Western capitalism in modern history, which was founded on humanism, is now the economic system of most countries. Therefore, it would be meaningful to understand the history of ancient Greece, which forms an axis of the historical background of Western values.
This is because Alexander the Great (BC 356-323), who established the first great empire of mankind, forced each city to worship him as a god, indicating that ancient Greece was a humanitarian society. This ancient Greek Hellenism influenced Europe, the Middle East, and India over 300 years until the establishment and construction of the Roman Empire.
However, the Roman Empire, which was established under the influence of Hellenism (Greek humanism), was later alienated by the acceptance of Hebrism (the God-oriented paternalism). This can be said to have led to the destruction of Rome as corruption became prevalent due to the corrupt sex culture of the paternal one-way.
And the Roman Empire (BC2C-AD5C) became a state religion around the 2nd century when Christianity worshipped the paternal monotheism, leading Europe to live in the so-called ‘Middle Ages’ which became a Christian empire from the 3rd to the 13th century. In other words, he lived in a monotheistic absolute feudalism society in which patriarchal philosophers such as Thomas Aquinas were active.
In addition, as the Roman Empire fell around the 5th century and became a religious empire, the subjects who accumulated wealth by freely trading and trading slaves exercised political influence on feudal cities. In particular, Martin Luther (1483-1546)’s religious reform in 1517 was an opportunity to accelerate liberalism. The following quotes understand this situation well.
Around the ninth century, 400 years after the fall of the empire, a procession of merchants led from manor to manor, followed by armed entourage to preserve them from gang attacks. These merchants became increasingly introspective on manors, especially the inner parts…
Europe’s subjects began to have political authority in feudal cities around the 14th century and expanded their favorable environment by colliding with the existing order with new attempts to develop. This was because feudal lords often had to borrow money from rich merchants to rule.
In Britain, the bourgeoisie took political power in the late 17th century, and France became a Brzoan state. 19C became the world’s dominant political force.” (90) (Robert Hailbrner, Steel Regions, 21C Capitalism, Modern Information and Culture History, 1993, 48p) In this way, it can be seen that liberalism to escape from the absolute soil of worshiping the paternal monotheism replaced the uncertain monotheism with certain mammonism.
Meanwhile, in the East, Confucianism of Confucius (BC 552-479) spread to the ideology of rule, and Qin Shi Huang (BC 247-210), who was crowned with the help of Yeo Bul-wi, the big merchant of the Zhao Dynasty, unified several countries into one China.
Then, at the same time, the Han Dynasty (BC 206-AD 220) was unified, but as it collapsed, ancient China was divided. However, ancient China was divided into several countries, and the Eastern feudal system based on democratic fundamentalism could not create the same liberal soil as the West.
In other words, at the same time, with the advent of the Christian papal system, liberalism was born as a feudal city state due to the fall of the Roman Empire. Of course, the East also had armed entourage at the top like Europe, but unlike the West, the East was a centralized system based on Confucianism, so low-ranking merchants had to be interfered with by power. Please refer to the fact that in the ‘God town’ of the matriarchal God-oriented society, the priestess became the subject of the upper stage and cultural exchanges with mutual interests.
Subsequently, as Genghis Khan of the East (1162-1227) built a large empire covering the East and the West, including Asia, the Middle East, and Northern Europe, the West entered an era of uncertainty claimed by Galbraid. This became an opportunity to become interested in Hellenism, followed by the Renaissance (literary revival) era of the 14th century.
This is because they were fascinated by mutual culture due to the expansion of exchanges between East and West, and European merchants became rich through trade and gained political authority in feudal lands, and they were certain to believe in science and technology based on humanism (relativism). On the other hand, as the religious authority of the absolute being, which became uncertain due to the influence of East-West exchanges, weakened, expenditure increased and income decreased. This forced the sale of indulgences.
In this way, the fall of teaching power was the cause of Martin Luther’s call for religious reform in the early 16th century, and at the same time, as the patronage of the subjects became important, the objects naturally became the core of power.
Therefore, as the authority of the paternal monotheistic religion and the political power of the absolute feudalism weakened at the same time, mercantilism emerged, indicating that individualism (liberalism) over the state began to emerge.
And while European religious leaders were generally favored by merchants and producers because of the low class, liberalism took shape due to the combination of criticism of political power and Martin Luther’s influence on universal equality under God.
But what we need to pay attention to is that even though the freedom of merchants and citizens was extended, women were still marginalized. Therefore, it can be understood that it was liberalism only for men, given the fact that tens of thousands of religiously outstanding women were punished severely as witches. In addition, liberalism has an extreme and biased aspect that overlooks human sociality in that it emphasizes an absolute individual who has rebounded from totalitarianism.
Western food culture preferred Eastern pepper and spices. However, as trade was disrupted by the Islamic Empire, Europe opened up an era of maritime trade, starting with the voyage of 16C Portugal and the discovery of the New World by Columbus in Spain.
And as a result of the industrialization of Europe by expanding trade in new cultural properties and expanding the consumer market through colonization, Britain achieved the industrial revolution with the invention of the textile industry and steam engine in the late 18th century. Subsequently, the capitalist economic system, a production style suitable for this, was created by Adams Smith. In this way, capitalism can also be understood in the dictionary sense as a principle of having the economic power of capital and having hegemony such as interests or commercial rights for gains.
“The term capitalism, established in the late 19th century, began to be used by Arnold Toynbee, and some scholars refer to it as a ‘free private enterprise system’ in a refreshing sense because of its stained past and unpredictable future.” (91) (50p) This can be understood as ‘free enterprise’ today.
Therefore, Western liberalism rejects the state’s intervention for free competition between individuals, and can be said to be an idea that believes that only material abundance created through free competition can make humans happy. This liberal idea developed commerce.
In addition, it can be said that the political sponsorship of a big merchant made it possible to participate in politics and raised the social status. In this process, commercialism was developed, and trade expansion in overseas markets for the accumulation of wealth and colonization for securing and consuming resources could be active. Through this process, the industrial revolution was born.
In other words, commercialism based on liberalism caused the Industrial Revolution, followed by capitalism. Subsequently, capitalism based on liberalism awakened the corruption of the old days. And the civil revolution was caused by the need for a new system required by the Industrial Revolution.
In addition, the capitalist production style formed a harsh society as it moved to the place where income was generated along with the concentration of population cities. For example, it can be understood from the fact that the British enclosure movement in the 17th century, which led to higher-yield wool trade than agriculture in the late 17th century, led to farmers’ 150 years of wandering and huge social problems.
“In Britain, with the Enclosure movement, when the British started livestock farming, many serfs lost their land and went out to the cities, creating the concept of labor as a factor of production.” (92) (Capitalism and Development, Reinforcement, National Economic System Research Institute, 1991p)
In any case, competition between free enterprises required large capital to improve productivity and realize profits of scale. In addition, by activating capital recruitment with stocks or bonds to bear the damage caused by natural disasters in overseas trade, it became an opportunity to create financial and legal advisory companies as various companies for capital transplantation. This is because industrialization needed large capital to mass-produce high-quality industrial products.
This was a remarkable development that opened the way to investment for ordinary citizens. Therefore, it can be said that it was a groundbreaking event that could not be imagined by the old mindset that only nobles were allowed to make money.
In medieval Europe, wealth belonged mostly to the powerful and to the rich in collusion with the powerful. At that time, a big merchant.who accumulated wealth in society had political influence, while small business owners were dissatisfied with the government’s interference, but did not have the wealth to counter the powerful.
In addition, a system suitable for the industrial revolution created by explosive demand due to colonization and expansion of overseas markets was needed. Thus, Adam Smith systematized capitalist economics in his book, The Theory of Nationality.
Thus, as the Industrial Revolution demanded a change in the system, capitalism was created, and the ensuing civil revolution led to the expulsion of the old era, thereby establishing a modern society. In other words, it has been transformed into an individualist (liberal) society that prioritizes practicality over justification, and a functional state society based on laissez-faire.
This change began to take shape from the liberalism of John Locke, an English empiricist philosopher. It can be said that Locke’s two papers on the government of citizens (1760) claim the importance of the right to work freely to own goods as his labor is his own.
In other words, he emphasized that individuals need to expand their freedom from power because labor is the source of possession of goods. Of course, it was quite shocking that society at the time claimed that personal ownership was possible with free labor to acquire natural objects as joint assets because the feudal dynasty monopolized state assets. Since then, Adam Smith has said that human free labor is sacrosanct, and a laissez-faire based on individual absoluteity was established.
Anyway, liberalism began to materialize from the Renaissance in medieval Europe. This is understood in the financial industry of the wealthy Medici Family, which flourished from the 15th to the 18th centuries in Florence, Italy, which played a central role in the Renaissance.
In other words, the property and currency were consigned and stored, received storage fees, or received brokerage fees for trading or exchange as a certificate issued by its own credit. It can be said that the size of the economy at that time was small and similar to the warehouse industry today.
Thus, capitalism created in a large economy was different from the formalization of money making money, such as saving in a bank to receive interest, or acquiring securities, which are direct investments, and receiving transplants or dividends.
In other words, because the West was based on Christian culture during the Renaissance, interest or transplantation, which is a form of money making money, was taboo as unearned income. However, as capitalism established with the Industrial Revolution at the end of the 18th century had moral justification to make money, it became the driving force behind the establishment of a modern society based on humanism.
In other words, property could be capitalized, and dividend income was generated through securities such as stocks and bonds as direct investment, such as interest on borrowings, such as rent. In addition, as it developed into a large-scale economy due to investment recruitment to disperse the risk burden of overseas trade, the Medici family’s goods-centered thinking ended, and naturally developed into a society centered on capital (financial).
Therefore, the industrial revolution triggered by the supply economy created capitalist production patterns for mass production, and the concept of natural people and corporations was established as capital recruitment methods were developed, and other studies such as science, economics, and law were developed.
In addition, as the Industrial Revolution formed the Mammonism, it developed science and technology, and as a relativism, democracy can be seen as a cause of trust as an ideal of mankind. In addition, the Industrial Revolution made it possible to move workers, and it can be said that the absolute system collapsed as a large number of capitalists appeared as powerful people.
In addition, to overcome the polarization of power and population decline due to urban concentration of the population due to the centralization phenomenon, feudal nobles were corrupt by participating in investment and interfering too much with small business owners.
In addition, the financial deterioration of feudal lords formed as serfs, who were oppressed by the absolute feudal system due to industrialization, were able to escape for political and economic freedom. Therefore, the collapse of the absolute feudal system can be seen as the result of the broad expansion of the absolute poor class due to the formation of an absolute polarization of 1:99 through the combination of feudal nobility and capitalists.
In a situation where a theory is needed to support and develop the Industrial Revolution, Adam Smith (1723-1790) systematized and created the economic theory scattered at the time, ‘national wealth theory’ (1776). This is the first economics of mankind, and it is important as a so-called capitalist theory. In other words, when the state does not interfere with free competition for individual selfish purposes, it is automatically controlled by the ‘invisible hand’ and the whole is harmonized.
This means that the meaning of ‘nvisible hand’ has various complex meanings as a market principle, but the monetary economy is clearly highlighted as it can be seen that the power of money, a means of exchange, has the ability to automatically coordinate in the market. However, despite Adam Smith’s emphasis on individual small and medium-sized enterprises, the capitalist revitalized the corporation, and from early capitalism, the bourgeoisie emerged in front of the public as a new ruling class, like an old aristocrat.
In other words, the people were once governed by the tradition of absolute feudalism, but were dominated and exploited by the money of the bourgeoisie. Therefore, it can be seen that in capitalism, humans have transformed like goods and consumables.
For example, it can be understood in Hailbroner’s article that early capitalism was a shining dogfish justifying exploitation. “Humans spend their lives performing only a few tasks. Until the early 19th century, factories, which had been small enough to mobilize women and boys for barely surviving wages, began to be pushed out of the ‘devil’s factory’ under harsh conditions, without having a chance to demonstrate understanding. Through Dickens’ description, such a British backstreet is well known. But it doesn’t say much about the fact that the same factories that shocked conscientious people at the time were not only the center of large-scale accumulation, but also the primary base to reach overseas.” (93) (R Hailbroner, 57-58p)
As such, it can be understood that it was natural for the people to join the citizens and cause a civil revolution to break through the harsh and corrupt old era of Pettiburgois (small businessmen) and the liberal intellectuals and heritage class.
For reference, in the social status system at that time, citizens can be viewed as a middle class different from serfs, and it means a higher group than the general public, but there will be no need to distinguish between the citizens and the people. It can be said that it was a class that led public opinion by creating a civic group (party) as a new main force that served as a bridge between the government and the people after the Civil Revolution.
In other words, citizens, the middle class in today’s meaning, were at the center, and the lower class and the people were united to withdraw the old system under the slogan of freedom, equality, and philanthropy. However, even though the middle class led the revolution to open a modern society, the people had no choice but to starve to death.
Therefore, it can be understood that a modern democratic society that seeks to realize capitalism and human dignity as economic liberalism is deployed. In other words, the established modern society based on philosophical relativism had to be historically developed as a maternal distribution style. Because humans are cultural beings that cannot live by bread alone.
This can be understood from the fact that as the number of people who want to live as ‘economic animals’ increases today, the number of people who follow the lives of the sages who pursued the life of existence is increasing. Therefore, it can be understood that today’s neoliberalism forcing humans, who are cultural beings, to be transformed into ‘economic animals’ is a historical regression.
This is because an active welfare society consistent with the declaration of freedom, equality, and philanthropy has not been established in the spirit of civil revolution today, which has become a global era more than 200 years after the establishment of modern society.
In addition, as a result of the overspending created by capitalist society, a system based on fundamentally different maternal distribution patterns is needed to escape a dangerous society due to resource depletion, ecosystem destruction, reckless development, environmental pollution, and human devastation.
For example, as bees die in some parts of the world, including Korea and the United States, it can be understood that the food chain is collapsing due to the decrease in crops caused by plants that cannot be modified. In other words, it is a sign of danger. In other words, it warns that humans can live only when they deviate from the paternal distribution pattern.
And it is worth recalling Einstein’s argument that if all the bees in the world die, mankind will die within four years. In addition, the nuclear accident caused by a large tsunami and earthquake in Fukushima, Japan in March 2011 has a much wider scope of damage than Chernobyl.
By the time we realize that we cannot afford the astronomical expenses caused by this phenomenon, and that humanity has been frugal, it is too late. In other words, it means that the result of negligence to rely only on temporary measures without a fundamental change for an active welfare society, which means the end of the paternal distribution pattern, becomes unaffordable.
In other words, it means that if humans are cultural beings and the maternal distribution style is ecologically suitable, but if they ignore it and cultivate greed, Saint’s warning can actually happen.
Therefore, just as the matriarchal society wanted to balance the inner world and the outer world, but today, just as human sociality and individuality must be balanced, humans are always living in the balance of youth. Therefore, it can be seen that the newcomers living in the global village era should make efforts to establish an active welfare society for the ‘life of existence’ that can be balanced.
For reference, it is said that death was considered part of life as a part of life as a mother society thought that humans progressed in a cycle to become mature human beings like the cycle of Mother Nature, and it was an ideal society to live an infinite life.
In other words, it was possible to live a rich life by satisfying a slightly insufficient life, and it was a society with a high happiness index. In addition, the fact that the matriarchal society was not barbaric can be affirmed from the fact that the matriarchal society worshipped the single god of matriarchy, that humans themselves believed to be descendants of godmother, or that they embodied a welfare society with a public system.
Of course, the matriarchal society lived a happy life in peace and rich nature obtained by sharing. This can be understood in the writings of economist Hailbrenner.
“Even a society dominated by tradition, as we think, is never necessarily at a level of hopeless poverty. Anthropologist Marshall Salins even called those societies ‘the first rich societies’ because he noted that there was a well-established way to meet the expectations of the tribesmen.” (94) (Hailbrenner, 28p) Therefore, it can be estimated that the maternal society of ancient times was richer than the primitive paternal society.
Therefore, capitalism, which is the result of hard work for a happy life in a paternal society, serves a happy life for humans, but it is necessary to establish a system that not only disadvantages half of the world but also escapes the dangerous society due to absolute polarization and overspending.
The Industrial Revolution in Britain established capitalism as a result of natural law and philosophical relativism, which contradicted absolute feudalism, along with empiricism and liberal ideas. This can be seen as the cause of the French Revolution (1789), which led to the expulsion of the French aristocracy, where corruption was prevalent.
In other words, the Industrial Revolution advanced into a modern democratic society based on humanism. Of course, the authority of feudal lords in Europe in the 17th century was weakened by the great merchants who created the Renaissance that emerged in Italy.
In addition, the support of small and medium-sized merchants for helping culture, art, academics, associations, and intellectual activities to foster the economic bourgeoisie (political bourgeoisie), writing activities of intellectuals for the legitimacy of liberal (individualist) logic, and active discussions on new political culture have also been the cornerstones of modern society.
In addition, economic bourgeoisie hated government interference, but there was no other way in the absolute feudal system, so as a result of pursuing mercantilism based on political and economic collusion, they were able to gain justification and practical benefits at the same time.
For example, it can be understood from the fact that subjects were able to exploit workers by acquiring political authority without challenging the authority of feudal lords for profit. In other words, the lives of the people were in dire need, and political distrust became prevalent, and power was weakened by the dual attitude of exerting pressure on the lord through political bourgeoisie for the benefit of merchants themselves.
In addition, mercantilism in the absolute feudal state created a great deal of money, and citizens and the people became hostile to feudal nobles from colluding with the target and interfering with small business activities.
In other words, while economic bourgeois monopolized wealth, power, and honor, the nation’s wealth improved overall as it accumulated great capital, but the people could not escape from their impoverished lives. This phenomenon stimulated dissatisfaction among political bourgeois and heritage-based citizens, especially women in the heritage class, who participated in the salon, which was a place of discussion and discussion, and became a new force in society.
This can be seen as the reason why women in the Western heritage class were active in society is that even women in the heritage class were alienated in the Middle Ages and Western women had a deep grudge. For example, it can be seen from the fact that women belonging to extremely poor serf families who could not even buy agricultural equipment in the feudal system lived a harder life than slaves. Therefore, marginalized women actively participated in achieving their dreams of women’s liberation and passport expansion in a social environment where liberalism was ripening.
Of course, in the Taiping Heavenly War in China, women were not as powerful as having a platform of gender equality, excellent organizational power and fierce participation. However, the participation of women from the heritage class became the driving force behind the French Revolution of 1789, which established the great heritage of mankind, the modern society.
However, the lives of numerous female leaders who led and developed the revolution were miserable, and due to the jealousy of the wives of the ruling male leaders, the outstanding female leaders disappeared or destroyed by guillotine.
In other words, female leaders were subjected to a “tosagupin” that they ate hounds after hunting rabbits. This is the reason why women became the enemy of women due to distrust between women after civil society was established. In other words, a woman thought that her husband’s status was the same as hers. In other words, it is said that there was a double whammy that refused to improve women’s status due to the family’s selfish tendency.
This can be understood from the fact that, despite the common goal of women’s passport enhancement, women in the miscarriage class are transforming into family selfishness and conservative to maintain the value achieved by progressive polarization today.
For reference, you can understand the previous facts in the life of Theroanne de Merrique, one of the women who participated in the revolution at the time. “She did not forget her childhood. What happened when landlords and tax collectors took away the last piece of bread left in the house… Theroanew broke the money admirers who had squandered money on her cold feet without lifting an eyebrow. That way, she could have a house, jewelry, and a fine carriage, and she could make servants and save money.
In 1789, in Paris, France, she was no longer an indulgent high-class whore. Theroanew marched with the people of the street, sang revolutionaries, and denounced the nobles. … In the crowd she noticed that there were deeply depressed women who had been ill-treated. Became the leader of these women. …” (95) (Kim Seong-won, Women of the Revolutionary Period, Han Woollim, 1985, 12-13p)
In The Roanneau’s speech,
“…the woman of France! Once again, our mission is sublime. Let’s break our shackles. Women who have been subservient to men’s unfair arrogance and ignorance for so many years, it’s time for them to escape from the fixed, humble world that holds us.
Think back to the time when the Gallic and the proud Germanic women, who were our mothers, participated in public gatherings and fought with their husbands to defeat the free enemies. … Embracing women, those of you who listened to me, let’s arm ourselves. Let’s take military training and register first on the French military list. Everyone who truly loves their country, let’s get together and join the women’s army.” (96) (Same book, 20p)
In short, Terroanyu led the Bastille on July 14, 1789, persuading men to advance to Versailles, drawing King Louis XVI out and directly condemning him. But even though she spent almost all of her wealth, women who had been oppressed for thousands of years were not active in new changes and returned home.
Despite her pioneering role and contribution to the women’s liberation movement, Teranyu was unable to become a member of the Jacobin Club simply because she was a woman, and the women’s club she created was closed because women returned to their homes.
After that, she became close to Brissau of Gironde, a moderate bourgeoisie of the Jacobins, and with a desire for women’s liberation, she was abandoned by both men and women, and Jacobins women lynched her horribly. She then reportedly became a psychopath.
Take the example of Manon Roland as another class of women of that time. Manong not only hated the fact that she was a child of a merchant and a commoner, but also hated other commoners and was a woman with strong self-esteem. However, as a brilliant woman, even if she wanted to be close to a noble woman, the nobles hated her.
So she said that in order to overcome the status system, she had to marry old Roland, the bourgeois philosopher, and become Mrs. Roland, and at the same time, she criticized the life of the aristocracy’s laxity. In other words, in 1789, Roland lived a noble life as Minister of Industrial Prosecution in Lyon, and Manon’s words and actions, which seemed to despise the Burjoa and his wives, who had money but had nothing to learn, drew anger.
To take advantage of Manong’s desire for power, Britso of the Geelong faction tried to attract Manong by opening a salon, but Manong avoided him because he could not trust Britso, who had a moderate bourgeois view of free enterprise, while Manong wanted to be close to Robispierre but kept away from arrogant Manong.
She did not act for women’s liberation and acted opportunistically, so she was appointed minister in 1772 and lived in luxury as she wished. However, in 1789, she resigned with the revolution, and her salon became the headquarters of the Geelong faction, which defended merchants, and Manong, who had no organization of women and poor, became an enemy of the people at the end of the revolution.
Eventually, Manong was recorded as a woman with a lot of tricks controlled by the Geelong faction and disappeared as the dew of the guillotine, and Manong said to the Statue of Liberty, ‘Ah! Freedom, how can so many crimes be committed in your name?'” (97) (Same book 93p)
It can be understood that most female leaders, as well as the above two women, only appeal to emotions to the extent that they express dissatisfaction without accumulated knowledge or ideas to overcome paternalism, and that there was a limit as they were not logical.
However, even if they could not form power without a belief system, lack of political experience, lack of training, and core comrades for organization, these events clearly served as a cornerstone of women’s movement later on as women awakened and built up their inner space.
In other words, the development of the women’s human rights movement consisting of women who fought to comfort the tired souls of each woman was a groundbreaking event that could not be imagined in Western Christian culture, and women became confident. In other words, even though modern society was established, women were divided by ignorance like children, but many women later understood that passport growth was the human rights of mankind, and women’s participation in society began in earnest.
This can be understood in what Mary Woolston Claft said about what women were like at the time. “Whether men deny it or affirm it, there are many paths to power and honor. And even though men have conflicts with each other (because people with the same job are rarely friends), there are far more people who never have conflicts. But women are in completely different ecosystems in relationships between women. Women are all competitors.·······
If women are not delusional and jealous of each other, women are the masters of superhuman virtues. Dress, pleasure, and excessive desire for control are unique passions for the savage. In short, this is the passion to coordinate ignorant humans who are not yet familiar with the ability to think, which is necessary to reach a consistent abstract idea that cannot expand the scope of the five stars and draw attention. So I don’t think there can be any argument that women are in this state of uncivilized society as a result of this education,” Mary writes. (98) (Same book 249p)
As women could not be protected by themselves, women who were like grains of sand were easily reduced to exploitation in a capitalist society that fostered selfishness and had to live on the edge of labor.
Slaves and women were not much different before the Industrial Revolution, but after the Industrial Revolution, as the demand for labor markets increased and the population concentrated in cities, troubled slavery was abolished, and more exploitation from poor men and women was possible.
n other words, as capitalists promoted the world with the abundance of materials, serfs who lived in feudalism fled to the city in rosy dreams, and the feudal serf system began to collapse, and at the same time, children had to make money as the labor market collapsed due to urban population concentration.
In other words, the people had to pay the price of freedom severely, and in urban poor families, they lived a miserable life worse than slaves due to unprecedented crimes caused by human devastation and massive industrial accidents. Therefore, the life of early capitalism can be seen as a living hell that was legally harsher than slave labor.
In other words, he lived a miserable life due to the price of side dishes, along with domestic labor such as pregnancy, childbirth, nursing, parenting, and family welfare. In addition, patriarchs often died and suffered accidents due to low wages and poor environments compared to their performance due to competition in the labor market, and women who handled them suffered double pain. Therefore, even though modern society was established, it can be seen that women have not improved much from the old days.
This is because women’s lives were hard as they maximized profits and accumulated capital through the harsh exploitation of capitalists. Of course, considering the fact that socialism, which opposed capitalism without interfering with excessive exploitation of capitalists, was created after the establishment of modern society, it can be assumed that the lives of the people were like hell.
This is because liberals value the economic sector of metaphysics rather than the realm of religion or ideological politics expressed in the human inner world because of the belief that they will be able to live like humans when they enrich materials with free competition. Therefore, in reality, only the capitalists as liberals were rich, and given the fact that the lives of the people were miserable, it can be understood that it was an idea for the rich.
The main pillars of the Napoleon Civil Code, which was promulgated in 1804 as a result of the Civil Revolution, such as private autonomy, occupancy, negligence liability, and contract freedom, are significant as laws to guarantee free competition based on economic liberalism. However, although the ideas of freedom, equality, philanthropy, and liberalism, which are the core of the French Revolution’s human rights declaration, were the basis of the Civil Code, it cannot be denied that there was an unusual aspect of strengthening patriarchal rights.
In other words, it is contrary to the idea of natural law that the wife stipulated that she could not acquire or trade property because the wife was subordinate to the husband. Of course, it was not consistent with the purpose of the human rights declaration, which is the cause of the civil revolution.
In addition, items without owners were able to own the resources of the colony by registering them based on a unilateral law made under the principle of ‘occupancy ,’ which means that the person who acquired them first is the owner. In other words, overseas colonies were unilaterally established as Western thinking by considering them as if they were uninhabited islands.
For example, it can be understood that the traditional distribution style of Indians is a cultural difference in that anyone thought that anyone could cultivate the land without cultivating it, but the West thought they could own it without cultivating it.
In other words, despite the indigenous people’s unique culture, lifestyle, and style of ownership, the West took it for granted to ignore cultural differences with one-sided Christian globalism, force them to keep Western values as a principle, and use violence to survive the survival of the fittest.
This is because weapons have developed and exploitation technologies have developed excessively, so that the survival patterns and traditional cultures of each region can be ignored over thousands of years. Of course, in the case of uncivilized areas, there are cases where they arrived first and registered with some cases. However, it cannot be denied that there was an aspect to revitalize overseas colonial development from the fact that the government guaranteed vested interests.
For example, it can be understood from the fact that they ignored it unilaterally and rationalized it with their own logic, just like the superior being permitted by the Christian monotheism. In other words, America was effectively ruled by the Indians over thousands of years of their ancestors, so registration for individual ownership was meaningless, and even though it was a society that did not need to understand Western values of liberalism, it was taken away by Westerners.
If it was ruled through the conquest war, the problem could be different. However, it is problematic that it naturally approached Christianity, which they think uncertainly about, as a means of colonization that can make the most profit at the minimum cost by economic principles, as an evangelical justification for human companions.
For example, one can understand their feelings from the economic reasons behind the crusade to regain Christianity in Europe long ago, as well as the fact that countries with contradictory historical experiences that continued to benefit in the name of Christianity formed a third world.
And it can be understood in the case of Indians who are at odds with Christianity, or who have fallen into the underdogs of the Americas. The uncertainty of absolute existence formed by historical experience is understood by imperialism, which can be seen as a result of the widespread utilitarian idea that those who have experienced an anomics due to lack of value do not care whether it is religion, politics, or whatever they use for possession.
It can be seen that the early capitalism, which justified greed created during the era of uncertainty, developed into a situation where people had to save bread even by selling their souls as exploitation techniques developed to the extent that they cultivated bourgeois greed.
It is understandable that people invented socialism by distrusting capitalism, which they saw as rosy, and how much early laissez-faire was from the fact that they even made the Communist Manifesto. In other words, even though modern society was established by the success of the civil revolution with the human rights declaration, which was the cause of the civil revolution, the exploitation of capitalists at that time went too far to the level of tyranny, and externally, they adhered to colonialism.
For example, it can be understood from the fact that in the Napoleonic Civil Code, the authority of the patriarch as a patriarchal state was absolute, while women were subordinate despite the civil revolution based on natural law. Of course, it is also true that Napoleon developed into a universal value of mankind by attacking an adjacent absolute monarchy to globalize modern society and settling it within a short period of time.
In any case, it can be understood that modern society, which was established by the success of the civil revolution, is fundamentally different from the old era of absolute feudalism when state power came from the gun.
In other words, it means that the modern democratic state established based on the idea of natural law is a state of sovereignty and is a state managed by the people themselves. Therefore, it can be said that mankind has prepared the foundation for a leap forward while creating a modern society established to realize human dignity. In other words, it may be that the West has opened new possibilities to women as it deviates from the father’s single god.
Finally, democracy, which is inherent in bourgeois liberalism and welfareism, can be combined even though it is contradictory because democracy remains in a procedural definition. However, it can be seen that in order to realize an active welfare society, which is the ideal of mankind, democracy must not be limited to procedural definitions, but matriarchal democracy must be established as an intact democracy with consistent form and content. Therefore, it can be seen that realizing an active welfare society consistent with democracy based on decentralization is in line with the spirit of civil revolution as a modern spirit.
Liberal ideas formed in the unique historical development of the West were embodied as capitalism by Adam Smith during the Industrial Revolution. Professor Galbraith (1908-2006) wrote in his book ‘The Age of Uncertainty’ (1977), that Western society began with distrust of Christian monotheism in the wake of the Renaissance and went through the process of questioning all existing values.
In other words, it is argued that the idea of liberalism (individualism) that values one’s existing individuality was formed, leading to the denial of absolute feudalism. In other words, as the most certain being in the era of uncertainty, he put meaning on his life that exists before the essence.
Therefore, it can be seen that capitalism was created by the tendency to solve human problems through the certainty of materials that exist in metaphysical reality rather than in the world of metaphysical ideas. This is based on the belief that even if one becomes an isolated individual, one will not be able to regress as an individual who exists in a civilized state unlike in the past.
Therefore, it can be seen that the capitalist lifestyle, which systematized living while freeing the survival competition of selfish individuals, stems from the human spirit of achieving public good through division of labor and cooperation.
Therefore, recalling that humans tried to balance selfishness and altruism from time immemorial, it can be seen that capitalism in the Adam Smith era cultivated and nurtured human selfishness to justify greed in a society with a small economy.
However, as today’s astronomical economy has become a dangerous society formed by selfish bias, it can be seen that a de-capitalist political and economic system that balances human altruism is needed. In other words, capitalism, which maximizes human selfishness due to the astronomical economic scale today, is inappropriate for newcomers.
In other words, in the global era when the majority of mankind became civilized, human sociality takes precedence, and it refers to the establishment of a system that can globalize (universalize) a new maternal distribution style to balance individuality.
Of course, the absence of the middle class, which fell due to infinite competition and absolute polarization, has become a dangerous society that lacks the willingness to share or make concessions, unconsciously becomes hostile, and is becoming an inefficient society due to the explosive increase in social costs.
In addition, the capitalist distribution style in the global village era creates ‘poverty in abundance,’ and due to absolute polarization, most people become frustrated and desperate, transforming them into aggressive attitudes.
And not only is it paying the price of instability as much as free competition, but the fierce competition to survive is increasing in desperation as hate and absolute polarization make the absolute majority no longer have anything to lose. Therefore, it can be seen that capitalism is a system that forces people to live a ‘life of opposition’ that encourages relative deprivation.
Therefore, it is true that capitalism has developed society as a whole by free competition, but as the impact of large-scale economic transactions is enormous to today, a new system is needed to live a win-win life.
In other words, as capitalism is inconsistent with the newcomers living in the global era, the mother-right system for the realization of an active welfare society based on the maternal distribution pattern will be appropriate for mankind. In other words, it refers to a system that can implement an active welfare society that can live a ’relationship life‘ that can exert creativity created with abundant imagination for a happy life.
“Liberalism aims only to provide external prerequisites for developing human inner life.” (Lee Ji-soon, Ludwig von Mises, Liberalism, Korea Economic Research Institute 1990, 20p) It can be understood that liberalism focuses on material enrichment through economic freedom and thinks of the inner world as secondary.
This can be seen as a result of historical experience that has been formed in paternalism for a long time. In other words, it may be because the paternal society with many conflicts is a repressive society where high tax rates are applied as it has to strengthen the rich country, and most people have become so chronically needy that they cannot afford to think about the inner world. Therefore, as a totalitarian society, the paternal society would have no choice but to be fascinated by the liberal idea of the people who suffered from power polarization and status system.
This is because people who have been suffering from thousands of years of totalitarian politics and have been poor have longed to be freed from oppression. For example, it can be understood from the fact that it later became the driving force for the civil revolution, and after the success of the revolution established a modern society, it demanded a night watch state as a functional state without anarchic interference.
However, in an early capitalist society that presupposes that the responsibility for welfare lies with the individual, the people could not resent anyone while living in poverty as in the old days.In other words, the modern democratic society was a formal democracy (half democracy) society for liberalism. In other words, there was no economic democracy for practical democracy.
This can be understood from the fact that the early capitalist society, which was faithful to the nature of capitalism, created imperialism by causing sharp confrontation and excessive competition of interests, and the emergence of the Communist Party that reacted to it, World War I, World War II, and the Cold War era.
In other words, as it became a capitalist society, the cultivation of greed and the emergence of unprecedented wealth due to the large-scale economy became a battlefield due to the will to own more. This is because even though humans must balance sociality and individuality according to their cultural existence, they justify imbalances in capitalism that motivates selfishness.
Therefore, it can be seen that capitalism needs interference from a third party state to prevent ‘everyone’s struggle against everyone’ caused by human selfishness, contrary to Hobbs’ argument, which justified a totalitarian society.
Of course, despite liberalism’s idealization of anarchy while justifying a life that maximizes selfishness, it can be understood that it should be supplemented with a democratic distribution style in that it is cutting off relationships by creating a dangerous society today.
In any case, liberalism (individualism) created in reaction to totalitarianism is an idea that emphasizes the absolute individual that the individual is more important than the purpose of the whole. Of course, liberals argue that human selfishness promotes the overall interests of mankind, resulting in public good.
Therefore, it can be understood that liberals are optimistic about humanity as they believe that the individual’s selfish role will lead to the material abundance of mankind and that mankind will prosper. However, Hunt writes:
“The psychological creed of liberalism (individualism) is based on the following four assumptions about human nature. In other words, humans are selfishly and coldly calculated, essentially lethargic and atomic.” (100) (E. K Hunt, capitalist development and ideology, Jeong Yeon-ju, Bibong Publishing Company, 1986, 55p) And “capitalist society created by liberal thinking is called capitalism” (101) (same book 27p) As such, Hunt can understand that liberalism is negative.
This is only a justification for the material abundance of mankind, and in fact, advanced countries have developed high-tech science and technology through capital accumulation formed by colonial development, and most people are falling into poverty due to the global polarization.
In addition, as liberalism does not guarantee at least a material basis for human dignity, and allows any individual to monopolize it, mankind is in trouble due to rapid polarization and environmental pollution.
Thus, in the past, liberalism was appropriate in small economies, but capitalism is inconsistent with the global era, given the bad consequences of resource depletion and environmental pollution caused by astronomical economies and overconsumption. In fact, in early capitalism, only the capitalists were rich, the majority of them were poor, and today they have become a dangerous society where terrorism is rampant due to polarization between regions.
In particular, neoliberalism, which is based on welfare reduction, shows that the life of the socially disadvantaged is difficult, and that poor women can be reduced to sexual beings, so a new de-liberal distribution style should be globalized.
Since the advent of capitalism, mankind has paid a lot of price in a short period of time. Of course, it can be seen positively in that it was the driving force for making high-tech science and technology into a global village, and in that it civilized mankind.
But the problem is that capitalism cannot overcome the greater risks that it has created so far. In the long run, the polarization caused by the nature of capitalism is leading to the devastation of humanity, and if a woman has to abandon freedom for bread or degenerate into a sexual being as in the past, it may become irreparable. It can be understood from the fact that neoliberalism, which wants to be faithful to the nature of capitalism, accelerates absolute polarization quickly.
It is also worth recalling that liberal ideas and capitalism systems were unintended consequences, as Max Weber points out, and that they could not achieve freedom, equality, and philanthropy, the spirit of the French Revolution, and that there was only freedom of poverty. Therefore, it can be understood that only when an active welfare society for a new distribution style based on matrilineal values is established, can we escape from a dangerous society.
For example, it would be possible if mankind practiced the argument of the absolutist philosopher Plato, who pointed out depolarization as the law of coexistence. In other words, “Platon told his student Aristotle that the maximum wage in any organization should not exceed five times the minimum wage.” (102) (Ko Chul Ki, the End of Capitalism, Aquarius, 1998, 88p)
Therefore, it can be seen that Plato, who was an absolutist philosopher, proposed the ‘upper limit of ownership’ as a law for living a happy life. In other words, polarization was thought to be the cause of Plato’s denial and unhappy life.
In other words, Plato believed that as a colleague, humans could live a happy life only when they were harmonized with ownership restrictions. This can be understood from the fact that the sharing (favoritism) of the maternal society, which was a religious society, and that mercy and love are the core of the doctrine in the paternal superior religion.
Of course, in matriarchal society, sharing was known as the truth and sharing was practiced as a shared system, but sharing was often a justification in the paternal superior religion created by the emergence of a paternal society based on private ownership.
Anyway, as an economic liberalism based on paternal values, capitalism causes natural disasters, human nature devastation, resource depletion, environmental problems, and polarization, and is fixing a dangerous society. In other words, humanity in the global era is in an urgent situation to overcome the crisis by recalling Seonghyeon’s teaching to practice sharing.
In other words, imagination freedom may be unlimited, but liberalism as a code of conduct is in crisis enough to be limited. Of course, mankind today studies ways to improve the quality of life or to live a life of existence (relational life) as an answer to a happy life, but it is facing limitations because it has not escaped from the capitalist framework.
For example, Plato, who was an absolutist philosopher, could understand the fact that he could not realize what was not followed even though he proposed an upper limit as a law for happiness because it was contrary to paternalism as totalitarianism.
Therefore, if mankind wants to accept Plato’s upper limit for a sustainable life, an active welfare society must be established. In other words, a new de-liberal system in which paternal and maternal circles coexist should be established by withdrawing the political and economic system based on paternal values.
In other words, a political and economic system that can implement an active welfare society with the ‘upper and lower ownership limit’, a new matriarchal distribution style for the proper distribution of limited goods, should be common.
Part II. Human Dignity Chapter 1. The Age of Human Dignity The dictionary…
Chapter 4. Conclusion We already knew that the poor Ok-soon, who was introduced earlier,…
Chapter 3. The happy life of a new generation 1. A history of human…
Chapter 2. Beyond capitalism According to the French Declaration of Human Rights, "the principle…
Part 6. The political philosophy of the mother …
Chapter 3. Neoliberalism 1. Neoliberalism contrary to the global zeitgeist 1.1 Capitalism that…