New Shun 1730

To put it in a way that is easier to understand in China, what exactly was Turgot's reform in history?

1: The Conscription Law. France did not have the Yellow River to repair, but as mentioned before, France relied on corvée to build roads, and Turgot wanted to introduce the Conscription Law to replace corvée with money.

2: Cancel the preferential treatment for gentry. France certainly has preferential treatment for gentry, but they are not called millions of students, but 100,000 nobles.

3: Cancel commercial taxes, all taxes are levied from the land, and the land is checked.

4: Abolish guilds. The guilds in France are different from those in China. They are supported by feudal law and have legal basis. They are also the guilds that can directly protest to the Minister of Finance and warn the East India Company not to import lacquerware and silk from the East.

It can only be said that Turgot in history was courting death.

Because, if you want to do all this, you have to strengthen centralization. And in the case of the existence of the imperial system, it can also mean strengthening the monarchy.

All these reforms are pinned on the monarchy.

However, there is a huge difference between France and China.

It took two thousand years from Shang Yang to establish the foundation for reforms on the central government.

Even so, Liu Yu spent more than 30 years before creating a new political force; and before that, there were various reforms, reforms, imperial examinations, and official systems for more than two thousand years, until the check and balance system left at the beginning of the founding of the Dashun Dynasty.

France does not have this condition.

To strengthen the monarchy and centralization, the king must die first.

If you dare to do this, the nobles can beat the king's shit out. Before Louis XV's financial debate, the Paris High Court strongly opposed the land inventory, and the reason used was that it violated the French constitution and freedom - the king's land inventory was an infringement on the freedom of the nobles and a violation of the traditional French constitution.

Turgot's reforms created a situation that France had never encountered before: a national crisis and chaos.

It is no longer the original regional crisis, chaos, famine, etc.

It should be noted that at this time, especially in absolute monarchies, centralization is sometimes achieved by strengthening the monarchy. Strengthening centralization and breaking regional divisions means challenging the power of the aristocracy.

Turgot's grain reform, right?

Yes.

It broke the feudal regions of the past, created conditions for the national market in France, and laid the foundation for the birth of France in economic terms.

But the problem is that if you do this, you have to be prepared.

You dare to do this without any preparation?

Is your grain depot ready?

Is the grain ready?

Is the Changping warehouse ready?

Is the Pinglian warehouse ready?

Is the governor of the grain transport ready?

Is the supporting policy ready?

Is the new method of selecting officials ready?

You dare to do a national free trade in grain without any preparation, money, soldiers, or grain...

How can this be called reform?

You are courting death.

Free trade is not wrong. In the long run, it is impossible to hoard goods for several years, and the price will always fall.

But the problem is that the purpose of economics should be people, not people becoming the elements of economics.

If people don't eat, they will die; people will rebel during the period of invisible hand regulation. You have to take this issue into consideration.

Economics is economics.

Reality is reality. In reality, you have to consider people's eating, shitting, sleeping and wearing clothes. Some things, such as eating, cannot wait for three to five years to adjust themselves.

Turgot, or the French Physiocrats, the essence of their doctrine is three points:

Ruling by doing nothing.

Another translation method is called natural order, that is, an idealized private capitalist society.

A well-off and prosperous era.

Another translation method is called happiness.

Egalitarianism... This does not need another translation method.

Lao Ma said that Turgot was paving the way for the French Reform.

Indeed.

The storm in 1993, the land law in July, and the subsequent rise of Nathaniel III as a small peasant emperor were the inevitable evolution of all this.

Of course, this is the original history.

Now, of course, the situation is different.

Turgot's reforms were successful to a certain extent in this time and space.

Voltaire's sigh of "My heart will never be at peace" due to Turgot's dismissal was only half a sigh.

After all, it was a partial success and still did not touch the real land problem in France.

On the one hand, because of the participation of Dashun in the war, France won the First World War and the financial problem was not so big.

Second, Dashun forced Britain to abolish protectionism, which greatly accelerated the development of agriculture in North America. During the famine in 75 years, France had both money and cheap food from overseas.

Third, Dashun gave France some support.

The concept of governing the country, learning from history, the political issues of a unified country, the game between the central and local governments, the profit-seeking nature of businessmen, and so on.

Because of the close exchanges between Dashun and France, Turgot did not get the political operation of Dashun from Gao Leisi and Yang Dewang, two half-baked overseas students.

To be honest, scholars and students may not understand these things, or they may understand them too idealistically.

However, Turgot's reforms lasted for 75 years, but they still couldn't survive the great drought in 1988.

It can be said that "yesterday is reappearing".

A series of problems such as food shortage, hoarding, and grassroots riots quickly evolved into "national" problems that France could hardly understand before. In this regard, France still lacked a long history of a unified country, and it was indeed difficult to understand what a national problem was, rather than a local, parish, or regional problem of a certain fiefdom.

To a certain extent, France's luck was "quite bad". Just after some reforms of the domestic unified market and free trade, it experienced a "little ice age" climate - the eruption of the Icelandic Laki volcano in 1783, which continuously affected Europe's climate and food harvest for ten years.

These problems were accompanied by France's lack of in-depth understanding of the "country" and the lack of long-term experience in truly unified internal markets, which made it lack sufficient means to deal with problems such as hoarding, monopoly speculation, and price manipulation of necessities.

Another factor was the exchange between the East and the West, the exchange of species in the Americas by Columbus, the cowpox and smallpox that Liu Yu had in Dashun, and the introduction of Eastern agricultural technology into Europe.

The French population surged from less than 20 million in 1700 to 29 million at this time.

This also led to the famous [Famine Conspiracy] in France:

The population surged.

The volcanic eruption caused the temperature to cool.

In addition, Turgot introduced a free trade policy at this time, and was so bold that he dared to engage in free trade in grain.

So, the whole of France was confused.

Feudalism has feudal morality and a complete system.

Capitalism has capitalist morality.

Under feudal morality, if there is not enough food in this area, it is not allowed to be transported away.

Under capitalist morality, or free trade morality, the freedom of the market allows speculators to freely export grain to countries that will sell grain at a higher price, even if it means that the country does not have enough food.

[The virtue of free trade in the international market replaces the moral obligations of the old country]

During the old system, grain was the basis of the peasants' diet, and food security was at the core of the relationship between the king and his people. Therefore, the king and his government had the responsibility to regulate grain trade and ensure a balance between national and local supply and demand.

Before France, there was a complex set of controlled and mandatory baker's laws to maintain basic bread prices.

However, the eighteenth century witnessed the development of liberal ideas, especially the desire to put the economic role of the state in the hands of the market. The theoretical hope of the physiocrats in abolishing price controls and trade privileges was to activate competition, reduce grain prices and improve its distribution.

However, this transition was so fast that many people were not used to it.

It is not to say that free trade is bad or capitalism is bad.

Rather, feudal society has been learning from history for thousands of years and hundreds of years, and has gradually repaired various problems encountered.

It can be said that it treats the head when it hurts and the foot when it hurts.

However, after thousands of years of tinkering, at least there is a set of ways to deal with the problem of bread prices. Although it is not very strong, and even only treats the symptoms but not the root cause, at least there is this thing.

And Turgot had no experience of what might happen when he carried out such reforms, and he could not "learn from history" at all, let alone have enough time to tinker and make it work perfectly.

History is the history of class struggle.

The struggle in feudal society created a series of laws and policies in feudal society to ease contradictions.

The struggle in the new era will naturally create a series of laws and policies in the new era to ease contradictions.

History originally developed in struggle.

It does not mean that all problems can be solved at once by reciting a sutra.

If there is a problem, struggle.

If it can be solved, it proves that it is not time to die.

If there is a problem, struggle.

If it cannot be solved, the old framework cannot solve it, which also proves that the old era is finished.

However, the new era does not mean that all old problems can be solved and everything will be fine with a policy.

No.

Instead, new problems and new contradictions will arise.

Therefore, in the face of reform, especially after grain can be sold freely and cross-provincial transactions are no longer restricted.

[Famine Conspiracy] came into being: What the hell is reform. All walks of life, including the poor, the police and government members, believe that the new free trade law for grain and flour is not for them, but to satisfy the agenda of interest groups and hope to make more money.

This in itself is also a struggle. It's just that at the turn of the old and new eras, many people understand the problem as a simple, easy-to-understand "conspiracy theory" that draws good and bad people.

Without understanding this, you won't understand why when the storm came in 1993, the radicals were so enthusiastic and radical about "cracking down on speculators and limiting the maximum price", and were even called "madmen". Because they were really harmed by speculators and merchants who hoarded goods.

Don't advise others to be good without experiencing their own suffering.

Even the conspiracy theory says that the Duke of Orleans, with the funding of the British government, made speculative purchases of wheat in 1988 because he wanted to create chaos and kill Louis XVI, who was the heir to the throne.

Putting aside conspiracy theories, against the backdrop of the 1988 disaster, the Bank of England and Prime Minister Pitt the Younger did indeed take direct action and bought a large amount of French grain.

Under such a disaster, they could still speculate. It can only be said that what happened next was a worthy death and a good fortune.

Of course, this is also one of the reasons why the idiom [emphasis on agriculture and neglect of commerce] quickly flowed into France and soon had a standardized translation in this time and space.

Dashun made suggestions to France.

If you want to reform, you can.

However, there must be supporting things to replace the original complicated and westward baker's rules.

At the very least, you have to stabilize the grain price - the French asked the people of Dashun, how do you know this? The people of Dashun told the French, we were originally rebels, we are an empire built on the basis of the disaster in the late Ming Dynasty, you ask us how we know?

Do you know that in order to stabilize the grain price, the local officials even considered the famine in Jiangnan, and told the court to collect rice instead of wheat to stabilize the grain price because they were not used to eating wheat?

So, in this time and space, the famine in 1988 broke out and a chaos spread to the whole of France. However, the reformists were quickly suppressed, and some young officers also stood out through the suppression of the Flour War.

In addition, North America was forced by Dashun to engage in free trade, and the development of Dashun steam engines and railway technology led to the improvement of France's early railway transportation routes, etc., which temporarily suppressed the turmoil in France.

But all this is only temporary.

Because, here, there is another special factor, that is, Dashun's funding for France.

Not to help France.

But to defend the "free trade" system.

Now, the whole of Europe is awakening and thinking about the free trade, the suppression of its own industrial industry, and the shocking outflow of silver from the whole of Europe.

And the French "free trade" theory is precisely based on the "Physiocracy School", and it is precisely the theory that has the greatest relationship with Dashun.

If this theory cannot even solve the food problem.

Then, under the background of Dashun's free trade system frantically suppressing the development of European industries, especially the textile industry and light industry, the European market, which is crucial to Dashun, will be in danger.

Therefore, after the outbreak of the Flour War in 1988, Dashun immediately helped France to transport a lot of North American grain to help stabilize prices.

It was not because of the so-called "monarchy" alliance, but to maintain the European market that was vital to Dashun, as well as the supporters of "free trade", "physiocrats" and "natural order theory" behind the European market.

Dashun now likes those compradors, speculators and financiers in Europe. But for small farmers, handicraftsmen and industrial capital in Europe, it is quite disgusting.

But now, "dark clouds" are spreading throughout Europe. Farmers, handicraftsmen and national industrial capital in various countries are trying to break free from this "shackle".

And Dashun does not have the power to directly invade Europe and maintain this trade system.

Because, if it fights in India, Dashun can beat Europe to shit; but if it fights in Europe, Europe can beat Dashun's delivery ability to shit.

Therefore, as a model of "physiocrats" and "Eastern learning to the West", France can hold on to today.

The Dashun School of Realism actually did not recognize the Physiocrats. They actually denied that land was the only source of value, but recognized the value of labor. There were actually fundamental differences between the two sides, but at the turn of the old and new eras, when agriculture was still the main industry in France, this difference could be ignored.

The key is that Dashun wanted the European market, and it was impossible to solve the direct invasion violently, so it had to support a model to resist the increasingly fierce awakening of European national capital. If even food was a problem, the free trade that Liu Yu had advocated in Europe would be greatly discounted.

The French Physiocrats themselves had an unclear relationship with Dashun. It is useless to say that it is not related. If everyone thinks it is related, then it is really related. If something really happened, it could be directly accused of "taking money from the Chinese".