New Shun 1730

This kind of choice is not just Dashun's own business, but a major event related to the future trend of thought in the world.

Not only because of Dashun's current size, if there is any internal movement, if there are three advantages and two disadvantages, it will definitely cause huge fluctuations in the world situation.

What's more, since the Enlightenment Movement, the Physiocratic School, etc. began to "spread learning from the East to the West", to a certain extent, Dashun still plays a huge leading role in those "producing countries" rather than "commercial countries".

Whether it is the so-called superstitious atheism; the private ownership of small plots of land, which is very radical in Europe; or the traditional utopia based on "humanity" that relies on the utopian idea of ​​"the world is for the common good"...

All these, for many radicals in Europe, represent a unique and explorable path beyond the empty rhetoric of the Paris Salon.

In fact, many Europeans came to Dashun to study and travel, and carefully inspected the roads in Dashun, and continued to bring these things back to Europe, continuing the previous "learning from the East to the West". And the influence is getting bigger and bigger.

Just like the ongoing reforms in Dashun at this time, as long as they do not go back but move forward, various factions can always find basis from Liu Yu's messy theories.

Just as Liu Yu mocked himself during his lifetime, he said that Dashun is like Malthusian economics in terms of production and consumption, Listian productivity in terms of productivity concept, and it is a three-headed stitching monster derived from Saint-Simonianism in terms of conception of the future. .

This kind of stitching certainly creates many problems.

For example, it is caricatured as Malthusian economics on matters of production and consumption.

Within Dashun, there are actually differences. After all, Dashun is not a feudal aristocracy like the United Kingdom or even Japan, so naturally there is no pure Malthus.

Generally speaking, this view can be regarded as a kind of "underconsumption theory".

Some people in Dashun are of course the beneficiaries under the old system. The reason why they support this view is because they are landlords, nobles, military officers, etc., and they belong to the "effective demand" in the theory. That is to say, if a capitalist factory produces so many things, it is definitely impossible to buy them all with the wages of workers, so this will inevitably require a group of professional and specialized people who "only consume, do not produce, and rely on land rent, military salary, financial interest, etc." Consumers”, otherwise wouldn’t there be a crisis of “not being able to sell”?

Others, who were not the beneficiaries of the old system, also hold this view. They themselves are not landowners, nobles, moneylenders, financial rentiers, etc., but the similar views they hold are another explanation.

Roughly speaking, it is a bit like "reversing Luxemburg's theory of capital accumulation."

The general idea before practicing reversely is to say:

Production is divided into two parts: the production cycle of simple reproduction - the production cycle of expanded reproduction.

The world is also divided into two parts: capitalist factors and non-capitalist factors.

The basic production of capitalism is completed by capitalists and workers within capitalist production relations.

However, once expanded reproduction occurs, the excess value cannot be consumed at all within the capitalist factors. That is to say, the capitalists and workers within the capitalist factors, combined, cannot consume all these things.

Then, we can draw a conclusion: only areas with non-capitalist factors can withstand the results of expanded reproduction.

This area with non-capitalist elements may not be a colony. Of course this also includes the colonies.

For example, the small farmers and peasants in Dashun have not been involved in the capitalist production system. Therefore, they are also a kind of "consumers who are detached from capitalist factors and are used to consume goods that cannot be consumed within capitalist factors."

Not to mention the colonies.

Of course, to be honest, what Luxemburg means is that if the whole world is generally industrialized and involved in the formal capitalist production system. Then, there will be no consumers who are independent of capitalist factors. Then capital accumulation will not be able to continue, and there will eventually be a crisis.

And practicing backwards is just a manifestation of Dashun's confused thinking.

Those who are not landlords, aristocrats, financial rentiers, and salary consumers also support this unorthodox Malthusian economics, which Liu Yu caricatured as a variant of Malthusian economics, because they believe that the people in the Songsu area Those factories with capitalist elements - of course, Dashun does not use this term here, but they are basically the same thing - if they want to achieve capital accumulation and expand reproduction, they must expand to non-capitalist areas . To resort to violence for external expansion is to be regarded as imperialism.

As for how to expand to non-capitalist areas, there are disagreements again.

Some people think that since it is necessary to expand to non-capitalist areas, then it should be expanded externally. In other words, this explains the necessity of Dashun’s previous external expansion, and the necessity to continue external expansion and expand in depth.

Others believe that this means that it must expand to non-capitalist areas.

So, of course there is no problem with the outside world.

What about internally?

Those small farmers and peasants in the interior are obviously outside the nature of capitalism. They can also be people who are actually "consumers outside of capitalist factors to avoid underconsumption within the capitalist system."

So, does it mean that opening the money gates and allowing the developed regions that already have capitalist characteristics to expand internally is the only way for the urgent development of industry and commerce?

So, Liu Yu mocked the Dashun side's perverted scriptures as being stitched together.

Because of the effect after stitching, and Liu Yu's "prophetic" behavior of "teaching the art but not the doctrine", even if it is called a "perverted scripture", there are many ways to "annotate the scriptures", "interpret the scriptures", and "explain the scriptures", and it seems that everything makes sense.

A "variant Malthusian economics" mocked by Liu Yu.

They can be divided into: "landlords and rentiers who only consume but do not produce are necessary, otherwise they will explode"; "must expand externally and use those regions without large factory production systems to consume goods, otherwise the workers and factory owners in the internal system cannot buy so many things"; and "those in the interior and those in the overseas colonies have no difference in economic attributes, and are all necessary consumers outside the system for the development of industry and commerce, capital accumulation, and expanded reproduction" internal radicals.

What about more complicated things?

Among these complicated things, the most interesting thing for European scholars who came to travel and "learn from" is that the "School of Physiocracy originated from China" is not a prominent school of thought in China at all, and can be regarded as the result of the traditional thought of emphasizing agriculture and suppressing commerce - because of the tradition of emphasizing agriculture and suppressing commerce, Dashun opposes physiocracy, because these two "emphasis on agriculture" are completely opposite.

Therefore, the extremely strange situation has emerged:

All European scholars who really came to Dashun to travel and study, or people like Napoleon who had contact with scholars from Dashun when they were young, are deeply suspicious of physiocracy and natural order, and feel that Dashun is not physiocracy at all.

All those who shouted "Eastern wisdom, physiocracy, natural order" in Europe have never really been to Dashun.

When Liu Yu's coffin was transported from Tianjin to the capital, many European students who had come to Dashun and began to question the physiocracy came to see him off with various attitudes, some respectful, some resentful.

At this critical moment of Dashun's choice and turning point, among the European students who came to see him off, there was a farewell person who was somewhat blackly humorous - Claude Henri Saint-Simon.

The true founder of one of the three perverse scriptures of Dashun, the fake Li Kui.

Saint-Simon, who was already in his thirties, did not run to North America to support the anti-British war at the age of seventeen or eighteen as in history. Because of Dashun's participation in the war, the North American War of Independence did not happen: in short, it was originally the southern plantation owners, northern smugglers, and the big land speculators in the middle who rebelled together; and the result of Dashun's participation in the war was that the southern plantation owners and northern smugglers achieved their demands, and followed the British army, French army, Indians, and Dashun's forest light infantry to beat the rebellious big land speculators together.

Of course, he did not have the opportunity to announce his abandonment of his noble title to participate in the vigorous storm of 1993. Because it had not yet broken out.

He was able to come to Dashun to study, or to travel and investigate, and he was not even going through formal political and economic exchanges.

And he was able to come to Dashun, in fact, he was following the line of the Academy of Sciences, which belonged to scientific exchanges, not official political exchanges. After all, his noble title was just an empty title, and he was not a member of the Paris court circle at that time.

There are a lot of such empty shell nobles in France. And the main reason for being able to travel to Dashun was the exchange between Dashun and the French Academy of Sciences.

He was a student of d'Alembert.

The French Academy of Sciences represented by D'Alembert and the Academy of Sciences on the Dashun side had a long-lasting dispute over the issue of calculus.

Roughly speaking, it was a question of "infinitesimal, infinity", what on earth is the problem. That is, the first logical crisis of calculus.

The cause of the incident was a very simple "small" problem.

Say, a particle N has a large mass; another particle P has a small mass. Roughly speaking, it is like digging a hole in the earth, and because of the result of gravity, it will fall. But what will happen when it falls to the center of mass?

Will it stop? Or like a spring? Or something else? Of course, the particle N here is not the earth, but imagine that the diameter of the earth is shrunk to an infinitely small point, but the original mass is maintained.

The origin is the logical crisis of calculus. The calculus on the Dashun side was built following Euler.

So, D'Alembert started by saying that according to your logic, we give this particle P an initial velocity perpendicular to NP, and it is easy to calculate according to Kepler's formula that the trajectory is an ellipse. Here, we assume that O is one of the focuses. According to the laws of planetary motion, it must be an elliptical motion around O.

According to your limit, when the speed gets smaller and smaller, the ellipse will become flatter and flatter, right?

Then, when the limit is finally taken, can this infinitely flat ellipse be regarded as a "straight" line that is infinitely close to a straight line?

Then this means that P moves towards O, and then after reaching the limit, it rebounds directly, is thrown back, and returns to the original path? Isn't this bullshit?

My intuition tells me that this is obviously not in line with reality. We can't say that because of the existence of "limits", all the laws of reality are invalid, right? Intuitively, shouldn't P first accelerate to N, and the speed is getting faster and faster; then it passes through point N, moves in the opposite direction, the speed is getting slower and slower, and then it is sucked back, and finally oscillates back and forth?

According to what you mean, Newtonian mechanics will fail when facing the problem of infinitely small singularities?

From this argument, D'Alembert gave his famous conclusion in the history of mathematics:

[Infinitesimal quantities or gradually disappearing quantities are meaningless. A quantity is either there or not. If it is, it has not disappeared; if it is not, it has indeed disappeared. Assuming that there is an intermediate state between the two, it can only be a fire-breathing monster composed of a lion's head, a goat's body, and a snake's tail]

And from this, he hopes to develop a set of calculus that does not use the concept of "infinitesimal", or to repair the weak foundation of calculus, and once again make the "infinitesimal" problem on the head of calculus, which has not yet reached adulthood, aggravate it.

This debate started when Dashun sent troops to India to fight a war and lasted until d'Alembert's death ten years ago. In fact, it is still going on now, and more and more people are involved.

For example, Lagrange, who was in Paris at the time, wrote the famous paper "Analytical Function Theory, Containing the Main Theorems of Differential Calculus, Without Infinitesimals, or Using Concepts such as Vanishing Quantities, or Limits and Residues, and Sweeping into the Art of Algebraic Analysis"; Dashun Academy of Sciences also published a paper, "On the Convergence of Series, and the Special Case of Two Different Functions Having a Common Power Series to Oppose Lagrange's "Analytical Function Theory, Containing the Main Theorems of Differential Calculus, Without Infinitesimals, or Using Concepts such as Vanishing Quantities, or Limits and Residues, and Sweeping into the Art of Algebraic Analysis" with Universal Problems".

Behind the two sides' quarrels, it reflects the rapid development of mathematics and natural sciences in the world at that time; and the background that social sciences can't keep up with the pace.

Last year, the French Academy of Sciences' award-winning paper in astronomy was "The Nebula Theory Based on Mathematical Principles"; Dashun's award-winning paper in astronomy was "On the orbital equation formula of planetary motion under non-ideal conditions - thoughts drawn from the long-term difference of the moon's orbit under the influence of the earth's shape and the gravity of other large planets and the sun, and the accuracy of the moon's orbit calculation under the navigation of the nautical calendar".

Compared with the rapid development of mathematics and natural sciences.

At this time, social sciences are like a baby.

In other words, this is the world background of 20 to 30 years after the end of World War I and Liu Yu's escape:

Mathematics and science have begun to discuss the nebula theory, the three-body problem, and solve the logical crisis of calculus.

Social sciences have just been born, and even started to cry a few times.

Technology manufacturing and application are craftsmen, handicraftsmen, and professional scientists. From the original longitude problem, watchmakers defeated Galileo, Newton and Euler; to the spinning machine, the spinning machine made by craftsmen who had never studied science, mathematics and calculus seemed to have a much more direct and greater impact on society and the world than those members of the Academy of Sciences who were already considering the convergence of series.

This is also part of the world background.

Or, this is also a social reality at this time.

This social reality and social existence will naturally give rise to some thoughts that conform to this status quo, or some consciousness that may have the qualifications of "prominent studies" in this era.

What does this background mean?

First:

The rapid development of basic science, especially the beginning of thinking about the universe and the basic theoretical explanation of the motion of the planets in the solar system, has made many people generally full of confidence in the future.

In particular, some of Liu Yu's "prophetic scientific conclusions", such as biology and chemistry, are developing at a speed far beyond the original historical era. At the very least, the pea story did not really have an impact until 1900 in history; at this time, Liu Yu was not the insignificant Mendel, nor was he "unlucky" to encounter "The Origin of Species", which would inevitably cause a stir and a lot of attention in the Christian world, resulting in insufficient attention, so naturally it quickly spread its influence.

Another example is the fertilizer problem for plant growth, the nitrogen problem in the air, the beginning of electricity, etc., etc.

Therefore, in this context, many people generally believe that: human beings will be better in the future.

These theoretical sciences that are ahead of application will be used to make people's lives better.

That is, from a purely technical perspective: the future is beautiful, better, richer, and well-fed and well-clothed.

This purely technical view even influenced the former emperor of Dashun. For example, his idea of ​​"Wang Xie Yan, the people's home" is a manifestation of the purely technical view in this context.

Secondly:

Technology, machinery, etc., at this time, it is not yet at the stage where a large amount of capital must be concentrated in research and development to break through or succeed.

On the contrary, the watchmaker made a marine clock that changed navigation at home; the weaver made a spinning wheel that changed the textile industry at home; the French craftsman also made a steam car...

In short, the relationship between capital and technological inventions is not that close.

It seems that a genius idea can change the world; a craftsman can become a technologically advanced capitalist and complete class leap with an invention...

People, or technology, may even have nothing to do with capital. People, especially independent, free, and individual people, have infinite possibilities, and may take a leap one day.

This will produce many ideas that seem correct at least at this time: elitism; individualism; personal talent and hard work will make you unknown today, but famous, money, and girls tomorrow.

Again:

The capitalist production system, factory system, etc., have been established in some advanced regions.

The application of new technologies and the use of new machinery have undoubtedly produced more products that were unimaginable in the past.

Or as the statement in the Manifesto says: [The bourgeoisie has created more and greater productivity in its less than 100 years of class rule than all the productivity created by all previous generations... Which century in the past expected that such productivity would be hidden in social labor?]

Although it has not reached this point yet, it has begun to show its grandeur and demonstrate the infinite possibilities of the future.

However, the struggle between classes, at this time, is more manifested in the destruction of the old era, rather than the unsolvable inherent crisis of the new era.

In other words, at this time and in this era, the inherent crisis and endogenous problems of capitalism are not the first issues to be considered.

On the contrary, the destruction of the old era and the sin of primitive accumulation have caused deep confusion to those who viewed the problem in the last era in the way of "morality", "eternal justice", "eternal benevolence and kindness".

On the one hand, the advancement of technology has brought about the rapid development of productivity.

On the other hand: the bankruptcy of small farmers, the bankruptcy of handicraftsmen, unemployment, the aggravation of universal poverty under the private ownership of small plots of land, and the original urban middle class such as craftsmen have been gradually impacted by the commodities of large factories and slid into poverty.

Technological progress should make the world better and people live better.

But in this transitional period, especially the stage when the new era breaks out of the mother body of the old era and kills the old era... It can only be said that for most people, there is only more pain, not better.

After all, the old era is not dead yet, and the vast majority of people are still people of the old era.

Therefore, it is inevitable that the reactionary trend of thought that "sounds benevolent and moral" has emerged.

It can even be said that whoever is "reactionary" can become a prominent school of thought in this era.

At least in Dashun at this time, these problems are very obvious.

Of course, mainly in other places, such as Europe, this problem is not qualified to appear for the time being.

The condition for "reactionary" doctrines to become prominent schools is obviously that the power of "progress" is already very strong and has begun to threaten the old era, and has actually created new problems, which is qualified to appear in such an "almost inevitable" stage - a reactionary society based on benevolence, abstract humanitarianism, morality, kindness, and humanity.

On the one hand, it is the premature development of Dashun's agricultural productivity, especially the widespread existence of small land ownership caused by the per mu yield of the first industrial revolution in Europe thousands of years ago.

And the resulting productivity level, as well as the many fantasies left over from the previous period of change that are compatible with this productivity level.

On the other hand, it is the various egalitarian thoughts brought about by the struggles and uprisings that have arisen one after another for more than a thousand years, which are not worried about scarcity but inequality.

That is to say, in the advanced areas of Dashun, some thoughts that can and can only be born at the "turn of the old and the new" have begun to appear.

These thoughts, subjectively, are "for a better future", "for the ideal of universal peace", and "for the majority of people".

But objectively.

Either:

It is trapped in [the fantasy based on humanitarian principles. The conception of the future of society is just to make the universalization of private property (that is, equal ownership of property) the direct purpose of social change...], that is, the second private ownership during the period of capitalist development is a reaction to the murder of the first private ownership.

On the one hand, private ownership is affirmed, and on the other hand, private ownership based on the possession of the fruits of others' labor, which is based on the principle of humanitarianism and does not allow exploitation and polarization, is logically trapped in a dead cycle that requires "deus ex machina", because in this set of things, ownership and production have nothing to do with each other, and private ownership is purely the result of a will, and the result of a will means that a god called "protecting private ownership; but not allowing annexation, oppression, exploitation, buying low and selling high, speculation, making excessive profits, and hoarding goods" is needed to protect this will from being realized in reality.

Or:

Advocating the goodness of human nature, advocating love, advocating benevolence, righteousness and morality.

Starting from abstract human nature, vigorously cursing capitalism is a sin because it bankrupts small producers and small farmers.

Idealizing the patriarchal small land ownership, advocating the equal distribution of land to the poor at no cost, and even advocating turning the proletariat into small producers.

Either:

Then they fall into a kind of inevitability [in a country where the peasant class far exceeds half of the population...it is natural to criticize the bourgeois system with the standards of the petty bourgeoisie and small farmers, starting from the standpoint of the petty bourgeoisie...]

So they try to restore the old means of production and exchange, and thus restore the old property relations and the old society, or they try to force the modern means of production and exchange back into the framework of the old property relations that have been broken through by them and must be broken through.

Finally:

For a country like Dashun, which had a history of salt and iron disputes, government-run, control, equal distribution, and light and heavy, it is easy to produce a critical fantasy.

Turn the country into a pure production management organization, develop industry, solve problems such as disordered production under the new era system, etc.

Relying on the elitism of "selecting elites to govern the country" derived from the imperial examination system; inheriting the traditional idea of ​​"commanding production with a baton" derived from the official mountain and sea, light and heavy art; the industrial development ideas derived from the emphasis on production and industry under the tradition of emphasizing agriculture and light commerce, etc.

It is one of the so-called three crooked classics of the Dashun School of Realism... Saint-Simonism.

This first-class school of thought influenced France for thirty years before March 18, 1871.