any peasant socialists?

[Angry Young Man]

hi. ive gone through many stages. i first started calling myself a socialist when i was about 14, but had little understanding, then i learned from my dad (a life-long (admittedlyly moderate) socialist) how maggie thatcher screwed over the miners in 84-5 (it's always funny to hear him slag off whoever the tory leader is as they seem to go through them like cigarettes), then i did about the labour govt of 45-51, then i read 'marx for beginners and began to understand the importance of communal ownership, then the manifesto, but i seem now to be developing hippy politics and communal farms. i think its the only way to have fair distribution. opinions plz.

[James]

I think you are probably rather keen on what i call the classic english victorian rural socialism. Have you read anything about the Chartists? (1840s) They developed a policy of resettling people onto the land in communial communities. Although i suppose the argument of explanation for this is that it was basically a development of anti-industrialisation english radicalism. Something which i wouldn't be surprised by, as the Chartists were a collection of numerous different kinds of radicals.


I don't think what you propose is actually practical. Or at least in England. I think it is fair to describe it as utopian. But that is only my opinion.

May i ask why you think "communal farms" are the "only way to have fair distribution"?
Also, how do you propose other things are made. Beyond food. For example medicine. And general research.

[LA GUERRA OLVIDADA]

Being into organic, vegan, communal farms or whatever the hell you mean is fine if you're a white dude from England. But industrialization of the third world will have to occur somewhat for living standards to truly go up. Until then these peasants you talk about will continue to die in scores of millions until they free themselves.

[WorkerBolshevik]

Well said Comrade LA GUERRA OLVIDADA. The organic food movement in the Western Nations is a decadent, petty bourgeoise movement which harms the working class. Why worry about how natural your food is when there are hundreds of millions of workers and peasents starving because they do not have enough food to eat. The only way that these people will be able to eat is through the application of modern industry and technology to agriculture. Chemicle pesticides increase the harvest per hecter many fold, and it is only through the continued use and further application of these and other methods that the Proletariat will ever enrich its diet. Yes, as Socialists we must also worry about the enviroment, but the organic movement is the not the appropriate measure for that. To begin with, many of the facts that its supports, especially those on the alteration of foods and crop techniques, are based on hearsay, not on any scientific findings. Instead, we should follow the path set down in Cuba in recent years. Faced with a shortage in chemicle fertilizer and pesticide after the collapse of trade relations with Russia, the Cuban workers have developed new natural methods in all sectors of agriculture which use less, if any chemicles, and are often more efficient. Through the application of these methods we can increase food production while at the same time being kinder to the enviroment. However, having enough food for the workers and peasents must be the top priorety, and therefore the right to use chemicle and other non-organic agricultural methods must be upheld. The organic movement is a utopian petty bourgeoise one, though so is peasent socialism.