Revolution
Huxley begins the essay with the five-syllable word, The proletariat
⤵️
He says for Karl Max, this word was very unpleasant.
According to Karl Max, this was not good for humanity and not good for the bourgeoisie, in particular.
⤵️
Karl Max associated the word “The proletariat” with the gibbous of politicians and journalists.
And gave it the name, ‘ the language of Modern ideology’.
But as said earlier this was an unpleasant thing.
Further Huxley speaks of the atrocious and uniquitous done in the name of progress and National prosperity.
He sympathises with the men, women children.
These accepted all these atrocities as inevitable.
⤵️
A ⤵️
Inevitable as the sunrises and sunsets.
as if all these were in accordance with the positivity of divin'
B ⤵️
Further, he talks of the wage slaves.
As how these of slaves well ill-treated worse than the animals.
Later after the conquest when slaves were plentiful, the owner class becomes extravagant in its labour resources.
⤵️
To them, slaves were as natural products of the soil.
They used themes as the Americans used their petroleum.
Now the slaves were treated better than a donkey.
Machinery increased production.
Empty lands were supplying cheap food.
This increased the population.
The industrialist of the last country was living at the time of population increase.
There was an endless supply of slaves.
The owner class now become more numb towards the iron laws.
Wage slaves were worked to death as slaves were easily compensated.
All this time Karl Max wrote his,
C ⤵️
Mara felt the proletariat was exploited and victimized.
But he was wrong.
The higher the degree of industrial development and development and material civilizations the more complete has been the transformation of the proletariat.
No longer was it a victim, but actually, it was becoming a victim.
The causes of these changes were many and diverse.
In the depths of human soil lies something which we rationalized as a demand for justice.
Here we try to perceive the necessity for balance in the affairs of life.
We are conscious of equality and have a hunger for the righteousness.
Huxley says that as aristocratic power holders of the 18thC they were driven by their outraged sentiments of equality.
They preached humanitarianism and equality.
The industrial bourgeois power holders passed laws to restrain their own cupidity.
These handed over more and more of their powers to the proletariat.
Though earlier they had outrageously oppressed them.
They took masochistic pleasure in sacrificing themselves.
They could have chosen to use their power ruthlessly.
They could have gone exploiting the wage slaves as they exploited earlier.
⤵️
But they could not make such a choice.
Because the unbalanced world of the early industrial epach was felled by the deepest self as an outrage.
Hence in late nineteenth century the ‘craven fear of being great’ afflicted the class of masters.
Here then is one cause of the changes.
It is a cause of historical materialism.
these deal not with real human beings.
They deal with abstract ‘Economic Men’.
These were more the less potent.
In the world of historical materialism, there was also a good store of causes.
This was the organisation of the proletariat.
Revolutionary propaganda culminated in revolutionary violence.
The discovery was that it pays the capitalist to have prosperous protection earlier about him.
They agreed that those who are paid well would buy well.
But the policy of modern capitalism was to teach the proletariat to be wasteful.
To organic and facilitate its extravagance.
And to make the extravagance possible by paying high wages in return for high production.
The new proletariat spends what it earns.
So much so that they mortgage their future earning in purchasing objects which the advertiser affirm to be indispensable luxuries.
Thus the money circulation and the prosperity of the modern industrial state are assured.
⤵️
Now the question is what is likely to happen in the future to Karl Marx's proletariat.
Then the answer was that it was becoming a branch of the bourgeoisie.
It was like the bourgeoisie were working in the factories and not in the offices.
A bourgeoisie with only in a finger.
The way of life of these two branches regarding the working hour.
These were the modern bourgeoisie.
⤵️
In highly industrial countries the wages of the skilled and unskilled are the same skilled.
They are fused as you can say semi-skilled.
Sometimes as the unskilled are paid more earning.
As the bricklayer mason are more than engineers, doctors, teachers and the like.
Huxley perhaps this is because their manual worker are better organised and are in better positions than the brain workers.
Then there is another cause Pastly to the overcrowding of profession.
Huxley returns to the transmogrified proletariat.
⤵️
The speaks of the equalization of income,
Regards this Huxley refers to the expectations of Bernard Shaw, who expected all blessings would be realized under the capitalist system in America.
The immediate future realized a vast plateau of income.
This income comprises the manual labours and the small professional.
And also relatively small peaks to a giddy height of opulence.
And on these peaks would be the owners of the property the directors of the industry and finance and the able and successful men.
The communist movement would rather become pointless.
⤵️
Huxley says those who inhibit heaven do not crave for paradise.
He adds sarcastically that they yearn for hell.
A socialist paradise is where all men share equally.
The common man does not care who guarantees these blessings as long as they get them.
So if they get from the capitalist and from the socialist also they will not discard any of them.
The communist revolutions would disappear especially from the highly developed countries.
The capitalist itself would be responsible for the change.
For levelling of income and secondly that all would buy the productions easily American capitalism is doing more for the democratization of society.
American capitalism is doing more than any idealist preaches of the Rights of men.
Here Huxley says its own downfall.
Further, he says democracy cannot be preached and give practical realization.
For this says Huxley that we need to arouse a desire to be consistent and ease the partial democratization of society to the end.
Initially, this would prove to be a paradox but late it would attain universal prosperity.
Post-revolution failed to produce perfect democracy.
The cause was that the downtrodden were too objected by the poor to imagine to be in equal with the oppressors.
Only those who were somewhere equal to their masters profited from these revolutions.
Huxley says in America the whole proletariat is prosperous and well-organised.
So they can feel equality with their masters.
Huxley compares this to the rich industrial landlords to the English industrial and professional bourgeoisie with regard to the territorial magnates in 18.
Further, he compares the lawyers, the merchants the financiers with regard to the French crown and its nobles in 1789.
As incomes have been levelled up, these by the demand of production would also like up.
Huxley explains that if a plaster oil driller is in worth with a construct, an engineer, geologist they would deserve the same wage demands.
Will there be justifiable asks Huxley?
Huxley opines that things would break up.
Mr. Shaw's dream of equality would need more time to achieve it.
And when the dream is actualized, what would happen next?
There arises the question is equality of income the only way to get happiness.
There Huxley refers to Shaw’s guide to socialism where he slightly suggests that equality is not only the solution.
He sarcastically says-‘fantasist doctrine… apparent by positivistic.
⤵️
Man is not the same thing as the Economic Man.
Man’s problem cannot be solved only by economic arrangements.
To some extent, it may be good, but the equalization of income can no more touch the real sources of present discontent.
Huxley goes on to say that the real trouble system is not that it makes some people very much richer than others.
But that it makes life fundamentally unlivable for all.
Every individual finds himself degrades from manhood towards more social functions.
As ever intense boredom is spread.
Existence is becoming intolerable.
Quite pointless and intolerable the materially-civilized humanity has not yet consciously realized.
The intelligent who have consciously realized are unaccompanied by some talent.
That some inner urge towards creations, is an intense hatred, a longing to destroy.
The type of intelligence by m.Andre ‘Malraux in his novel Les Conquer.
Huxley says that the whole population in the coming time will mental of life.
Huxley asks, “And what then?”
He says revolutions will break, but not in the betterment of humanity or in anything else whatever it will be nihilist revolutions.
Destruction hate aimlessness will result in universal nihilism.
In the end, the writer wishes that it will not come in his time.
0 Comments