background preloader


The prototypical bourgeois: Monsieur Jourdain, the protagonist of the play Le Bourgeois gentilhomme (1670), by Molière, is the best would-be nobleman that money can buy. In Marxist philosophy, the term bourgeoisie denotes the social class who owns the means of production and whose societal concerns are the value of property and the preservation of capital, in order to ensure the perpetuation of their economic supremacy in society.[3] Joseph Schumpeter instead saw the creation of new bourgeoisie as the driving force behind the capitalist engine, particularly entrepreneurs who took risks in order to bring innovation to industries and the economy through the process of creative destruction.[4] Etymology[edit] The 16th-century German banker Jakob Fugger and his principal accountant, M. History[edit] Denotations[edit] The Dictatorship of the Bourgeoisie[edit] Nomenclatura[edit] In France and French-speaking countries[edit] Related:  Societal evolution

Glossary of Terms: Bo Bonapartism First used in reference to the government established by Louis Bonaparte, who had been elected to the office of presidency in 1848. Three years following, on 2 December, 1851, he staged a coup d'etat against his government, setting up a military dictatorship in its place. Marx soon after wrote a popular pamphlet called the Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte "demonstrating how the class struggle in France created circumstances and relationships that made it possible for a grotesque mediocrity to play a hero's part." Bonapartism has been used to describe a government that forms when class rule is not secure and a military, police, and state bureaucracy intervenes to establish order. Further readings: Trotsky, The Rise of Hitler and Destruction of the German Left; and The Workers' State, Thermidor and Bonapartism. Bourgeoisie The class of people in bourgeois society who own the social means of production as their Private Property, i.e., as capital. Bourgeois Democracy V.I.

Bolsheviks revolt in Russia - HISTORY Led by Bolshevik Party leader Vladimir Lenin, leftist revolutionaries launch a nearly bloodless coup d’État against Russia’s ineffectual Provisional Government. The Bolsheviks and their allies occupied government buildings and other strategic locations in the Russian capital of Petrograd (now St. Petersburg) and within two days had formed a new government with Lenin as its head. Born Vladimir Ilich Ulyanov in 1870, Lenin was drawn to the revolutionary cause after his brother was executed in 1887 for plotting to assassinate Czar Alexander III. After the end of his exile, in 1900, Lenin went to Western Europe, where he continued his revolutionary activity. After the outbreak of the Russian Revolution of 1905, Lenin returned to Russia. Lenin opposed World War I, which began in 1914, as an imperialistic conflict and called on proletariat soldiers to turn their guns on the capitalist leaders who sent them down into the murderous trenches.

Paris Commune The Paris Commune (French: La Commune de Paris, IPA: [la kɔmyn də paʁi]) was a revolutionary and socialist government that briefly ruled Paris from 18 March until 28 May 1871.[3] The killing of two French army generals by soldiers of the Commune's National Guard and the refusal of the Commune to accept the authority of the French government led to its harsh suppression by the regular French Army in "La Semaine sanglante" ("The Bloody Week") beginning on 21 May 1871.[4] Debates over the policies and outcome of the Commune had significant influence on the ideas of Karl Marx and Vladimir Lenin.[5] Prelude to the Paris Commune[edit] On 2 September 1870, after his unexpected defeat at the Battle of Sedan in the Franco-Prussian War, Emperor Louis Napoleon III surrendered to the Prussian Chancellor, Otto von Bismarck. The population of Paris on the eve of Commune[edit] The radicalization of the Paris workers[edit] Radicals and revolutionaries[edit] The defenders of Paris[edit]

Soviet working class Employment[edit] Productivity[edit] Several Soviets expressed concern over the focus of sharp growth in per capita income over that of labour productivity. A problem was that wages in the Soviet Union could neither be used as a way of disciplining workers or as an incentive system, except in a limited capacity. Soviet workers were not controlled by the stick and carrot (the carrot being increased wages and the stick being unemployment). Women[edit] Suits for men are manufactured at the Bolshevichka garment factory by women A last, major campaign to increase women employment was initiated in the 1960s because of labour shortages across the country. Similar to capitalism, patriarchy and the role of women played an important part in Soviet development. Despite discrimination, several advances were made. Standard of living[edit] Working conditions[edit] Wages[edit] An average Soviet working-class family; this family lived in Kiev Social benefits[edit] References[edit] Notes[edit] Bibliography[edit]

Economic Manuscripts: Capital Vol. I - Chapter Six Karl Marx. Capital Volume One Chapter Six: The Buying and Selling of Labour-Power The change of value that occurs in the case of money intended to be converted into capital, cannot take place in the money itself, since in its function of means of purchase and of payment, it does no more than realise the price of the commodity it buys or pays for; and, as hard cash, it is value petrified, never varying. [1] Just as little can it originate in the second act of circulation, the re-sale of the commodity, which does no more than transform the article from its bodily form back again into its money-form. The change must, therefore, take place in the commodity bought by the first act, M-C, but not in its value, for equivalents are exchanged, and the commodity is paid for at its full value. We are, therefore, forced to the conclusion that the change originates in the use-value, as such, of the commodity, i.e., in its consumption. The owner of labour-power is mortal. Footnotes 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

October Revolution The October Revolution (Russian: Октя́брьская револю́ция, tr. Oktyabr'skaya revolyutsiya, IPA: [ɐkˈtʲæbrʲskəjə rʲɪvɐˈlʲʉtsɨjə]), officially known as the Great October Socialist Revolution (Russian: Вели́кая Октя́брьская социалисти́ческая револю́ция, tr. Velikaya Oktyabr'skaya sotsialisticheskaya revolyutsiya), and commonly referred to as Red October, the October Uprising or the Bolshevik Revolution, was a seizure of state power instrumental in the larger Russian Revolution of 1917. Etymology[edit] Initially, the event was referred as the October coup (Октябрьский переворот) or the Uprising of 25th, as seen in contemporary documents (for example, in the first editions of Lenin's complete works). The Great October Socialist Revolution (Russian: Вели́кая Октя́брьская Социалисти́ческая Революция, Velikaya Oktyabr'skaya sotsialisticheskaya revolyutsiya) was the official name for the October Revolution in the Soviet Union after the 10th anniversary of the Revolution in 1927. Background[edit]

Proletariat The proletariat (/ˌproʊlɪˈtɛəriːət/ from Latin proletarius) is a term used to describe the class of wage-earners (especially industrial workers) in a capitalist society whose only possession of significant material value is their labour-power (their ability to work);[1] a member of such a class is a proletarian. Usage in Roman law[edit] As defined in the Constitution of the Roman Republic, the proletarii constituted a social class of Roman citizens owning little or no property. Although included in one of the five support centuriae of the Comitia Centuriata, proletarii were largely deprived of their voting rights due to their low social status caused by their lack of "even the minimum property required for the lowest class"[4] and a class-based hierarchy of the Comitia Centuriata. Usage in Marxist theory[edit] A 1911 Industrial Worker publication advocating industrial unionism based on a critique of capitalism. See also[edit] Reference notes[edit] Further reading[edit] External links[edit]

Bolsheviks The Bolsheviks were the majority faction in a crucial vote, hence their name. They ultimately became the Communist Party of the Soviet Union.[6] The Bolsheviks came to power in Russia during the October Revolution phase of the Russian Revolution of 1917, and founded the Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic which would later become the chief constituent of the Soviet Union in 1922. The Bolsheviks, founded by Vladimir Lenin and Alexander Bogdanov, were by 1905 a major organization consisting primarily of workers under a democratic internal hierarchy governed by the principle of democratic centralism, who considered themselves the leaders of the revolutionary working class of Russia. History of the split[edit] In the 2nd Congress of the Russian Social Democratic Labour Party, held in Brussels and London during August 1903, Lenin and Julius Martov disagreed over the membership rules. Origins of the name[edit] Composition of the party[edit] The average party member was very young.

Dictatorship of the proletariat In Marxist socio-political thought, the dictatorship of the proletariat refers to a state in which the proletariat, or the working class, has control of political power.[1][2][3] The term, coined by Joseph Weydemeyer, was adopted by the founders of Marxism, Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, in the 19th century. It was expected that the capitalist class (the bourgeoisie) would use military force to remain in power whenever the proletariat attempted to replace it, and therefore the proletariat would have to respond with violence of its own.[4][5] Both Marx and Engels argued that the short-lived Paris Commune, which ran the French capital for three months before being repressed, was an example of the dictatorship of the proletariat. In the 20th century, the October Revolution in Russia overthrew the provisional government and initiated the establishment of the Russian Socialist Federative Soviet Republic, which would become a founding member of the Soviet Union Theoretical approaches[edit]

Bourgeoisie Encyclopedia of Modern Europe: Europe Since 1914: Encyclopedia of the Age of War and Reconstruction COPYRIGHT 2006 Thomson Gale The long existence of the term bourgeoisie in the various European languages and the multiplicity of meanings it took on over time, beginning in the Middle Ages and in different historical and geographic contexts, make a comparative study of this group throughout Europe in the twentieth century particularly problematic. For ease of translation from country to country, we here limit ourselves to a minimalist definition that identifies this group with the upper, nonaristocratic strata of society possessing wealth, income, and/or educational levels that are clearly above average. According to Jürgen Kocka, the bourgeoisie would then represent, depending on the country, from 5 to 15 percent of the population at the beginning of the twentieth century, depending on whether or not we include the petty bourgeoisie and the middle classes. Beller, Steven. Joly, Hervé.

Class conflict Class conflict, frequently referred to as class warfare or class struggle, is the tension or antagonism which exists in society due to competing socioeconomic interests and desires between people of different classes. The view that the class struggle provides the lever for radical social change for the majority is central to the work of Karl Marx and the anarchist Mikhail Bakunin. However, the discovery of the existence of class struggle is not the product of their theories; their theories can instead be seen as a response to the existence of class struggles. Usage In the past the term Class conflict was a term used mostly by socialists, who define a class by its relationship to the means of production — such as factories, land and machinery. The anarchist Mikhail Bakunin argued that the class struggle of the working class, peasantry and poor had the potential to lead to a social revolution involving the overthrow of ruling elites, and the creation of libertarian socialism. Arab Spring

The driving forces of the Russian Revolution | International Socialist Review The soldiers’ revolution No revolution resembles those that preceded it. Each has a particular identity. This is why we ask every time a revolution breaks out: is it indeed one? We evaluate it with reference to old schemas and we shake our heads with amazement as regards its “abnormalities.” Equally the revolution, which reared its head on February 23, 1917, has now to be evaluated in a critical fashion. Even if the underlying reasons for the collapse of the 1905 revolution were diverse, the main reason is the fact that the bourgeoisie passed over to the side of Tsarism; it also resulted from the help that foreign capital provided to the bourgeoisie. The soldiers’ uprising followed on from the workers’ revolution; but between the two and a so-called military revolution there was no similarity. It was not by a command from on high, but by the spark that spread from the street into the barracks that the army was set in motion. The imperialist revolutionaries The role of the working class

Dialectic Dialectic (also dialectics and the dialectical method) is a method of argument for resolving disagreement that has been central to European and Indian philosophy since antiquity. The word dialectic originated in ancient Greece, and was made popular by Plato in the Socratic dialogues. The dialectical method is discourse between two or more people holding different points of view about a subject, who wish to establish the truth of the matter guided by reasoned arguments.[1] The term dialectics is not synonymous with the term debate. The Sophists taught aretē (Greek: ἀρετή, quality, excellence) as the highest value, and the determinant of one's actions in life. Socrates favoured truth as the highest value, proposing that it could be discovered through reason and logic in discussion: ergo, dialectic. Principles It is also possible that the rejection of the participants' presuppositions is resisted, which then might generate a second-order controversy.[7] Western dialectical forms

Aristocrats and Bourgeois Aristocrats and Bourgeois The eighteenth century was an aristocratic century, particularly in England. In all areas of western Europe, the aristocratic class gained economic and social stature. In England they even achieved political supremacy. Aristocrats were not the only class to benefit from economic and social transformations in eighteenth century. The portrait of Mr. and Mrs. The political victory of the English aristocracy came with their successful overthrow of King James II, and his replacement by William and Mary. In England, and even in those countries where aristocrats did not triumph over monarchs, the aristocracy gained social and political influence by virtue of its growing prosperity. The bourgeoisie expanded significantly in western Europe as trade to the east Indies and the Americas boomed. Which would prevail, the values that these classes had in common, or those which divided them? The eighteenth century was in several respects the age of aristocracy.