The investigation reports of the two prefectures alone led to fierce disputes at this enlarged congress of representatives.

Is it a one-size-fits-all approach?

If it is not one-size-fits-all, how can we achieve logical self-consistency?

If you want to do it all, it is also simple, let the council in Mincheng introduce a policy to reduce rent and interest while allowing tenants to have the right of first refusal for up to ten years.

The question is, what is the difference between this and the petty bourgeois socialists of the patriarchal guilds? They will certainly take the opportunity to challenge and ask the Mohamcan Party if such a solution is not the same as the idea of returning to the patriarchal guilds.

In this way, it seems that there is no need for an earth-shattering change at all, and only a good, good landlord is needed to solve all the problems.

From this logic, it can be deduced that the root of all problems is not a systemic problem, but a moral problem. As long as traditional morality is rebuilt, society does not need to change at all, and it can move forward spontaneously, and there will not be so many problems of unemployment and vagrancy and cotton cannibalism.

If you don't want to be one-size-fits-all, you have to tell one, two, three, four, five, and you also need a large number of high-quality grassroots organizations within the party, and treat them differently from facts, which is somewhat idealistic and unrealistic.

If you don't want to be one-size-fits-all, and don't talk about one, two, three, four, or five logical self-consistency, that is, pure practicality has completely lost the support of the concept, and the road behind this opening will not be able to go.

The distant futureists believe that since the tenancy system is an obstacle to social development, then the right of first refusal is reactionary, and what is the difference between this and a return to the guild patriarchal era? This is completely an improvement on the basis of the original, so what do you want our Mo Party to do? A good king and a good county keeper can solve the problem.

Since capital controls the land, land annexation, and the influx of rural people into the cities as cheap labor are inevitable, we should certainly facilitate this process.

Objectively speaking, the influx of population into the city has reduced the cost of employing labor, the rate of capital accumulation is faster, and a corn tortilla can replace a person's labor for a day's labor, which can definitely accelerate the industrial and commercial development of Mincheng at an unprecedented speed, and crush all the enemies of the export trade.

Besides, it's not us who is at fault, it's not our Mo Party that has caused these people to lose the conditions for survival, and we can't be blamed for this, right? Those who slander us must not blame us for such wandering, unemployment, loss of land, etc.

If we're in power, that's another matter, and of course we have to think about the survival of these people. But we are not now, so we just need to speed up the historical process, and we are not causing the problem, and we are not going to solve it.

Therefore, it is time for our Party to promote the capitalist process in the countryside, and the problems that arise will allow capitalism to go over, even if the main force of change at this time is the bourgeoisie and not us.

We should wait for the opportunity to wait until the change is completed and we have the foundation of our practice before taking the next step.

At this stage, we should continue to remain silent and dormant, and give the leading power of change to the industrial and commercial bourgeoisie in Mincheng, and let them take the lead, and we will wait for the future.

……

The realist school believes that the tenant system is indeed an obstacle to social development, but the problem is that now you let capital control the land, and you are ready to take the reform line to temporarily avoid the revolution of nationalization and collectivization of land, what will happen to those tenants who have lost their land?

Running to the city, can the city accommodate so many laborers? Otherwise, what was the reason for the last uprising? Isn't it because of unemployment, falling wages due to absolute overpopulation, and the influx of landless peasants into the cities, which cannot accommodate so many people for the time being?

Since it is a matter of analyzing the specific problems on a case-by-case basis, the best way now is to delay the process of the crisis.

A 10-year right of first refusal plus a rent reduction and interest reduction will allow you to get through this transition period. You are letting the capital eat too hard now, and Hulala is pouring into the 50,000 landless tenants in Mincheng, who will be responsible?

It is true that we did not cause the lives and deaths of these people, but we must not only focus on the future, but also based on reality.

In the past ten years, as long as we ensure that the development of Mincheng is higher than the population growth of Mincheng cities, we will be able to attract a large number of rural people to the cities in ten years.

A seemingly unplanned, seemingly unforced flow to the countryside is used to solve the problem of the limits of urban capacity. Such a reputation would sound better than a forced, planned, agitated movement of people.

Since we are a party based on the future of all people, we should have a sense of responsibility and mission to bear and solve the pains of social development, rather than promoting the development of social segments as those distant futurists say.

Originally, it was planned that Nanyang would open a second IPO, so that a large amount of capital accumulated by land would be invested in Nanyang Company, because the yield was higher than that of land.

But now that the Nanyang Company and several families in the capital have merged, the existing land has become the second choice of capital. At least for now, there is no place where the rate of return of excess capital is much higher than that of land, and even if there is, there is still a risk, or a somewhat long payback period.

Capital is anxious to see the landlords fall, reduce land rents, and increase operating profits, so that they will not care about what to do with the landless and vagrants who pour into the cities.

Besides, we easily won the lead in last year's uprising and the pacification incident, and we took the initiative to give up at this time, isn't there a problem in our brains?

Take the first step back, and then do you want to retreat? When there is no way back, all supporters and potential supporters are chilled and wait for their own death? Waiting for someone else's knife to chop down?

Cotton cannibalism and silkworm cannibalism is progress, the problem is that the cost of progress is caused by people who don't want to care, but we can't ignore it.

……

The radicals, on the other hand, believe that the problem is too simple, that revolution should be carried out in the countryside, that land and national ownership should be carried out, and that the movement of people should be controlled.

It is not divided into small pieces, since it is said that the agricultural employment system has a foundation, it is completely feasible to establish cooperatives.

We have urban factories and foreign trade as a foundation, and we don't need to ask the rural areas to collect a large amount of surplus grain, and new crops have just been introduced, and the rural areas will definitely get better and better in the next 20 years, and this is absolutely no problem.

When the cities can accommodate so much labor, and then gradually let the people from the countryside out, plan and control, this problem can be completely solved.

Yes, if cooperatives and land state ownership are carried out now, and new horse-drawn machinery and planting methods are promoted, there will not be so many people in the rural areas.

The problem is that the cities can't accommodate so many people now, so we can send people who can't be temporarily accommodated in the cities to the rural areas, at least so that they can have something to eat.

Ten or twenty years from now, if the new things of the Institute of Science and Practical Technology are successful, Mincheng will be able to accommodate so many people with its rapid development.

At that time, the population will be transferred to the cities in batches, and at the same time, the time spent in the rural areas over the years will be used to carry out the punctual work of education, popularization of organizations, cultural upgrading, and training of the factory system.

Moreover, once the seizure of power is successful, it is completely possible to vigorously develop foreign immigration.

Now the Nanyang Company does not care whether the peasants live or die, if they use 50 percent of their income to resettle, there will be no problem at all, and the nationalization of the Nanyang Company and the nationalization of the land will obviously solve the problem.

There is so much land in the Great Wilderness City, let's reclaim it, won't this increase the total wealth of the people? Capital only looks at profits, we don't look at profits, and the planned and organized reclamation of foreign immigrants is a good way to alleviate the pain of this kind of "cotton cannibalism".

Therefore, the problem now is to lift the table of the new council of Minjun County, to create a real republic of the people, to nationalize land and companies, and to solve the problem as long as it succeeds.

The only problem, and the most critical, ...... At this time, when the table is lifted, can it withstand the counterattack of the reactionary and conservative forces in the thirty-six counties of the entire republic?

In this way, the enemy is not a reactionary and conservative force, but also the Mincheng Capital Group, which has grown wings.

……

This is just a seemingly simple problem, and even seems to be only the most basic rural problem, reflecting the difference in the thinking of factions within the party.

Even if the ends are the same, the means to achieve the ends have diverged.

Theoretically, without taking into account the practical operation and the side effects of the new power system, the symptomatic solution is actually the radical solution.

This is not a normal world line after World War II, and now there is a world full of land that can be reclaimed to accommodate the population instead of being carved up - if there is a Middle Eastern Railway connecting to the densely populated area and ten Great Northern Wilderness in a certain time and space, and then there is the organization and control of a certain organization, and at the same time there is no world pattern formed by the external capitalist imperial system, as well as foreign trade advantages and scientific and technological advantages, what the consequences can be imagined.

At this time, not to mention the Great Wilderness City, it is the Black Swan River at this time plus the ends of the earth, and it is easy to accommodate a million people to live an idyllic life.

However, the Nanyang Company preferred to go to Africa to transport slaves to ships to transport people of the same roots.

The former is profitable, and the latter is their business?

It seems that as long as the flow of capital can be planned, controlled, and manipulated, there is still hope for planned investment that violates the free flow of capital.

But even if we don't take into account the operability and ideal variability that follow, just look at the question that lies in front of the radicals themselves: this is the time to flip the table...... Can't beat it.

Without the general bankruptcy of the rural areas brought about by external pressure and commodity shocks, the rural areas would still be able to hold on, and it would not have reached the time when they could not move. The "labor pains" of the times have not yet spread to more places, and there are not many people affected by the "labor pains". The conservative and new capitalist forces are still fighting openly and covertly, and they can still use their strength to fight with their strength, but once this method is adopted, it will be a joint strangulation.

The only thing that seems to be a symptomatic solution cannot be adopted, and this seemingly simple problem has become the most difficult so-called "labor pain" problem to solve.

Including the previous Mincheng Uprising and various reactionary ideological trends, that was also brought about by the "labor pain" problem. Progress has a price, and no one can get around it.

If cotton eats people and eats well, it is called the great development of liberal capitalism.

Cotton is not good for people to eat, it is called land annexation, and the next step is to meet the king with free food in Juntian, and by the way, he will send out a crown from the republic to the empire. When the time comes, not to mention the landless peasants, even the hired workers and craftsmen, they will also look forward to an emperor with unlimited power over capital to save them from the sea of misery. 10