Marx’s analysis of Capitalism and predictions of where it heads are proven more correct with the passage of time. The reason the Proletarian is exploited to a greater degree than the serf is due to the nature of commodity production. As the M-C-M’ circuit, whereby M is an initial sum of money, C the commodity produced with M, and M’ the greater sum of money after selling said commodity is the basis of Capitalist production, said process is incentivized to be maximized. In Feudalism, rent is extracted and the rest kept for subsistence, in Capitalism wages are set by cost of continued existence and replacement, moving up or down mostly by societal norms.
I highly recommend those interested to check out my Introductory Reading List on Marxism.
What went wrong with the Soviet Union?
What, specifically, are you asking about? Are you asking about why it was dissolved from the top down and sold for parts to the west? Or is this about something more specific?
For clarity, the Soviet Union marked dramatic improvements for the lives of the Working Class, and showed that Socialism is a working economic model. Asking what went “wrong” without asking specifics helps nobody, the best answer to that is just directing you to Blackshirts and Reds, which took a critical look at what went right and what didn’t in the Soviet Union and how it collapsed, along with the brutal reintroduction of Capitalism that killed 7 million people.
You don’t know how bad peasants actually had it.
I usually take these post less as ‘look how great peasants had it’ and more ‘look how much better we could have it’.
This idea that peasants had it better because there were more “holidays” (which were feast days for specfic groups and religious holidays, mass was not optional) is asinine. There are good reasons they had a shorter expected lifespan.
The peasantry worked fewer hours because of the nature of production. Capitalist commodity production seeks to maximize profits, and does so by ensuring wages are regulated by cost of subsistence and replacement. Feudalism operated differently, peasants worked for themselves and produced essentially rent for their feudal lords, and thus did not have maximized working hours.
Question 8 : In what way does the proletarian differ from the serf?
Answer : The serf enjoys the possession and use of an instrument of production, a piece of land, in exchange for which he hands over a part of his product or performs labour. The proletarian works with the instruments of production of another for the account of this other, in exchange for a part of the product. The serf gives up, the proletarian receives. The serf has an assured existence, the proletarian has not. The serf is outside competition, the proletarian is in it. The serf frees himself either by running away to the town and there becoming a handicraftsman or by giving his landlord money instead of labour and products, thereby becoming a free tenant; or by driving his feudal lord away and himself becoming a proprietor, in short, by entering in one way or another into the owning class and into competition. The proletarian frees himself by abolishing competition, private property and all class differences.
-The Principles of Communism
This isn’t to say the serfs had it materially better, but that their mode of production was different. Their low level of technological development stood in the way of great progress, and we cannot return back to such a model, but instead should progress onward to Socialism now that Capitalism has largely run its course and centralized most modern industries for central planning and public ownership.
Marxism is useful for understanding this phenomena.
^ exactly what he said
It’s always funny when these dense contrarians completely bowl over the point of the person they replied to and respond to a non-sequitur showing that they’re uninterested in anything resembling a conversation.
I’m old enough that my grandpa in 1930’s was living not much different than a serf and was constantly malnourished, and it was in one of most fertile parts of Poland, country famous for its fertile fields (it’s even in name, Poland means “Land of the fields/farmlands”). And that was 70 years after serfdom was abolished, because before that it was one huge horror story and literal slavery.
In short: peasants did not had it good.
There’s a staunch libertarian view on Lemmy, wherein people will advocate for personal liberty ahead of technological progress. The Country Mouse has it better than the City Mouse, because he can own a gun and drive a big truck and smoke weed without the neighbors ratting him out to the cops. The lack of basic amenities - subways and school systems and high speed internet and big medical centers - is worth the increased personal autonomy.
The “Serfs had it better” trope takes this to its logical conclusion. Rolling back the technological frontier 500 years is worth it, because the surveillance/police state and the corporate oligopoly even on the fringe of society is seriously that bad.
I don’t agree. But I can’t really argue against it. This is just a personal preference. Its not any kind of objective truth.
The idea that medieval peasants somehow had more free time than the average modern american still is absolute bullshit as far as I’m aware. Unless “necessary preparations for survival” count as free time just because it’s not contracted work (it doesn’t that’s not what free time means).
The idea that medieval peasants somehow had more free time than the average modern american still is absolute bullshit
Paleontologists will tell you otherwise. One reason you had all those giant cathedrals going up in the Medieval Era stemmed from the enormous excess labor just wasting around in between harvest seasons.
Agricultural surplus creates free time. It’s the whole reason why people opt for farming over hunter gathering.
your highness, the peasants are bored out of their minds
oh yeah? put em to work building some crazy shit before they start killing each other for a thrill
This but unironically. I’ve got a coworker who took vacation days to help build a temple up in Pennsylvania. He was incredibly proud of his contribution and happy to participate.
I’m going to be the nerd who talks about how difficult it is for modern, post-Industrial Revolution humans to truly understand how medieval peasants lived. Really, this applies to how ancient and medieval people of all walks of life lived, but for now, let’s stick to the topic of this meme. Is it entirely relevant to this post? Eh, probably not, but I’m bored at work and in the mood to ramble.
That meme about how peasants had so many more days off than modern workers? Those “days off” were simply the days when their labor wasn’t solely for the benefit of their lord. The days they “worked” were the ones spent fulfilling their feudal obligations—working their lord’s fields to stock the larders of the nobility and clergy. The rest of the year was when peasants worked to sustain their own communities.
Make no mistake: a peasant’s life was one of constant toil. For a medieval peasant, there was no sharp distinction between work and home life like we have today. There were no modern conveniences either—everything required labor. When fields didn’t need to be tended, and livestock didn’t require care, that was the time for milling grain, baking bread, brewing ale, weaving cloth, etc. God, crafting and maintaining your clothes took a lot of work, not to mention repairing and upkeeping your cottage.
Granted, these duties were often divided among family and community members. Unless you were a hermit living alone in the woods, no one was expected to do it all themselves. One of the “nicer” aspects of medieval peasant life was the close bonds within families and communities. People provided for one another. Children and the elderly, while still expected to work, had lighter duties. Bartering and trading goods or services with neighbors was also common.
That said, I don’t want to romanticize their lives too much. Here are some of the harsher realities:
-
If you were a man, you could be levied into your lord’s army at any time. This meant marching far from home, risking death in battle, and providing your own equipment. If you were relatively well-off, this might mean a spear, a shield, and padded armor. If not, you’d bring whatever you had—likely a farm tool. Refusing to serve could result in being hanged.
-
If you weren’t called to war (because you were a woman, a child too young to fight, or too old or infirm), you lived in constant fear of armies rampaging through your village. They could destroy your home, steal your valuables, and rape you, regardless of age or gender. With your lord’s army far away, you’d be left to defend yourself, and running was often your best option.
-
Medical care was rudimentary. Alcohol was the primary painkiller, and while there were herbal remedies, their effectiveness was often questionable. Every illness or injury carried the risk of an agonizing death. Infections were almost always fatal. Childbirth was a leading cause of death for women, and as people aged, they faced constant pain with little relief.
Medieval peasants lived lives that, by our standards, were horrific: short, brutal, and full of hardship. They were at the mercy of powers far beyond their control—victims of the whims of history. Yet ignorance truly was bliss. They knew no other way of life. If they were blessed with good times, free of war, famine, or plague, many peasants could lead fulfilling lives, and some, may have even considered themselves happy.
-
This is a misinterpretation of a study on peasant life. It called certain religious days “holidays”. What it meant was those days were days they didn’t have to work for their lord. Peasants were obligated to work a certain number of days per year on the lord’s land. The other days they still had to work their own land. Agriculture was back breaking work and if you weren’t working in the fields you were constantly working on things like making cloth, repairing things, preparing food, etc.
It’s polyworking now, get with the times!
We better at least get off for a national dictator day out of this whole debacle.
Just banks and federal employees.
You will of course be required to be in the office that day.
Well hopefully Susan will bring in some dictator shaped cupcakes at least.
That was partly as a result of the Black Death reducing the workforce so much that it put the remaining population in a great bargaining position.
Given Trumps pick of RFK for HSS, I’d say give it a few years and you’ll be in a great position too.
You’re describing a few decades out of almost a thousand years of feudalism, in Europe specifically, and it wasn’t ever universally true.
A lot of things contributed to that. Not the least of which is the difference between what we’d consider a day off and what they’d consider a day off. Not to mention how they paid taxes and what was actually required of the medieval peasant.
Taxes could be paid in labor or produce. The guys doing the manual labor building a castle were likely to be paying taxes. They did that for up to a third of the year. The rest of the year was theirs to do with as they pleased, and the majority of that time would have been spent growing, gathering, hunting, or maintaining. Guild artisans had the closest thing to jobs that we’d think of them. Coopers made barrels, ropers roped. You had masons and blacksmiths and carpenters sure. Most people were growing and raising food, and maintaining their home. A day off was likely spent doing those things. They had so many partially because that time was needed intermittently.
They worked harder than we do. Every part of their life was harder, required more energy, and took more time.
Taking a day off to relax would have been exceedingly rare and probably maddeningly boring. Though they did party hard.
We don’t even get gruel, just Krusty brand imitation gruel. 9 out of 10 orphans can’t tell the difference.
I live for that imitation gruel. It’s what keeps me going with producing Gucci wallets for the streets of Hong Kong.
I don’t think that being a peasant was bad, it doesn’t seem to have been exploitative in the same way capitalism is. Peasants were largely farmers who grew food and provided the landowner with a percentage of their crop. They were integral to human survival and as far as I know the percentage taken by landowners was not comparable to the wealth extracted from workers today. Also they were essentially tasked with being in control of an area of land where they lived and worked.
Ah, the good old days of serfdom when peasants were tied to the land/manor and its Lord in a slave-like state.
You see some wild shit on Lemmy apparently.
Now we are tied to corporations and state as slave-likes
Almost. We are proletarians working under late-stage Capitalism, where markets have largely coalesced into monopolist syndicates and cartels, and competition is rapidly dying out. The conditions are ripe for siezure, public ownership, and central planning, ie Socialism.
You see wild shit on lemmy .world
To be fair, they aren’t entirely out of range of reasonableness here.
Question 8 : In what way does the proletarian differ from the serf?
Answer : The serf enjoys the possession and use of an instrument of production, a piece of land, in exchange for which he hands over a part of his product or performs labour. The proletarian works with the instruments of production of another for the account of this other, in exchange for a part of the product. The serf gives up, the proletarian receives. The serf has an assured existence, the proletarian has not. The serf is outside competition, the proletarian is in it. The serf frees himself either by running away to the town and there becoming a handicraftsman or by giving his landlord money instead of labour and products, thereby becoming a free tenant; or by driving his feudal lord away and himself becoming a proprietor, in short, by entering in one way or another into the owning class and into competition. The proletarian frees himself by abolishing competition, private property and all class differences.
-The Principles of Communism
We cannot simply pretend the serf and the proletarian share the same nature of exploitation, rather, Capitalism’s unfettered thirst for growth drives further exploitation and misery despite producing abundance, while feudalism did not share the same thirst for absolute growth overall, as technology largely didn’t allow for it until inventions in production that gave rise to the Proletariat and Bourgeoisie.
The serfs had it worse, but owned more of their production.
EPA and revitalize auto industry is obviously a conflict of interest.
I understand the point being made, but don’t knock gruel.
Yeah but we gots fraydum!
More dysentery also… like a LOT more dysentery. So much so that people often believed their soul exists in their lower abdomen because when you feel pain there you die shortly after.
Wow that’s a lot of dysentery.
Sorry your point lacks proper context based on reality.
So you’re not really a serf if you’ve got plumbing? The labor relationship with your employers isn’t the issue?
Well we could argue your whole comment lacks connection to the original post
That’s really a western Europe thing and American thing. Even then no where near as much as you’re suggesting, not for the last 10k years or so at least. Beer/wine taking over and replacing water drinking unironically eliminated most of that, and in other cultures sanitation prevented it. English serfs had a lot of dysentery though, since they were too stupid to use Roman infrastructure.
“Oh, you’re mad that you have to work 12/7 to stay alive? Well, have you considered that peasants didn’t have good healthcare?!? Hah, I bet you didn’t… Wait, you can’t afford healthcare either?..well, you’ll suffer and die from a modern illness rather than shitting yourself so you still aren’t allowed to complain! It’s all perfect now!”
You are a serf. removed, you live in Alsace. You are a peasant. You need to give your fuckin’ lord the grain. Your fucking children, you’ve had 15 children. You’ve never taken a bath. You’ve literally never. washed. your. penis. You’ve never used toilet paper. Motherfucker, you have worms. You are dying. You’ve had 40 children, 3 of them are alive. 2 of them are child soldiers in the Duke’s army.
removed, the greatest thing you can hope for is to die at the ripe old age of 36. You fucking can’t read. You don’t know what TV is. If you were transported into today, you would be the worst gamer of all time. You don’t know shit. You literally probably don’t even know what the direction ‘left’ is. I’m sure some Medieval guy is gonna get mad at me for this, removed I’ve been to the Renaissance Fair. I’ve eaten a large turkey wing, which the Juggalos call ‘removed beaters’, which I think is problematic but a funny thing to call them.
Motherfucker, you gotta recognize where you are, and then you gotta get past that. You gotta be unemotional. You can’t sink into this hole. You live in the oubliette. Your job is to crawl up the ladder, motherfucker. You live in the HOLE. You’re in the HOLE. You are a RAT. And the rat, when he’s in the hole gets fucked. People only throw trash in the hole.
You need to eat a body. And you need to carry the plague. And you need to carry a plague around this whole world, that will change this whole fuckin world. And all your enemies will vomit black bile and will choke on blood and will grow boils and die. But only if you get together with your other RATS. And you come up with some kind of super plague, to fuckin end your enemies and… END THIS NIGHTMARE
The dark cowboy rides again.
