Military Review

145 years of the Paris Commune

47

145 years ago, 18 March 1871, a revolutionary government was created in Paris - the Paris Commune. The internal crisis in France and the defeat in the Franco-Prussian war led to the fact that unrest began in the capital, which turned into a revolution. As a result of the revolution, self-government was established, which lasted from March 18 to May 28 of 1871. At the head of the Paris Commune were neo-Jacobins, socialists and anarchists united in a coalition. Since 1872, by the decision of the General Council of the First International, in honor of the workers' first successful attempt to seize the political power, March 18 began to be celebrated as the Paris Commune Day.


Development of the Second Empire

1850-1860-ies were a time of rapid industrial growth in Europe. France was one of the leaders of the capitalist world. In France, over the two decades that coincided with the time of the Second Empire, the total volume of industrial output has almost doubled. More than three increased turnover of French foreign trade. During the Second Empire in France, the industrial revolution was largely completed. Factory production covered almost all branches of French industry. The number of steam engines, not counting locomotives and steam vessels, increased by more than 4 times.

Major successes were in heavy industry. From 1851 to 1869, France more than tripled the extraction of coal and brown coal, tripled the production of pig iron, increased the production of iron more than three times, and almost eight times increased the production of steel. The development of heavy industry was largely ensured by the wide construction of railways and shipbuilding. The length of railways in two decades has increased by almost five times. The production of railway rails increased tenfold, the number of locomotives increased almost fivefold (973 in 1850, 4822 in 1869). The total tonnage of steam vessels increased by more than 10 times (from 13 to 925 tons). The river fleet more than doubled (142 ships in 942, 252 in 1850). However, the heavy industry of France, ahead of light industry in terms of growth, was still inferior in its specific gravity. It was due to historical the development of France, where the industrial revolution began with light industry.

Enhanced large industry. Large enterprises are widely used in textile, mining, metallurgical, chemical and some other industries. The concentration of production led to the concentration of workers. There were enterprises where hundreds and thousands of workers worked. Thus, more than 10,5 thousand people were employed at the Creozo metallurgical plant, about 5,5 thousand people at the Japy brothers' iron products factory, 1,4 thousand people in the silk-weaving factory, etc.

However, despite the successes of large-scale industry, small and medium-sized enterprises were still typical for France. The most common type of industrial enterprise was small-scale production with one or more workers — at the end of the 60s, about 60% of French workers were engaged in small-scale production. Particularly large role small production, due to historical development, played in Paris.

There has been a significant increase in French trade. The turnover of “general trade” increased from 2615 million francs in 1851 to 8003 million in 1869. “General trade” covered all types of imports of goods intended for domestic consumption and re-exports to other countries, as well as all types of exports of goods; there was also a "special trade" - the import of goods only for the consumption of France and the export of only French goods. Trade with England ranked first in French foreign trade. France exported mainly silks, wines, ready-made dresses, high-grade woolen fabrics, luxury goods, etc. For France from England (to a lesser extent from Belgium, Sweden and Germany), they mainly supplied textiles, metallurgy and coal.

A feature of France was the domination of financial capital. “Capital surplus” grew from about 2 billion francs in 1850 to 10 billion in 1869. It was not the development of the French economy that was used (especially the development of agriculture lagging behind industry), but for export to less developed countries of Europe. in the colony for the big, industrial and banking bourgeoisie to gain super-profits. That is, capital was not the development of France, but to increase the wealth of a small handful of "financial aristocracy."

Exchange speculation in France took large sizes. Paris Exchange operations have tripled over 18 over the years: in 1851, 118 of securities varieties worth 11 billion francs were quoted on it; in 1869, 307 paper types worth 33 billion francs. The Paris Stock Exchange has become a money market of a European scale, successfully competing with the English one. In 1868, 14 governments borrowed from French stockbrokers for 2127 million francs. Foreign securities accounted for about one-third of the French portfolio in 1869. More than five times (from 1592 million francs in 1851, to 8325 million in 1869), operations of the French bank increased. On securities courses, speculators made fortunes, fraudulent joint-stock companies, who floated their shares with impunity among the population they fooled, robbed numerous holders of securities, mainly from townspeople and middle peasants in the villages.

The operations of a number of credit institutions, such as the Land Loan Society, which provided its shareholders, mainly large financiers, with enormous usury profits, also grew on a huge scale. This society, whose purpose was formally to finance French agriculture by providing mortgage loans and without mortgage security, in fact, pumped large sums from the villages. The General Society of Movable Credit, before it collapsed in 1867, provided loans to the railways, the government to finance the Crimean, Italian and Mexican wars, for the treasury purchase of the Austrian railways, to build railways in Russia and in Spain, and dd

As a result, the largest credit institutions in France controlled the country's economy. A small group of "financial aristocracy" was robbing the French people, as well as colonies and other states.

J. Duchene wrote in 1869 g.: “Banks, credit societies, steamboats, railways, large metallurgical and gas plants, all any significant societies are concentrated in the hands of 183 entities. These 183 entities own the huge capital they manage. These capitals represent in shares and bonds over 20 billion francs. ”

Government loans, subsidies, and concessions provided by the government of the Second Empire, as well as adventurous colonial expeditions and wars that did not meet national interests, contributed to the enormous enrichment of the banking oligarchy and the industrial and commercial bourgeoisie associated with it. As a result, the national debt of France during the years of the Second Empire has grown greatly: by 1 in January of 1852 it amounted to 5516 million francs, by 1 in January of 1871 G. 12 454 million francs.

Growth of social problems

It is clear that all this led to the development of social problems. The ruin of small peasants and agricultural workers led to their escape to the cities, especially sharply this phenomenon intensified in the 50-60-s of the XIX century. The size of the working class has grown considerably. The living conditions of the workers were harsh. The delegates of the Paris workers at the 1867 World Fair complained that “machines that are an element of progress are causing poverty for workers” lead to lower wages and increased unemployment. This was also indicated by the workers' delegates of Lyon. The use of steam engines in industry and transport development, they noted, "benefited only capital owners who widely used these major innovations."

The position of the workers in France was no better than in England. The growth of factories and plants did not lead to an improvement in the life of the working class. In a number of industries, wages have declined. But those workers whose nominal wages grew, skillfully robbed. There were a number of hidden methods to reduce fees. Here and numerous monetary fines, which imposed on workers under all sorts of pretexts, and forced remuneration in kind, that is, goods, the margin on which reached 80% of their value. There were also compulsory deductions from wages to pension funds, which were often in the hands of entrepreneurs. Such deductions reached the 4% patch. Meanwhile, workers who were deprived of work due to injury at work, due to illness or old age could not always receive benefits or it was insignificant and could not feed a person, let alone a family. In addition, the average salary of women was 2-3 times lower than that of men.

The working day lasted 10-12 hours (at 12 hours a working day, workers had a two-hour break for food and rest). However, in many of the enterprises in which he was officially listed as ten o'clock, he was in fact much longer. Entrepreneurs forced workers to work much more 10 hours to ensure their minimum living standards. For example, working delegates from Parisian cartwrights at the 1862 World Fair in London complained that although their working day was officially ten hours, they were actually forced to work 12 and 13 hours a day due to lower prices . The saddles of Paris, according to official data, had an 10-hour day. But their delegates at the World Exhibition said: “Almost all of us work on piecework wages, however, in view of the lower prices, our working day should be calculated by 12 — 13 for hours. Even under these conditions, the average daily wage is still far from sufficient. ” They demanded shorter working hours to 10 hours. The tins of Paris were even worse: officially, their working day lasted 10 hours, but in reality, due to lower prices, 14 and 16 hours lasted.

In the provinces, the situation was even worse. The working day, according to official 1860 data, was 11 hours of actual labor. However, in fact, in many cases, it reached the 13 — 18 hours. Former railway worker Antoine Roche, the author of the booklet "The Manslaughters", published in 1871. in Geneva, reported that the working day of excavators and handlers rail on the railway Paris-Lyon-Marseille was at the end of 60-s 17 hours, while in official documents it was 10-hour. The businessmen, threatening workers with dismissal, forced them to give in writing false testimony that their working day did not exceed 10 hours. In the silk production of the outskirts of Lyon Croix-Russ, the length of the working day was also 17 hours. Lyon weavers worked 16 — 18 hours a day. Lyon's ribbons worked 14 — 16 hours, not counting the breaks, silk silk bitches — 13 and more hours, decoiler — 13 — 14 hours, etc.

Cruelly exploited children. According to the reports of the prefects of the departments of Somme, Nor, Sart, the working day of children aged from 8 to 12 years was 15 hours; in the cotton mill production departments of Seine and Oise, Marne, Aube, Meuse - 12 and more hours; in silk and silk twisting production of the departments of Drome, Ardeche, etc. — 14-15 watches; in wool spinning production departments Manche, Loire and Cher - 16 hours; in the match production departments of the Lower Rhine, Sart, Lund - from 12 to 16 — 17 hours.

The rights of workers were narrowed. By decree of 9, September 1848, the revolutionary 2 law of March 1848 of 10 — 11-hour working day was annulled and the working day equal to 12 hours of actual labor was set for all plants and manufactures . By decree of 17 in May 1851 and by the January decree of 1866, the number of enterprises and industries that were exempted from the restriction of the working day was consistently expanded.

Many workers and their families lived on the verge of starvation and were starving. The growth of nominal wages lagged significantly behind the rise in prices for foodstuffs and other basic necessities, especially the rise in prices for apartments. The price of a hectoliter of wheat from 17,23 franc to 1852 has risen in 1868 to 26,64 franc; the price of a kilogram of white wheat bread from 30 centimes in 1849 - to 37 centimes in 1869. The prices of meat and other products increased significantly. A cubic meter of firewood, which cost 1850 francs in 1,6, increased in price to 1870 francs in 1,94, and the lighting oil increased in price from 1,16 to 1,60 francs per kilogram over the same period.

Even more than the price of food and consumer goods, the price of apartments has risen, especially in large cities, primarily in Paris. Authorities and businessmen sought to pass on the shoulders of ordinary people the costs of reconstruction of the capital and a number of major cities in France (Lyon, Marseille, Le Havre, Lille, etc.). Workers' representatives at the 1867 World Fair complained of an extreme increase in rents in Paris. “The room and the storage room on Gregoire de Tours,” they said, “cost 1846 francs in 100, in 1866 cost 250 francs (an increase of 160%); a room on Rue Saint-Martin, which cost 1846 francs in 160, increased in price in 1866 to 400 francs (by 150%); a room without a window on Grand Tuanderi Street, which cost 80 francs, rose in price to 260 francs (by 325%); a room on Polivo street, which cost 1846 francs in 90, cost 1866 francs (in 180%) in 100 ”.

During the 50-60-ies the government of the Second Empire spent over a billion francs on the restructuring and decoration of Paris, in the interests of the rich. As a result of the reconstruction, 57 streets and driveways were destroyed, 2227 houses were destroyed, more than 25 thousand people, almost exclusively workers, were forcibly evicted from their homes. Thousands of ordinary people were forced to leave their homes, located in the city center, near enterprises and large central markets, where they could buy food at a relatively cheap price. At the same time, new houses built on the site of the destroyed ones were extremely expensive and, therefore, inaccessible for workers and other commoners. They were taken mainly by representatives of the propertied classes.

Simple people had to move to the suburbs. But even there, due to the massive influx of people from the center, as well as from the village, the price of apartments sharply increased. When the outskirts were overpopulated, the workers and artisans were forced to move to the suburbs, located outside the old Paris. That is, workers have lost the benefits of life in Paris itself - lower prices for food and essential items.

In addition, the reconstruction of Paris clearly divided the world of the rich and the poor. Previously, while all layers of its population lived in territorial proximity, these contrasts outwardly somewhat erased in the maelstrom of life in the capital. Now everything became obvious. This was also noted by some representatives of the bourgeoisie, who accused the authorities of Paris of frivolous hindsight: “All the wonders of art, all the seductions of luxury, all the variety of pleasures are concentrated in Paris. But all this luxury, all wealth, all wonders are locked, squeezed like a hoop, blocked in a huge anthill. Around the city of the possessing classes the city of workers rampantly towers. One dressed up in lace, silk, velvet, diamonds; the other has nothing but a blouse to cover his nakedness. ”

At the end of the 60s, the position of the Paris workers deteriorated further. According to various testimonies, the total annual consumption of a working family of four, as a result of the further appreciation of the basic necessities, was about 1700 francs. But even relatively well-paid workers, whose daily wages were around 6 francs, could barely fit into their budget, since their annual wages, minus non-working hours, were about 1500 francs. At the same time, even according to the embellished data of the Paris Chamber of Commerce, in 1860 only 19 thousand from 416 thousand Paris workers received such wages. That is, in the capital of France a powerful charge of hatred has accumulated, and only a reason for a social explosion was needed.

In France, there was a whole army of partially unemployed people who were not busy with 4-6 months in a year, and completely unemployed. A terrible phenomenon of France was a huge number of beggars. Only in Paris at the beginning of 1860 were there 90 thous. Registered beggars. In 1866, there were already more than 120 thousand people.

Outwardly, there were successes in agriculture: in increasing the area of ​​grain crops while reducing the area under the wastelands; in increasing the number of cattle and pigs in connection with the significant development of dairy and beef cattle breeding; in the expansion of food supply; in increasing the area of ​​sugar beet crops and land allocated for vineyards. Large landowners and the urban bourgeoisie, who bought or rented land, as well as the rich upper crust of the village, had the opportunity to switch to intensive, specialized agricultural production using machinery. At the same time, large landowners who did not adapt for one reason or another to the new conditions lost their lands. But the remaining large landowners expanded their holdings at the expense of the ruined ones. That is, there was a process of concentration of land ownership.

A large mass of the peasantry did not have the capital to carry out such a restructuring. There was a massive deprivation of the peasantry with the outflow of peasants to the cities, where they joined the ranks of workers with temporary jobs or beggars. Another part of the peasantry, as well as landless farm laborers and rural workers, was heavily dependent on large landowners and "kulaks." One form of enslavement was mortgage debt. The peasant who mortgage the mortgage remains only its nominal owner. For the sake of preserving his fictitious property, he is obliged to pay huge interest to the usurer annually. The actual owner of the land becomes usury. It was only through mortgages that French banks, large landowners, usurers and kulaks took more than 1 billion francs from the peasants each year.

Thus, in the 50-60- XIX years. From the policy of the government and the inordinate greed of the "financial aristocracy" and other wealthy classes, the social and economic position of the majority of the French population has deteriorated sharply. This was one of the main prerequisites of the revolutionary explosion.

To be continued ...
Author:
47 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Galich Kos
    Galich Kos 18 March 2016 07: 02
    +2
    That is, in the capital of France a powerful charge of hatred has accumulated, and only a reason for a social explosion was needed.



    Another successful UK operation to weaken the geopolitical rival. France is weakened, and a new empire appeared on the world stage - the German Empire, which, with the help of English bankers, began to rapidly militarize, which ultimately led to the beginning of the 1st World War.
    1. Pig
      Pig 18 March 2016 09: 36
      +3
      "" Another successful UK operation to weaken a geopolitical rival ""
      and where does the UK? Napoleon’s regime3 was rotten to the ground, and if at the beginning of the war with Prussia the discontent of the people could be neutralized by patriotic hysteria, then after the Sedan there was a social explosion ...
      as contemporaries wrote: the Emperor’s power ended at the very moment when they learned in Paris about the surrender at Sedan ...
      but the fact that England "weakened" one geopolitical rival so she immediately got the second - Germany
      1. Galich Kos
        Galich Kos 18 March 2016 10: 30
        +1
        Quote: Pig
        and where does the UK?


        All with the same. France is one of the strongest European powers of that time, a natural rival of Britain. Eliminating an opponent with someone else's hands (in this case, Prussian) is very English. Similarly, Britain dragged Emperor Paul into the war with Napoleon by promising him the island of Malta. And Malta is a strategic point in the Mediterranean, a very tasty morsel. I will not go into details, but the British "threw" the Russian emperor and took the island under their actual control. Britain is a naval power, the British navy is an instrument of domination in the world. Consequently, all the most important strategic points in the world must be under British control.
        When Pavel realized that he had been cheated and the Russian army under the command of Suvorov and the fleet under the command of Ushakov fought for the interests of others, he made peace, and then an anti-British alliance with Napoleon. Further, in cooperation with France, a campaign was organized in India, which was not destined to materialize. Emperor Paul was killed by the conspirators. After his death, Alexander the First refused the title of Grand Master of Malta, and, accordingly, of all claims to this skeleton. Accordingly, the Indian campaign did not take place either.
        The fact that the overthrow of Paul was the British well-known and proven fact!

        Quote: Pig
        but the fact that England "weakened" one geopolitical rival so she immediately got the second - Germany


        Again you do not know the essence of the matter. There is no desire to chew on this topic for you, for too long. My advice to you, read books, and do not poke your fingers on the keyboard without understanding the essence of things.
        1. Pig
          Pig 18 March 2016 10: 44
          +2
          What are you giving me a lecture about Paul here? you better say:
          HOW did Britain "weaken" France?
          although judging by your rudeness, "chew" something - you are not able to anyone
          1. Galich Kos
            Galich Kos 18 March 2016 10: 55
            0
            Quote: Pig
            HOW Britain Weakened France



            What historical period are you interested in?

            Quote: Pig
            although judging by your rudeness, "chew" something - you are not able to anyone


            "Rudeness" you are quite worthy, because you climb with your ridiculous comments without knowing and not understanding the essence and history of the issue. And I can chew you very much, but it takes a long time. If you are interested in these questions, google, there is a lot of information.
            1. Pig
              Pig 18 March 2016 11: 33
              0
              "" What historical period are you interested in? "
              pretending to be? a conversation for the Paris Commune ... we ask: "chew" for us dark - how did Great Britain weaken France with the help of the Paris Commune?
              no lectures needed an answer to a specific question
              1. Galich Kos
                Galich Kos 18 March 2016 12: 01
                -1
                Quote: Pig
                Did Britain weaken France with the help of the Paris Commune?


                Because the Paris Commune is the French 5th column or the liberal community of that time. almost immediately after the departure of the emperor Napoleon to the active army (long before the disaster at Sedan, "mass demonstrations began in Paris under the familiar entrepreneurial slogans (freedom, equality, brotherhood, etc.), plus the court intrigues of Napoleon's wife, the remaining regent and the betrayal of the French army at the very top, all this ultimately led to the so-called revolution.And we know from the example of the events of February 1917 that a revolution in a country at war is a 100% defeat in a war.

                Quote: Pig
                we ask: "chew" for us dark


                Chewed briefly, enjoy and shake on a mustache.


                1. Pig
                  Pig 18 March 2016 12: 37
                  +1
                  the revolution began because of a loss in the war! had Napoleon won the war with Germany and would have remained Emperor until the end of his life
                  and everything else (intrigue, manifestation of public discontent up to open rebellion) shows only the rottenness of Napoleon's regime3 but not as "a successful operation of Great Britain" ...
                  the revolution was already brewing (the article says why) and the war with Prussia was to become a "small victorious war" with the help of which they hoped to silence the people
                  the same thing happened in Russia in 1905 (and in 1917) - unsuccessful war - revolution
                  and there is not a single fact that the defeat of France was advantageous to Great Britain
                  so there’s absolutely nothing to enjoy in your writings - all a twist
                  1. Galich Kos
                    Galich Kos 18 March 2016 15: 27
                    0
                    I will not argue with you. Stay in your ignorance further. I see you are quite happy with this.
                2. parusnik
                  parusnik 18 March 2016 16: 01
                  +4
                  (long before the catastrophe near Sedan "mass demonstrations began in Paris under the familiar entrepreneurial slogans (freedom, equality, brotherhood, etc.),... And the catastrophes of the French army, during the war, is also the work of the Communards? .. Did they oppose the war? .. The Thiers government wanted to surrender Paris ... and the Communards did not want to ... But still because of this, the commune spun. The workers demanded the continuation of the war against the invaders and the organization of elections to the Commune.
                  1. Rivares
                    Rivares 18 March 2016 17: 16
                    -1
                    Quote: parusnik
                    .A catastrophe of the French army during the war is also the work of the Communards? ..

                    No, the communards just crawled out at the right time. As an everywhere. In Germany and Russia in particular. If you remember in 1905, the Communards also crawled out just during the Russo-Japanese era, and captured the most powerful ships in the Black Sea to prevent them from being transferred to the war.
                    1. parusnik
                      parusnik 18 March 2016 17: 24
                      +2
                      But the government of Thiers, and not the Communards, concluded a truce with Prussia .. The communards advocated the continuation of the war with Prussia .. so where did they get out during the time ... When the Germans reached the city of Paris, they gave concerts with great success along the way .. like Sedan, for example. .
                    2. Pig
                      Pig 18 March 2016 19: 57
                      +1
                      "" and captured the most powerful ships in the Black Sea to prevent their transfer to war ""
                      not a single Black Sea Fleet ship would have fallen into the Russo-Japanese War - because Turkey did not pass military vessels through the straits ...
                      Montreux Convention has not yet been ...
                    3. Rastas
                      Rastas 18 March 2016 20: 14
                      +1
                      And why then did the French capitalists call on yesterday’s Germans to help destroy the Paris Commune? What patriots they are, it turns out. In general, there is a good site istmat.info ›there is a whole section on the commune. Interesting.
              2. Fat
                Fat 18 March 2016 23: 09
                +1
                Quote: Pig
                "" What historical period are you interested in? "
                pretending to be? a conversation for the Paris Commune ... we ask: "chew" for us dark - how did Great Britain weaken France with the help of the Paris Commune?
                no lectures needed an answer to a specific question

                ANY DIFFICULTY OF THE COMPETITOR PLAYS HANDS OF OUR CORPORATION
                It should however be noted Indigenous the difference between the French capitalists and the British - BANKS... If the Britons have the key - industrial production and after that the expansion of goods, lifestyle, capital, then the francs were initially at the forefront of "cash"
              3. Fat
                Fat 18 March 2016 23: 36
                +1
                Quote: Pig
                answer to a specific question

                The labor of the proletariat is also a commodity! Who should sell it to usurers - bankers? The Paris Commune is absolutely objective, Ch.P. Money, in and of itself, is not potato or wheat.
                1. The defeat in the war
                2. Catastrophic unemployment
                3. Counteraction of the main competitor in the markets of daily demand
                THEIR BRITISH MAJESTIES gave the Gallic state expanding real markets through the colonies. They stopped the Gauls for a couple of years ... They took their colonies "and FSE" ... So whose "lands" are the "FATEST"?
              4. Morrrow
                Morrrow 20 March 2016 22: 01
                0
                It was enough to hint to Bismarck that England did not approve of his military plans.
          2. Fat
            Fat 18 March 2016 23: 06
            +1
            Quote: Pig
            What are you giving me a lecture about Paul here? you better say:
            HOW did Britain "weaken" France?
            although judging by your rudeness, "chew" something - you are not able to anyone

            You really need chewing gum. Are you an "abandoned child" or having Your opinion is a man? Serve counter!
        2. Rastas
          Rastas 18 March 2016 20: 10
          +1
          I'm afraid you are wrong. By the end of the reign of Napoleon III, France was an internally weakened country in which a crisis was brewing. All Napoleon's adventures - the Crimean War, the fight in Italy with Garibaldi, the attempt to plant his sidekick Maximilian as emperor in Mexico, the attempt to help the confederation of the South of the United States in the Civil War, finally, the war with Prussia - these were all attempts to distract the people from the internal problems that devoured the country ... Read some of the classics of French literature by Emile Zola, especially his novels The Trap and Nana, which show the vicious underside of the empire. And better Hugo - "The Story of a Crime" about Napoleon's coming to power in 1851 and "Napoleon the Small".
        3. Fat
          Fat 18 March 2016 23: 01
          0
          Quote: Galich Kos
          The fact that the overthrow of Paul was the British well-known and proven fact!

          Thank you for your well-founded position. The origins of the death of the monarch are clearly British "fish soup". Well, it happened like this .... What secret are you taking from Britain to Russia? ... Tell the Sovereign that in Britain guns are not cleaned with bricks, after that they are unfit to shoot...
    2. Kenneth
      Kenneth 18 March 2016 10: 13
      +1
      Did the British do something personal to you? The usual unrest in the wake of which the socialists came to power. February revolution in Russia, only earlier
      1. Galich Kos
        Galich Kos 18 March 2016 10: 37
        +1
        Quote: Kenneth
        February revolution in Russia, only earlier



        Holy naivety. Look at the modern world and name at least one country where the revolutionary change of power has done without interference and funding from outside. Weak?
        Believe me, a hundred and two hundred years ago, the rules of the game were not much different from today.
        1. Kenneth
          Kenneth 18 March 2016 10: 46
          0
          Do you want to talk about conspiracy theory? Of course, financing is good, but in addition to financing, certain social conditions and certain people taking leadership are needed. In the case of the Commune, it was such a hodgepodge, both politically and socially. There was even a wild Pole.
          1. Galich Kos
            Galich Kos 18 March 2016 10: 58
            0
            Quote: Kenneth
            Do you want to talk about conspiracy theory?



            No conspiracy theory, just a struggle for geopolitical primacy. Until the middle of the last century, Great Britain tried to act as a world hegemon, after the end of the 2nd World War the USSR and the USA fought among themselves for dominance in the world. After the collapse of the Union, the United States took on this role.
            1. Kenneth
              Kenneth 18 March 2016 12: 28
              +1
              Let's make it easier. Give links to documents confirming your thesis about the participation of Britain in the subject of discussion of the Paris Commune
              1. Galich Kos
                Galich Kos 18 March 2016 15: 30
                +1
                I will not give you any links. If you really are, then you will find them in two minutes.
                1. Kenneth
                  Kenneth 18 March 2016 22: 14
                  +1
                  Then your speech is an empty chatter
                  1. Fat
                    Fat 19 March 2016 00: 42
                    0
                    Funny laughing But not very. Thanks to the European crisis of the 60-80s of the XNUMXth century, Britain chopped off colonial possessions from the Franks and Germans, which the two "young powers" could boldly claim.
                2. Fat
                  Fat 19 March 2016 00: 32
                  0
                  Quote: Galich Kos
                  I will not give you any links. If you really are, then you will find them in two minutes.

                  You're right! Having asked a question to whom it is favorable, to search in a network ...
            2. Kenneth
              Kenneth 18 March 2016 12: 28
              0
              Let's make it easier. Give links to documents confirming your thesis about the participation of Britain in the subject of discussion of the Paris Commune
              1. Rivares
                Rivares 18 March 2016 17: 24
                +1
                Quote: Kenneth
                Let's make it easier. Give links to documents confirming your thesis about the participation of Britain in the subject of discussion of the Paris Commune

                The sworn assurances of the English crown that they did not do this will go as proof of your innocence)))
              2. Galich Kos
                Galich Kos 18 March 2016 18: 47
                0
                Search and find! God help you.
                1. Rastas
                  Rastas 18 March 2016 20: 56
                  +2
                  Ahhh! Here it is. Anglo-Saxons are behind everything. Well, it’s necessary, otherwise they’ve been writing and writing for 140 years, and the casket just opened. It turns out that Queen Victoria and the Prime Minister of Great Britain, Sir Gladstone, were hidden communists and, having read Marx, decided to organize the first socialist revolution in the history of mankind. The most disgusting thing is that many people believe in this nonsense, not understanding the essence of the events taking place then.
              3. Fat
                Fat 19 March 2016 00: 55
                0
                Quote: Kenneth
                Let's make it easier. Give links to documents confirming your thesis about the participation of Britain in the subject of discussion of the Paris Commune

                Are you a loer? If yes, then flop yourself in the machinations of counterarguments. I dare to assure you will not find anything worthwhile. The worldwide network is a fairly young thing and, as an object of initially "dual" PURPOSE, has been critically emasculated by its creators. You will not find ANY normal documents on the topic. Europe is united since 2000 and pi-ets. Peace, friendship, chewing gum, and since WWI and WWII have nowhere to go (it happened) something else can be found. But just how Bismarck unified Germany and expelled France to the outskirts of the continent will not find anything worthwhile. And about the role of the "United Kingdom" whose lemon sour in every conflict is eaten away by the "profit" label ... As they say, "the wrong resource" ...
            3. Fat
              Fat 19 March 2016 00: 22
              +1
              Quote: Galich Kos
              Until the middle of the last century, Britain tried to act as a world hegemon

              I didn't try, but was. The British Jew Disraeli was the prime minister of the UNITED KINGDOM during the COMUNE period, honor and praise for the destruction of the usurious Frankish state, only a brilliant politician-technocrat could so beautifully remove competitors in colonial possessions. It's amazing how few of the British passionate Britons of those imperial years, more and more Welsh, Scots, Irish and British Jews ... The Empire was fresh with "young blood". How many women have done to Russia, it’s so simple, blin’s nothing personal, “business like that” ... All Eurohistory has been tailored for themselves (special status) to this day, although 1 and 1/3 of the islands remain from the empire ...
              Well, chicken is not a bird, Britain is NOT EUROPE
              1. Rastas
                Rastas 19 March 2016 01: 41
                0
                So at the time of the Commune, the Prime Minister of England until 1874 was Gladstone.
        2. Kenneth
          Kenneth 18 March 2016 10: 46
          0
          Do you want to talk about conspiracy theory? Of course, financing is good, but in addition to financing, certain social conditions and certain people taking leadership are needed. In the case of the Commune, it was such a hodgepodge, both politically and socially. There was even a wild Pole.
          1. Rivares
            Rivares 18 March 2016 17: 25
            +1
            Quote: Kenneth
            In the case of the Commune, it was such a hodgepodge, both politically and socially. There was even a wild Pole.

            Maidan. One to one.
            1. Rastas
              Rastas 18 March 2016 20: 15
              -2
              The revolt of the slaves of Spartacus is also the Maidan, paid for by the British crown or the State Department?
              1. Fat
                Fat 19 March 2016 01: 19
                +1
                Quote: Rastas
                The revolt of the slaves of Spartacus is also the Maidan, paid for by the British crown or the State Department?

                Well, if you laugh, so in a voice! The uprising failed because of the complete ignorance on the part of these institutions, due to their absence during the named period in the information and economic sphere ...
                "What, the chapel is me ...." (c) Shurik
    3. Rastas
      Rastas 18 March 2016 20: 05
      0
      The commune of Paris is a rebellion of the people against the arbitrariness of French capitalism, which at that time had degenerated into imperialism.
  2. crasever
    crasever 18 March 2016 07: 15
    +2
    French "fat cats", seeking to suppress the Commune, quickly conspired with their recent enemies - the Germans (occupiers !!!), and they released a huge mass of French prisoners of war to kill fellow citizens ...
  3. parusnik
    parusnik 18 March 2016 07: 36
    +3
    Here .. the other Alexander Samsonov writes .. everything is clear ... Thank you, we are waiting for the continuation ..
    1. Army soldier2
      Army soldier2 18 March 2016 10: 37
      +4
      I am reading an article - interesting and informative. I read it by author Alexander Samsonov. Pleasantly surprised!
      Apparently, during the industrial revolution, it was not easy for ordinary people in all countries to live, to put it mildly.
      What drew attention. Over ten years, food prices rose by 20-30%, which was one of the reasons for the social explosion. Interestingly, what about the year 2006?
      1. Rivares
        Rivares 18 March 2016 17: 35
        +1
        Quote: Army 2
        Interestingly, how have we been since 2006?

        To detonate, you also need a detonator. With white ribbons, parmesan, Nemtsov did not work.
        The explosive mixture is probably not ...
  4. King, just king
    King, just king 18 March 2016 08: 40
    0
    The author writes in stamps. Why rewrite the nonsense of others?
    I watched a series of films about the reconstruction of Paris. If it were not for the restructuring of the city, now Paris would be chaotically built up with one-two-storey huts. Workers, of course, so for the workers' sake the capital of the country should be a "favela"?

    All the wonders of art, all the temptations of luxury, all the variety of pleasures are concentrated in Paris. But all this luxury, all wealth, all miracles are locked, squeezed like a hoop, blocked in a huge anthill. Around the city of the propertied classes the city of workers stands menacingly. One is dressed in lace, silk, velvet, diamonds; the other has nothing but a blouse to cover his nakedness

    What are the representatives of the bourgeoisie, the author? Quote from Zhelubovskaya. "The collapse of the Second Empire and the emergence of the Third Republic" !!! I read it about a year ago.
    1. Alex
      Alex 18 March 2016 11: 06
      +7
      The problem was not in the very restructuring of Paris as such (cities are growing, the way of life and way of life are changing - everything is clear here), but at whose expense it will be done. The author directly pointed out: the bourgeois wanted to live in luxury (and, preferably, separately from the "laborers"), but did not want to pay for it. Doesn't it look like anything?
      1. King, just king
        King, just king 18 March 2016 15: 39
        0
        Something cause and effect in your post does not fit. THIS (demolished almost the majority of the city) was done at the expense of the treasury of France and the treasury of the city of Paris.
        1. Alex
          Alex 18 March 2016 16: 47
          +2
          Actually, I proceeded from the logic of the article and the information provided in it. But I do not know how these costs were then compensated.
          1. King, just king
            King, just king 19 March 2016 16: 26
            0
            "Alex"!
            Strange approach. So after all, the treasury is needed to carry out "uncompensated" projects, such as medicine, education, monuments, etc. etc.
  5. Sargaras
    Sargaras 18 March 2016 09: 28
    -4
    It is believed that this very Parisian commune is nothing more than a rampant marginal element, which, incidentally, was crushed by ordinary French peasants dressed in soldier's overcoats.
    1. Pig
      Pig 18 March 2016 09: 39
      +1
      "" simple French peasants ""
      they were specially recruited in the most bearish corners - the most illiterate and clogged ...
      1. Kenneth
        Kenneth 18 March 2016 12: 30
        +3
        You write nonsense. Most of the army of Versailles consisted of prisoners of war released by the Germans from under Sedan. Nobody collected any peasants.
      2. Kenneth
        Kenneth 18 March 2016 12: 30
        0
        You write nonsense. Most of the army of Versailles consisted of prisoners of war released by the Germans from under Sedan. Nobody collected any peasants.
  6. Kenneth
    Kenneth 18 March 2016 10: 15
    +3
    If the Communards were less likely to breed among themselves, they would have every chance of rushing to Versailles and throwing Thiers, whose government was extremely weak after the defeat. But negotiating with the Germans is a matter of technology.
    1. Rastas
      Rastas 18 March 2016 20: 52
      +3
      The main reasons for the defeat of the Paris Commune are as follows:
      1. The communards did not feel like masters of the country, and the council of the Paris Commune clearly looked like a municipal government body. There were, of course, attempts to create some kind of association of communes, but the Paris Commune was only one of them. And she should not be an ordinary participant, but the national center of this association.
      2. The fighters of the National Guard did not have enough experience in participating in battles.
      3. Paris communards did not take advantage of the fact that the main office of the Bank of France was located in the territory controlled by it. But through it one could manage the country's banking system. In Paris, the main vault of the central bank was located, in which almost 3 billion francs were concentrated. The government of Thiers, who fled to Versailles, did not manage to take out these values.
      4. The commune did not enter into an alliance with the peasantry, underestimated its strength, and the peasantry did not understand the meaning of the commune.
      1. Fat
        Fat 19 March 2016 01: 25
        0
        Bl-in, in order to understand "What went wrong" in tactics, it is enough to read "April Theses" by Vladimir Ilyich ...
  7. Alex
    Alex 18 March 2016 11: 13
    +8
    J. Duchene wrote in 1869 g.: “Banks, credit societies, steamboats, railways, large metallurgical and gas plants, all any significant societies are concentrated in the hands of 183 entities. These 183 entities own the huge capital they manage. These capitals represent in shares and bonds over 20 billion francs. ”


    In his book, I. Maisky, describing the Munich events of 1938, mentioned the powerful French lobby "200 families". It seems that the situation has not changed much over the past century.
  8. Rastas
    Rastas 18 March 2016 20: 03
    +4
    Victor Hugo:

    Behind the barricades, the street is empty,
    Washed by the blood of the victims, and sinful and holy,
    An eleven-year-old boy was captured!
    “Are you a communard too?” - “Yes, sir, not the last!”
    "Well! - the captain decided. “The end for all is execution.”
    Wait, the turn will come! ” And the little boy looked
    On flashes of shots, on the death of fighters and brothers.
    Suddenly he said, without losing courage:
    “Let mother give me the watch!”
    “Run away?” - “No, I'll be back!” - “Yeah, if you don't believe me,
    You scared, tomboy! Where is your house? ” “At the fountain.”
    And he vowed to return to the captain.
    “Well, hell with you! The trick is not thin! ”
    The platoon burst out laughing over the boy’s flight.
    With the wheezing of those who perish, the laugh of victory was mixed.
    But the laughter ceased when suddenly the boy was pale
    He appeared to them, harsh pride not melting,
    He went up to the wall and shouted: “Here I am!”
    And death was ashamed, and the captive was released.
    Child! May the hurricane raging in the universe
    I mixed good with evil, with the hero of the scoundrel, -
    What made you fight to the end?
    An innocent soul was a beautiful soul.
    You took two steps over the terrible abyss:
    Step to the mother - one and the execution - the second.
    There was an adult shamed, and the boy was a hero.
    Nobody has the right to call you to responsibility.
    But the morning rays, childish fun
    All future life, freedom and spring
    You preferred to come to friends and stand against the wall.
    And eternal glory kissed you.
  9. iury.vorgul
    iury.vorgul 19 March 2016 10: 07
    0
    In my opinion, does the author write about modern Russia?
    1. Vladislav 73
      Vladislav 73 23 March 2016 08: 25
      0
      Quote: iury.vorgul
      In my opinion, does the author write about modern Russia?

      It was precisely this opinion that got me upset. Regarding social tension, it’s like tracing paper from modern Russia request
  10. Warrior2015
    Warrior2015 19 March 2016 17: 34
    +2
    A cubic meter of firewood, which cost 1850 francs in 1,6, increased in price to 1870 francs in 1,94, while oil for the same period rose from 1,16 to 1,60 francs per kilogram.
    Just a fucking price increase! 30% for 20 YEARS !!! Author, do you happen to live in Russia, where do we have 20% YEAR prices rise?

    For the tinsmen of Paris the situation was even worse
    But the tinsmiths from Calcutta - the situation is so gloomy, and for 200 years, and nothing. And the lovers from Zanzibar are also not so hot ... But then they took it right and rebelled, by chance?