we look at Spain to clarify all a bit more and we compared this we can see houses every day are more expensive and the downs are ridiculous compared to the cost, and education and health are becoming increasingly privatized, Bologna I see Esperanza Aguirre. These control mechanisms can be imposed from top materialized for instance in the workplace. Stable work occurs and drabs, so that this happens to be considered a valuable asset. This benefits workers control prevents the mobility between jobs and therefore calls upon the working class to maintain their tameness. Imposing a "social peace" based on charity. The term enterprise, remains significant, but the "market ideology" has changed its meaning. Now this concept, company, not respond to the idea of \u200b\u200ba private initiative in pursuit of profit, but is considered a main element benefactor. Has anyone ever considered that there is the possibility of a rational and productive public company? And amid all this, why does nothing that working class? Is there? From my point of view, still exists even might say it is diluted. Diluted in a sea of \u200b\u200bprecarious jobs, and services sectors. Marxism developed a theoretical model for achieving socialism based on a different production methods, there are no large factories, and meetings at lunchtime. That class had nothing, got a welfare state now lost every day. The left should give out of this crisis not only awareness, but "method."
straightening, holidays, luxuries that made them sink into complacency and as the acquisition Marxist theories of labor for wages, destroyed its own justification. Will now coincide with the end of bourgeois development, when it came the turn of the working class. And what this group will base its moral social workers who had no access to property? Being poor, however they were not "idle", did not fall into the deslegitamación had now no longer only the nobility but also the bourgeoisie. Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, would find the moral justification. Marxism will represent the ultimate expression of this search for values, represents the theoretical justification equality and solidarity. As it says Jenkins, "If the property was cancer of this system, why not give it up? The whole world now suffers the problems of lack of access to property and not only understood as possession, but also wealth. But this is but a cause-effect of the problems that embodies the capitalist system. Still, this mode of production which ended with millions of lives in the fields of Vietnam, Korea and the jungles of Africa emerged victorious to the disaster of "real socialism" Soviet and division of labor struggle. The capitalism that destroys the left is the same just with Keynes and Milton Friedman hovers and the Chicago School. Is the same as with the grim nickname of Neoliberalism. Will be from 73 of the crisis that shook the West, they begin to implement these policies, however, fall into an error if we searched his home in amazing capacity for growth that will emerge from the destruction caused by World War II. It is in these decades of the 50 and 60 when they will emerge the moral self-justifications of the system. In the same way they did the bourgeoisie or the working class, now is the turn of the markets. These are justified by the fear and freedom. It seems contradictory but if we look at the evidence will prove to be very close indeed everyone. First, the fear is imposed from the dictatorship of the economy, manifested in fear to assert, to lose the job, they could not afford the mortgage, college for their children. In short, the fear of losing everything. On the other hand, society has been educated to believe that this is the only system capable of allowing complete freedom of human beings. But freedom is not only able to watch a TV channel or another, voting right, left or center, or why not have two vehicles. But involves issues such as access to housing, education or health. If we look at Spain to clarify all a bit more and we compared this we can see houses every day are more expensive and the downs are ridiculous compared to the cost, and education and health are becoming increasingly privatized, Bologna I see Esperanza Aguirre. These control mechanisms can be imposed from top materialized for instance in the workplace. Stable work occurs and drabs, so that this happens to be considered a valuable asset. This benefits workers control prevents the mobility between jobs and therefore calls upon the working class to maintain their tameness. Imposing a "social peace" based on charity. The term enterprise, remains significant, but the "market ideology" has changed its meaning. Now this concept, company, not respond to the idea of \u200b\u200ba private initiative in pursuit of profit, but is considered a main element benefactor. Has anyone ever considered that there is the possibility of a rational and productive public company? And amid all this, why does nothing that working class? Is there? From my point of view, still exists even might say it is diluted. Diluted in a sea of \u200b\u200bprecarious jobs, and services sectors. Marxism developed a theoretical model for achieving socialism based on a different production methods, there are no large factories, and meetings at lunchtime. That class had nothing, got a welfare state now lost every day. The left should give out of this crisis not only awareness, but "method." Ordóñez Pablo Iglesias
IS-PSOE Coordinator General Extremadura
0 comments:
Post a Comment