Who will own property after the workers' revolution is over?
There are two things that can happen: first of all, with the revolution, most of the bourgeoisie could become proletarian, and vice-versa. With the last argument, we could assume that the situation won’t change,because the bourgeoisie would still own most of the properties.
If we consider our second argument, if the revolution leads to the point in which opportunities appear for everyone (specially for the proletarian), to earn what they really deserve with their hard work; this means that, although the bourgeoisie could still own the land, but the proletarian will still have the chance to work for a betterfuture and earn what they deserve with their hard work.
What are the means of production?
Factors of production: Land, capital, labor, knowledge. The bourgeoisie was the party that could accomplish or the ones that had all four characteristics on what are the means of production. They possess the lands, they have the money to “work” the land and to pay their workers, and they had the people(later on the machinery), and of course, they had the knowledge to work the land and to get the best of it, to get all of the benefits they could get.
What does the community woman argument talks about?
From the communist side, argue that the women is more useful for the family, and they don’t mean this in a racist way, but as a complement in comparison to what the bourgeoisie women did. They saythat proletarian women contribute with useful actions, when in the bourgeoisie side, they just don’t contribute as much, because their economic and social situation doesn’t ask for more.
This history of all societies is the history of struggles between what?
The fight of social classes. What the proletarian we’re mainly looking for was balance in the society, to be treated as equal.
“Freemanand slave, patrician and plebeian, lord and serf, guild-master and journeyman, in a word, oppressor and oppressed, stood in constant opposition to one another, carried on an uninterrupted, now hidden, now open fight, a fight that each time ended, either in a revolutionary re-constitution of society at ralge, or in the common ruin of the contending classes.”
What are the consequences for theindustrial worker of the use of division of labor and the machines?
We consider that, mainly, the workers would lose their sense of work, they would lose their objective, their finality of work, because, all of the time they invested in the land, all the hard work, was meaningless when the machines started to do everything by them, so they would spend lots of hours doing nothing.
“… the work of theproletarians has lost all individual character, and consequently, all charm for the workman. He becomes an appendage of the machine, and it is only the most simple, most monotonous, and most easily acquired knack, that is required of him. Hence, the cost of production of a workman is restricted, almost entirely, to the means of subsistence that he requires for his maintenance, and for thepropagation of his race. But the price of a commodity, and therefore also of labour, is equal to its cost of production. In proportion therefore, as the repulsiveness of the work increases, the wage decreases. Nay more, in proportion as the use of machinery and division of labour increases, in the same proportion the burden of toil also increases, whether by prolongation of the working hours, by increaseof the work exacted in a given time or by increased speed of the machinery, etc.”
What does this phrase mean? :
All that is solid melts into air, all that is holy is profaned, and man is at last obligated to face with sober senses his real conditions of life, and his relations with his kind.
The bourgeoisie cannot exist without constantly revolutionizing the instruments of production, and...