The labor aristocracy is a special layer that the bourgeoisie sought to bribe. This process became feasible thanks to superprofits from the export of capital in the colony. What, in essence, is a labor aristocracy? The concept is quite controversial. We will analyze it in more detail below.
general information
So, the labor aristocracy is a special category of people whom the bourgeoisie bribed at the expense of the superprofits obtained in the process of exploiting the liberated countries and redistributing the national income. In particular, this became relevant after the colonial system collapsed . In order to understand what a labor aristocracy is, it is necessary to take into account the conditions of the scientific and technological revolution that began in the 2nd half of the 20th century. Additional surplus value has become a major source of bribery. It was extracted thanks to the introduction of advanced technology in the conditions of maintaining monopoly prices.
Education Features
The labor aristocracy (definition given by F. Engels and C. Marx) arose in the 19th century in Great Britain. It included the bourgeois, privileged sections, consisting of skilled highly paid factory workers. They, in turn, were members of closed guild unions. The class was engaged in a reformist compromising policy. The labor aristocracy was bribed by the colonial and commercial-industrial monopoly of Great Britain. Thanks to her, a huge part of superprofits stood out for the top of this class. This was done in order to slow down the labor movement and split it.
The era of imperialism and further development
With its onset, what a labor aristocracy is, they learned in a number of other states. We are talking about France, USA, Germany and others. The social base of opportunism was the labor aristocracy. This has become a kind of stronghold of social chauvinism. Lenin wrote a lot about the events. He considered the new trend to be completely philistine in terms of lifestyle, as well as the size of his earnings and worldview as a whole. In addition, Lenin said that the labor aristocracy is the most important social support of the bourgeoisie.
Features of the influence on the formation of the layer
In individual capitalist countries it is not the same. In this case, the correlation of class forces plays an important role, as well as the political maturity of the labor movement and its character. As for the bribery of the top in Russia, it was much smaller and weaker than, for example, in Western Europe and the USA. This did not greatly affect the working masses, as the leader of the proletariat spoke of.
Development after the 1st World War
During this period, the position of the labor aristocracy noticeably weakened. This was due to new ideological, political and socio-economic factors. There was a narrowing of the traditional layers. This was due to changes in the structure and capitalist production of the working class. The role of skilled labor declined. This was due to the widespread adoption of the inline method and pipeline. The global economic crisis was a severe blow to the labor aristocracy. There was a significant undermining of positions. There was a weakening of guild unions. There was also an increase in the influence of production professional societies.
Development after World War II
During this period, the power of the social system increasingly influenced the politics and internal processes of imperialism. The onslaught of the labor movement and the elimination of colonial regimes are noted. The monopoly bourgeoisie is spreading its ideology. At the same time, new methods and means are used, to which "human relations" can also be attributed. This is a demagogic propaganda of the equality of all workers. Thanks to this, more and more layers of this class were involved in the “collaboration of labor and capital”. The labor aristocracy was sharply reduced. This was due to the flow of scientific and technological revolutionary processes. Thanks to them, profound changes took place in the structure of the working class. Its expansion was observed. This was carried out mainly due to new units that had more professional and general education.
Further development
So, the labor aristocracy has narrowed significantly. Despite this, reformist illusions continued to persist in some parts of this class. This was also traced among the intelligentsia and ordinary employees. However, the whole picture includes the process of forming a large-scale front of anti-imperialist forces and the "revival" of socio-political consciousness. This indicates the fall of this class and the crisis of the bourgeoisie. Thus, the concept of "labor aristocracy" is no longer used in socio-political literature.
Analysis Features
For its holding in a separate country, it is necessary to take into account the historical specifics. It also requires the calculation of numerous factors that are able to determine the size of the labor aristocracy, its political significance, economic situation and so on. All this presents a certain difficulty for conducting universal sociological planning. From a political point of view, it is necessary to determine the general features of this layer. This also applies to its prospects, historical development, general contours and political expression. The problems of the labor aristocracy can be considered both from the standpoint of a specific social force and theoretical abstraction, moreover, in different imperialist countries. In the works of Lenin, these materials are constantly repeated. However, he had no attempt to systematically identify the subject in detail. As for Vladimir Ilyich himself, the political motives for the struggle against opportunism were paramount for him.
Thus, a detailed sociological analysis of the aristocratic layer faded into the background. In the socialist movement there were many subjects for debate. First of all, the role of the labor aristocracy in the class struggle in the imperialist countries was discussed, and not its existence as a whole. The way in which the privileged upper stratum developed rapidly was noted everywhere. In particular, this applies to developed countries. In reality, the Marxists had no need to discover this phenomenon.