Printable View
Among other factors mentioned in his book A HISTORY OF RUSSIA, Nicholas Riasanovsky notes that Soviet historians blamed feudalism as a major factor for the fall of Kievan Rus. Were they being defensive given that feudalism was considered one of the 'ills of capitalist society'. Or was it the choice of the Grand Prince to subdivide the Kievan state into different kingdoms ruled by his sons instead of applying primogeniture. (You see, some historians have convoluted history).
Of course all the early feudal states were very unstable because the local lords usually have more actual power than king of whoever above them. And there was no idea of "nation" yet to stick the land together. There is nothing to blame, it is how the things work.
Feudalism has nothing to do with capitalism, all soviet historians knew it. Capitalism was considered to be more "progressive" than feudalism (with socialism being even more "progressive" :) )
As for Kievan Rus feudal system, it was rather different from one of the Western Europe, namely with less emphasis on the primogeniture but included intensive rotation. For some time this system worked well but was unable to survive Mongol invasion.
As it-ogo said feudalism was not considered one of ills of capitalist society, and was not considered a bad or a good thing per se (not without a context)
A little oftop to help you to understand this kind of thinking better:
Soviet historians firmly believed in Marx's theory of socioeconomic formations (which is quite logical, and I think it's not far from the truth). According to this theory there are certain laws of history that determine the progress of human society. "Formations" change in a certain order (in very rare cases a society can skip a step in a really powerful leap).
The chain of formations is as follows:
Primitive society - Slaveholding system - Feudalism - Capitalism - Imperialism - ...
Every next formation is more progressive and has more productive power than the previous one. So, for example, surprising as it may sound to you, from Soviet point of view capitalism was a GOOD thing when it appeared, because it was a step forward from the feudal society. The problem was that Soviet ideologists thought that they foresaw the next step, and that it was a so called "Communism", which they tried to build ahead of time to gain an advantage. Socialism (and the Soviet Union as a socialistic state) was supposed to be a transitional step between Capitalism/Imperialism and Communism.
This statement in brackets is the essence of Lenin's modification of Marx theory. :DQuote:
Originally Posted by gRomoZeka
Well, yeah. It appears we were NOT a rare case. :DQuote:
Originally Posted by it-ogo
Feudalism in the Philippines was one of the root causes of PKP (Partido Komunista ng Pilipinas (Moscow oriented) rebellion in the 1950's. But when reforms were passed in the law-making body of the Philippines, the rebellion resulted in complete cessation. PKP then waged its own parliamentary form of struggle which was welcomed by ex-President Marcos. My father Senator Aquino was a negotiator for the government when the PKPs were actively recruiting peasants. Since it started campaigning through electoral process nobody among them were victims of salvaging or disappearances. If ever they suffer from these human rights violations, the Communist Party of the Philippines-New People's Army (CPP-NPA) are the ones responsible. Today, peasants and landowners get along well because the percentage alloted to the farmer is 70% while 30% of the harvest goes to the landowner. The peasant can opt for fixed rent if he likes to. So no matter how small the harvest, the farmer is assured that he will get 70 percent of the harvest. 20 percent of these 70 usually is in the form of working capital. So the peasant profits from the 50 percent. If a peasant is occupying the land as a seasonal worker, he is entitled to devote all the time to his plot (which is 4 times bigger than the private plot in communist collective farms) where he can plant vegetables and fruits. Again 30 percent goes to the landlord, 70 percent goes to the peasant. The only time his labor is needed is during planting and harvesting which amounts only to 5 days all in all. The peasant in the commune devotes 300 days in the collective farm while 65 days are spent in his private plot. Under feudalism, 360 days are devoted by the peasant to his private plot which is 5 times bigger than those in the collective and 5 days in the hacienda or land owned by the landlord. Usually these lands are devoted to sugar cane planting or corn or rice planting. So you see, Joma Sison is the object of ridicule and the antagonist in the Biblical verse which states "They want to eat the cake and have it too"-The government through the Department of Agrigulture sends its agricultural techincians to the outlying provinces and surrounding towns to give advice and donate seedlings or seeds to the farmers. These advice and seeds are free of charge. Pesticides are sold to them without the usual transportation fees. The government has done a lot to improve the lives of peasants. But the CPP-NPA terrorize them and extorts revolutionary taxes which they, the peasants, cannot afford. Usually their harvests are confiscated just the way Che Guevarra did to the peasants or campesinos in Bolivia. If they resist, they end up dead. Farming is such a noble trade. I would like to be a farmer instead of working in the city. But the NPAs are all over the place, terrorizing the people.= end of quote, Benigno Simeon Aquino III, President of the Philippines; Hacienda Luisita landowner stockholder. :lol: :ROFL:
Capitalism is perfected by giving the peasants or their siblings or descendants the right to migrate to the cities. In China nowadays they erect fences and locked gates to stop the peasants from migrating to the cities. They find less strenuous jobs in the cities. A lot of them have connections through the town mayors or councilors. So they end up working for the government doing clerical work. Some work in factories. The workers are unionized in the PHilippines. So they can dictate their wages. If workers in factories are said to be impoverished, why is it that every labor union meeting, cases and cases of beer or liquor are flowing? They do have money to sustain themselves. They just don't save it for the "rainy days". If one is really really unlucky and cannot make both ends meet, ex-President Gloria Macapagal has institutionalized the 'social safety net'. Social workers can take care of the elderly or the children while their sons and daughters go to work.
But inspite of the feasibility of feudalism ala 70-30, the lawmaking body made land reform imperative and mandatory. We used to own thousands of hectares of lands. We submitted our lands to land reform. The government compensated us by giving us shares of stocks in Land Bank of the PHilippines. The amount we get from these are miniscule. NOnetheless we are proud to be donors under Marcos-style landreform. My grandfather actually volunteered all our lands to ex-President Marcos. I doubt if the feudal landlord Mr. Joma Sison, Sr., father of Joma Sison, Chairman of CPP-NPA, tagged as a terrorist group, surrendered all their land. Greedy bastards commies!! He might do it but he gets hundreds of millions of dollars from his Chinese spymaster handlers from China.
If your harvest turns out to be poor, then pray. "Be wise as serpents (JOma) and harmless as doves, Be like those sparrows flying in droves...They don't know if tomorrow they'll eat or not..They don't know that God loves them a lot"-Holy Bible
Surrender yourselves to economic and health uncertainty..Surrender yourselves to God Almighty..Do not imitate the devil Sison and his son, Janos Sison aka MSantor..
What does this have to do with Russian culture, travel, history?Quote:
Originally Posted by heartfelty
You notice that the posters were discussing the validity of Marxism vis-a-vis feudalism. PKP was a communist party in the Philippines sponsored by the old Soviet Union. The decision of the PKP to attain power through parliamentary struggle was surely influenced by Moscow political commissars. Feudalism was a lingering issue in the Philippines. PKP (Moscow-oriented) was a communist political party whose members pushed for reforms. Crop sharing used to be 50-50. Through the PKP which was funded by Moscow and the Communist Party of the Soviet Union it was reduced to 70-30 which became institutionalized because peasants were amenable to it. So you see, the Soviet Union had a hand in pushing for reforms here in the PHilippines through the Partido Komunista ng Pilipinas (Moscow oriented). That was a great achievement. I am proud of my father who was a member of this political party. NPA used to stand for 'nice people around'. PKP does not have to hide under accidentally construed semantics. We PKPs are the good communists. We are proud to have been good and not terrorists. "We do not intend to rule by coercion nor challenge an all-powerful AFP or US Army into a lopsided battle where they have all the chances of winning....We together with the AFP and US Army are 'not (devils) seeking death'"-PKP.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lampada
Jose Maria Sison has been given so many chances to repent. He was offered a job in the legitimate government which has the mandate of the people, it being elected by majority. He was offered amnesty so many times under so many succeeding governments. He was encouraged to run for office. He was encouraged to seek legitimation through the electoral process. Inspite of having murdered hundred of victims both from the government and PKP he has been granted the right to his lawyer, a right which was denied to dissidents by his icon Mao-tse Tung. He was given the benefit of the doubt inspite of not having corrected the murderous and rapacious Mao-tse Tung invoking the motto: Mao, right or wrong! We have no issues with his daughter. We welcome her in our house. She has been welcome to dinner and lunch. But she has a different motive for visiting us (me and my mother to our house). She wants us to be her 'bitterest enemy inside the household'. One reason I kept on criticizing JOma. His family is made up of evil, scheming diabolical and unrepentant communists who are anti-social and difficult to deal with. How can you deal with unrepentant devils who know that Capitalist Christ is alive at present and still insist on their decadent irrational Maoism?
The Bible preaches us not to be impressed or overwhelmed with those people like Joma Sison whose knowledge of world events has been merited by the same people who profess to know wordly matters like Marxism, Leninism, Maoism. These people are nothing compared to those who have not finished high school but are proficient in their knowledge of the Bible. The church attendee, the Metropolitan of Kiev, the Pope and the Catholic priests, the outstanding members of Iglesia ni Cristo or the Filipino Church of Christ, these people are far more intelligent and wiser than Joma who has mastered Maoism. These people are wiser because they are not concerned with wordly matters instead,their spiritual salvation has been their main prerogatives. You are far more intelligent than Sison. You are a genius. How can a cum laude University of the Philippines professor (kuno) profess intelligence or ingenuity when he has not mastered the ways and means to attain salvation. The poor squatter of Iglesia ni Cristo is wiser and more ingenious. He worked hard and studied hard for the salvation of his soul. Joma Sison is an idiot when it comes to spiritual salvation. He should have been saved if he, his wife and children have attended Sunday school. How can one brag that he has 'gained the whole world but has lost his soul'. =@
I bet that the first thing that the evil son of Joma, Janos Sison aka MSantor would do is ingratiate himself with Hindus, Jews, Moslems, Sikhs, Buddhists and incite them to mauling me for professing belief in Christ. He is capable of doing that. He can provoke me with 'cough, cough'. He then goes to jail for violation of the right to freedom of religion..