"Interesting, I didn't expect there to be capable people, I just made a move, and they actually started to shrink all the people!" Listening to the other party's report on the phone, Wu Ling smiled lightly and put down the phone.

And what he said was naturally nothing else, it was the actions of the church.

Don't look at Shueisha's decision to cooperate with the church, but whether it is the big guy above or the ordinary members below, they will naturally not relax about the church, so after entering Magnolia from the church, their every move is under the watchful eye of Shueisha. As long as there is any abnormal behavior, Shueisha will go out for interviews, and now the other party has suddenly shrunk the manpower, which is an abnormal move for Shueisha, so it naturally needs to be reported.

And all this information was naturally reported to Lu Qing, Lu Qing knew that Wu Ling wanted to find trouble with Shueisha, so after seeing the information, it was directly fed back to Wu Ling's hands, so even if he was sitting here, he could know what he wanted to know.

"Young Master, is something wrong?" Looking at Wu Ling's expression, Shao Zikang on the side couldn't help asking. Now that he has decided to follow Wu Ling, they probably can't do big things, but with his current strength, as long as he recovers from his injury, some small things can still be done.

Of course, he also knew Wu Ling's status in Shueisha, so it wasn't his turn to do things at all, but this was just an attitude. Staying in front of such a strong man, you can't do nothing at all, such a useless subordinate, it is estimated that no one wants to take it in.

"It's nothing, Old Shao, you take care of your injuries. It is estimated that there will be some things on Yulan's side in the recent period, if it is not necessary. It's best to take a good rest during this time! Wu Ling said.

originally took in Shao Zikang, and Wu Ling was only because of the dream stone. Now that the Dream Stone has been obtained, Shao Zikang's power is dispensable for him. But since it has been stated that he wants to accept them, Wu Ling will naturally not go back on his word, he just wants the other party to do something, and Wu Ling has not thought about it at the beginning.

Although Shao Zikang also has a certain combat effectiveness, D-level martial artists can definitely resist D-level mid-level or even high-level abilities, if it was before, such combat power would still be of great help to Wu Ling. But at this level, the D-class is just a slightly more powerful ordinary person in front of Wu Ling. With his current strength, even if he didn't use potential energy, he could easily destroy dozens of D-rank abilities.

So now Shao Zikang is a bit of a chicken rib for Wu Ling, but if he really doesn't look for something, not to mention that this is a very wasteful thing, even Shao Zikang's side will be a little uneasy. Equivalent exchange is an important principle everywhere. Since Shao Zikang wants to gain his protection, there must be something to do. These things don't matter how big or small. But it can also make Shao Zikang a little more reassured.

If Shao Zikang is kept like this, it is estimated that the other party will have other thoughts in his heart. Just like Shao Zikang himself thinks, no one will raise a subordinate who only eats and does not work, and Wu Ling naturally needs to consider these.

Such an equivalence principle. Not to mention in reality, it is the most basic principle in all places. Especially in the so-called capital, this is something that everyone has to abide by.

The social basis of bourgeois ideology lies in the rearrangement of power relations. The "knights of money" replaced the dominance of the "knights of swords" in the social structure. The monarchy was "man. rights". The monarchy is "divinely granted" and is monopolized by the emperor or king. and is hereditary, privileged; And people. Rights are universal. The key is how to understand the "people" or "people" here. right".

Person. The essence of the right. It is the "universal" private ownership of property of the bourgeoisie. "All men are equal" before property rights. The "people" here refer to the capitalists, who, as the personified representatives of capital, have equal rights for each unit of capital. The original definition of "equality for all" refers to the economic sphere, affirming the property right of the same amount of capital to receive the same amount of profits. Other political, sectal. The right to teach is a generalization attached to it.

Out of circulation, capital ceases to be a living capital that can increase on its own, and is reduced to dead money. Therefore, the "equal" power of "the same amount of capital for the same amount of profit" depends on the "free" market exchange. In feudal society, the economic form of market exchange has emerged, albeit on a small scale and sporadically. why pre-capitalist market exchanges, such as the slave trade, the land trade, were associated with hierarchy; And the capitalist market exchange, which is also the labor market and the land market, is linked to freedom and equality? Obviously, the size and frequency of transactions alone cannot be explained. The bearded man's analysis in the Critique of Political Economy gives us clues to understand the problem. "In the developed system of exchange (and this superficial phenomenon confuses democracy), the bonds of human dependence, differences in blood, differences in education, etc., are in fact broken and shattered; Each person seems to be independent. This independence is generally nothing more than an illusion, or rather - in the sense of indifference to one another. freely come into contact with each other and exchange with each other in this freedom". In the capitalist economy, the former feudal aristocracy or commoners, as buyers and sellers of commodities, were only personified representatives of money or commodities, and "for the seller, a worker who buys commodities for three shillings and a king who buys commodities for three shillings have the same function and equal status - both in the form of three shillings." All the differences between them are gone. "The hierarchical differences of status stipulated by the patriarchal law of blood have lost their basis for existence.

From the divinely ordained "kingship" to the universal "man. "Right" is the progress of history, although the "man" here is the bourgeoisie. People tend to use the effective protection of private property to prove this historical progressiveness, which falls into a circular argument, because "people. . . The "right" itself is a property right to receive an equal amount of profit from the same amount of capital. In fact, from "monarchy" to "people. The historical progress of "right" is reflected in the fact that it adapts to the forward development of the productive forces.

In the early days of feudal society, bronze tools and coupled tillage were used as symbols of productivity, and the level of agricultural output was low. After the violent conquerors took possession of the land and the population. Declaring himself sovereign, he becomes the natural owner of the land and its population, as well as the output obtained by their combined production. The few nobles with whom he had a blood patriarchal relationship were divided between land and population. However, the surplus produced on this plot was shared between the monarch and the nobles, and the fief could be inherited but not transferred for sale. Theoretically, it can be retracted. Thus, the land was privately owned by the monarch alone, the few nobles had incomplete possession, and the population was more of a physical means of agricultural production like the land. The aristocracy is dependent on the monarch for existence.

With the development of agricultural labor tools to iron tools and ox ploughing, the surplus products of agricultural laborers increased. Families with strong labor force have cultivated some cultivated land in addition to their share of land, and the privatization of the peasants' share of land has accelerated, dividing the landlord class of non-governmental land annexation. The abundance of economic surpluses was able to feed a larger population, and as a result of population growth, land became scarce relative to the population, leaving no new wasteland to colonize. The passage from commoners to nobility became narrow. One is the political channel -- the imperial examination for military merits, and the other is the economic channel -- the industrialists and businessmen have accumulated money and can purchase land and property. It was obviously difficult to obtain nobility through political channels. Because the level of agricultural productivity at that time was, after all, very low, and production was only sufficient to maintain self-sufficiency, the economic surplus, which could be used as an object of industrial and commercial transactions, appeared by chance, was small, the rate of money accumulation was slow, and it was very difficult for nobility to obtain from economic channels. Moreover, under the condition that the monarch had the highest ownership of the land in the country, the land of the nobles could be confiscated under arbitrary charges. Landowners. Even large landowners were still physically attached to the monarch.

The productive forces have made a qualitative leap forward in the capitalist era: social production has become so much richer than in previous epochs that all production is aimed not at use value, but at exchange value. Capitalist market exchange is universalized to the extent that all means of production, products. Even labor itself is a commodity, and all people are only connected as personified representatives of the private ownership of commodities, and the status hierarchy of money holders loses its meaning. People's social status is measured by whether they hold money and how much money they hold, and the status hierarchy is broken. "Monarchy" to "people. right" process. It is the same process in which the feudal system of land ownership, which is linked to the hierarchy of status, evolves into the capitalist system of private ownership of property, which is itself a product of the forward development of the productive forces. This, in turn, has adapted and promoted the further development of productive forces.

In particular, the laborer acquires full ownership of his own labor capacity, "the worker is a free man, capable of disposing of his labor power as his own commodity", and "being able to dominate it, he must therefore be the owner of his own labor capacity, of his own personal freedom". This is not a complete emancipation for the laborer, but it is the first step of emancipation from personal dependence.

The bourgeois state, which adheres to the principle of market exchange, raises the banner of "freedom and equality" and tells its people: "If one becomes poor and the other becomes rich, then it is their free will, and in no way caused by economic relations, that is, by their economic relations with each other." Even inheritance and similar legal relations perpetuating the resulting inequality do not in any way impair this natural freedom and equality. In other words, the subjective will of an individual can determine the amount of personal wealth. This is certainly not true, the fact is that everyone wants to get rich, but the rich outnumber the poor. The prevailing consciousness in capitalist countries often explains the causes of poverty in terms of individual laziness, stupidity, and profligacy. The objective position of the individual in the system of relations of production (whether the individual is the owner of capital, the owner of land, or the seller of labour) is never mentioned in the position of fixing the poor in poverty.

In fact, "in the existing bourgeois society as a whole, the expression of commodities as prices, their circulation, etc., is only a superficial process, and behind this process, in the depths, there are completely different processes that take place, in which the apparent equality and freedom between individuals disappears." "Freedom! For the buyers and sellers of commodities, such as labour, depend only on their own free will. They enter into contracts as free, legally equal people. The contract is the final result of the common legal expression of their will. Equal! Because they only have a relationship with each other as owners of goods, exchanging equivalents for equivalents. This is the bearded man's interpretation of freedom and equality in imitation of the mainstream consciousness of capitalism. In the following lines, he penetrates the fog of the field of circulation and goes deep into the field of production. The essence of the "equal" contract concluded by the "free" exchange of labor and money is pointed out. "As soon as we leave this simple sphere of circulation or commodity exchange, from which the views, concepts, and standards which the vulgar free-trade theorists use to judge the society of capital and wage labour, are derived. -- You will see that the faces of the people in our drama have undergone certain changes. The original owners of the currency became capitalists. Walk forward with your head held high; The owner of the labor force became his worker, following behind. One is smiling and ambitious; A trembling and cowering man, as if he had sold his own skin in the market, had only one future - to let the family come to tannish. That is to say, the nature of capitalist commodity exchange is regulated by the circumstances of property possession. The proletarian, who does not own the means of subsistence and at the same time lacks the means of production for subsistence production, hunger compels him to seek employment out of the instinct of survival. In the absence of other options to relieve hunger. Selling labor is not the result of true free-will choice. The "equal" form of exchange in the field of circulation ensures the absolute dominance of capital over labor power in the field of production and the right to take possession of the fruits of labor without compensation, and the "equal" exchange in the field of circulation is a condition of inequality and coercion in the field of production. "It is forgotten that the premise of exchange value as the objective basis of the whole system of production contains from the outset the coercion of the individual". The exchange value that the bearded man refers to here is a certain amount of money that has been accumulated. The possession of a considerable amount of money convertible into capital by a minority and not by a large number of people is the basis of the capitalist system of production, that is, the system of wage labour.

The concepts of "all men are created equal" and "free" were put forward during the bourgeois ideological enlightenment. Engels pointed out that "this man was the middle citizen who was at that time transforming into a bourgeoisie". Adam? Smith also described the economic behavior of "man": "Capital is accumulated in the hands of a few people. Of course, there are some people, who, in order to make a profit from the sale of the products of labor or the value added by labor to raw materials, invest capital in the working people, and supply them with raw materials and means of subsistence. Let them work. …… If the proceeds from the sale of the products of labour do not exceed the capital they advance, he will not be interested in wage labour; And. If the profits they receive are not proportionate to the amount of capital they have advanced, he will not make large investments but only small ones. "Obviously. The "people" here are the bourgeoisie.

The bourgeois Enlightenment thinkers generalized the nature of the bourgeoisie to the nature of all human beings, and put forward the hypothesis of "homo economicus"; The demands of the bourgeoisie - to establish the status of a person equal to the feudal monarch in terms of status. The establishment of a unified domestic market for free trade, the legal establishment of the equal right of private property against the encroachment of feudal monarchs - generalized to the demands of all. Justifying the emergence of the capitalist system from the point of view of human nature, history is no longer seen as created by gods, gods, absolute ideas or some heroic figure for a certain purpose, which has a positive impact on the fulfillment of the historical task of anti-feudalism. However, to generalize the humanity of the bourgeoisie to the humanity of all people, and to generalize the interests of the bourgeoisie to the interests of all people, erases the difference between the bourgeoisie and the laborers. The freedom and equality of the same amount of capital to obtain the same amount of profit obliterates the unfreedom of the laborer who cannot choose not to sell his labor power repeatedly, and also obliterates the inequality of the capital that approves the product of labor and the product of labor that the laborer cannot possess.

The continuous production of surplus value by the compulsory labour of capital is the first priority of the existence of the capitalist system. However, the coercion of capital took a very different approach to slavery or feudal production. "In capital, the union of workers is not due to direct physical compulsion, nor is it forced by forced labor, forced labor, slave labor; This union is forced because the conditions of production are the property of others". It is sufficient to organize the exploitation of the proletarians simply by keeping them in a state of nothing, that is, by relying on the "capitalist private ownership of the means of production" itself. Naturally, the protection of "the sanctity of property rights" became the whole point of the existence of the bourgeois state apparatus.

The state is in the hands of the bourgeoisie. The power conferred on the state by the bourgeoisie is limited to what is necessary for private interests and competition, which is the bourgeoisie organizing state politics. The principle of rights. "The state is nothing more than a form of organization that the bourgeoisie must adopt in order to protect their property and interests at home and abroad." "The bourgeoisie does not allow the State to interfere with their private interests, and the powers vested by the bourgeoisie on the State are limited to what is necessary to ensure their own security and to maintain competition; For the bourgeoisie generally appears as citizens of the State and is confined to the extent that their private interests require them to do so. "Capitalist competition requires only a government that provides public goods that the private sector cannot provide. The principle of efficiency of product provision is organized in state politics. Right. Emphasizing the transfer of power from subordinates. This is explained on two levels.

The first level is local self-government. Emphasizing that "central power comes from the localities", it ensures that the grassroots governments close to the main body of market participants have full autonomy. Why respect local power? "Those conditions that enable a certain amount of productivity to be utilized. It is the condition for the exercise of rule by a certain social class, the social power of this class, which arises from the state of its property, each time acquires the expression of the ideas of practice in the corresponding form of the state". What are the "conditions under which the productive forces can be utilized" required by the private ownership of capital and socialized large-scale production? Compete. "They do not recognize any other authority, but the authority of competition, only the coercion imposed on them by the pressure of their mutual interests." First, competition requires that "only socially necessary labour time should be expended on a commodity to produce that commodity, which in the conditions of commodity production manifests itself as the external coercion of competition". Socially necessary labor time is "the labor time required to produce a certain use value under the existing normal social production conditions and under the average social labor proficiency and labor intensity". "Social average labor proficiency" requires that the labor force generally has considerable physical fitness, education and employment skills; The reproduction of labor force (including children's education and pension) is required to be qualitative. This requires that the areas of emigration of workers provide roughly the same public health care, education, social security and so on. Products. Secondly, "all relations created by competition." Such as the disappearance of local limitations, the development of transportation, the development of the division of labor, world trade, the proletariat, the machine, etc." In addition to breaking down barriers to the regional flow of goods, capital, and labor, it is also important for local governments to provide roughly equivalent infrastructure such as transportation, logistics, and information for industry. The above two points boil down to the pressure of competition that is bourgeois politics. The right is based on the "Public. Product configuration effectiveness" "Select" the root cause of local autonomy.

The second level, parliamentary democracy, emphasizes that "local power comes from the people". "Although individual A needs the commodity of individual B, he does not take possession of the commodity by violence, and vice versa, but instead they recognize each other as the owner. It is a person who infiltrates his will into the commodity. Thus, here for the first time, the legal element of man and the element of freedom contained in it appears. No one takes possession of another person's property by violence. "The state apparatus does not need to organize top-down personal attachment and non-economic coercion, but only needs to protect the property rights of the bourgeoisie, and the instinct to survive is sufficient to compel the proletarians to repeatedly sell their labor power to the bourgeoisie. This legally established form of private property is the sacrosanct property ownership of the bourgeoisie. It is the so-called "man" of Western universal values. right". The original legal contract that protects the ownership of the means of production by the bourgeoisie is generalized to protect the ownership of the means of subsistence as personal consumer goods by all persons (including the bourgeoisie and the proletarians) in the expression of the legal text. Personal consumer goods, whether in physical form or in monetary terms equivalent to their value, are difficult to transform into means of production that can add value on their own. The protection of private ownership of individual consumer goods does not affect the social nature of capitalism. However, this generalization is very cleverly in line with the "before the law" of universal value propaganda. All are equal". Further, the legal "property rights" are generalized to the political aspects of parliamentary democracy. The people are given the "free" right to choose whether party A or party B exercises state power on their behalf, however, the people can only choose between party A and party B, and this choice is not a real "free" choice for the people, because neither party A nor party B is nothing but a division within the bourgeois interest group, and candidates who have lost their financial support cannot enter the electoral alternatives at all.

As Sweezy himself revealed, as long as there is a distance between form and substance that can only be bridged by sophisticated analysis, then comprehension plays a wonderful trick. Mistakes and fantasies are easily accepted as obvious common sense, and even provide a basis for imaginary scientific explanations...... This principle applies in particular to commodities and commodity production. There is often only a vague and inverted relationship between the ideas arising from this form of social organization and the social relations on which it is based. The bearded man was first aware of this fact in his doctrine of commodity fetishism, and saw its decisive importance for modern ideology.

Where does the mysterious nature of the commodity come from? "The mystery of the form of commodities is nothing but that the form of commodities reflects before people the social nature of their own labour as the nature of the things of the products of labour itself, and the natural social attributes of these things, thus making the producers the same? The social relations of labor are reflected in the social relations between things that exist outside of the producer. Specifically, "the equivalence of human labour acquires the form of the object of value of the equivalent of the product of labour; The expenditure of human labour, measured by the duration of labour, takes the form of the quantity of value of the product of labour; Finally, the relations of the producers, through which the social provisions of labour are realized, acquire the form of social relations of the products of labour. "In the world of commodities, what is directly presented to people is the exchange relationship between commodities and commodities, and the form of commodities covers the relationship between people with the relationship between things. Under the cover of this relationship of things, people regard the sociality of labor as the nature of the thing of a commodity; Labor time also plays a role in the cloak of value quantity, and the relationship between workers is directly expressed in the relationship between commodities and commodities. This relationship of things in the form of commodities conceals the relations of people, and bourgeois ideology is a description of commodity fetishism.

This kind of situation is naturally more common in reality, so if Wu Ling just asked Shao Zikang not to do things, it didn't matter much at first, but after a long time, there would definitely be problems. If Wu Ling didn't know what to let Shao Zikang's master and apprentice do at the beginning, but from the current point of view, there are some things that Shao Zikang can do, that is, to protect Wu Xueqing and Chang Huifang. (To be continued......)