Editorial staff Proriv

What a decent person should know about the essence of his earned payment.

It is impossible to say today, that theorists of communism have provided an answer for those interested as to why the USSR collapsed and why capitalism has proved to be more resilient than expected.

It is essential to admit though, that from the viewpoint of the past history, slavery is a by far more resilient system compared with capitalism, which is still at its infancy stage. But it does not mean, that a sensible man will try to regenerate slavery, because it existed for five thousand years while capitalism for only three hundred years and because it was struggling to survive all through the XX-th century. Judging by the current developments in the global financial system and the political life of both Americas, one cannot say, that after the collapse of socialism in the USSR the present-day capitalism has secured itself more reliable guarantees.

In short, the length of existence of this or that type of social order is no good reason for servile imitation.

Nevertheless, it would be useful, from the scientific point of view, to try and answer the quesion: why does capitalism still exist despite the fact that every year hundreds of thousands of people in market economy countries prefer to commit suicide rather than change the economic system turning them into losers, homeless, drug addicts, drunkards, psychopaths, the system which is forcing them to ''voluntarily'' yield up the life? Why do millions of people - year after year - prefer to die of diabetes, heart attack or stroke, to suffer from impotence, loneliness, and for all that, with a mules obedience, keep drudging in the market economy squalor? Why do billions of people, juridically free people, often deprived of their days-off or leave, sleepy and irritated, flood the streets daily in the morning, squeeze themselves into busses or metro cars, travel for hours in a jammed traffic, then walk hurriedly to their job-places and start working obediently for their boss - the work they normally hate. Why do the bulk of the population of market economy countries put off starting a family, and, instead, on a massive scale, provide themselves with rubber dolls, pornography, artificial genitals, without even trying to make their life in such a way that the work for the boss should only be done at the time free o love and other useful things? What are the chains that made people more servile than ancient Egypts slaves, who fairly often broke their tools to spend the rest of the working day idling?

It is no problem to answer similar questions in general terms: only massive ignorance, political one in particular, is capable of condemning people to this sort of idiotic way of life.

But if you refer to most esteemed theorists in the West, you will find, that one of the basic conditions for the existence of market economy is, in their view, a diplomatically formulated principle: people tend to lend themselves to stimulation. Plainly speaking, it implies that people, like animals, easily yield to training by means of threats and bribery.

So, what sort of incentive is it that rivets billions of people to their working place by far more strongly than a slaves chains and turns a juridically free person into a hireling, torturing himself for the sake of his masters profits?

Billions of people today are still unaware that their attachment to the boss and hence the resilience of capitalism are, to a considerable extent, determined by the attraction of the so-called earned payment. Many do not realize, that at the age of its origin the monetary form of earned payment was considered (among free people) to be the most shameful institute and was applied mainly to hired soldiers and prostitutes. Free people who earned their livelihood on their own never offered their services to other people, but they could witness lots of soldiers prepared - for money - to die a fools death; they also had first-hand knowledge of prostitutes quite agreeable to any conceivable muck, provided the sum offered corresponded to the extent of lechery. Therefore, in the graves of aristocrats, monarchs and free people one could always find a lot of golden adornments, but hardly any gold coins, because all through the ages they were associated with lechery and martinets venality.

With time though it dawned on aristocrats, that lashes and stocks demonstrated too graphically the main point of the situation the slave was in, thus annihilating his motivation to work for the tyrant. Realizing that, one fine day English landlords freed their peasants from feudal dependence and transferred them to a monetary system of earned payment, i.e. started applying to serfs the type of remuneration of labour customary for prostitutes and hired soldiers .Entrepreneurs worldwide got conscious, that, with a monetary form of remuneration of labour, the majority of people trying to attain a higher pay are capable - of their own free will - of riding themselves to death when toiling in a mine or at a plant.

Why do miners fairly often switch off gas analysers in mines BY THEMSELVES? Because they want to get a bigger payment. On the horns of the dilemma - life or a bigger payment - manual and office workers will choose death from an explosion, or silicosis, cancer, stroke, rather than give up their laborious work for the sake of wages. They tend to think it is their own choice. In fact, it is but an astute technology used by entrepreneurs around the world, who are smart enough to take into account the peculiar psyche of semieducated people or, which is the same, those of lop-sided erudition.

If a donkey is following a carrot dangling on a stick in front of his muzzle, the donkey is liable to think he is a jolly good fellow, because he knows no worse than his driver whereto and wherefore to go. Guided by this wisdom the donkey is trotting away from the troublesome lashes on his croup, but is eagerly reaching for the carrot in anticipation of a feast.

Such is the free choice of a donkey. Though, even a donkey starts sometimes wondering why the stretch towards the carrot is suspiciously long and in that case the donkey stops dead, thus going on strike, the worlds most ancient form of protest.

After a centures-old undisguised tyranny and scoffing at toilers feudal lords turning into entrepreneurs found a brilliant technology, creating a staunch illusion of partners relations between master and slave, whereby the former slack slave is striving himself after a more intensive use of his work time for the master, as he candidly hopes, that his master will respond with a rise in wages for the workers self-torture. The illusion was so strong, that in the first decades of the existence of market economy, in Holland and England, for example, the working day of hired workers, i.e. former serf peasants, amounted to 14-16 hours and ... no strikes whatever! For such was the agreement between the two gentlemen while hiring. Though, one of the gentlemen had at his disposal stores and shops crammed with goods, while the other had only one thing to offer --- his labour force, underfed for the previous three days. Therefore, despite faints from hunger, vanguard hired workers were toiling as enthusiastically as the donkeys, running, of their own free will, after the carrot dangling on the stick.

It was somewhat later on, that there started a workers struggle for shorter working hours without a wage cut, but at first entrepreneurs were virtually in a flood of tears, moved by the touching scenes of labour enthusiasm of hired workers and ...an appropriate growth of profits.

It goes without saying, that these issues were scientifically investigated in the works of the classics of Marxism - Leninism. Marx proved, that earned payment was the most fortunate godsend for the exploiter classes: it is a peaceful agreement between proletarians and bourgeoisie and creates, firstly, an illusion of justice within the relationship between hired workers and employers, secondly, an illusion of there being a chance to earn more than stipulated in the contract and, thirdly, an illusion of transparency of the wage settlement system. Marx also proved, that the rate of wages for the merchandise labour force is always the MINIMUM, necessary for maintaining a workers physical and intellectual abilities at a level determined by the employer, thus not letting proletarians or their children break away from the fetters of hired labour.

For more than three hundred years to date proletarians of intellectual and physical labour (now sure that their attempts to become richer by intensifying their personal labour will prove fruitless) flood yearly the streets of many capitals, impeding the traffic, and demand a rise in wages, i.e. ask actively to bring the rate of wages into line with the value of labour power. Playing hard-to-get, for show, entrepreneurs eventually agree to grant the request of proletarians. Trade-unions leaders declare a new victory over the tyranny of capital, while downcast proletarians start dispersing towards their working places --- by hard labour to earn their shagreen earned pay. But tomorrow they are to learn, that due to the rise in wages, entrepreneurs have raised prices for all goods. This is how ends the yearly comedy of the economic struggle of proletarians for survival.

But, what is excusable for ignorant proletarians, is inexcusable for communists, if they, too, proclaim as their strategy a struggle for bringing earned payment into line with the value of the merchandise labour power. A communist party cannot be in the vanguard of the working class, if it is dragging behind the slogans put forward by trade-union activists, who, as the worlds history of trade-unions shows, are, in the final analysis, just bearers of the vital interests of bourgeoisie amidst proletarians.



Salary wages within the system of market economy is the most important, fundamental instrument in the hands of entrepreneurs for deriving a surplus value.

When wondering, what circumstance is the most reliable means of keeping proletarians in a state of slavish dependence on capital, or what kind of narcotic is the most virulent and destructive within the range of psychotropics fuddling peoples brains and making them lifelong convicts, one invariably arrives at the conclusion, that it is exactly the salary / wages.

There is a flattering formula, charactrizing the participants of market relations, which represents the matter in such a way, as if in the market there meet two equal subjects, one being a producer and the other a consumer.

Other adepts represent the participants of market relations as sovereign sellers and buyers thereof.

At any rate, the analysis of these relations in the market economy theory is confined to examining the market of consumer goods and services, to stating the fact that the consumer plays first fiddle therein and is free to leave it majestically, if dissatisfied with the goods on offer.

January 2009

@Mail.ru Rambler's Top100