Xinshun 1730

Chapter 1443 The crooked has become

After understanding his concept of "productivity".

After understanding his understanding of the state as a tool to protect the development of productive forces.

It is also easy to come to the principle of "poorness leads to tariff protection, and prosperity leads to free trade" in Lister's economics.

Note that Lister is not against free trade.

However, his attitude towards free trade theory can be deduced from his definition and understanding of productive forces and his cognition of the state as an abstract necessary tool for the development of productive forces.

Namely: Britain is a first-mover country, and the wars in Europe have caused a large amount of capital to flow to Britain. Your British industry has already developed, and you have an absolute advantage over other countries.

At this time, you, the United Kingdom, shouted Adam Smith's free trade theory, which was not taken seriously and activated at the beginning.

Isn't the UK still doing this to safeguard its own national interests?
And you, Adam Smith, when you came up with the theory of free trade, Britain's advantages had already been established, so you are clearly a nationalist, but your policies that are beneficial to the country are based on universal, world, free trade in name.

Therefore, the United Kingdom, which was shouting for free trade at that time and had already established absolute advantages, was not universal, world-wide, or free-trade at all, but centered on national interests, or in other words, maintaining the rational conditions for the development of its own productive forces. of.

Therefore, it can be concluded that Germany, as a late-developing country, must cover up and take its core.

Since the starting point of the British policy is based on national interests, it just holds the banner of "free trade" under the first-mover advantage.

Then, Germany, which is a latecomer, naturally has to take national interests as the cornerstone, but based on reality, it wants to take the banner of "tariff protection".

Therefore, Liszt is definitely not at the root of his opposition to free trade.

Rather, "if you are poor, you will be protected by tariffs, if you are rich, you will be free trade."

It's just that the first-mover countries, or some advantaged countries, can package things that are beneficial to their own countries with things like world and freedom.

But in essence, just like the free trade of the United Kingdom, it is just a policy and rhetoric for "the development of the country's productive forces".

The productivity here is the productivity defined by Liszt, not the concept of productivity in Lao Ma’s political economy.

under this definition.

A strong state is needed to complete the German customs union to facilitate the development of this productivity.

This is Germany.

The intervention of a strong state is needed to complete the development of industry and commerce. A detailed "Report on Manufacturing Industry" is needed, including a series of industrial policies including copper, coal, timber, grain, silk, steel, and glass. Specific support methods include subsidies, incentives, export tax rebates, tariff increases, etc...

This is America's Hamilton.

A strong country is needed to protect and promote free trade with gunboats, troops, bayonets, etc. under the condition of achieving first-mover advantage.

This is British free trade.

Wait, wait, the ideas are all in the same line.

Here, the "productivity" defined by Liszt is more similar to the concrete "industrialization".

Here, productivity does not only include science and technology, factories, equipment, machinery, products and so on.

It also includes political system, social and cultural ethics, social operation form, law and other factors.

In simple terms, it can be understood as "industrialization" - a set including technology, factories, products, and political systems, social ethics, cultural products, social operations, laws of the industrial age, and consciousness of the industrial age Etc., etc.

That is, "industrialization," or the industrial age, was seen as a goal.

The state, or the political power, will be used as a "tool" to achieve this goal.

Everything is aimed at the development of "productivity" under this definition.

The difference in definition is that the productivity defined by Lao Ma does not include production relations.Rather, it is the answer to "seeking what determines the relations of production and the superstructure", that is, productivity.This is a logical deduction.

The productivity defined by Liszt is an intuitive observation impression. It can even be said that it is based on the concept of "national wealth" as a starting point, an intuitive and concrete explanation for the development of the national economy, and even a concrete description of "industrialization". ——It’s like describing a plant, what kind of leaves, what color are the flowers, etc.”

Of course, Quesnay also talked about the word productivity.But Quesnay is a Physiocrat, based on the belief that agriculture is the only value-creating industry. Therefore, the term productivity here in Quesnay refers specifically to agriculture.

Therefore, the word productivity has different meanings in different articles and theories of different people.

To use a crude biological analogy.Lister's productivity is similar to the stage of descriptive biology, which is to describe what plants look like; Laoma's productivity is similar to the stage of molecular biology, which is to explain why this thing is like this, what is determined by it, and what is determined by genes Is the flower purple or black.

Under the current situation of Dashun, which one is easier to be understood and accepted?

In Dashun’s society where the imperial power is still very stable, the bourgeoisie is shrinking, and agriculture still occupies a dominant position, plus Liu Yu’s subtle influence of taking meaning out of context, it is obvious that Liszt is more acceptable to Dashun’s practical school. productivity concept.

After all, the cornerstone of Liu Yu's deception is derived from the definition of "total national wealth".

And from this cornerstone, the so-called concept of "ineffective labor in the macroscopic sense of small farmers on small plots of land" was introduced.

Then from "ineffective labor in the macro sense", the idea of ​​"industry and commerce to accommodate more people and create effective labor" was introduced.

In the end, the description of "industrial and commercial development to accommodate more population" is essentially the concept of "productivity" in Lister's economics.

Including laws, ethics, regulations, national policies after the development of industry and commerce, as well as technology, machines, factories, etc.

Here, the concept of "productivity" is distorted into a "prophetic description of a society with developed industries and commerce".

Rather than the interpretation of social production relations such as the pre-Qin system, Zhou ritual utopia, small peasant economy, imperial power, landlords, gentry, and tenancy.

Once productivity is understood in this way, many questions naturally arise.

For example, "the first-mover countries are correct, so they are correct", you see, the future is already there, if you are different from some countries that are more technologically developed, then you must be wrong.

After all, since it is a "descriptive" stage, then a "grown plant" is placed there alive, and you just transform yourself into that.

If you are not like that, you have to think first that you must be doing something wrong.If the flowers on the opposite side are not as "bright" as yours, then you should first consider whether there is something wrong with your definition of "bright".

This distortion of the concept of productivity naturally has many negative problems.

However, in Dashun at this time, these negative issues do not have practical significance for the time being.

On the contrary, this concept of "productivity", which is more concrete, easier to understand, and more easily imagined by ordinary people, essentially condenses an industrialized society that includes production relations, has a strong ability to spread.

And this communication ability is closely related to the current situation of Dashun.

There are many different interpretations of Dashun's current situation.

Liu Yu’s interpretation of the “summary of national wealth” and the fact that Dashun’s yield per mu before industrialization had basically reached the peak of the Niu Geng Iron Age made this concept of “industrialization” “productivity” clearer.

Take North China as an example.

Is three-cropping every two years and intensive farming an improvement in productivity compared to rough agriculture with one crop a year?
If you want to say, no, it is not wrong to say that the increase in productivity requires the mechanization of tractors in large-scale production and the addition of chemical fertilizers. That is not wrong, but it does not have practical significance now.

Assume, two years and three crops, the average yield per mu is 150 jin, and a certain area needs 10 laborers.

But once a year, rough agriculture, with an average yield of 100 catties per mu, only 3 laborers are needed to plant a certain area.

However, this is correct for North America, which has a small population and a large population, or North America, the United Kingdom, and even France, where the industrial and commercial population is insufficient.

For Dashun, which has no shortage of potential wage laborers at all, it is correct and has practical significance to cultivate three crops for two years and invest more labor. The agricultural revolution is called the agricultural revolution in the UK, and it is called the agricultural revolution in Dashun. Yield per mu went backwards.

The problem is that, even so, in North China, even though more labor is needed for two-year and three-cooking, macroscopically, many people are still "macroscopically ineffective labor".

Even if it is said that from two years of three crops to the extreme of intensive cultivation at this time, there is still no need for so many people.Reducing the agricultural population by a few million more will not have any effect on the total grain output.

This is the basis of the status quo of "industry and commerce to accommodate more people and transform them into effective labor" advocated by Liu Yu.

That is to say, the basic appearance of the future where crude industrialization turns into productive forces—it is easy to imagine, and people can understand it as farmers with an average of 30 mu of land per household, while everyone outside the household average is working in industry and commerce.

Even if it is said that it has been reduced to 30 mu of land per household, intensive cultivation, and three crops in two years.The average household has 30 mu of land, which is not much, because the pasture land for livestock is also considered, and the intensive cultivation without livestock is not enough for even basic manure.

Rao has been compressed from "a family of five, with a field of one hundred mu" to "a family of five, with a cow of [-] mu of land", which has shrunk by one-third, and may even continue to shrink.

Taking Shandong as an example, if it is compressed like this, in essence, Shandong can still use nearly 1000 million people to invest in industry and commerce while ensuring that the agricultural grain output remains the same. The red line of the collapse of the farming era, and another saying of "a family of five, 3 mu of land and a cow" is actually 6 mu of land per agricultural population.

Therefore, it can be simply deduced that in this "industrialization" model of "resolving invalid labor", at least a social model should be built in which "at least several million people in Shandong make a living by industry and commerce".

This is a model that a person of the Dashunshi School can understand and believe in.

Of course, this model, in the thinking of some people in the Dashunshi School, is derived based on the aforementioned "Malthusian economics" as the cornerstone: foreign trade under the concept of so-called "effective demand", the fruits of victory in World War I , the materialistic class of the country, officers and soldiers, students, landlords, nobles, etc.Coupled with the addition of some radicals who add small farmers with equal land to "effective demand", it is theoretically possible to support a model of "industrial and commercial society with millions of people" without collapsing.

That's not to say the model is correct.

Rather, people cannot create history as they please, nor do they create history under conditions chosen by themselves, but under conditions directly encountered, established, and inherited from the past.

What are the conditions that Dashun’s Practical School directly encounters, established, and inherited from the past?

Under such conditions, let them imagine a truly industrialized appearance?There is nowhere to even copy it, and no chance to see it with your own eyes.

This is the same as those who can only understand the era of super-light speed, wormholes, and space battleships, but they are still the core of modern times.

The people of Dashun can only build a model based on the current basis, then think about the appearance of that model based on the current basis, and finally draw a conclusion through simple calculation: the theory is feasible.

This is enough.

In this process, through the continuous struggle between various classes, it may eventually become completely different from the fantasy at this time. This is a normal, struggle, and historical development.

But at this time, after constructing this model, these people naturally hope to use the state as a tool to strengthen it, so as to use this tool to realize the development of Liszt's "productivity" that includes the meaning of production relations.

Thus, in Dashun, the distorted scriptures have gradually taken shape, with a beginning and an end.

The Malthusian set is an interpretation of the status quo that there are a large number of materialistic classes in Dashun, while the tenant farmers and small farmers basically have no "effective demand".

Liszt's set is as the goal of national wealth, and the new school hopes that the state will be used as a tool to achieve their goals.This is in line with the Confucian dream of the rule of three generations, which must be realized by the state, policies, and enlightenment.

Only the last "ultimate goal" remains, which is closely related to the positioning, knowledge, and interests of the group of people in the Practical School, as well as Dashun's small-scale farmer's fantasy of equalizing land and average thoughts since ancient times.It is precisely because of this that this utopian "ultimate goal" has a utopian "goal of benevolence and righteousness" that conforms to the traditional thinking of people-oriented and equal fields in the distorted fantasy of "industrialization".

It has a head and a tail, and there are entities that are easy to imagine and understand. It spreads naturally, and it will not simply die.

And if we want to talk about this ending, we have to talk about the class attributes of the Dashunshi School.

And if we want to talk about this, we have to mention the "self-deprecating" of the Dashunshi School over the years - saying that they are not scholars.

The subtext of this kind of self-deprecation is: first, scholars themselves are a kind of superior status; second, we are not opposed to superiority, and what we mutter is that only those who have studied in the imperial examinations are considered scholars. Some people still hope that the emperor will regard them as scholars one day in the future; three, in fact, we are the truly capable scholars, and those people are considered astute scholars and learned people?

And Saint-Simon's doctrine, politically, is precisely in line with the demands of Dashun and the Real School.

The society is simply divided into three parts.

Part I: Learned Men.

Part Two: Those who are afraid of change, those with vested interests.

Part Three: The rest.

So, according to this division, bloodshed, revolution, what, how terrible?
Then, the people in the second part directly hand over the ruling power to the people in the first part, and let the [real scholars] rule without bloodshed, and "give us the position that should belong to us", and then Wouldn't it be beautiful to be guided by these real scholars to the new era?
For Dashun’s Practical School, their self-mockery is not actually saying, “Actually, we are the learned people, we are the scholars, the rulers should be us, and those of you who are so-called scholars, you are clearly vested Interested parties, hurry down and make room for Lao Tzu."

"If we want to rule and govern, this country can't take off?"

And this goes back to the previous question: Lao Ma has always opposed the interpretation of productivity mixed with production relations, but in Dashun, productivity is a distorted concept, not a concept that explains production relations, but a Abstract yet concrete future of social development.

It's actually similar to things like Utopia, learning from the east and learning from the west, rule of three generations, and so on.However, it is based on the development of industry and commerce, or fashionable industrialization.

Therefore, it is easy to produce such fantasy.

Utopian definitions, drawing fanciful conclusions.

(End of this chapter)