There is a basis for inciting the cities to fight against the old forces in the countryside in Fujian.

In addition to a section of the petty bourgeoisie of the revolutionary democrats and a large number of subjective utopian socialists, the big bankers and the big bourgeoisie are also a force that can be borrowed.

For example, the Nanyang Company now earns a huge amount of wealth every year, but only 100,000 silver coins are paid into the national treasury every year, which is the price at which the monopoly power that no one was optimistic about at the beginning for 12 years, and this is only a fraction of the annual profit of the Nanyang Company from smuggling cotton cloth in the Spanish colonies.

Not counting the citizens who were drawn into it by Chen Jian, the major shareholders and board members were also very worried that the old forces would use their power to interfere with the company or force the division of monopoly power and shares.

There is a difference between the people's state ownership and the oligarchic aristocratic ownership disguised as state ownership.

For them, the monopoly was just a name, and the real pillar of profit was the growing industry and commerce and the powerful armed fleet of Mincheng. They were afraid of the revolution at the bottom, but they were also afraid that the power of the old times would hinder their profits, and for them the first priority was the stability and development of the industry and commerce in Mincheng, and the second was to ensure that the 60 percent of the empty shares in the future were in their own hands.

The 60 percent of the empty equity given to those big aristocratic oligarchs is to lure the wolf into the house; Give yourself a part and give a little bit to the middle level, that is the holding financing.

They are the most unreliable commercial bourgeoisie, but unlike the Netherlands, the handicraft industry is very developed, and the prices are lower than in Europe, where the price revolution has begun on the other side of the ocean, so they are in this case in the same way as the interests of the handicraft bourgeoisie - of course, if the handicraft industry is not developed, they will turn into compradors and smugglers, and they will destroy their own handicraft industry with high interest.

From the perspective of a "empire" view of history, these people are the moths of the "empire", but those who have a "empire" view of history are not necessarily the masters of the empire.

Like the smugglers of the Spanish colonies, the largest trading partners of the Nanyang Company, they were moths of the Spanish Empire, but when the time permitted, they became the revolutionary leaders of the colonial bourgeoisie.

This moth of the "Empire" is precisely a force that can be borrowed to destroy the old ruling class of the "Empire".

The reforms of poll tax, land tax, and stamp duty to be carried out in Mincheng were all welcomed by these big bourgeoisie.

In order to carry out this reform, what is needed is a "package tax" system with the "county self-government council" as the main body, and the annual national tax will be paid according to the previous fixed amount.

The city is in chaos, there has just been an uprising before, and they don't want to pay to appease it, so letting the landlords give a part is the best choice.

However, in fact, they are indirectly responsible for this problem. The inflow of trade silver, the rise in prices, the export of too many goods, the lack of increase in the number of commodities in Fujian, the increase in land operating profits, the dumping of cotton cloth and the emergence of ginning machines led to large-scale cotton planting, which led to a part of the landlords close to Mincheng spontaneously choosing to operate independently to reclaim their tenant rights, which led to the influx of many landless people into the city, resulting in an increase in the cost of maintaining stability.

To reason with them and make them pay is a waste of tongue, and they would rather use twice the money to suppress it; They are happy to transfer the contradictions to the countryside and transfer the problem to the countryside.

Without the premise of the ownership system, if it were not for their fear of touching the bottom line of the old forces, they would be the group of people who are most desperate to nationalize the land and then auction it privately, and no one is richer than these shareholders and bankers.

Do not think that only the poor want to nationalize land, but simply nationalization of land is the most radical bourgeois land reform.

From the point of view of the bourgeoisie, under capitalism the capitalist is a necessary and dominant party to production, while the landowners are completely superfluous and useless burdens.

Especially in the present situation, the price of land in the cities has not yet developed greatly, the rural land is in the hands of the landlords and not the capitalists, and the bourgeoisie has not yet taken power.

The bourgeoisie and capital have only one word to express their feelings about the land occupied by the landlords who live on rentier and personal dependence: the destruction of heavenly things!

Thorough nationalization of land and free competitive leasing of capital would be the most thorough, perfect, and purest means conducive to the development of rural capitalism.

The same is true for Chen Jian's previous opposition to some of the internal supporters of land nationalization - most of the people who support land nationalization are the kind of subjective sympathizers and kind-hearted people, who are worried that the capitalist monster they saw in Mincheng will penetrate deep into the countryside and are angry at the oppression of the old forces in the countryside, so they want to jump over and directly engage in nationalization - but from the internal logic, what their methods have led to is the most thorough, perfect, and purest development of rural capitalism.

This is equivalent to being afraid of going east, but not to west, but from walking to running......

It is reactionary to curb the involvement of capital, divide the land equally, and protect the management rights of small plots, which has gone to the road of populism; To engage in the collective management system, there is no foundation for the time being, and there are not enough excellent executors, and the road is easy to go astray; To engage in free competition, it is necessary to maintain it for several decades on the premise of curbing capital involvement, equalizing the distribution of land, and guaranteeing management rights, so that the rural areas can accumulate sufficient capital, otherwise the land will be directly released and all will run directly into the hands of the capitalists, and before industrialization, the profits of the land will spontaneously attract huge amounts of external capital.

Today's arable land is like urban land after industrialization, and it is only the purest capitalist land policy that can bring about a massive influx of capital.

Therefore, instead of this, it is better to directly oppose the nationalization of land whose internal logic is paradoxical at this stage, once this path is crooked, that is, the monster of capital devours everything and leads to large-scale populist uprisings in the countryside, and it is too difficult to go crooked at this stage.

Moreover, although the landless bourgeoisie at this time was very welcoming to the nationalization of land, they had to consider the consequences.

The bourgeoisie fears that the negation of one form of private ownership of labour conditions will endanger the stability of another, and that the abolition of private ownership of land will cause a chain reaction that will shake the whole of capitalist private ownership. Since land can be nationalized, can the rest of the means of production be nationalized? If the rest of the means of production could be nationalized, then as long as capital existed, it would be operating, and the capitalists would become the landlords they denounced as burdensome, and even the managers of state capital, which they were extremely disturbed and unwilling to see.

Therefore, under the premise that there is a contradiction between support and opposition, but the starting point of support and opposition is fundamentally different, this kind of bourgeois and imperfect land reform is very promising.

It not only ensures that the system of private ownership will not be moved, but also ensures that capital has the opportunity to get involved in the gluttonous feast of dividing up land profits, although it is not pleasant, and it can also ensure that it will only be tried in the name of reform in Minjun without worrying about the counterattack of the old forces in the north that have not yet completed their preparations.

They will be weak and swaying in the face of a powerful alliance of old powers; But in the face of the soft persimmons of this group of landlords in Minjun, it will harden again.

However, they can only give one kind of spiritual support at most, and to implement these policies, they have to rely on the organizations of the Mexican Party to go deep into the countryside, and rely on the Mexican Party to help them complete the capitalist transformation so that they can eat enough.

This is also the reason why some people within the Mexican Party understand what Chen Jian meant, but psychologically can't get by: we work hard, but in the end we are the most disgusted capitalists, and even if this is progress, we feel very unhappy.

The only reason that those who support Chen Jian is that this is one step closer to the future goal, but how far do we have to go to get to the last step, many people's hearts have been inevitably shaken: since it is far away, why are we not capitalists now, isn't this also progress from a macro point of view?

This situation also made Chen Jian cry and laugh:

The young people in the opposition are some of the most determined, but they do not have a thorough understanding of the whole set of theories, and they oppose Chen Jian out of a sense of justice in their hearts, but they are absolutely firm in their ideals and are the most reliable young people. They were Paul, who joined the workers' opposition, ready to go to the snow in one shoe to build a railroad for the benefit of the countrymen, but it was not until many years later that he figured out the theory and stripped himself from the ascetic gadfly saints to love life.

Those who understand all this, except for some idealists, the rest are facing the distant future and want to become capitalists to promote progress.

In such a situation, it is conceivable that the enlarged party congress will be held. Many of the angry Chen Jian jumped to their feet, but they had to explain a little bit in the midst of a burst of ridicule and anger, trying to try to win the understanding of the most determined young people and try to gain their support.

Without these radical young people as cornerstones, there is simply no way to work in the countryside; If they don't make sense of their radical inner grievances and contradictions, they will accumulate such grievances when they see so many grievances when they are doing things.

Whether it is reducing rents and interest rates, guaranteeing some tenant rights, or abolishing the poll tax and measuring land, these are all theoretical policies.

It is necessary to explain the rationality and feasibility before we can answer the first question: how can we have power and power in the countryside under the condition of immovable ownership?

Not everyone has ideals, and if you want to have power, you must have interests, even if rent and interest reductions and the protection of tenant rights can mobilize tenant farmers, then how can you make tenant farmers have enough enthusiasm? How can we get the tenant farmers to unite as soon as possible?

It is not enough to rely only on lip service, nor can it be to rely on reform without power, and the basis of power is land ownership, and under the premise of this unchanged, power will be greatly reduced.

After the concrete truth and feasibility have been determined, power in the countryside has become a problem that must be solved.

In this regard, Chen Jian proposed to give two powers.

1. For those who actively participate in the peasant association, the Mexican Party gave his family a ticket to the Great Wilderness City as a reward for working in the countryside.

Especially for some motivated young people, it doesn't matter if the purpose is not pure, but it is important to make sure that enough young people stay there in exchange for a future. Relying on ideals will not last long, and it is also unrealistic under the condition of not moving ownership.

This power to determine interests will attract many tenant farmers to join them, and they can quickly get to work and mobilize the tenant farmers. Today's Great Desert City, with the construction of the first batch of people, is very beautiful compared to rural tenants.

This can strip away the connection between rural cadres and the local land, which is equivalent to five years when the whole family of village officials immigrated to Australia, so that no matter whether it is real or falsely positive, it can ensure that there are people available in the countryside and people willing to take root, even if it is for the sake of profit.

Since the basis of ownership is not moved, it is necessary to consider interests, and under capitalist conditions it is necessary to demand people with the morality of the next age, which will soon be schizophrenic.

2. The village-based team has the right to nominate some excellent, motivated and progressive young people to study agriculture at Nanyang College.

On the one hand, it can attract excellent young people with progressive ideas; On the other hand, after they have completed their studies, they can exert their strength in the next step of rural transformation in the future.

These are two very important powers, without the power of this kind of interests, the pressure of long-term work is very great, especially in the next step after the completion of rent reduction and interest reduction, without this authority, the rural areas cannot retain outstanding young people who choose to work in the rural areas, and the rural grassroots will also completely disintegrate.