Reply to Conor Lynch
Reply to this post on Twitter
Response:
Reminder that, as Britain creates ever-less council housing, as our population gets poorer and our homelessness crisis gets worse, that Britain never got rid of its landed aristocracy - unlike the bourgeois revolution in France, which broke up the great landholdings the British bourgeoisie was entirely fine with keeping its aristocratic partners in exploitation around. Rather than destroying the aristocracy like the Jacobins set out to, the British bourgeoisie actually made the aristocracy bourgeois as well!
The bourgeoisie and the aristocracy needed each other to deal with the realities of developing forces of production.
Marx made this incredibly clear in his review of M. Guizot's pamphlet "Pourquoi la revolution d'Angleterre a-t-elle reussi?"; he said that;
"the enduring alliance between the bourgeoisie and a great part of the landowners ... constitutes the major difference between it and the French Revolution, which destroyed the great landholdings with its parcelization policy. The English class of great landowners, allied with the bourgeoisie — which ... had already developed under Henry VIII — did not find itself in opposition ... but rather in complete harmony with the vital requirements of the bourgeoisie. In fact, their lands were not feudal but bourgeois property On the one hand, there were able to provide the industrial bourgeoisie with the manpower necessary for manufacturing, and on the other they were able to develop agriculture to the standards consonant with industry and commerce. Thus their common interests with the bourgeoisie".
Long Live Marx!
