Chapter 11 Chapter Six

live in I Anyone who has carefully observed the development of socialist ideas among the working people must have felt that a definite conclusion had been reached without knowing it on an important question (the question of the habitation of the people).It is a true fact that in the great metropolises and many small towns of France the working class has come to decide that houses are not in any case the private property of those who are recognized by the state as their owners. This idea naturally developed in the hearts of the people.In any case, they cannot believe that "ownership" should extend to houses.

Houses are not built by their owners.It was built, decorated, and fitted by countless laborers who toil in woodyards, brickmakers, and workshops for the lowest wages to survive. As for the money spent by the homeowner, it was not produced by his own industry.This, like all other wealth, is due to the kind of labor which pays only two-thirds (or one-half) of what is due to the laborer, and robs the other third (or one-half). ) method of saving up. And—and here is where the evil of this approach is most obvious—the real value of a house is determined by the profit the owner can reap from it.This profit is again the result of the fact that the house is built in a city—that is, because it is built among thousands of houses, in a paved street, with bridges, with docks, A metropolis with beautiful public buildings, a metropolis with brilliant lights, and capable of providing its inhabitants with innumerable pleasures and conveniences unknown in the countryside, a metropolis which communicates with other cities and is itself an industrial In a metropolis that is the center of science, commerce, science, and art, a metropolis that is beautiful, hygienic, and livable has been created by the labor of twenty or thirty generations of residents, so this house has a high value.

For example, if there is a house somewhere in Paris that costs a million francs, it is not because the labor that went into building it is worth a million francs, but because the house is located in Paris; Thanks to the contributions of countless laborers, artists, thinkers and scholars, Paris has become the center of industry, commerce, politics, art and science; and because Paris has its past history; and because of the power of literature, The names of the streets of Paris are known at home and abroad; and because they are the result of the hard work of fifty generations of French citizens for more than 1,800 years-this makes the houses in Paris have a high value.

However, who would dare to occupy a small piece of land, a small building in a city like Paris, if it were not for that unjust thing?Who has the right to sell the smallest part of this common inheritance? On this point, the opinions of the laborers are unanimous.At a time when Paris was under siege and the proletariat was already singing about the denial of the conditions demanded by the landlords, the idea of ​​rent-free living was already evident.At the time of the Paris Commune of 1871, the working people of Paris were already looking forward to the Commune meeting's bold decision to abolish rent.This will be the first concern of the poor when the new revolution takes place in the future.

Whether in time of revolution or in time of peace, the laborer must have a house to live in, and he must have a roof over his head to cover him from the scorching sun and rainstorm.However, no matter how bad and dirty the house he lives in, the owner can evict him at any time.True, at the time of the revolution, the homeowners could not find arresters and policemen to take out the laborers' rags and other things and throw them into the street; but who knows what the new government will do tomorrow?Who can say that violence will no longer be used, and the police will no longer force laborers to move out of the dilapidated houses in which they live?Have we not seen the proclamation of the Paris Commune exempting rent only up to April 1st—and only up to April 1st! ①After April 1st, although it was a time of chaos and industry had come to a complete standstill, rent was still obligatory.As for the revolutionaries who armed themselves to defend the independence of Paris, they had nothing to support their family except a salary of thirty sous a day!

① Proclamation of March 30: This Proclamation abolishes rents for October 1870, January 1871, and April. - author Workers, then, must clearly understand that in refusing to pay rent and homeowners they are not just taking advantage of the breakdown of power.They should know that the abolition of rent is a generally accepted principle; that living without paying rent is a right that the common people have loudly declared. Why, then, should we wait for a few socialists among the bourgeois who organize the provisional government to adopt this method, which is indeed in harmony with the sense of justice of every honest man?If we want to do that, we will have to wait for a long time—in fact, I am afraid we will have to wait until the reaction returns again!

So those zealous revolutionaries, rejecting uniforms and badges, etc., which are the hallmarks of power and slavery, still live among the common people as commoners, and work with the common people to make the abolition of rent and the confiscation of houses fact.They cultivated their minds and made their minds develop in this direction; when the results of their work should be ripe, the people proceeded to confiscate the houses. Naturally, there were always some theories that hindered this-such as why the loss of the house should be compensated, What should have the necessary funds first, but this is not a concern.

On the day when the houses are confiscated, the laborers who have been plundered before will know that a new era has arrived, that labor will no longer be fettered by wealth and power, equality will be declared openly, and the revolution has become a real fact. There's never been a fake thing on stage like that. II If the idea of ​​confiscation has been adopted by the people, it will not matter that there are many obstacles that threaten us, and confiscation will be carried out gradually. Naturally the good guys in their new uniforms sitting in armchairs at City Hall must be busy piling up obstacles.They're going to talk about how to compensate the homeowner for the damage, make the statistics, make the long report, and so on.Their reports are extremely long, until the people can no longer wait and starve in this state of forced indolence, but they have never seen any results from the investigations of these officials. Discouraged, lost faith in the revolution, and went to the reactionaries.The result of the new bureaucracy is that confiscation has become an abomination to all.

There is indeed a rock here that will sink our hopes.But if the people had listened with their ears to the plausible arguments that deluded them, and had known that a new state of life required a new state of society, and if they had risen to the task themselves, confiscation would have been carried out with little difficulty. You have to ask: "But how? How is it possible?" We will try to answer this question, but with caution.We do not wish to describe the confiscation plan in great detail.We have long known that nothing that any individual or any group can dictate is much better than when it actually appears.People rely on simple methods to accomplish greater things, and the results are better than those obtained by other people's pre-conceived methods.We now only point out the ways in which confiscation can be accomplished without government interference.We do not want to answer in any other way to those who assert that this is impossible.Let us simply reply that we do not absolutely advocate any particular method of organization.What we pay attention to is that ordering confiscation can only be achieved by the people's will, and no other method can be effective.

It seems to be the case that when the confiscation was effected, volunteer bands were organized in all districts, streets, and alleys, and began to investigate the number of houses, where they were vacant, and where they were full and overcrowded. Yes, where are the dirty alleys, where are the few people living in a wide area, where the many people who are crowded in a small house should be moved there--these should be investigated clearly.Within a few days, these volunteer teams will determine whether all the houses, rented houses, mansions, villas, etc. rooms and entire sets of rooms in the streets, alleys, and districts to which they belong are hygienic or unhygienic, large or small, wide or narrow , filthy or gorgeous, etc. are investigated very clearly, and all lists are made.

These volunteer teams freely communicate with each other, so their statistics can be completed in a very short period of time.If we talk about false statistics, this can be produced in any bureau or office; however, accurate and precise statistics must be done by individuals, and they must go from simple to complex. So, without waiting for anyone's permission, the citizens ran quickly to find their companions who lived in squalid and cramped houses, and said to them: "Comrades, this is a real revolution, don't misunderstand it!" .Meeting somewhere tonight; all the neighbors will be there. We're going to reassign housing. If you don't like the filthy cramped house, come and choose a five-room house, if you move into it From now on, you can handle everything by yourself. No matter how long you live, you don’t have to be afraid. Because the people are already armed, even if someone dares to drive you out, the people will not agree.” Some people say: "Anyone is willing to live in a gorgeous house, a spacious house!" Actually it is not, this is a wrong opinion.The people have never dreamed of taking the moon and putting it in a bucket.On the contrary, they often set out to correct some evil; the kindness and justice of the masses often move us.When did we see them ask for what they could not do?During the Terror of 1792-94, or during the two sieges of Paris, the people of Paris waited for the distribution of bread and fuel, but was there any scramble among them?Their endurance and ability to relinquish power had already been shown in 1871, and they were often admired by correspondents of foreign newspapers.Yet these patient waiters knew full well that the last to come would have no food or fuel to live on. If we look at each person in today's society separately, naturally, we have to admit how many self-interested instincts exist.We know this well.But we think that if the problem of people's habitation is to be settled by some bureau or committee (in fact, relying on the grace of any form of bureaucracy), the result will be to revive this self-interested instinct and to cultivate it. make it develop.So all evil thoughts arise, and who is the most powerful person in the game becomes a problem.The slightest unequal thing will cause controversy and attack.If one person gets the slightest advantage, the event becomes a source of outrage,--and not without reason. But if the people, organized according to the streets and districts, follow their own plan to move the inhabitants of the squalid and cramped houses to the unoccupied middle-class houses, then this small inconvenience and Inequalities are also easily dispensed with.We seldom have recourse to the good instincts of the masses—a last resort to salvage sinking ships of revolutionary times—yet such recourse is by no means in vain; To answer the cry for help.This will be the case in future revolutions. Although everything has been said and done, there will still be some inequalities and injustices.There are still such people in our society who have long sunk into the quagmire of egoism, and even in the face of a great crisis, they cannot extricate themselves.At this time, it is not a question of whether there will be injustice in the future, but a question of how to reduce injustice. All history, all human experience, and all social psychology show us that the best and fairest course lies in trusting the decisions of those most closely connected with the matter.Such are the only people who notice and manage to deal with the innumerable little things that the distribution of officials necessarily overlooks. III And there is no immediate need for absolute equality in any redistribution of housing.Naturally, there are many inconveniences at the beginning, but in a society where confiscation has been practiced, it will not be long before it can be corrected. Masons, carpenters, and others connected with the building of houses, having been assured of a daily supply of bread, could ask for nothing more than a few hours each day of the work of their former trade.They want to renovate those golden palaces and jade buildings that took countless servants' time to build and only accommodate a few families. In two or three months, they will build houses that are more hygienic and lighter than the current ones.The anarchist Commune says to those who have not yet found a comfortable dwelling: "Be patient, comrades! Soon there will be more houses in our liberated cities than any capitalist can build for himself." Spectacular and more beautiful palaces arose, houses for those most in need. Anarchist communes did not build houses for the sake of increasing revenue. These monuments to the citizens, these communal spirits The products are to serve as models for all mankind; these are yours". If the revolutionary people had confiscated the houses and announced that no rent would be charged for the houses—that is, the houses were in common, and each family had the right to a proper residence—then, at the beginning of the revolution, there would be a communist The nature, the goal is certain, and it will be carried out in that direction, and it will not be easy to waver.This is of course a fatal blow to individual private property. In fact, all the germs of the social revolution are contained in the full surface of the house.The nature of everything that happens afterwards will also depend on the circumstances of the achievement of the confiscation.Or we have been on the road to anarcho-communism, otherwise we are still stuck in the soil of authoritarian individualism. From this, we may expect that we will encounter many objections--part theoretical, part practical.Since it is a matter of maintaining inequality, it is natural that those who oppose us also oppose "in the name of justice."They said: "Isn't this a very shameful thing? The peasants in the country live only in thatched huts that are about to collapse, and the people of Paris occupy these beautiful houses alone."Let's make no mistake, however.These righteous people, because of their forgetfulness, forget that they themselves are also secretly protecting this "extremely shameful thing".They forget that even in Paris there are countless laborers suffocating in filthy and small houses, but from the windows they can see the tall buildings of the rich.They forget that generations of people have been smothered in slums where there is no air or sunlight.The first job of the revolution is to correct this unfair fact. Let us not be caught off guard by such foolish protests.We know that at the beginning of the revolution, although there was no equality between the city and the country, this was only a temporary phenomenon, and it would naturally correct itself after some time.Why?For if the peasants cease to be landlords, rich peasants, merchants, moneylenders, and cattle and horses of the state, then the villages will immediately begin to improve and live in them.Shouldn't we correct past mistakes in order to avoid accidental and temporary inequalities? Those so-called practical objections are not strong either.They say that a poor man, who labored as hard as he could, and suffered innumerable hardships, bought a house just large enough for his whole family.But now we deprive him of the happiness he has so hard won, and drive him to the street instead!Is this reasonable?Actually we would never do that.If it turns out that his house is only big enough for his family, then, no matter what, we will not ask him to move out.Let him cultivate his little garden, and our men will not interfere with his work--and they will help him whenever he needs it.However, if he has a spare vacant house to rent to others, then the people will go to the renter and say: "Comrade! You should know that you should not pay everything to the previous owner in the future. You live here." Go down, but don't pay any more rent. There are no more rent-collectors and benefactor-collectors than before; socialism has abolished all that." Let us think again, the owner of the house alone occupies ten or twenty rooms, while the poor woman who lives nearby is crowded into a small room with her four or five children.Under such circumstances, it is natural for the common people to try to make those empty houses a comfortable home for the poor woman and her four or five children.This is much fairer than making the poor woman and her children live in a shabby house and suffering, while letting the grown-ups sit in high-rise buildings and have fun.And maybe the grown-up gentleman will do this on his own initiative; his wife will be willing to give up half of such a big house because she finds it difficult to tidy up such a big house because she doesn't have the slaves she used to drive. Those who stand for law and order will say, "You're going to overthrow everything. Evictions and relocations will never stop. It's better to call everyone outside the door and cast lots." Wouldn't it be better to redistribute?" Such was their criticism.We firmly believe, however, that expulsion and emigration would have been much easier under the present system of society, had there been no government intervention, and all changes had been entrusted to free bodies specially organized for this work. There are far fewer such incidents in the next year due to the greed of homeowners. First, that in all the great cities there are now enough vacant houses and dwellings to accommodate all the inhabitants in squalid quarters.As for the vast palaces and beautiful houses, many workers will not live in them unless they have to.If there were not many slaves, it would be difficult for a person to "maintain" such a large house.Even those who now live in these houses will soon feel the need to find more modest accommodation elsewhere.If those beautiful ladies cook in the kitchen themselves, they will feel that such a large house is not very suitable.The people will gradually settle down.The people need not drive the luxurious banker to the loft with the spear, nor guard the poor workman with arms into the banker's mansion, they will meet no resistance, no inconvenience, and there will be peace. Appropriate housing redistribution has been properly secured.Today's rural communes redistribute land without inconveniencing the recipients of the land. Who can not admire such a clever and benevolent method?The lands under the administration of the Russian communes change owners less often than the lands under the title of private property, which are often brought before the courts.Shall we believe that the inhabitants of the great cities of Europe are less intelligent and organized than the peasants of Russia and India? And let us not forget that in all revolutions there is at least some disturbance in everyday life; those who hope that when they run from the old society to the new one will not even shake the utensils on the table of the bourgeoisie, they will soon Realize that their views are fallacious.It is true that a change of government may be made without disturbing the dignified gentleman who is lunching, but society is by no means amenable to the crimes of the people who sustain it by the tricks of any party. Confusion is unavoidable; but we should prevent it from being an utterly pointless loss, and we should seek to reduce it.And--we repeat without hesitation--we shall have the greatest success in minimizing everyone's inconvenience, only by consultation with those groups in which there is a direct interest, and never by delegation to bureaus and committees. It is a very, very wrong thing for the people to elect frivolous candidates by ballot.The candidate asked for the honor of representing the people and pretended to know everything and be able to do everything.But better results are always obtained when the people themselves do what they know and which concerns them directly, than when some officials or representatives do it.Isn't the Paris Commune a fitting example?Was it not the same with the general strike in the London docks?And don't we see evidence of this fact in every village commune?