| |
|
[XVII.
1.]
[XVIII. 1.]
|
|
[XVII.
2.]
....This
competition has the further consequence that a large part of landed property
falls into the hands of the capitalists; thus, the capitalist becomes
landowner, just as the smaller landowners are, in general, nothing more
than capitalists. In this way, a part of large landed property becomes
industrial.
....So, the final consequence of the abolition
of the distinction between capitalist and landowner--which means that,
in general, there remain only two classes in the population: the working
class and the capitalist class. This selling off of landed property, and
transformation of such property into a commodity, marks the final collapse
of the old aristocracy and the final victory of the aristocracy of money.
....(1) We refuse to join in the sentimental
tears which romanticism sheds on this account. Romanticism always confuses
the infamy of selling off the land with the entirely reasonable and, within
the system of private property, inevitable and desirable consequence of
the selling off of private property in land. In the first place, feudal
landed property is already in essence land which has been sold off, land
which has been estranged from man and now confronts him in the shape of
a handful of great lords.
....In feudal landownership, we already find
the domination of the earth as of an alien power over men. The serf is
an appurtenance of the land. Similarly, the heir through primogeniture,
the firstborn son, belongs to the land. It inherits him. The rule of private
property begins with property in land, which is its basis. But in the
system of feudal landownership, the lord at least appears to be king of
the land. In the same way, there is still the appearance of a relationship
between owner and land which is based on something more intimate than
mere material wealth. The land is individualised with its lord, it acquires
his status, it is baronial or ducal with him, has his privileges, his
jurisdiction, his political position, etc. It appears as the inorganic
body of its lord. Hence the proverb, nulle terre sans maitre [No land
without its master], which expresses the blending of nobility and landed
property. In the same way, the rule of landed property does not appear
directly as the rule of mere capital. Its relationship to those dependent
upon it is more like that of a fatherland. It is a sort of narrow personality.
[XVIII. 2.]
|
|
[XVII.
3.]
[XVIII. 3.]
|
|