Yes, and again, even Mao had to negotiate with them and use them as allies at times and make concessions.
I’m not saying that landlordism is just an average job and I would prefer that it not exist, but we have to think tactically and realistically.
Not through memes about “How many landlords Mao killed” or some shit. If anything, Mao and the CPC (and this can be further corroborate by such figures as Deng Xiaoping and Liu Shaoqi) often had to make compromises with them like any revolution negotiating with petit-bourgeois forces would.
And lest we forget: as Felipe Forte just said, this was the feudal landlord class, not necessarily the petit-bourgeois landlords we have now.
So, in reality, if a revolution in the United States or Brazil or wherever we live is going to succeed, we’ll have to make concessions along the way and even make strategic alliances like Mao Zedong’s revolutionary forces, especially since we’re not talking about something as, in my honest opinion, bad as a feudal landlord class.
But I’m rambling and to answer the OP’s question once again: no, landlords are not part of the bourgeoisie and some, if I may say so (though I’m still a novice into Marxism and am only now reaching for third year of it), may not even be petit-bourgeois.
I’d also like to add on that what they meant by “landlords” in China was basically akin to feudal land owners, not today’s more common concept of a landlord being somebody renting out property. As a result, their renters were treated essentially as “subordinates” and practically at the whim of the landlord who could kill them, beat them, enslave their children, and sexually abuse female relatives.
Turkey had a similar situation for a good part of the 20th century before the practice diminished, in the form of an “aga” who was essentially the owner of the village. The village would have it’s own elected government official in charge like any other municipality but the aga owned the farmland, the streets, the houses, even the villagers(who relied entirely on the aga for their money and homes and in many cases even had their travel restricted. There are stories of villagers who weren’t even allowed to marry without the aga’s permission).
These days in capitalist societies, that sort of control is mostly split and limited between property renting landlords and business executives who control parts of your life(in regards to relying on being employed with the company to receive access to health insurance). So the landlords who were killed were killed because they were generally terrible people who abused and humiliated people because they “owned” them(albeit not like a serf in bondage).
Yes, and again, even Mao had to negotiate with them and use them as allies at times and make concessions.
I’m not saying that landlordism is just an average job and I would prefer that it not exist, but we have to think tactically and realistically.
Not through memes about “How many landlords Mao killed” or some shit. If anything, Mao and the CPC (and this can be further corroborate by such figures as Deng Xiaoping and Liu Shaoqi) often had to make compromises with them like any revolution negotiating with petit-bourgeois forces would.
And lest we forget: as Felipe Forte just said, this was the feudal landlord class, not necessarily the petit-bourgeois landlords we have now.
So, in reality, if a revolution in the United States or Brazil or wherever we live is going to succeed, we’ll have to make concessions along the way and even make strategic alliances like Mao Zedong’s revolutionary forces, especially since we’re not talking about something as, in my honest opinion, bad as a feudal landlord class.
But I’m rambling and to answer the OP’s question once again: no, landlords are not part of the bourgeoisie and some, if I may say so (though I’m still a novice into Marxism and am only now reaching for third year of it), may not even be petit-bourgeois.
Take that for what you all will.
deleted by creator
Good point.
I’d also like to add on that what they meant by “landlords” in China was basically akin to feudal land owners, not today’s more common concept of a landlord being somebody renting out property. As a result, their renters were treated essentially as “subordinates” and practically at the whim of the landlord who could kill them, beat them, enslave their children, and sexually abuse female relatives.
Turkey had a similar situation for a good part of the 20th century before the practice diminished, in the form of an “aga” who was essentially the owner of the village. The village would have it’s own elected government official in charge like any other municipality but the aga owned the farmland, the streets, the houses, even the villagers(who relied entirely on the aga for their money and homes and in many cases even had their travel restricted. There are stories of villagers who weren’t even allowed to marry without the aga’s permission).
These days in capitalist societies, that sort of control is mostly split and limited between property renting landlords and business executives who control parts of your life(in regards to relying on being employed with the company to receive access to health insurance). So the landlords who were killed were killed because they were generally terrible people who abused and humiliated people because they “owned” them(albeit not like a serf in bondage).