Capitalism — the history of the big robbery

1. Preamble

Modern capitalism, a descendant of the deceased in the throes of the Roman capitalism, was born in the so-called "Long 16th century", extended from the mid-15th century. until the mid-17th century. "Child" immediately showed rather strong appetite and strong teeth. This was the era of large-scale redistribution of property and put it undiplomatically, the era of the great robbery.

In Europe, this time to the onset of the peasants, which occurs with the confiscation of communal and small-scale peasant land ownership.

The property became sacred only when fell into the hands of the emerging capitalist class and bourgeoisified nobility. Seniors took away the land from the peasants, the urban capitalists bought the land from the seniors. Masses of people were deprived of their own means of production and subsistence. The elites have decided in their own way the question of surplus rural population. The courts sentenced landless peasants who have become vagrants, to torture, executions, sent to the gallows and sentenced to hard labor. Hungry proletariat had to give away their work for any employer closest (ie lowest) price. I robbed the peasant had a "big choice" between the chopping block, a prison-workhouse, and so that's a "free hiring."

His "liberated" labor does not become a commodity on the open labor market, as endeavor to provide the Liberals. He turned to slavery to the collective capitalist. The alternative — death. The hunt for looted peasants (vagrants, "heretics", "witch") masked the offensive of capital, pounding them into textiles, mines and factories.

Even in places where there is an authority lords (lords, barons), farmers are beginning to work under pressure to the needs of the world capitalist market — comes "the second edition of serfdom" in the terminology of Marx, or "secondary serfdom" according to Braudel. Panschina-base service in Poland, Silesia, Livonia, Hungary comes to 6, and then 7 days a week, the farmer does not have the time working on his site and gets soldered-mesyachinu a camper. [1] Pan, driving raw Hanseatic and Dutch wholesalers, more interested in land and serfs in the east and the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth Panskoe conducts the "Drang nach Osten" colonization of the West Russian lands. Swallows the Galicia-Volyn Rus, Polotsk, Dnieper, jumps over the Dnieper, sneaking across the Smolensk-Moscow Upland to Mozhaysk. Russian peasant has to provide Pan-syreviki supplies to the West European market, where the influx of South American silver and policy enclosures sharply vskrutili grain prices.

At this time, the capital goes to the world stage, and is entered into the society of subsistence and small-scale farming, destroys them, like an eraser erases the nation, with its belated development, enslaving their remains. Were doomed to extinction culture of Native Americans, and in the most developed regions of the New World, where, complex technology intensive agriculture, such as chinampy (artificial island). Begins pumping slave labor from Africa to the Americas via the transatlantic "raboprovod." Unable to plantation slavery of the Indians destroyed and replaced by the African-American workaholics. For half a century after the arrival of the Western colonizers American Indian population fell from 75 million to 9 million. [2] The hunt for African slaves to the American plantations launched a long-term process of depopulation of Africa. With the cannon began firing Albuquerque destruction of civilization Indian Ocean, soon will come to replace the Portuguese Dutch and English.

Capitalism is gradually developing a new social system — the bourgeois nations, supporting their homeostasis due to severe exploitation of the poor and the weak odnoplemennikov societies of the world periphery. In a sense, the principle of the bourgeois nation is vampirism. The stability of a vampire is achieved by increasing the entropy in the systems of the donor.

The new Protestant ethic reflects the new principles of management: profit maximization and cost reduction, which is related to the former and morality.

2. English model of capitalism, beginning

As shown I.Vallerstayn, the expansion of states and societies have always been on the periphery of the means of access Western capital (the core of the capitalist world-system) to new resources. "The power of the state machinery in the states of the center is a function of the weakness of other state machines. Therefore, the interference of foreigners through wars, disruptive, and diplomacy is the fate of the peripheral countries. "One of the ways this is a psychological intervention — suggestion endearing people that he defective, with an ugly history, with an innate slavery, aggression, violence, disrespect for property and t . § But there is de nation, which has always reigned supreme liberty, democracy, respect for property rights and humanitarianism. Therefore remains unfinished narodtse submit a "nation of free people." As a stronghold of "freedom", "democracy" and the like agents of Western influence is very long and very often present England. And I think the main advantage of Britain — is the ability to break down and absorb the sacrifice of all sizes, while maintaining that deadpan expression. "She's dead," and that's it. Sweep them under the carpet traces of their crimes British ruling elite learned to perfection.

Marine waters separating the British Isles from the European continent, have become the source of two of England's wealth. By facilitating trade exchanges, they defended it from the powerful continental enemies.

Two main resource of the first phase of the industrial revolution — coal and iron ore — were in England in "close proximity" and in abundance. In Yorkshire, Lancashire and other parts of the iron ore and coal deposits almost creeps on each other. A relatively small area has deposits of copper, tin, lead and silver. Coal and ore located near the main shopping resource — the ice-free ports, through which could be the export of finished products and import additional quantities of raw materials. But in England there is not a single item, never removed from the freezing of sea water (which provide the cheapest transportation of cargo) is more than 70 miles. [3]

Geographical location, climate, natural resources have been important factors in favor of the English capital. But there was one more. And it is not "free" as surely mark Anglophiles, and the ability to grow at the expense of the weak, due to their ruin, destruction and expulsion. That freedom is always strong upside slavery of the weak, the example of English history has been shown very clearly.

The process enclosures (enclosures, evictions), took place in the Late Middle Ages, when the English village began to penetrate the capitalist elements of management, from the late 15th century, constantly gaining strength. This in general is a technical term called the privatization of community (public) fields, pastures and seizure of peasant holdings — usually in favor of the Lord of the landowner and his major tenants. A large role in the expropriation of the peasantry played and elimination of three thousand English monasteries. Crown took away from them all that they owned, often with the pogroms and violence. (English preachy somehow did not like to remember the cruel persecution of the Church in their own territory.) Monastic lands were sold and transferred to the bourgeois "new nobility." For the peasant communities that inhabited these lands came lean times.

Even Thomas More in his "Utopia", dated 1516 year, drew an impressive picture of the social impact of enclosures. Expropriated peasants turned into beggars vagrants:

"… There is a migration of poor men, women, husbands, wives, orphans, widows, parents with small children and more numerous than the rich households, as arable farming requires a lot of hands. They are moving, again, with the usual and familiar places and do not know where to go, all the utensils, standing inexpensive, even if she could wait for a buyer, they sell for a pittance when necessary to sell it. And when they are in their travels quickly spend it, what else can they, they do not steal and get to the gallows on merit or wander and beg? However, and here, as vagabonds, they go to prison for his careless walking — no one is hiring their work, although they are the most ardent manner offer it. "[4]

Contemporaries Mora wrote: "Where the forty people had the means to live, now all there is one man and his shepherd." [5]

The reports of government commissions that produced a survey enclosures under Henry VIII, typical phrases of their victims, the families of the tens, even in cases of ring-fencing in any one manor (estate), or the village, "Out here, crying 60 people who were forced to become vagrants and falling into idleness, part perished from hunger". [6]

Early Tudors, being absolute monarchs in imitation of French colleagues portrayed care of the lower strata of the population, so in 1489 and 1515 took actions against the enclosures, which, however, proved fruitless, and formal. [7]

In reality, the legislation expands the Tudors struggle is not against reason, condemns people for vagrancy, begging and begging, but directly against the victims of expropriation — the poor, have become beggars and vagrants.

Already Act of 1495 chastised the local authorities to strengthen the fight against begging and vagrancy, undeterred by the most brutal means. Sheriff (Crown officials), mayors, bailiffs and constables were to produce in their territory quest strollers unemployed and generally all the "idle suspicious" individuals, arrest them and put in the stocks, "so that they (tramp) remained in this position without food, bread and water". If the tramp will be caught again in the same place, then again ordered him arrested and put in the stocks for six days already and have exhausted man on the same starvation diet. And so on, until you die. [8]

And then goes on increasing ferocity. The act of Henry VIII for the poor, published in 1530-1531, provided a more severe punishment. Sick and unable to work for the collection of alms to the needy in another hundred (smallest territorial-administrative entity) were instructed to enter a block with the content on bread and water. (Apparently, it was thought that because they improve their health.) "A healthy beggar 'after arrest handed magistrates — the officials appointed by the crown from the local wealthy landowners. The latter must have been to award him a bloody scourging. Beggar stripped, chained to the back edge of the cart and hit all the way through that trade settlement (market town), or some other place where the execution took, "as long as its body (pauper) not everything is covered with blood".

After this bloody beggar swore that immediately come back to the place where he was born and lived until his sentence in the last three years, "it sets to work on what it behooves". Hewn man for the poverty issue identity is that he really was punished in such a place, at such a time and such a way. (That's really as Europeans — flogged and give to the certificate of quality.) If a beggar can not or do not want to go back to the prescribed place of residence, the punishment was repeated again and again. [9]

And it turns out that the "birthplace of freedom" is the country of the whip. And the immense praise liberal writers in honor of an early withdrawal of English feudalism, too strained. There is no freedom of movement in England, robbed proletarizovannnogo peasant attached, but just not to the land, which he has not, and the capitalists in the community.

Further development of the 1530-31 year, the act was an act of that of Henry VIII from the year 1535-1536.

Statute prohibited by the charity to the poor to collect and ordered to stop distributing alms to the individual by individual persons ("so that no one gave alms to open any money, nothing more or other except through public crates …"). Violators were fined ten times greater than that alms that they filed "unlawful manner". [10] sung Anglophiles "society of individualists" is not allowed to individually exercise their good inclinations and help people.

All these drastic measures did not help themselves out of poverty and vagrancy, because the system itself is massively produced disadvantaged.

Government document end of the reign of Henry VIII testifies: "In all the places of the kingdom England vagrants and beggars for a long time, all increased in number and continue to multiply even more due to laziness, this mother of vices, why is increasing every day, and theft, murder and other heinous crimes and violence. " [11] What sort of an epidemic of laziness among the hard-working, as we always say the Europeans? After that, think about a certain predetermined hypocrisy of capitalism — the country has recently relatively prosperous, with fertile soil and mild climate, poverty and vagrancy are attributed to laziness robbed, not greedy thieves.

Even the creator parade patent "History of England from Chaucer to Queen Victoria" in George Trevelyan among the "hard-core poor crowds that were a disaster for the first Tudors" refers to "farmers, lost their jobs as a result of ring-fencing of pastures". Results and cause such enclosures: "Landlords have to be if they did not want to splurge, to raise the rent when the lease period ended, and exploit the most profitable land — take it for grazing, not for cultivation." [12] The liberal historian hypocrite quality — landlords, it turns out, had to rob and expel the peasants because they were threatened with ruin, staff and scrip — although there is a hint that it simply was profitable.

Try to run as soon as possible subject enclosures under the Tudors, Trevelyan in the chapter on the later of the parliamentary enclosure movement of the 18th century had to explain that "the Kent, Essex, Sussex, northern and western counties and Wales were little affected by the laws of the enclosure movement, because a large part of their land area was of fenced fields … many years ago. "[13] And among those areas that have been particularly affected by ring-fencing under the Tudors, the most populous in the country.

Writing in the 70 years of the XVI century, William Harrison, referring to the Italian physician calculations Cardano, who served at the court of Edward VI, said the colossal figure of thieves (ie, rounded up to the nurse-land and condemned to poverty of the peasants), which executed under Henry VIII: up to 72 thousand. [14]

And this in a country with a population of barely reaching 2.5 million people. [15] English law there are hundreds of crimes for which the death penalty relied, for example for the theft of the sum of two shillings (the cost of chicken) — and that robbed people for stealing food remained the latest way to save them from starving themselves and their loved ones. In fact the ruling class — as in English — committed a crime, robbing a lot of people put them in the role of criminals and was about to punish them.

Contemporaries were virtually unanimous in saying that poor people are deprived of their land and means of production, in the 16th century. constitute the largest part of British society. (In this respect, it was clearly ahead of the rest.) It turns out that the Tudor laws against vagrants and beggars was a tool of violence, the results of which were fixed ruin majority-rule greedy minority, and the offense in the historically kratchashie time. That's how she grew up, the Western "democracy." [16]

According to the Act of 1547, every "healthy beggar" or tramp, he deviates from the proposed work, enslaved and given to the person who will carry it as a runabout (Tramp). Master-slave owner can force his slave to do any work to feed his very shoddy food (garbage). Can bequeath his inheritance, to give for hire. Justices of the peace are required by the application to search for slave slave owner, if he ran away from such happiness. After the first escape thrall awarded to life in slavery, his face burned S (slave — slave), after the second put a new brand, after a third of its executed as a state criminal (Felon).

Tramp, if he lived in the "ill he place" more than three days, ordered to grasp, brand mark V (vagabond — Rogue) and in chains, guide for travel and other heavy work.

We took away their children's strollers, which are also converted to the slaves under the guise of "training of their labor." Owners could lawfully subject them to any penalties, beat whipping and chained.

Beggar, if he wanted to avoid punishment was to remain forever in his parish and to take any job that will give the parish authorities. The law clearly viewed it as "aservant of the parish"(Roundsman). [17]

In this masterpiece in its strikes law, and above all cruelty to injury, and turning the proletariat in direct servant of capital.

Tudor legislation makes it clear that the "liberation" of peasants from serfdom only means that they are on land that is not needed. It was a release from the sources of food, home and yard, but not the release from work on the host. Attachment to the land was replaced by attachment to the parish (place of residence), and in fact the community of local capitalists, here a former farmer had to give his work the closest to the employer for a pittance. And another payment capitalist and will not offer, knowing that the employee anywhere from him to stay.

Early Tudors replaced later — there comes a long reign of Elizabeth I (1558-1603), which many liberal historians are praising as a "golden age." Was not it occurred in the early Tudors some warped primitive accumulation of capital?

Elizabethan statute of 1563 specifies that anyone aged 20 to 60 years old (at the time, even up to 46 years living out only one out of ten), which has no fixed occupation, obliged to work at that host who wish to hire him. The working day was set from dawn to dusk, and wages are determined by magistrates ie representatives of the interests of employers. Statute strictly punished him who receives or gives a salary above the judge. And this statute will run until the end of the 18th century. [18]

And where is the freedom of labor-selling product? In fact praised by liberal historians' freedom to work "does not apply to the principal things for capitalism. This system operates on the basis of a very different principle: reduce costs, especially wages, for the sake of profit maximization. Capitalism is willing to reduce labor costs at zero and make it a slave.

In the 1560s, "the noblest of England" — John Hawkins begins to trade black slaves Guinea Gold Coast — and, of course, granted by the Queen in sirs. [19] Such an important source of capital accumulation as the black slave trade, Britain, and almost at the same time add a large-scale piracy on transatlantic communication — but this does not improve the relationship to its own nationals crown.

With the coming to power of the Tudor dynasty, the British elite began to pursue an active policy of dispossession of the indigenous population of Ireland. In terms of Irish English Reformation emerged as one of the tools of the land under the pretext of robbery Irish dodge them from the only permissible church, whose head was the king himself. Confiscation of church land and property combined with the massive destruction of churches and sacred images, altars, as it happened during the campaign viceroy Lord Grey in 1538. [20]

When Mary Tudor (despite the fact that she was a Catholic), the British had a large land confiscation in the Irish province of Leinster. Strife CEPT (birth) O 'Moores and O'Connor with English landowners Paley (of early English colonization) were filed as a rebellion against the crown. The subsequent "pacification" royal decree read: "I order you to all the lands confiscated from the rebels and enemies have been put in order, granted and leased: the two parts of the British and one third — the Irish." Last obliged to marry only with the permission of English governor, teach children English and dressed in the English style. Earth as O 'Moores and O'Connor in two strategically important central counties — Lakes and Offaly were totally confiscated and distributed to the English colonists. [21]

Already at the Queen Elizabeth Leinster "Zamir" more thoroughly — 400 leaders were invited to the CEPT Mallgamaste Castle (County Kildare) for the conclusion of a peace agreement, and there cut off by British soldiers and colonists. [22]

In a brilliant reign of Elizabeth area of direct military occupation of Ireland has increased dramatically as the size of land confiscations. Elizabethan administrators in Ireland acted in a fail-safe circuit: pitted Irish clans, and then, under the pretext of suppressing the rebellion, carried devastation of their interest areas and land confiscation.

This land of the Irish community was followed by the so-called Celtic Atlantic or land use system, but the government presented so that it belongs to the rebel leader, after which it could seize on the "legal" way.

Rise of Shana O'Neil in Ulster (1563-1567) began after this most powerful leader in the province has been accused of treason, possibly because prevented the abolition of Catholic worship. Incite the O'Neill clan O'Donnell British suppressed the rebellion and devastated Ulster with a completely predictable confiscation of a large part of the land owned by the O'Neill clan. Confiscated heard favorites Elizabeth who undertook to settle the land bestowed "good and obedient subjects," exclusively British. [23]

The next wave of British confiscations were aimed at the Irish province of Munster, located in the south-west of Ireland, fertile, with extensive forests and ten ports.

In Munster there was a struggle between the clans of Desmond and Ormond, who also ignited and was aggravated by the British government. The British meanwhile put a fortress, and received the crown from the local chiefs oath of allegiance and gave them aristocratic titles.

At the right time, British troops intervened in the feud, as it were, on the side of Ormond; Desmonds were declared rebels. In 1579-1583, British troops conducted large-scale operations against mansterskih CEPT, led by John Desmond. The troops were of a scorched-earth. Captured by the British Irish settlements were destroyed, houses and barns turned into ashes, the inhabitants were exterminated without exception, livestock and crops destroyed.

"We went through a rebellious troops of the two countries, burning all the villages and delivering the death penalty residents, where we had not overtaken"- Demonstrates the Elizabethan poet E.Spenser. [24] And he adds that this "the most populated and fertile province in Ireland was suddenly without humans and livestock". [25]

In the summer of 1582 British governor wrote from Cork: "The country is destroyed and devastated by the killings and looting soldiers. Many cities and towns totally destroyed. Just died of starvation 30 million people, not counting those who were hanged or killed". The total number of exterminated while in Munster population is estimated at 60 thousand. [26]

Following the devastation of Munster, there was confiscated 588 thousand acres of land. [27]

In June 1584 there was sent to the Royal Commission on the basis of its reports in 1586 produced a "Plan Check Munster." Confiscated and peeled Irish land was divided into plots of large size from 4 thousand to 12 thousand acres to transfer landlords. Land transferred to the condition that it will be settled only by British settlers. "None of the British did not have to pass the Irish land… "[28]

Large tracts of land were favorites crown: the poet and pirate W. Raleigh (10 million acres), Treasurer E. Fitton (16 million acres), another "noblest of Englishmen" the poet Spenser. [29]

The looting and devastation caused in Munster Ulster powerful Irish rebellion under the leadership of Count Hugh Tyrone and Tirkonnela. Rebel army consisted mainly of peasants, who threatened to expel them from their communal lands.

Successful first uprising, which began in 1595 and spread to the Munster and Connaught, becoming very reasonable goal — the freedom of religion of the indigenous Irish, cessation of seizures, freedom of movement and trade. In 1601, the rebels tried to help the Spaniards, but the landing was blocked in Kinsale and gave up after after the Irish defeated, trying to unlock it.

Spaniards were released, and "all prisoners (Irish) were hanged, despite the fact that the proposed redemption." [30]

After the defeat at Kinsale started ruin the rebel areas. At the same time the devastation suffered and the rest of Ireland.

Witness the events Morison wrote: "While the army Mountjoy (British commander) moved, it destroyed the bread and burned everything in their path, leaving the desert."[31]

Acting on the southern island of the British General Carew proudly Elizabeth wrote: "Your Majesty is not something to rule over the country, except the corpses and piles of ashes." [32]

According to estimates of contemporaries Ireland lost half its population. [33]

As a result of the subsequent confiscation of lands, primarily in Ulster, to the English crown passed 800 thousand acres, occupied 6 counties. Destinations Commission has also produced "The procedure and conditions for the colonization of Ulster", under which again cut into large patches on the transfer of thousands of acres for royal servants and entrepreneurs.

"All persons who have been in the use of the various areas were required to settle their English and Scottish holders."[34]

Each recipient of the Entrepreneur (undertaker) had to swear an oath of loyalty supremacy, ie England or the Scottish Presbyterian Church, received the right to hold their own baronial court, and 7 years of duty-free export goods to the mother country.

"Said owners do not have to give up their land or any part of their Irish or persons who are not given the oath of supremacy." [35]

By colonization joined the company of London merchants. Especially great was part of London companies in land confiscations in County Derry. Even the county is renamed to Londonderry.

Determined that "the duty on all imported and exported goods must be owned by City for 99 years." The City of London is actually getting a monopoly on trade in goods and irlandckimi judiciary, also bringing a steady income, created in Ireland, his private army. [36]

Soon the whole of the Irish trade was in the hands of London merchants who exported duty-out raw materials — wood, fish, skin, fat and meat. For ages to come, Ireland became an agrarian appendage of England — and that its status is thoroughly canned.

In 1605-1608 in the conditions of the land rush, when a large amount of land speculators headed for Ireland, the clan system, and with it the communal ownership of land and custom tanistri (choice of leaders) have been legally abolished. Irish — holders of small parcels — and there were many — were losing everything. Holders of large plots have to pay rent to the leader who became a landlord and rent the English king as the supreme owner of all the land. Privatized so the land could be alienated, bought and sold, and quickly began to retreat into the hands of the British colonialists.

In 1607-1608 were finally confiscated the land of his dominion Count Tyrone (ie, ownership of the entire clan O'Neills) and Tirkonnelu (property O'Donnell), clan O'Doggerti (County Derry), about 500 thousand acres …

3. English model of capitalism. Elizabeth's "Golden Age."

But back, so to speak, to the English sheep. Elizabethan Act of 1572, "the punishment of vagrants and the poor and disabled", contains primarily severe punishments for beggars and vagrants. In the category of "persistent and healthy vagrants and beggars" are inscribed directly workers seeking better conditions for the sale of their products or their labor. Here and itinerant craftsmen and small traders, workers changing their place of residence for a higher salary.

All of them were instructed to detained, subjected to flogging, and then burn them with hot irons right ear cartilage.


And again we see that for the desire to freely sell their labor of people subjected to cruel punishments.

Act 1572 prohibits begging all the poor over 14 years. Violators prescribed whip lashes, contain blocks, forced to return to their former place of residence. In the event of recurrence of begging beggar sent to the gallows. Again, the law attaches the poor to their native place of impoverishment. [37]

The writer described the Elizabethan times U.Garrison many categories vagrants who were punished by the law. It turned out that in the "home of democracy," most of the freely moving around the country people considered criminals. Criminals who threatened to block, flogging and gallows, was in fact a representative of any common people, who lost on a small home livelihoods. Even students at Oxford and Cambridge Universities, if they collected alms without permission from university authorities, considered by authorities as "vagrants" with all the ensuing consequences.

Elizabeth Law of 1576 "for the poor" is fed by liberal historians, we can say with shrieks of delight. It provided for the organization of the poor at home, which was headed by collectors and supervisors, as well as a very "humane" the eradication of poverty by correctional homes. [38]

"And if any of those who are able to produce such a work, give up, or go begging, or to live in idleness, or by taking (at home) a job, make a mess of things and confuse her, so find it impossible to continue to give his work from the same warehouse, then one (or some) to be adopted in the House of Correction. "

The latter is a slave institution of forced labor. Officially declared that the poor are there to "learn to work", hence the name — "House of Correction» (house of correction).

Forced labor camps 16th century served as the enrichment of capitalists, who took on the mercy of such institutions, as well as to protect the ruling class of the possible social excesses — keep the poor in jail somehow safer. [39]

Sent there to "fix" is not only poorly executed issued to them at the house work, but all outsiders homeless people for a period of three years. Conditions of work in the house of correction is the text of the act proved to be very harsh: the poor were instructed to vigilantly guard, do not let them rest from time to time subject to corporal punishment.

"Correctional houses" were established at every county in the larger villages and other places that local authorities deem it necessary to … [40]

In practice it was even worse. "Detention House," where the poor proletarians found themselves at the mercy of the guards, were places of torture and sacrificed limitless labor.

Rolling Stone even took the blame of having committed any criminal offense — and risked though life due to the extreme severity of punishment — if only to get into a regular prison, not in the house of correction.

All coming to this establishment primarily flogged, "lazy" kept running exclusively on bread and water. During the escape attempt was chained to the workplace chains for hand, foot and neck. [41] Even were considered exemplary "correctional homes" working day was 15 hours. For refusing to work or bad work penitentiary administration could punish a prisoner of my own — with the use of a set of medieval torture equipment. [42]

That's actually elaborated Protestant "work ethic", which is also quite often remembered liberal writers.

And despite all the punitive measures the number of beggars kept coming — because they were cost of capital accumulation, which is put on by the capitalists society, "externalizing".

"In London, indigenous and immigrant paupers together was about 50,000, accounting for almost a quarter of the population of the city to the beginning of the XVII century. [43]

Queen Elizabeth's famous phrase: "Everywhere the poor (Pauper ubique jacet)». Yes, the crown is not averted her eyes from the ugly social phenomena. It would seem that it should come up with a way to deal with the cause of begging, not by the poor?

However, there is. The statute "of persistent beggars and tramps" from 1598 again lists numerous categories of strollers. The legislative act requires local authorities to detain and punish people who call themselves students (scholars) and involved in the collection of alms, sailors, referring to the shipwreck, at the same time in the category of criminal gets a number of professions associated with folk art — fencers, drivers bears, clowns, singers ( minstrels), magicians, jugglers, etc. For offenders classified as coppersmiths, plumber, hawkers, peddlers and other small itinerant traders (chapmen). Also labor, "Able to work, but idle and wobbly refusing to work for the reasonable charge, which he had established in their locality… "

People are realizing basic as it is, the principle of the capitalist "free labor" — find an employer offering the best working conditions and pay, again referred to the criminal element.

Among the criminal statute includes vagrants of all prisoners released from prison, all the mendicant "under the pretext" that they were affected by the fire. And even the only nomadic people present in England — those "who falsely claims to be Egyptians, and walks in the clothes allegedly Egyptian …" This Gypsies and Gypsy.

Despite the flourishing of the capitalist "golden age", again prescribed to expose poor people to torture, regardless of their gender. "Each tramp must be stripped to the middle of the body and above and publicly flogged until his or her body and will not gory". Then hewn (carved) are sent at the parish where he (she) came from. That is, the poor man make a serf of the parish. If you do not know where the arrested person was born or lived in the last years, he was sent to the penitentiary or prison, where he was to spend at least a year.

"The most dangerous" of vagrants magistrates awarded to the expulsion of hard labor for overseas or to the galley-slavery.

If such a tramp back to the place of residence, to which he was attached, it was considered nothing less than state criminal and were sentenced to death («As in case of felony»). [44]

But for running away with the attachment was not taken to punish by death even in the most severe outbreaks of serfdom of the time, what were Poland, Hungary, Livonia.

As most great, tremendous, unprecedented act of humanism liberal historians have portrayed the statute "of the poor" of the same date in 1598 (which in 1601 took its final shape and effect until 1834).

Ctatut but did not provide any personal assistance to the poor, nor any public expenditure on this article. Salvation is ruined from starvation announced the arrival of a collective conscription.

If someone in the parish refused or was unable to pay a tax on the poor, the parish overseers («oversees of the poor of the parish») sold his property or the magistrates threw him into debt, while it does not pay the required amount.

The poor man was starting to get a miserable allowance, but it was attached to the parish where he replenished the reserve army of laborers, which can be exploited at will.

The first consequence of the law of 1601 was "hopeless decline in wages." In the early 17th century. it was about 47% in real wages in 1500 [45]

Does not seem an exaggeration statements Marx's law Tudor times: "Fathers present-day working class were primarily punished for what they were forcibly turned into vagabonds and paupers", "rural population, forcibly deprived of land, expel, on a large scale turned into vagabonds, tried, relying on these monstrous terrorist laws to teach the discipline of wage labor whips, stamps, torture. "[46]

4. British capitalism in Ireland. "Age of Enlightenment" in the English style

The population of the American colonies, which England has acquired in the first half of the 17th century. and where she could finally lose their vagrants and beggars, replenished not only voluntary manner. On the plantations — the most important sources of cheap raw materials and capital accumulation for the metropolis — worked slaves. And not only black.

As acknowledged by Trevelyan: "The government banished there only convicted, and later — the prisoners civil wars. These accidents, as well as youth stolen private entrepreneurs into slavery Barbados or Virginia, earned their freedom if lived long enough … "(leave the" long enough "to the conscience of the author — is unlikely to slave labor in the unusual climate prolonging life.)

Among the reasons for eviction to America in the first half of the 17th century. he also mentions the victims of enclosures: "It was a time of famine in the land of England (3.5 million people were clearly under the yoke of 12 million sheep) … former homage often been driven from their old secured tenancies and relegated to the status of tenants or holders by the will of the Lord. "

Then came the English Revolution, which in many ways was a reaction to the English gentry and the bourgeoisie to certain limitations imposed by King Charles Stuart on confiscation in Ireland and fencing in England. In this festival of freedom of the Irish decided to reclaim their confiscated lands and restore freedom of religion.

The bourgeois revolutionaries responded immediately. In February 1642 both houses of the Long Parliament was an act of "speedy and successful in bringing the Irish submission of the kingdom" are loans on real ripoff. According to the law onomu anyone who will loan money to the suppression of the rebellion, shall, after the victory obtained land confiscated from the rebels in all the four provinces of Ireland.

It was clear that the borrowers and the parliament are interested in to the rebels had more and they looked terrible. Because the Puritans Parsons and Borlez, supporters of the extreme views of colonialist who led the Dublin government (the British administration in Ireland) in all correspondence with London Irish demagogic accused in an effort to exterminate all the Protestants in Ireland.

In fact, the extermination was carried out by the British. Since the beginning of November 1642, British troops and volunteers committed the extermination of the peaceful protesters of the Irish population on the peninsula in County Anstrim Magee — were killed about three thousand. It was to be expected, because the Dublin government demanded that the commanders of the British troops'put to death, to kill in battle and in all other ways the conspirators, traitors and their supporters, as groups and alone."[47]

In Leinster and Munster British punitive smashed and estates Anglo-Irish lords (those provocations obviously pursued to increase the number and size of the rebels landed property subject to confiscation), so in December of 1642 happened unseen, many of these gentlemen have joined the uprising. [48]

Having met October 24, 1642 in Kilkenny general assembly of representatives of counties and cities, created the Irish Confederation, led by the Supreme Council, presided over by Lord Mauntgarret. It was proclaimed the equality of "the ancient Irish", "ancient" and "new" by the British, and the septa between families, between urban and rural residents, loyalty to King Charles. And this, of course, was unacceptable to the English capital. [49]

August 15, 1649, Cromwell landed in Ireland with an army of Independents (English Calvinists) and the carnage began in order to seize Irish land; meeting robbers subscribing to loan the Long Parliament in 1642, and the remuneration of the parliamentary forces, many years did not receive salaries.

Cromwell's troops and Jones took Drogheda and Wexford, cutting out all the inhabitants of these cities, and in March 1650 — the Confederate capital of Kilkenny. Cromwell then left for England to prepare for war with Scotland, and the British troops conquered and devastated Ireland under the command of Ayrton and Charles Fleetwood. Their actions are repeated, but in a more concentrated form, the actions of the Protestant Swedish army during the Thirty Years' War, recently in Germany, which resulted in the death of 10 million people., Mainly in the regions inhabited by Slavs. In Ireland, it all happened about a year and a half. A closer comparison — actions the Nazis in occupied Belarus during the Great Patriotic War.

Punitive British troops burned villages, destroyed stocks, trampling the crops, mowed on the vine are not mature bread, cut cattle. Bringing the population to starvation, they expected to prevent all support Irish guerrillas, called, by the way, "Tory." (In the 19th century. Non-native Americans, I mean the Anglo-Saxons, so will destroy the American prairie bison to vymorit Native American Indians.)

"Cattle in the country — reported empowered parliament — almost all destroyed, so that more than four-fifths of the best and most fertile land desolate and uninhabited Ireland — It threatens the country's great need. " [50]

The most conservative estimates of the number of dead Irishmen are given in English economist William Petty mid-17th century. "Irish people were killed and were killed as a result of the sword, plague, famine and poverty, exclusion for the period between 23 October 1641 and the same day in 1652 504,000."[51]

Other estimates of the 1,466,000 people who inhabited the island, killing 616 thousand [52]

Were expelled from the country, under the terms of capitulation, 40 thousand people. Up to 100 thousand Irishmen were enslaved and shipped to the West Indian plantations, almost certain death. The government has ordered to send back and all Irish people in prisons, workhouses, all without some means of life. Agents of various hunting for Irish servants, as were hunting for blacks in Africa. Everywhere meeting from military courts continue to send the Irish on the chopping block for participation in the rebellion.

This was followed by the taking of lands under the two acts of the Irish parliament.

An Act of Parliament on 13 August 1652 "On the dispensation of Ireland" completely deprived of the ground all the Irish, who participated in the anti-British uprising. The act defined 100 thousand rebels, who are "not subject to pardon for their lives and property," they should be executed, and all their property confiscated.

And those Irish that did not participate in the uprising — and, in fact, deprived of all as "not showing his constant devotion to the English state." One third of the land they just took away, and instead of the remaining two-thirds, "provided" in a barren rocky land area in the west of the island — "For a more lasting peace in this nation." Do Protestants who have behaved as well as those Catholics who confiscated a quarter of the earth, they are not subject to relocation. [53]

Small Act of Parliament from September 27, 1653 represented the partition plan of the confiscated land. [54] And at the same time demonstrating the triumph of the rule of law is very specific in the British "rule of law".

By May 1, 1654 Irish Catholics had to move out polls across the river Shannon, in Connaught. Who among the Irish, by that date, will remain on this side of the Shannon, to be executed as a "spy and an enemy". [55] And the land on the coast Connaught again passed British military and settlers to the Irish did not have access to the sea. Allowed to remain until a minor and farm laborers who worked in the home-British. For the capture or elimination of the Irishman, who was detained in the wrong place, appoint a good cash reward. [56]

Compare these pieces of legislation in the degree of ruthlessness can only Indian Removal Act, adopted in 1830 by the U.S. Congress — was then made mass deportation of the indigenous population of the Atlantic coast near extinction to a completely "legitimate." [57]

In the largest-ever simultaneous confiscation of land, according to William Petty, of the 20 million acres of land was Ireland confiscated by the British colonialists to 11 million acres, most convenient and suitable for processing.

To the Irish contrary to expectations not found a livelihood in the cities, they were forbidden to enter illegally in urban areas. [58]

So what is the subtotal? "The civil list", produced by the British government in 1654 shows "Teeming masses of poor people in all parts of the country, some often ate horse meat and grass, while others died of starvation on the highways, Many times poor children who lost their parents or have been abandoned by parents, remained at the mercy of fate, some of them became prey of wolves and other predatory animals and birds. "[59] The number of victims of" appeasement "of Ireland after the suppression of the rebellion is hardly much smaller than the number killed during the revolt itself.

English gentlemen still love to point the governments of other countries in the violation of "freedom of conscience". A Catholic priest in January 1653 was ordered to leave Ireland for 20 days, those who tried to escape were hunted down with dogs and hung up. The British government paid for each dead patera, how many and for a wounded wolf. Hunting for Roman Catholic priests has become a real attraction for the English colonists and the soldiery …

Let's go back to the mother country. The continuation of acts of "serfs arrival" was the "law of the settlements" published by Charles II, 1662, which was valid until 19. and in fact deprived of freedom of movement of workers. Authority of any parish in which a man was trying to settle down, could send it back. Read in candy gingerbread Trevelyan, generally not inclined to wash dirty linen in public English: "Nine-tenths of the population of England, virtually all who did not belong to a small class of landowners — no matter how good their behavior and what would be, even the most high-paying jobs they had not — were in danger of being expelled from any parish, except where they were born, with all its consequences — arrest and dishonor."[60]

The same author adds that "in Scotland working coal industry have been reduced to the status "serfs", attached to the work in the mines". And the system of attaching the Scottish miners operated until the early 19th century. [61]

In general, the labor is forced or as if free ("as if" because the means of production workers still do not belong) does not depend on starry-eyed liberal declarations, but only matter under what form the use of labor, the cost of the capitalist will be lower. And the totality of British legislation for three centuries was to ensure that the worker is free proletarianize only work from dawn to dusk, his work belongs to the capitalist class, starting with the closest capitalist. All attempts to wriggle out of this capitalist "freedom" savagely punished.

Those who followed the prescribed path, had a working day of 15 hours and starvation wages, which is not enough for food and a roof over his head, so that was a normal child labor — even for recognition of such Varnish as Trevelyan.

Even in the manufacturing period of "little children that age could not yet give to students who are often forced to work from home with the same early age, as well as factory children in more recent times." Daniel Defoe (author of "Robinson Crusoe" and the huge number of moralizing works) met the children "young as four years old, which could support themselves by their labor". [62]

A kids' parochial serfs "contained in the workhouse, who were real morilnyami.

Before becoming a craftsman, working manufactory or factory child had to go through an apprenticeship. And the hosts, at the mercy of whom were the children, often paying them young slaves who were of different types of violence and unrestricted exploitation. [63]

At the turn of the 17th and 18th centuries. there was a new wave of enclosures, now in the Midlands and the north-east (before going to the South, West and North of England).

Since the 1740s "began to pass through parliament particular laws that did not take into account the resistance of the ring-fencing of the individual owners… "

That is it, "rule of law" that the liberal intelligentsia hard put to example. Even retouched Trevelyan English history shows that respect for property is not a hallmark of even quite mature capitalism — the property is sacred, only when it is in the "sacred hands" persons holding adequate capital.

The laws of the seizure of peasant property and the transfer of its landlords' entire bundles quickly carried through every parliament of George III (1760-1820) — the meeting did not honor any other radical legislation. But it was the radicalism of the rich, often at the expense of the poor. " In the countryside sent to the parliamentary commissioners, whose decisions have the force of law. The commissioners made the redistribution to the wealthy landowners and such revolutionary capitalist activity led to more and more "accumulation of the earth" in large estates. [64]

Liberals love to criticize the Socialists that they want to "take and share," but classical liberal policy has always held under the slogan "take away and add it to the one who already have a lot." Not worth much and loved the bike liberals that under capitalism invariably bloom small farms.

After raiding the parliamentary commissioners landlords are not afraid to "ruin" their rents and profits as the major capitalist tenants grew rapidly, and the "farm worker, devoid even of its small land rights … very often had to be doomed to total dependence on the host and reached even to pauperism. "

It is only in the dark ages of the poor could wait for Robin Hood or Wat Tyler. Forgetting marksmanship with the bow, the peasants could not defend in "civil society" even the most minimal social and economic rights.

"When he (the farmer) lost his stripes in the open wheat field or pasture for their cows at the community pasture, a few guineas given to him in exchange, will soon dissipate mime in a restaurant. Even if the Parliamentary Commissioner refunded peasant communal rights they lost by a few acres of land located far away from his home as he could enclose and drain them? He could only re-sell them cheaply off people… "[65]

In the "age of enlightenment" bourgeois writers (and other-then was) came to be called the community "a bunch of lazy and thieving people" Thomases Morov of them have already been observed.

After 1740 the process of enclosure (expropriation) of peasant lands came with each passing decade, faster and at the end of the century peasants in England were already low layer.

By the time of accession to the throne of Victoria this process was almost completed in respect of arable land, fencing of communal grazing continued in the first 30 years of her reign …

Enclosures ended with the complete disappearance of the peasantry. Great Britain was the first country in the world that destroyed the peasantry as a class, and violent means. [66] So the cries of various British "historians" like Conquest of the poor peasants who have suffered in any country of the "tyrant" — it's just a way to divert public attention from their own dirty ispodnikov.

Trevelyan argues that fencing was useful for increasing the efficiency of agriculture — in the capitalist sense of the word, that is, the profitability and productivity of crops coming onto the market. But related to the fencing-aside land in the 16-17 centuries. led to a rapid rise in grain prices to outbreaks of hunger, stimulating the spread of epidemics (plague so in 1665 caused terrible damage to London filled with lumpen), the mass of mendicant and repression against the poor, an increase of bloody wars, reduced life expectancy, even in comparison with late Middle Ages. [67] A 18 and 19. — A multi-million overseas emigration to North America and Australia, where the British received land in the destruction or expulsion of the natives. So Aboriginal people of Australia have been reduced by 80% since the beginning of colonization until the early 20th century., And in the Murray Basin — Darling and in Tasmania it was destroyed completely.

As noted by M. Sarkisyants, the British elite has always led the double-entry bookkeeping. "Ethical measurements are applied only to the other, unelected — to convict them. Hence the tradition to evaluate the actions of their own government from a pragmatic point of view, and the actions of rivals — based on moral categories. "[68]

But even if the devastating social consequences in the metropolis to some extent offset by the increased economic efficiency, that the colonized peoples had to bear some costs.

Specific form of enclosures were confiscated land from the Irish clans and CEPT conducted c extermination and expulsion of the peasant population living Celtic community (remember the work of British "Sonderkommando" during the suppression of the uprising and Tyrone Tirkonnela and Cromwell during the conquest of Ireland).

As a result of special actions to end 17. 85% of all convenient land that belonged to the Irish, was confiscated and transferred into the possession of large tracts of Protestant settlers from England and Scotland.

"One third of Irish rents is spent in England, which, together with the profits, pensions, and other income is a good half of the kingdom, all — net profit for England. This rent is squeezed out of the blood, vital organs, clothing and housing tenants, who live worse than English beggars "- read Jonathan Swift's article" A brief review of the state of Irish. "

In the relatively fertile country hunger with thousands of deaths became commonplace.

In "Letters clothier" Swift wrote that "all roads, streets and doors of houses deposited destitute women, followed by children 5-6, asking and praying passer on alms," and his contemporary, the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, reported in London, that in the urban trenches lie the corpses of people, the mouth of which is covered with green grass, which they were trying to satisfy their hunger in the last minutes of life. [69]

Irish industrial production was suppressed so as not to compete with English, Irish, even forbidden to trade directly with other British colonies. High export duties were killed Irish wool production.

But by the early 19th century. each year into the pockets of the Irish landlords living in England, pumps out more than a million f. Art. rent.

British rule confidently led Ireland to the demographic catastrophe of 1840.

Chozhie confiscatory measures are somewhat less fierce, but also leads to depopulation, held in the Scottish Highlands. The fencing there were driven from the land of about 150 thousand., This led to a devastating famine 1782-1783. [70]

By the way, one of the signs that someone is subjected to over-exploitation and humiliation, is the increase in alcoholism. Lawmakers in the 18th century. consciously taught English common people to cheap crude alcohol, setting it on a very low tax. After distillation, raised the price of grain and has been very beneficial to large landowners, and the place from which the legislators. During the high consumption of gin funeral in London was twice the baptisms.

O mores of society showed capitalized and such facts. In English prisons' tyuremschiki debtors tortured to death trying to extract money from the people who came here, and because they had no money". A prison "were rented by the local authorities at the mercy of such wretches." [71]

The fleet was replenished by forced recruitment. "Our fleet is equipped with violence and held in subjection by cruelty,"- Testified Admiral Vernon. [72]

Britain 'rules the seas "with the whip-devyatihvostki, referred to as" cat "(CAT o' nine tails), who walked on the backs of the sailors. ("Soak cat" meant — to wash off the blood that stick together and made fiber whip strikes a particularly painful.) By the way, the cruel corporal punishment in the British army and navy lasted until 1881 addition to the painful scourging — the number of strokes it came to 1200 — was used by the British Navy and a sadistic, often ending in death, torture, as careening.

"Barracks and the soldiers did not have houses in the taverns, where they lived at the expense of the population that hated 'redcoats' ". [73]

Soldiers and sailors as mercilessly beaten. There was a record-breaker in the time of George II, who for 16 years of service received 30,000 lashes. Service in the West Indies was tantamount to a death sentence. But this is unlikely to bother the English elite, mercenary soldier's service was "blood tax" on the poorest sections of the population in the ranks of the army were saved from starvation Irish and Scottish Highlanders.

And the civilian number of crimes punishable by death and torment, only grew throughout the "age of enlightenment".

From the diary of a priest Woodford, "1777 July 22. Robert Durr, attached to the trolley been scourged executioner afternoon on the streets of Cary (Somerset) for stealing potatoes. His scourged all the way by George Inn to CNN, where were back along the street to the royal oak tree in South Cary and back to the George Inn. " Fee for the executioner was about to take the good with the local parish.

5. British capitalism in the global spaces

And if that situation was the case with humanity against their own Englishmen, what can we say about blacks. U.S. trade industry, long monopolized Liverpool, the slave trade was closely associated with cotton production Lancashire. More than half of the slaves who fell into a transatlantic raboprovod, crossed the ocean in the crowded holds of British ships. In addition to serving the English colonies in America, the English slavers had the exclusive right to supply slaves to the Spanish colonies in America, the so-called "Asento" — that was the result of the War of Spanish Succession. In 1771, 58-sleyverov slave ships sailed from London, 23 -, and 107 from Bristol — from Liverpool. They moved to this year 50,000 slaves. By the end of the century, this figure will be released over 100,000. In all, the New World was delivered 12 million slaves. [74]

The slave trade was a major factor in the development of the textile industry. African slaves were bought in the same party with cotton. Plantations in the West Indies and then to the southern United States, where it is transported slaves, made much of the raw cotton to British industry. [75]

On each slave, brought to the New World, had lost 3-4 at catching and transportation — for sleyverami swam shoals of fatty sharks that feed on human flesh. Africa development of British capitalism would cost millions of dollars demographic loss — scientists estimate the size of its depopulation in the 40-80 million people.

As the authorities promptly sent to the chopping block or hard labor potential rebels, proletarian protest was in England is weak and meaningless until the 1830s, so in the 1810's brought to the famine workers Luddites destroyed machinery. In the event that there is some kind of self-organization of the workers, the slaughter of them was swift and bloody. As an example, in 1819, when gathered for a rally in Peterloo (Near Manchester) working cotton mills were slaughtered cavalry. The number of dead and wounded was 400. Frightened authorities issued then tn "six laws" that prohibit collection of more than 50 people, the procession with orchestras and banners, crossed the arrest and deportation to the colonies of "dangerous persons". [76]

British industrial revolution was on the bones, and not only in the colonies of Great Britain. Several decades in the period after the Napoleonic wars there was a reduction in salary metropolis — the capitalists fought for increased profits and production machine shops killing hand weavers (their income fell by six times from 1795 to 1834). Historian E. Hobsbawm estimates the number of deaths from starvation during this time in England, half a million people. [77]

In 1834 (shortly after the abolition of slavery in the British colonies) was canceled delivery of benefits to the poor, are not in workhouses. Now all the poor people had to go through hard labor "workhouse". [78]


Country of rapid industrial expansion, cheap eats resources and forced labor colonies showed a very sad picture of the proletariat of its own back in 1840.

"In London, every day 50 million people, waking up in the morning, do not know where they will spend the next night. The happiest of them who manage to put aside until the evening a couple of pence, go to one of the so-called houses of accommodation (lodging-house), in which the set of all the big cities, and for my money there are a shelter. But what kind of shelter! House from top to bottom bunks made to, in every room, four, five, six beds — as much as can fit. On each bed awake at four, five, six people, too, as much as can fit — the sick and the healthy, young and old, men and women, drunk and sober, all huddled together, without discrimination. "

The London labor market, which was located in the quarters White Chapel and Bethnal Green, parents offered their children from seven to ten years to any person on any sort of work from early morning until late at night.

Only in 1842, the law forbade Underground work of women and children up to 10 years. [79] And some of the time limit for children up to 10 years there will be only in the 1850s. [80]

In the 1840s, the British government would be almost indifferent witness to the great Irish famine induced by a ruthless policy of dispossession, cleansing and maintenance carried out by the English ruling class in relation to the Irish during the previous three centuries.

The famine was caused by cleaning (clearance) of large estates from small Irish tenants — on their remaining tiny sections of the Irish could subsist only undemanding potatoes, but that's it ruined fungus.

Hunger is a catastrophe of the Irish people, from which he never recovered so far.

"… We went into the hut. In the far corner, barely visible through the smoke and covering their rags, lay embracing three children with sunken eyes, without vote, in the last stage of degeneration … Above the remains of burning peat crouched another figure, wild, almost naked, with almost superhuman mind. Plaintive moaning withered old woman begged us to give her something to show his hands, where the skin was hanging from the bones .. "- writes English author, who visited Ireland in 1847. [81]

"Huge herds of cows, sheep and pigs … go with every tide, from each of our 13 ports course for England, and landlords receive rent and go spend it in England"- And this in a time of famine, was reduced to a third of the population of Ireland. [82]

The death of Ireland did not meet specific philanthropic feelings in London, where private foundations and the government are blaming each other's commitment to help the starving. But the British propagandists worked out well, shifting the blame to the British ruling class to the fungus, which of course can not argue.

Today, the population in Ireland is far less than in the early 19th century. If, in 1840, on the island there were about 8.18 million people., By the end of the 19th century. about 4.46 million, including Anglo-Saxon minority, now 5.5 million, given his Ulster Protestant population. [83] A British propagandists of all famines are looking for anywhere, but not under the shadow of the British Crown. (For comparison, in Catholic Poland was ruled by the "tsarist" Russia, the population grew rapidly — from 2.7 million in 1815 to 9.5 million in 1897 [84] In the Russian "prison of nations" Catholics proliferated and flourished in the British "citadel of democracy" is rapidly dying out.)

Cleaning possessions landlords of small tenants and was held in the Scottish Highlands. So in 1814, with all declared civil rights, the Duke of Sutherland ordered to burn all the houses of the peasants in their vast dominions — 15 thousand people. lost their homes and livelihood, many of them died of hunger and cold. Therefore, the potato famine of 1840, followed by cholera, and made great devastation in the Scottish Highlands. And the last act of forced enclosure took place there in 1882 (the so-called "Battle of Braese). Mass emigration of Scottish Celts did not stop in the second half of the 19th century. The population of the Highlands (and so badly decimated by famine and fence in the second half of the 18th century.), From the early 19th century. at the beginning of the 20th century. decreased from 260 thousand to 60 thousand people.

At the other end of the world, the other British colonies, there was a lot of what was experienced in Ireland.

The first Indian state, which fell under the dominion of the British East India Company, was a populous and rich Bengal.

The troops of the Company and their commander personally R. Clive to start ransacked Bengal coffers — and for that, apparently, this "great son of England" won the monument in the center of London. The company then took possession of the fiscal apparatus of Bengal. Taxes were increased twice and given away at the mercy of short-term employees of the company. According to the testimony of a contemporary: "They (tax farmers) were selected to the last farthing at unfortunate peasants past, unwilling to leave their old homes, comply with requests that could not perform." The Company assumed the monopoly of foreign trade and in the most important sectors vnutribengalskoy trade. Bengali peasants and artisans were forcibly attached to the factors of the company, which had to take their products, they often did not pay anything at all. "Agents of paying for goods picks up pennies or not paid at all." "Markets, marina, wholesale markets and granaries destroyed. As a result of the violence of traders with his men, artisans and Raiatea and others fled. " [85]

Different types of robbery of the Indian population by the British East India Company led to the famine years 1769-1773., During which lost about a third of Bengal, from 7 to 10 million., what we kindly informs encyclopedia "Britannica" 1911 edition. In the 1780 — 1790-ies. Bengal famine continued to mow his victims was a few million people. The famine came as captured by the British in Benares, Jammu, Bombay and Madras. [86]

For India, it was only the beginning. Communal lands under various pretexts given to companies from the tax collector was formed a new class of feudal landowners. The company followed the true liberal principles — and crushing the Indian community, I do not spend money to work in the public interest, for irrigation and reclamation, so important in Indian climatic conditions. From this field emptied faster than a direct rip-off. [87]

Famine did their "successes", covering all over again a large area of colonial India. This was the result of a deliberate policy of the British authorities for the destruction of rural communities and the ruin of local handicrafts and thereby freed up the market for British manufactured goods. (Good example: in 1820, the subcontinent has received 11 million yards of fabric h.-b. English, and in 1840 is 145 million) [88]

"The plains of India whiten bones weavers"- Reported by the British governor-general in 1834, after 77 years after the beginning of British rule in this country.

Outbreaks of mass starvation in the vast expanses of India were the constant companions of the British rule in the country. So in the years 1875-1900. his victim was at least 25 million people. [89]

Conducted in Latin America, with the help of Britain — its money and its fleet — the Bolivarian revolution, regardless of the idealistic plans of Bolivar and Sucre mysteriously murdered general, led to complete economic and political dependence of the vast space of the English capital. Banks in Latin America have been under the control of the British financial services groups in the governments' banana republics "were sitting British government agents, their markets have been captured by English goods by asking the local industry. (In 1840, the British received here h.-b. tissue more than doubled in Europe). [90] All of this culminated in a stagnant poverty, income inequality incredible, insidious forms of domination of the oligarchy of the common people, including direct slavery — it will all be masked prekrasnoslovnymi liberal constitutions. "Death squads" and a gang hired by plantation owners and landowners, the terror of the peasants. In "liberated" in Latin America, and then there were outbreaks of genocide, since two thirds of the population of Paraguay, who was trying to develop not just the capitalist road, was destroyed by the armies of neighboring Brazil, Argentina and Uruguay, who were supported by England …

In March 1839 the Chinese imperial commissioner Lin Tse-hsu eliminates a large quantity of smuggled opium c plantations in British Bengal, 20 million boxes, and takes custody of smugglers, English subjects. And in April 1840, for the first time in world history, one government (English) declares war on another (Chinese) for the direct protection of the vicious fishing.

The English fleet valiantly shot from guns junks, landed troops to capture the ports blockaded Imperial Canal — one of the most important transport routes in China.

Anglo-Chinese "peace" agreement concluded in Nanjing August 29, 1842 opened to British trade of opium and Chinese ports on the southern and south-eastern coast of China. British subjects in China came from the jurisdiction of the Chinese authorities. In China, there were British trading settlements, Settlement, Royal Navy acquired a strategically important bases in the Pacific. China has paid a huge indemnity colonial predator of 15 million liang of silver (21 million dollars), the cost of reimbursing the British conquest of itself.

The first Opium War was the beginning of a long period of weakening China. The next hundred years of Chinese history were filled with opium drugged, endless bloodshed, riots, and foreign intervention. Within a few decades will be destroyed by the largest economy in the world, will be plundered treasures of the Middle Kingdom (English even cleaned out the Imperial Palace), its industry decimated, its trade and customs brought under control by British "experts." Together with the weakening of the state was a long-term depopulation. If the population of China in 1842 was 416 million., In 1881, 369 million [91]

Both the Irish famine, and Indian field littered with the bones, and China, dying in the capable hands of the British, are already in the Victorian era, which is considered another "golden age" of British capitalism

By the time of Queen Victoria's Britain a half century was the most powerful trading and maritime power, 70 years the undisputed leader of industrial development, half a century the richest country in the world, controlling financial transactions around the world and owning colonies with innumerable resources and a population of hundreds of millions of souls. And also lectured about civility and freedom of the rulers of different countries.

For the development of capitalism in England was paid an exorbitant price — tens of millions of lives in Ireland, Africa, India, China, Australia, America, the disappearance of many peoples and cultures, the destruction of the economies of the two most populous countries — India and China, congestive poverty in Latin America.

English model of capitalism has shown that capital advances by inequality, inequality support that he needed extensive peripherals and external environment, where almost sucked free resources and gratuitous labor. It is through the periphery of the environment is growing capital — they are the major costs. It captures what is created by the labor of others, appropriates other people's savings.

Naturally raises the question of what would happen if Russia would represent a cluster of tribes and clans, like Ireland, America Indian, Aboriginal Australia, Africa or loose feudal education like India. Then we would become prey of British capitalism still in the 17-18 centuries. And the second would have been a "Canada" — twenty million English-speaking population, among the remnants of "Muscovite" aboriginal tribes on reservations. There would be no great Russian colonization of northern Eurasia, nor Russian civilization with its cultural, scientific, technical, and military achievements.

Russian could share the fate of the American Indians. But a strong state and private colonization of new lands, servitors and peasants, on a large scale began in the reign of Ivan the Terrible, saved Russia from the invasion of Western capital. Have made it the largest in the world and third in size in terms of population (up to 1991), brought her relatively fertile land and mineral deposits, which are practically not in the center of the country.

Russian state since the "Ivan" was of a clear and centralized mobilization character (with the wide use of various forms of self-organization and self-management — on Russia, stretching in the late 1630s. To the Pacific, accounted for only a hundred one thousand clerks and scribes, that's and the whole bureaucratic apparatus). "Ivana Vasilyevich," basically done away with the feudal aristocracy, both political and economic power, which facilitates dissection and the subjugation of the country by foreign forces.

Therefore the Russian did not share the fate of many indigenous peoples of the world periphery, and advancing the frontier further and further, have created a huge "Russian World", where numerous peoples to retain their land, customs and languages.

I think that based on the strength of the Russian state, the British colonialists at the time rejected the idea it tough to conquer by force and decided to expand it from the inside, igniting the material interests and greed of the elite groups.

Sources and links:
1 F. Braudel material civilization, economy and capitalism, XV-XVIII centuries. M. 1988, p.260
2 Zeiten und Menschen. Paderborn: Schoeningh, 2011
3 E. Hobsbawm, The Age of Revolution. Europe 1789-1848. Rostov-on-Don, 1999, p.68
4 T. Moore. Utopia. Publishing House of the USSR Academy of Sciences, 1947, p.58
5 JM Trevelyan History of England from Chaucer to Queen Victoria. Smolensk, 2001, p. 126
6 VF Semenov Enclosures and peasant movement in England XVI century. Publishing House of the USSR Academy of Sciences, 1949, p.164, 168, 180
7 Trevelyan, p.126
8 Tanner. Tudor Constitutional Documents, 1922, p. 443-444
9 Tanner, p. 475-479
10 Tanner, p. 479-481
11 Tanner, p.475
12 Trevelyan, p. 122, 129
13 Trevelyan, p. 403
14 W. Harrison. The description of England prefixed to the Holinshed's Chronicles, vol.I, 1807, p.186
15 Samarkin VV Historical Geography of Western Europe in the Middle Ages. M., 1976, p. 197
Samarkin 16, p. 191
17 T. Rogers History and wages in England. St. Petersburg., 1899, s.346
18 History of the Middle Ages. V.2. M., 1977; Trevellian with. 299
19Trevelyan, p.151
20 Saprykin YM The English conquest of Ireland (XII — XVII centuries). M., 1982, p. 85
21 Maxwell C. Irish history from contemporary sources. London, 1923, p. 229-232; Saprykin, p. 94
22 Annals of Ireland. Translated from the Original Irish of the Four Masters. Dublin, 1846. p. 496; Saprykin, p. 95
Saprykin 23, p.97
24 Spencer.E. View of State Ireland. p. 143-144
25 Spencer. p. 166-167; Saprykin, p.99
26 I. Godkin. Land-war in Ireland. London, 1870. p. 84
Saprykin 27, p. 100
28 Calendar of state papers, relating to Ireland. London, 1860-1912. Vol.III, p 84, hereinafter CSP
29 Godkin, p. 431
30 Maxwell, p. 196
31 F. Moryson. A description of Ireland. ed. Morley «Ireland under Elisabeth and James the First». p.76-77
32 Afanasiev GE The fate of Ireland. In: Notes of the University of Novorossiysk. V.46. Odessa, 1888, p.48; CSP, p. 207
33 Saprykin, c. 108
34 Maxwell, p.282
35 Maxwell, p.282
36 CSP, p.360-361

37 Tawney a. Power. Tudor economic documents. Vol. II. London, 1924. p.328
38 Tanner, p. 482-484
39 Trevelyan, p.250
40 Tanner, p. 483
41 Lipson. The economic history of England. V. III, 1931, p. 424
42 Tawney a. Power, p.319-320
43 MM Kovalevsky Economic growth in Europe. T.II, M., 1900, p. 765
44 Tanner, p. 485-487
Rogers, 45, p.349
46 Marx's Capital. T.I, 1949, c.738, 741

47 Temple J. History of General Rebellion in Ireland. Cork, 1776. p 88
48 Gilbert J. History of the irish Confederation and War in Ireland 1641-1643. Dublin, 1882. Vol.I, p. 38
49 Gilbert, Vol. II, p. 74-81
50 Dunlop K. Ireland under Commonwealth. Manchester, 1913, VI p. 239
51 W. Petty economic and statistical work. M., 1940, p. 99
52 Afanasyev, p. 85
53 Acts and Ordinances of the Interregnum. London, 1911. V.II, p.598-603
54 Acts and Ordinances, p. 720-750
55 Acts and Ordinances, p.720-750
56 Afanasyev, c. 85; Curtis L. Nothing But the Same Old Story (The Roots of Anti-Irish Racism). London, 1985
57 Die Geschichte der Indianer Nordamerikas. Paletti, 2004. P.31
Saprykin 58, p.165
59 Dunlop, p.340
60 Trevelyan, p. 300
61 Trevelyan, p. 308
62 Trevelyan, p.349
63 Trevelyan, p. 348
64 Trevelyan, s.403, 404
65 Trevelyan, p. 407
Samarkin 66, p.191
Samarkin 67, p.195
68 Sarkisyants M. English roots of German fascism. St. Petersburg, 2003
69 Afanasiev. p.90
70 Trevelyan, p. 483
71 Trevelyan, p. 374
72 Trevelyan, p. 375
73 Trevelyan, p. 375

74 Trevelyan, p. 416
75 Hobsbawm, p.53
76 Trevelyan, p. 505; Sarkisyants
77 Hobsbawm, p. 63
78 Trevelyan, p. 563
79 Trevelyan, p. 569
80 Vinogradov, VN Lord Palmerston, in European diplomacy.
81 Curtis
82 Curtis; Mitchel J. The History of Ireland from the Treaty of Limerik to the Present Time. 1869. V. II, p. 244-247
83 Fitzgerald G. Towards a New Ireland. Dublin, 1973, p.67
84 Eberhardt P. Geography of the Russian population. Per. from Polish. St. Petersburg, 2003
85 World History. The period of the British conquest. T. 14. M.-Mn., 2000, p.307
86 K. Antonov, A., Bongard-Levin, GM, Kotovskij GG History of India. Moscow, 1979
87 MM Kovalevsky communal land ownership. Part I. M, 1879
88 Hobsbawm, c. 55
89 J. Nehru, Glimpses of World History. T. II. M. 1981, Antonova, Bongard-Levin. History of India; DI Mendeleev Cherished ideas. M., 1995, p.17, 49, 60
90 Hobsbawm, c. 54
91 China, a country in Asia / / Dictionary of Brockhaus and Efron
Scenes from my book "The Truth about Nicholas I. slandered the Emperor "(html) and "Russian — successful people. How to grow through Russian land".

Alexander Tyurin

oko-planet.su

Like this post? Please share to your friends: