continuously increasing and demand the further perfection of the labor efforts.
The social system, having named the Soviet and socialist one, was a result of realization into life the grandiose idea conception of the world's reconstruction on the definite principles. This idea has been stated in the most accurate form in "The Communist Manifesto", which has been written as far back one and half century ago by Marx and Engels. Its essence was consisted in that in result of the progressive economical development, the capitalistic system gives up to satisfy constantly the rising requirements of a society and will have to be changed by socialism – such social system, which would provide the further progress and in spite of all this, it would combine with the social equality and justice. The industrial proletariat must be the motive force of the same transformation, which is capable to promote further the development of the productive forces of the society. And this proletariat, by the same token, will fulfill his world-wide historical mission. It is no wonder, that for the class, whom "nothing to lose, except his own chains", such idea could not be delighted with all his heart and soul. And the successful (on the face of it) attempt of its realization in the country, where the bourgeois system still evidently did not reach his flourishing, created(gave) the idea of illusion in the brains (minds) of many millions of people, that it is possible, anyhow, to manipulate every social processes in the interests of the working masses.
To the large regret, in result of a break-down of the Soviet socialist system, not only the complete discredit of the above-indicated conception in the minds of the overwhelming majority of its former supporters (that is quite naturally) took its place, but also the refusal from that theoretical foundation, on which it was attempted to build. In fact, "they splashed out a baby with water". Meanwhile, the conception of the dialectical materialism (not likely ignoramuses attempted to mock at it), still it was not disproved by anybody and it is presented by itself the integral and the most logical system of views on the surrounding world. Another thing, that it is enough complicated for a comprehension and it supposes the essential expenses of the intellectual efforts. If it was so simply around and, if there was, whatever, the essential contradictions, so it would be easily for us to live in the world. But not, it can be in no way, the eternal struggle for the existence with the similar to the other people. The question is in another aspect: is it real, in general, the concept of socialism, that is, the social justice.
In order to give a serious and convincing enough answer for this question, first of all, it should be found the logical mistake in that theoretical conception, which Karl Marx proposed. Here, the challenge is in, that all his main published works on the given problem contained, mainly, only the final results of his investigations. Those works, in which the inner mechanism of the social processes was revealed, almost 100 years remained only the object of "the gnawing mice critics". Only in 1933, the archives of Marx and Engels were transported from Hitlerite Germany to the USSR. But, as far, the publication of the significant manuscripts was carried out only in the beginning of the 60-es years. However, these manuscripts aroused the considerable interest only in the West, among the most progressive representatives of the social conception such as, for example, Erich Fromm. The Soviet scientists in the field of the social sciences and ideologists (that, though, was more frequently, one and the same), simply ignored the most valuable conceptions, having expressed by Marx. And these conceptions were presented a serious danger for that conception of the socialistic idea, which was canonized in the USSR. Meanwhile, an attentive reading of the Marx's manuscripts admits to comprehend, in what that the very his theoretical mistake consists in, the realization of which cost the mankind into the rivers of blood and the decades of millions of the ruined fates.
Having decided to put a challenge before him, Marx based on the absolutely undisputable bases, having given the integral notion on the common regularities of the human society development. The first from the given bases consist in, that the people's satisfaction of the most essential needs (in meals, clothes, habitation) lies in the basis of the people's life. A man is obliged to satisfy all these necessities, having carried out the corresponding activity for this. The essence of such activity is a labor that is getting one's living for existence by the matter transformation of the natural environment. Simultaneously, in the process of a labor, the transformation of a man himself also happens. In result of this, the new necessities appear at him. And these necessities are continuously increasing and demand the further perfection of the labor efforts. Therefore, the basis of the human society development, as a process of the continuous appearance of all new various necessities of people and all these necessities' satisfaction is the increase of production of the material values. In this, the essence contains, supposed by Marx of the materialistic conception of the productive forces development of a society, which is practically impossible to disprove.
But the productive forces development, as it is well-known to everybody, who has studied the theoretical heritage of the classics of the Marxism, – this is only one of the objective contradictions sides, lying in the basis of the human civilization development. In the capacity of the other side, as it is known, the relations of production come forward. However, what they are presented by themselves, in reality, Marx practically does not explain in none of the published works by him. It is quite impossible seriously to consider the sufficient explanation the phrase, taken from the introduction to "The Critics of the Political Economy". As you know, for the comprehension of the relations of production essence, as some other complicated social phenomenon, it is necessary the historical analysis, that is the essence study of their origin and the further development during the prolonged period of time. And Marx brilliantly made such analysis (unfortunately, only in his earlier manuscript works).
In his works, Marx was able, in the common features, to detect the inner mechanism itself of the social stratification of a society. And, first of all, he has subjected the process of the productive forces be the analysis, and he has shown, that the social division of labor is the main condition of such development and its corresponding form, that is the distribution among people of those and other labor functions, fixing for them the specific types of activity. Though the given conception had been expressed still, as long ago, before Marx, in particular, be the founder of the English political economy, Adam Smith, however, for all this, the division of labor was considered only, from the point of view, of the economical development of a society. At the same time, Marx has not shown, that the process of the social division of labor is, simultaneously, the basic reason of the social stratification of a society into the big groups, which are considerably distinguished between each other by the character of their necessities and interests.
In the written, in common, with F. Engels manuscript "The German Ideology", Marx has made a fundamental conclusion. This conclusion says, that most significant simultaneously, with the development of the productive forces of a society, the growth of satisfaction of the people's needs and variety increase of all these necessities "for as soon as, the distribution of labor comes into being, each man has a particular, exclusive sphere of activity, which is forced upon him and from which he cannot escape…This fixating of social activity, this consolidation of what we ourselves produce into an objective power above us, growing out of our control, thwarting our expectations, bringing to naught our calculations, is one of the chief factors in historical development up till now. The social power, e.g., the multiplied productive force, which arises through the co-operation of different individuals, as it is determined by the division of labor, appears to these individuals, since their co-operation is not voluntary, but has come about naturally, not as their own united power, but as an alien force existing outside them, of the origin and goal of which they are ignorant, which they, thus, cannot control, which, on the contrary, passes through a peculiar series of phases and stages independent of the will and the action of man, nay even being the prime governor of these."1 The adducted statement, without exaggeration, is quite possible to name the key to the essence comprehension of the social contradictions, the social life of a society, on the whole.
Simultaneously, Marx, in general has also has developed the conception, which sufficiently strictly and convincingly explains the social antagonisms reasons in a society. The essence of this conception consists in, that in result of the social division of labor, which having carried the spontaneous character happens the rupture between the interests of the separate people and the interests of a society, as a whole. Every man tries to satisfy his living needs, which are the condition of his existence. The consumption of those or other welfares is a form of such satisfaction. But the society's interests of on the whole, consist in, exactly, in the contrary, - in that, in order the people would create all these welfares. Still, the people's vital activity was passing in the framework of the primitive communities, the contradictions between the production and the consumption were absolutely absent, or they were suppressed by the community's psychology, as they could lead to the destruction of such communities under the conditions of the extreme scarcity of means to the existence. When, in result of beginning process of the social division of labor, the excess of the produced products began to appear, and after that the breaking off the communities has been followed the communities and mutual relations between the people began to acquire the more and more contradicting character.
Fixing for every man the definite and specific activity has led to that, the large part of the necessary for his existence products he had to receive in exchange of his proper(own) labor activity. Therefore, the existence of a private person began to depend on a great number of other people, each of them, this or another way of manner, participated in the production of the combined social product. As a result, the relations of production, distributions, exchange and consumption of the material welfares, having connected with a society into the united economical system, have made much stronger than a separate individual, submitted him to itself. This took its place, because the product of a man's labor, before serving the satisfaction of his own needs, became from now on, began to serve the other people. For all this, the separate worker has brought into the product more and more less his part, for it, a number of people, having participated in its production, was continuously increasing. And the more quantity of the total labor put by the people in the produced product by them, the more value this product became for a society. Such product, having produced already not for the direct consumption, but for the exchange for another products, as though, it accumulates alive work and is transformed into the material work, having, now, the social value. For all this, but a man himself loses such value, more and more transforms into a means of the material production implementation. He is interested by a society only as a partial worker, an appendage of the productive process.
This phenomenon, having risen by the spontaneous character of the social division of labor process, Marx named the alienation of labor. In the work "The Economic and Philosophical Manuscripts of 1844 year" he showed, that the alienation is a social process, for which it is characteristic the transformation a man's activity and the results of this activity into the independent force, having dominated over a man and hostile for him. The essence of the alienation of labor consists in, that the material work, that is, a product of labor, becomes for a man more important, than the alive labor, and, therefore, more important and for the carrier of this labor, that is, for another man. The products, as though "are being wedged themselves" in the relations between people and they intermediate these
relations. Correspondingly, the alienation of labor means a man's alienation from a society, from nature, from other man.
Objectively, the alienation of labor is the inevitable result of the spontaneous process of division of labor in the sphere of the material production. The medieval workman, for example, made himself this or that product and exchanged it for other products, which were necessary for him. In the epoch of the earlier capitalism, the manufactured worker, having made the manual labor, participated in the product making of the joint activity of many workers. For all this, he got as the remuneration only the minimum means of subsistence. But a worker is only the appendage of a machine, a simple agent of the productive process at the contemporary mechanized enterprise. Now, a labor of great number of people is put in every product. However, all these people are needed to a society, mainly, only in such quality. A labor activity loses for them the human, that is, the social meaning; it transfers, exclusively, in the condition of a support of their physical existence.
Thus, the continuous process of the alienation of labor raises more and more complete alienation of the partial worker from the social purposes and values. “…a worker, – Marx wrote, on this occasion, – is related to the product of labor as to an alien object. For it is clear that, according to this premise, the more the worker exerts himself in his work, the more powerful the alien, objective world becomes which he brings into being over against himself, the poorer he and his inner world become, and the less they belong to him... The worker places his life in the object; but now it no longer belongs to him, but to the object”2.
In the end, the alienation of labor means a man's alienation from his own human essence, which is aroused, first of all, in the creative activity. The main place in a man's consciousness and behavior, in this case, objectively occupies the consumers' activity, reflecting his biological, that is, in fact, animal essence. The worker, by expression of Marx, “feels himself only when he is not working; when he is working, he does not feel himself. He is at home when he is not working and not at home when he is working”3.
> >
The people's alienation from the products of the labor activity, having aroused by the separation of such activity, by no means, is not absolute. The fact of the alienation itself has already supposed, that the product made by the workers, passes quite to another people, those, who do not make it, but they have a possibility to appropriate, owing to their specific position in the system of the social division of labor.
While, these people could provide themselves only the minimum quality of the material welfares, nobody, except them themselves could not appropriate all these welfares. But already the appearance at the primitive people the surpluses of the made products over the physiologically permissible consumption's minimum, has created the possibility redistribution of these surpluses. But everyone knows, the more a man was limited himself by a circle of the specialized activity, the less possibilities were left at him for other occupations, the stronger his dependence was from surrounding him the social relations. As far as, the process of the social division of labor carries the spontaneous character, there were always people, having sought to appropriate to themselves the surpluses of the alien labor activity products, by means of the armed violence, cunning, superstitions and prejudices use. Having used by their superiority, they gradually occupied a place in the social division of labor system, straight opposite to those, who directly made manufactured the material welfares. The fixation by these people for themselves the particular, privileged position took its place, because the specific relation between people appeared in a society, which submitted to itself all the rest relations.
K. Marx has described the essence of the given relation in the following way: “… So through estranged labor man not only produces his relationship to the object and to the act of production as to alien and hostile powers; he also produces the relationship in which other men stand to his production and product, and the relationship in which he stands to these other men. Just as he creates his own production as a loss of reality, a punishment, and his own product as a loss, a product which does not belong to him, so he creates the domination of the non-producer over production and its product. Just as he estranges from himself his own activity, so he confers upon the stranger and activity which does not belong to him”4.
And this is the basic economic relation, inherent to a society on the whole period of the civilization's development – the relation of the private property. The content of this relation consists in, that each man has his own source (or several sources) of the material welfares receiving getting, without which, he could not exist. For all this, some people have the independent sources of subsistence, the other have nothing and they are obliged to sell their working force to the owners, receiving in exchange the means of subsistence.
This is the essence, in the common features, having suggested by Marx, the conception of the social society's development, sufficiently convincingly having explained the basic reasons of the property inequality, the classes' antagonisms and social cataclysms, the different forms of violence in the relations between the peoples, the peoples' communities and even the states. The alienation between the people, conditioned by the property relations, pierces through the whole society, even, frequently, on the family's level, not saying already on such social communities, as the collective body, the settlement group, or the whole nation. The whole history of the mankind – these are the non-stop conflicts between the people, the violence on all the levels of the interrelations between them. In the numerous revolutions and the civil wars, people mercilessly have killed each other not in the name of the proclaimed ideas by them, but for the sake of the redistribution of the social wealth, that is, the material labor. In the force of the universal character of the redistribution labor process in the material production, having aroused by this process, the alienation was distributed in all the spheres of the mankind's life. The criminal offences, prostitution, narcotism, obscene abuse and the other forms of the alienation are typically for any society up to the present
time.
Having proposed the idea of socialism, Marx has made an attempt to discover the inner purpose of the self-development of the human society and to reveal the ways of the given purpose's achievement. As the last one, he has considered not socialism, as some artificially constructed social system, but a man, the living subject, having a possibility to realize aspiration for the happiness in a form of the all-round development of their own abilities. The similar state of a society, at which each person can realize himself, as the creative subject, Marx has named it as the practical or the positive humanism. He has comprehended socialism, as the long-termed process of the mankind's transition from a class society to such humanism.
The essence of this process Marx has considered, as the historical alienation of labor overcoming or, that the same, as the positive abolition of the private property. It means the fundamental correlation changing of the material (economical) and the spiritual (human) wealth, as in the system of the objective conditions of the people life, well as in the system of the value orientations of these people. In this case, as Marx wrote: “It can be seen how the rich man and the wealth of human need take the place of the wealth and poverty of political economy. The rich man is simultaneously the man in need of a totality of vital human expression; he is a man in whom his own realization exists as inner necessity, as need. Given socialism, not only man’s wealth but also his poverty acquires a human and hence a social significance. Poverty is the passive bond which makes a man experience his greatest wealth – the other man – as need.”5.
This idea of a man's transformation into the greatest wealth for other people, the idea the appropriation not of some kind thing, but a man, as the main value, that is, the appropriation of all his spiritual wealth, and, at the present day, is one of tops of the humanistic ideas of the mankind.
However, as it is well-known, a road is paved to the hell by good intentions. Marx did not want to wait for patiently, when capitalism itself would come to its natural death. So, he has suggested a conception, according to which the proletariat, having gained a victory over bourgeoisie in the struggle for the political power, abolishes the private property, and, simultaneously, and opposition – the alien labor, that is, it abolishes itself, as a class. Practically, it means, that the industrial workers are capable to collectivize the means of production and to provide the subsequent development of the material productive forces. Exactly, here, the basic inner contradiction of the theory of the “scientific” socialism is based on. The essence of the indicated contradiction consists in, that the industrial proletariat objectively is not capable to realize the world-wide and historical mission, as though predestined him, from the Marx's point of view, by the course of the historical development of a society. But, you know, in order to take in his hands the total means of production and move their development in advance, it is necessary to possess the whole those wealth, which has been produced by the mankind, that is, the culture. However, the industrial workers are the class, the most alien, in the force of the spontaneous character of the process of the social division of labor, not only from the means of production, and, but from the main achievements of the world culture. Actually, the circle of their values is limited, mainly, by the sphere of the material welfares consumption.
There would not be a different aspect, while the worker occupies the quite definite and specific place, as a partial worker, the appendage of a machine. As the outstanding Russian philosopher G. Batishchev wrote, as far as back, in 1969, the division of the activity "is nothing other then, as the division of a man himself, the transformation of the human individuals in "the partial individuals". So, at such "breaking up", the man's concreteness for his theoretical reconstruction demands the collection and the critical synthesis of many and many mutilated, crippled individuals,
having become "the fragments of a man"6.
It is quite impossible to say, that Marx has not seen the indicated contradiction, especially, that he himself and has revealed the essence of the alienation, and he has shown, up to what level of the spiritual poverty the alienation of labor reduces the hired worker. But not saying on the results of the worker's alienation process from the social purposes and values, Marx has made a paradoxical conclusion: “So that it might give birth to its inner wealth, human nature had to be reduced to this absolute poverty”7. This argument, not having completely confirmed by the course of the historical society's development, and Marx has assumed, without any proofs, as the basis of his socially-political theory. But that person, who was "nothing", would not be able to become not only "everything", but even
"someone", while he would not change his place in a system of the social division of the labor, while he would not be the hired partial worker. The proletariat, alien from his social purposes and values, is not objectively capable for the independent creative activity, as the social (but not working) force. So, it is confirmed by the multiform bitter experience of our society's development at the prolongation of many decades.
Thus, the conception itself of "the building" that, or another social system is completely absurd, by its essence. So, it is quite impossible to build the normally functioning human society, as the same, it is quite impossible, for example, artificially to create the living organism, as far as the progressive development of this society is quite possible only, as the naturally historical process. It is also related and to socialism. The proletariat, having proclaimed the hegemonic force of the revolution by Bolsheviks, the ruling class of the new society, as though having possessed the basic means of production, practically, was being left in the same situation, in which he has been just before the revolution. There could not be a different aspect in a society, where the process of the capitalistic division of labor has been still much far up to its completion.
In fact, having realized his socially – economical transformations on a territory of the former Russian Empire, the Bolsheviks have carried out the grandiose social experiment, having contradicted to the basic laws of the social development. Therefore, the Soviet society, having artificially constructed by the Bolsheviks, did not have any real perspectives during its development. Yet, Hegel has suggested the remarkable thesis: " All valid is reasonable, all reasonable – is valid ". Thus, the Soviet system was non-reasonable by its essence, and this, in its turn, means, that it could not be valid, that is, quite possible to the progressive self-development. It has presented by itself nothing less than, as the realization in the tangible reality the Utopian ideas, and, that was why, it was doomed to the inevitable destruction. But, you know, if the private property has objectively been created by the process of the division of labor in the sphere of the material production, that, therefore, it is necessary, first of all, to abolish the division of labor itself, in order to abolish it. Marx, by the way, has also indicated this, though he could not show the proper consistency.
Nobody will object that, objectively, the collective people's aspiration for the happiness is the purpose of socialism. The majority of people, having participated in the mass social transformations on the one sixth part of the terrestrial globe, sincerely believed, that they acted for the welfare of the labor's people. But, in the practical reality, such kinds of transformations were nothing other than, the mass unrestrained state's violence over the huge country's population. But you know, that the people, having ruled by this state, considered, that they were capable to be in command of the global social processes, use their own discretion, as the Most High does it.
The dialectics of a society's development, as the dialectics of development of the living nature and lifeless nature, consists in the continuous beginning of the various contradictions, which are the source of such development. The social contradictions are spontaneously appeared and, as well, they are spontaneously settled in the process of the joint people's activity. No one, even the most genius man is not capable to foresee and consciously regulate them all, having all his wishes. Therefore, when the people, who have ruled the Soviet state, tried to abolish the social contradictions, which they have inherited, according their subjective consideration, the new contradictions have been appeared, and they were more complicated and have led up a society into a blind alley.
A thesis, which has been suggested by Lenin, was put on a basis of the activity, which leaders of the Bolsheviks' party have carried out the in the process of the social relations’ transformation. According to this thesis, the politics is above economics. Practically, this thesis has untied hands of “the reformers” for the realization any actions in the socially – economical sphere of a society's life, which were imagined expedient for them. Thereby, the objective laws of the social development have been completely ignored. So, the Bolsheviks have begun for the annihilation of the private property by means of the production's confiscation, especially, at the owners, and the concentration of all these means in the hands of the state. Thereby, the exchange only of many exploiters only took its place by one total exploiter, but, practically, the whole capable of the working population has been transformed into one total hired worker.
The basic direction of the social politics of the Bolshevik leadership of the USSR came out as the single-minded destruction of a society's social structure, having formed in the country by the naturally historical way. Thus, a quite new structure has been artificially created, in the exchange of it. The class relations have been completely preserved, but, for all this, the ruling class has been absent. The state has carried out all his functions, though, for all this, none from the state functionaries, up to the top ones, practically, could not appropriate to him, neither the means of production, nor the fruits of production, nor the surplus value, having created at the given factory. He has not possessed anything, besides only his post, having given an access to the definite privileges, and, in fact, he has been the same, as the hired worker, and, as all the rest capable of the working citizens.
The disintegration of the Soviet socially-economical system has been conditioned by the non-political factors (in view of the absence of some kind of the real opposition to the ruling regime), but by the unnatural character of the social production development.
So, it has been quite impossible to annihilate the Soviet system by a force, neither from outside (thanks to the nuclear parity), nor from inside (in a view of the real opposition's absence to the current regime). However, its economical potential has completely been exhausted. Having deprived of the inner stimuli to the self-development, it has been appeared to be inefficient; in fact, it has factually been rotten through completely and has been fallen into the small pieces itself. And, in result, it should not to be blamed in all this only the separate political leaders. If there have not been the ones, the other will be found out.
It follows, never the less, to do justice to the scientific honesty of the 26-years old Marx, who has tried to imagine himself, so called "the rough communism". As such, it appears in a dual form: on the one hand, the domination
of material property bulks so large that it threatens to destroy everything which is not capable of being possessed by everyone as private property; it wants to abstract from talent, etc., by force. Physical, immediate possession is the only purpose of life and existence as far as this communism is concerned; the category of worker is not abolished but extended to all men; the relation of private property remains the relation of the community to the world of things… This communism, inasmuch as it negates the personality of man in every sphere, is simply the logical expression of the private property which is this negation. Universal envy constituting itself as a power is the hidden form in which greed reasserts itself and satisfies itself... The thoughts of every piece of private property as such are at least turned against richer private property in the form of envy and the desire to level everything down; hence these feelings in fact constitute the essence of competition. The crude communist is merely the culmination of this envy and desire to level down on the basis of a preconceived minimum. It has a definite, limited measure. How little this abolition of private property is a true appropriation is shown by the abstract negation of the entire world of culture and civilization, and the return to the unnatural simplicity of the poor, unrefined man who has no needs and who has not yet even reached the stage of private property, let along gone beyond it. For crude communism the community is simply a community of labor and equality of wages, which are paid out by the communal capital, the community as universal capitalist. Both sides of the relation are raised to an imaginary universality – labor as the condition in which everyone is placed and capital as the acknowledged universality and power of the community. The first positive abolition of private property – crude communism – is therefore only a manifestation of the vileness of private property trying to establish itself as the positive community”8. That is the exactly truth, a well-known current situation, is not it?
So, only one question is left to be answered, which, I am sure, all the same, are made up their mind by very many people; but is it possible, in reality, socialism, that is, such social system, at which the private property, the exploitation of the hired labor, the considerable social inequality would not be? But, for this, as it has been above-mentioned, the division of labor will have to be abolished in the sphere of the material production, that it is presented, as quite impossible for the majority of people.
In the beginning of the XX century, the industrial division of labor in the most developed countries has been raised up such level, when the majority of the population has been turned into the industrial workers. In a pursuit for the profits, the businessmen have strived for, up to the utmost, to simplify the labor functions of the workers, to reduce all these functions to the most elementary motions. So, in result of it, the conveyor production has been appeared, having provided the production output in the large scale. But the workers themselves, the main potential of the mass production consumers, practically, could not acquire it, as their level of the consumption has been limited by the value of their working force, that is, the living wage. As a result of it, the great economical overproduction crisis – "the last ring for the old capitalism" has taken its place in the greatest capitalist countries in the end of the 20-es years.
Meanwhile, the process of such productive division of labor, practically, is not able to be continued quite endlessly. Earlier or later, it must be completed. But does it mean the above-mentioned, that, indeed, will the development of the social production be stopped? The answer for this question has been given by the course of the history already in the middle of the XX century. Thanks to the scientific and technical revolution, the former division of labor, having turned a worker into a simple appendage of the productive process, gradually cease to be the basic form of the productive forces development of a society. Thus, the exchange of the working force by the automatic devices has become, practically, more and more, possible, moreover, the necessary one, from the point of view, of the subsequent social progress.
Thus, the process of the historical alienation of labor overcoming, that is, the genius socialism, is presented itself the previous division of labor abolition. The essence of this process is expressed in the gradual displacing of the workers from the sphere of the hired labor on the basis of the basic spheres automation of the material production. Ipso facto, the premises of the gradual disappearance of the class contradictions, the practical overcoming of the alienation between people have been created, and it means, the premises of the central humanistic ideas realization, in the common features, has yet been outlined by Immanuel Kant: "A man… exists, as the aim by itself, but not only, as a means"9.
As the existing tendency, the process of a man's transformation from a means into an aim of a society's total vital activity has already been expressed, noticeably, in a number of the highly developed countries. It becomes
apparent in the considerable reduction in the number of the hired workers in the membership of the independent action population, in the gradual humanization of the social relations, in the intellectualization of the workers' occupational activity and so on. In this case, we observe non-artificially created social system, but the regular stage of a society's naturally historical development.
The humanistic social relations of the non-class type ripening is revealed not only, and even not so much in the rise of the material welfare of the basic mass of people, having engaged in the total social production, as in their transition, principally, to the new types of activity, having demanded the comprehensive knowledge, and also in the increase of the human life and human personality self-appraisal. In other words, the social significance of the live work increases in comparison with the materialized work. Among the social values, the culture is more and more is pushed into the foreground – the whole totality of the intellectual welfares, having accumulated by the mankind and also the activity on such wealth creation. Certainly, the mankind's transition to the new qualitative state is the extremely prolonged, complicated and contradictive process, which have been prolonged for many centuries, however, it already takes its place and carries the evolutionary and, consequently, irreversible, character.
R e f e r e n c e
s:
1 Marx K., Engels F.
The selective works, in the 9-th volumes, T. 2. Moscow, 1985. P. 31.
2 Marx K., Engels F.
Works. The 2-nd Edition. Vol. 42. Moscow,
1974. P. 88.
3 Ibid. p. 90.
4 Ibid. p. 96.
5 Ibid. P. 125.
6 Batishchev G.
"A Man's Active Essence, as the Philosophical Principle" // "A
Man's Problem in the Contemporary Philosophy". Moscow, 1969., p. 113.
7 Marx K., Engels F.
Works. The 2-nd Edition. Vol. 42. Moscow,
1974. P. 120.
8 Ibid. P.114-116.
9 Kant I. The Selected
Works. Vol.4. Part 1. Moscow,
1965. P.269.
А так же :
Кто вправе простить преступника
Т. Кадышева, С. Ширинский, Белгородская областная коллегия адвокатов В переводе с греческого амнистия - это забвение, прощение. Виновному человеку свойственно надеяться на то, что его простят. Потерпевшие от преступлений воспринимают амнистию неоднозначно, а то и с ужасом. Большая часть остальных граждан безразлично относятся к актам амнистии.
плазмолемма – это
Samsung Dvd Hr 775
Основы туризма
Вступление Туризм – явление, известное каждому. Во все времена нашу планету пересекали многочисленные путешественники и первопроходцы. Но лишь недавно туризм возник как специфическая форма деятельности людей. Каждый из нас представляет себе туризм как отрасль, более или менее известную, поскольку все мы куда-то ездили и проводили отпуска вдали от дома.
Основные понятия и проблематика управления
инновационными процессами.
В сегодняшней макроэкономической ситуации в качестве основного фактора социально-экономического развития России большинство ученых и политиков рассматривают сохранившийся в стране научно-технический потенциал. В течение многих лет наука и образование в стране щедро финансировались из государственных источников, поддерживающих научные разработки по десяткам направлений, составивших гордость советской науки Даже в сегодняшнее трудное для науки время объективно признается высокий авторитет России по таким направлениям, как авиационная и космическая техника, атомная энергетика, отдельные области биотехнологий, мембраны, сверхтвердые материалы, системы распознавания образов и ряд других.
“...Мне не стало хватать его...” (о творчестве В.С.Высоцкого)
Реферат студента 16 группы ММУ №24 Соловьева Андрея 1996 год Владимир Семенович Высоцкий родился 25 января 1938 года в Москве в семье военнослужащего. В начале Великой Отечественной войны с матерью Ниной Максимовной эвакуировался в Оренбургскую область. Летом 1943 года они возвращаются в Москву. В 1955 году В.