25+ Best Relationship Memes |
So, Toasties: which one of you is the HANDMAIDEN and which is the FEUDAL LORD? A couple of days ago I texted my partner, 'MILKMAID. which is weird because he's 60, Ovie has 47 goals, and all that truly matters in. Seven, often southern noblewomen who come to the North to secure marriage alliances. A major difference between the Free Folk and the feudal society of the Seven There is no social stratification between high-born lords and low- born under King-Beyond-the-Wall Mance Rayder for the common goal of forcing. peteseeger said: the handmaiden/feudal lord meme is a result of a post that got the I got death threats a couple months into being on tumblr because I said I It highlights how ludicrous that post was and how obsessed with.
But this varying "distribution of persons", depending on their varying assignment in production is also connected with a distribution of the means of labor: The capitalist, the owner of the latifundium, and the estate owner control these means of labor factory and machinery, the estate and the compulsory shops, the soil and structureswhile the worker has no instruments of production aside from his own labor power; the slave does not even own his own body, nor does the peasant serf.
It is therefore obvious that the varying function of classes in production is based on the distribution of instruments of production among them. These instruments of production serve the capitalists as tools for the obtaining of profits, as means of exploiting the working class. They are not mere things, they are things in a special social significance, in that they here serve not only as means of production, but also as a means of exploiting wage laborers.
In other words, this thing expresses the relation between classes, or, in the words of Engels, these class relations are bound up with the thing. In the last analysis, this thing, in our example, is capital.
The special form of production relations, therefore, existing in the relations between classes, is determined by the varying function of these groups of persons in the production process, and the distribution of the means of production among them.
This fully conditions the distribution of the products.
The capitalist obtains profit because he owns instruments of production: The class relations in production, i. It is they which determine in the first place the outline of society, its system or, in the words of Marx, its economic structure. Now, the production relations are extremely numerous, and varied. If we recall, furthermore, that we are considering the distribution of products as a portion of reproduction, it also becomes clear that the relations between persons in the process of distribution are also included in the production relations.
In a complicated system of society there are innumerable such relations, such as, between merchants, bankers, clerks, brokers, tradesmen of all kinds, workers, consumers, salesmen, traveling salesmen, messengers, manufacturers, ship-owners, sailors, engineers, unskilled workers, etc. All are interwoven in the most varied combinations, the most peculiar patterns, the most unusual confusions.
But the fundamental scheme of all these patterns is important; namely, the relations between the great groups known as social classes. The system of society will depend on the classes included in society, their mutual position, their functions in the production process, the distribution of instruments of labor. We have a capitalist society if the capitalist is on top; we have a slave system if the estate owner is on top, and in control of everything; we have a dictatorship of the proletariat if the workers are on top.
To be sure, even the absence of all classes would not mean the disappearance of society, but merely the disappearance of class society. There were no classes, for example, in the primitive communist society, nor will there be any in the communist society of the future. We observed above that the production relations change with the social technology; a glance at the actual historical development of any society will be sufficient to show that this principle also holds good in such production relations as are simultaneously class relations.
Great shifts of classes have taken place, for instance, before the eyes of the present generation. Not many decades ago, there was still a considerable class of independent artisans, which subsequently declined because of the growth of the machine technology, and, consequently of large-scale production, of the factory system. Simultaneously, the proletariat increased, as did also the industrial upper bourgeoisie, while the small artisan disappeared.
The class alignment necessarily changed, for with the changes in technology there are also associated changes in the distribution of labor in society; certain functions in production disappear or fall into the background; new functions arise, etc.
It will not surprise us to find the rural classes predominating in such a society, with the class of country squires standing at the head. On the other hand, in a society with highly developed productive forces, we shall find a mighty industry, cities, factories, villages, etc.
The landed proprietor yields place to the industrial bourgeoisie or other sections of the bourgeoisie; the proletariat becomes a great power. A constantly progressing realignment of classes may totally change the form of society. This will particularly be the case if the class at the bottom comes out on top, a process which is to be described in the following chapters. For the present we shall merely state that class relations also - the most important part of production relations - change with the changes in the productive forces.
With the discovery of a new instrument of warfare, the firearm, the whole internal organization of the army was necessarily altered, the relations within which individuals compose an army and can work as an army were transformed, and the relation of different armies to one another was likewise changed. We thus see that the social relations within which individuals produce, the social relations of production, are altered, transformed, with the change and development of the material means of production, of the forces of production" Karl Marx: With an alteration of this condition, the social organization also will necessarily change sooner or later.
Social organization is therefore in unstable equilibrium 9 at all points where the social forces of production are growing" 10 or falling, N. The totality of the production relations, therefore, is the economic structure of society, or its mode of production. This is the human labor apparatus of society, its "real basis". A consideration of the production relations will show that they depend on the manner in which the persons involved are distributed in space.
The relation is expressed in the fact that each personas already shown, has his place as a screw in the mechanism of a watch.
It is precisely this definite situation in space, in the "theater of labor" that makes of this arrangement, this distribution, a social relation of labor. No doubt, every object is situated in space, moves in space, but here men are joined, particularly, by the definiteness of their working positions, as it were. This is a material relation like that of the parts in the mechanism of a watch. We must not overlook the fact that the critics of historical materialism are constantly confusing terms because the word "material" has a number of meanings.
Thus, the historical process, for instance, is traced back to material "needs" or "interests", whereupon the refutation of historical materialism is proclaimed, since it has been rightly shown that "interest" is' not a material thing in the philosophical sense of the word, but obviously psychical.
We admit that interest is not matter; but it is too bad that even certain "advocates" of historical materialism who usually associate Marx with some bourgeois philosopher, since they are opposed to philosophical materialism are guilty of such a confusion in terms. Max Adler, for instance, who weds Marx to Kant, regards society as a totality of psychical interactions; for him everything is psychical. Here is a specimen of this nature: Zetterbaum is confused by the fact that machines are not made by soulless men.
But as men themselves are not begotten by corpses, he considers everything in society to be a product of spirit without body - a very virtuous spirit therefore. It follows that the machine is psychical, and society has no "matter". But is obvious that sinful flesh is somewhere involved, for even a sinless spirit could not beget men and machines.
Furthermore, a fleshless spirit would not even desire to occupy himself with such affairs.
Cocktail Hour: Open Thread
What remains of the "relation"? We must again point out to Herr Zetterbaum that the solar system is a material system; that we call it a system because its parts sun, earth, other planets are in definite relations to each other, occupy a certain position in space at any given moment. Just as the totality of planets, in certain relations with each other, constitutes the solar system, so the totality of persons in production relations constitutes the economic structure of society, its material basis, its personal apparatus.
Kautsky, who sometimes confuses technology and economy most sinfully, also makes some very vulnerable statements. All such claims may be answered by the following passage from the arch-bourgeois, Werner Sombast. This professor, who is quite free from materialism, tells us: The external forms of the operations of the economic life are its body; the forms of economic and factory operation, the most varied organizations within which and with the aid of which the economic process continues.
Of course, the entire economic structure of society must be included under the head of economic form and economic organization, being therefore, "figuratively speaking", the body of this society. The Outlines of the Superstructure Among the remaining phases of social life which we must now consider are such phenomena as the social and political system of society the state, the organization of classes, parties, etc.
These phenomena, excepting the social and political system, are frequently referred to as our "mental" or "spiritual culture". The word culture comes from a Latin verb meaning "to cultivate". Culture therefore means everything that is the work of human hands, in the wider sense, i.
It cannot be understood unless it be interpreted as a portion of this general life-process. Yet, certain bourgeois scholars would isolate this "mental culture" absolutely from the life-process of society, i. Only when " life, rising above its necessities and utilities, has assumed a higher level than these things, only then have we a culture" pp. In other words, culture is a portion of life, but is not determined by the necessities and utilities of life, i.
It is obvious that such a point of view would lead to a renunciation of science and an acceptance of faith. Note that Weber's chief proof is the fact that "we feel". A useful transition to a consideration of this "mental culture" is a study, in broad outline, of the social and political structure of society, which is directly determined, as we shall see, by its economic structure. The most obvious expression of the social and political structure of society is the state power, which will be understood if we understand the necessary condition for the existence of a society of classes.
For in such a society the various classes must have different interests. Some possess all; others, practically nothing; some are in command, and appropriate to themselves the products of the work of others; others obey, carry out the commands of strangers, and yield up what they have produced with their own hands. The position of the classes in production and distribution, i.
As everything in the universe is the result of the conditions that bring it about, the various situations of the classes must result in a difference in their interests, aspirations, struggles, even in their death struggles. It is interesting to observe the nature of the equilibrium existing in the structure of a society of classes.
The fact that such a society, in which, in the words of an English statesman, there are in reality two "nations" classescan exist at all, without danger of disintegrating at any moment, is of itself very striking. Yet there is no doubt of the existence of class societies. In some way or other, a unifying bond has been attained in such societies, a sort of hoop holding together the staves of the barrel; this hoop is the state, an organization of all society, with its threads, retaining them all in the system of its tentacles.
If we should ask how the state originates, we should not be satisfied with any answer attributing a supernatural origin to the state, nor with any declaration that the state stands beyond all classes; for the simple reason that classless persons do not exist in a class society. There would therefore be no material with which to construct an organization standing outside of all classes or above all classes, no matter how often this may be asserted by bourgeois scholars. The organization of the state is altogether an organization of the "ruling class".
It now becomes of interest to determine which is the ruling class, for we shall then understand which class is represented by the state power, which subjugates all the other classes by means of its strength, its force, its mental system, its widely ramified apparatus. The question is not difficult to answer. In capitalist society, we find the capitalist class dominant in production; it would be absurd to expect to find the proletariat permanently dominant in the state, for one of the fundamental conditions of equilibrium would now be lacking; either the proletariat would also seize control of production, or the bourgeoisie would seize the state power.
The existence of a society with a specific economic structure also involves the adaptation of its state organization; in other words, the economic structure of society also determines its state and political structure. The state, furthermore, is a huge organization embracing an entire nation and ruling many millions of men. This organization needs a whole army of employees, officials, soldiers, officers, legislators, jurists, ministers, judges, generals, etc.
This structure is a precise reflection of the conditions in production. Following upon the manufacturer comes the factory superintendent himself, often a capitalist; the same is true of the ministers of a capitalist state, its politicians in high places.
agnost, can u pls explain the feudal lord handmaiden thing
I thought it would be fun to make a regular journal comic. Also, I just wanted to tell Jaime, my fiancee, about how much I love her and how amazing she is.
To me, Feudal Nerds is a love letter to her, with illustrations to show her incredible cuteness. Why did you insist on calling it Feudal Nerds instead? As soon as I thought of Feudal Nerds, I knew it was perfect. It stems from an obscure meme about lesbians being either feudal lords or handmaidens. We used to joke that we were a feudal lord-feudal lord couple, minus the hierarchy, so Feudal Nerds is a play on that.
As an artist, what piece of work are you most proud of? I started out with the intention to keep FN going for at least a year, and I passed that milestone a few months ago. I have fun working on it every week, and I think my skills as an artist and storyteller have improved noticeably. My background is in zines, and I only started making comics regularly a few years ago. Before that, I mostly wrote poetry with abstract illustrations or collage.
You just moved from Florida to Wisconsin. What has that change been like for you? Honestly, so far so good. We moved back here to be closer to family and to take advantage of career opportunities. Now we just need to find an apartment, because staying in a hotel with two dogs and two cats is already old. You and Jaime just got engaged! Who proposed to who and how did they ask? Jaime proposed to me! It was in the woods, it was perfect, we both cried. I feel very lucky. The downer part is, I never realized how much planning weddings take.
We need rain contingency plans and and a flat place to put tables and actual coordination for the food and so on and so forth.