The Peasantry - Really just Proletariat and Petit-Bourgeoisie?

[AK]

The peasantry doesn't seem to have some strict relation to the means of production - rather, "peasants" - like the rest of the population - fall into two main categories: those who own private property (but still work on it) and those who don't own private property but work on the private property of those who do. Now, hang on, to me this sounds an awful lot like the Petit-Bourgeoisie and the Proletariat, so why do we continue to classify the Peasantry as a separate class? Is there something I missed? Could it be simply that they don't work in industrial jobs? Or because the land-owners sell their produce directly to end-consumers or the Bourgeoisie?

[Zanthorus]

I was under the impression that there was a distinction between the "peasantry" (Rural petit-bourgeoisie) and the "rural proletariat". In Sam Dolgoff's history of the Cuban Revolution at least he makes a distinction between the rural proletariat and the peasantry in order to show that the former was quite prevalent in Cuba at the time of the revolution and that Cuba wasn't a peasant country.

[AK]

I was under the impression that there was a distinction between the "peasantry" (Rural petit-bourgeoisie) and the "rural proletariat". In Sam Dolgoff's history of the Cuban Revolution at least he makes a distinction between the rural proletariat and the peasantry in order to show that the former was quite prevalent in Cuba at the time of the revolution and that Cuba wasn't a peasant country.
So these "peasants" are just agricultural petit-bourgeoisie?

[Ravachol]

'The peasantry' is more of an occupational discription than a class-based one. A 'peasant' who owns his own property and employs several peasant-laborers, is obviously part of the bourgois. Whilst a peasant-laborer who works on someone else's land for a wage is part of the rural proletariat.

[The Vegan Marxist]

What exactly wouldn't put the peasantry within the working class or the proletariat? They are of similar grounds to the working class & have played an initial role in the revolutionary process towards a more collectivized system.

[AK]

'The peasantry' is more of an occupational discription than a class-based one. A 'peasant' who owns his own property and employs several peasant-laborers, is obviously part of the bourgois. Whilst a peasant-laborer who works on someone else's land for a wage is part of the rural proletariat.
They're only Bourgeois if they don't work on the private property they own. They are Petit-Bourgeois, it seems. And these "peasant labourers" are actually Proletarian.

What I really don't like abour Maoism is it refers to the peasantry as a separate class distinct from the Proletariat and Petit-Bourgeoisie. Whilst they have different jobs to their industrial/commercial counterparts, they do share the same relations to the means of productions as their industrial/commercial counterparts do - and that's what really matters when it comes to determining Marxian social class, doesn't it?

[red cat]

They're only Bourgeois if they don't work on the private property they own. They are Petit-Bourgeois, it seems. And these "peasant labourers" are actually Proletarian.

What I really don't like abour Maoism is it refers to the peasantry as a separate class distinct from the Proletariat and Petit-Bourgeoisie. Whilst they have different jobs to their industrial/commercial counterparts, they do share the same relations to the means of productions as their industrial/commercial counterparts do - and that's what really matters when it comes to determining Marxian social class, doesn't it?

Comparing the whole peasantry in this way to classes within a capitalist economy is wrong; they might merge at some common points, but in no way are they fully equivalent.

In the countryside of feudal or semi feudal economies, power is generally in the hands of feudal lords. They are the main exploiting class.

Then come the rich peasants; they both own land and rent from the feudal lords; and have a large amount of liquid capital as well as well developed machinery for agriculture compared to the rest of the peasantry. They thrive mainly on exploitation, but are smaller than feudal lords. A big peasant can engage in working in his fields, owning small businesses and rent out his land.

The middle peasants are next. Generally they work on their own fields. Some of the middle peasants might rent their land or hire men, but the major and regular source of their income is their own land and labour. Because of their economic status, this class is partially exempted from the feudal dictatorial laws, and can sell a part of their produce. They are small scale producers, and they can be compared to the middle and lower layers of the petite-bourgeoisie.

The semi-owner poor peasants are those peasants who own some land and have some agricultural tools, and are largely exploited. They are followed by poor peasants who own almost no land or no land at all. Poor peasants are strictly bound by feudal laws and are no better than slaves. The lowest category of poor peasants; the landless peasants are prone to becoming rural proletarians where there is greater centralization of the feudal state.

The point here to note is that the form of exploitation is different from that in the capitalist system; the lower peasantry is forced to hand over a portion of their crops to the feudal lords, and as a "price" for renting land or interest for previously loaned money they have to work on others' land. Whenever a poor peasant owns some land, a specific feudal lord exploits him; and the wages are nothing but food-crops that the peasant uses to feed his family. Landless peasants are bound by strict feudal laws and are no better than slaves. There are often colonies of these landless peasants from where the feudal lord can order any service at any time. They are kept stationary.

The rural working class is very small and can be distinguished from the landless peasants by their ability to choose their workplace. They are generally found where the traditional feudal structure has been replaced by a centralized feudal state and the government hands out wages in cash. The rural proletarian is mobile and can travel from village to village or even to cities.