According to Marx, Engels, Lenin and any other respectable communist.
Capitalism is a historical progression rather than something you adopt willy nilly, and it has expanded productive forces significantly allowing us to produce stuff far more efficiently in far higher quality and complexity. With feudalism, it’s mode of production was far more individualized, with peasants essentially producing for their and their family’s subsistence only, and artisans in guilds would only work in small groups, limiting to what they can produce.
Therefore, this expansion of productive powers in capitalism in theory leads to better life quality, less socially necessary labor time to provide for everyone, less mortality given how we can now produce things like insulin in complex labs, etc.
Keyword is in theory - in practice, everything else in the system goes against that, leads to overproduction and having us proletariat work for much higher hours than is socially necessary, it concentrates wealth to private owners giving them immense political power. That’s what communists are trying to do - progress forward so we produce not for profit, but for use based on need which would solve these issues.
Btw, comparison between feudal peasantry and proletariat is flawed - peasants were based in countryside and essentially were the middle class of it, owning a small amount of land that they worked for themselves. Proletariat are urbanized, work in factories they don’t own and produce for thousands of people. A more apt comparison in work hours would be proletariat vs guild apprentices - their exploitation and work hours were essentially the same and this system was precursor to capitalist wage labor.
Progressive =/= better. The Capitalist social relation inevitably reproduces itself across the globe because of the social forces. Not because it is an improvement.
Therefore, this expansion of productive powers in capitalism in theory leads to better life quality, less socially necessary labor time to provide for everyone, less mortality given how we can now produce things like insulin in complex labs, etc.
Regardless of the debate that these modern conceptions can be attributed entirely to a change in the mode of production rather then simply the inevitable progression of humanities technological knowledge, Marx actually argued Capitalism inevitably immiserates the proletariat rather than advancing quality of life.
You try to hedge this by saying “in theory”, yet not even in theory. It is a lie of the bourgeoisie the proletarian slavery is an improvement over peasant slavery. In theory, Capitalism is simply the reproduction of the capitalist social relationship and the replacement of the nobility class with the new bourgeoisie class.
Btw, comparison between feudal peasantry and proletariat is flawed - peasants were based in countryside and essentially were the middle class of it
The comparison is not to equalize the proletariat and peasantry in their relationship to the means of production, but in the demographic comparison for who is the majority of the planet. In Feudal times, peasants, including serfs make up the majority of people. And serfs are decidedly not middle class. Peasants were an exploited class under feudalism, duped by the bourgeoisie to support the inevitable capitalist revolution that would “improve their quality of life”, only to find themselves alienated industrial laborers and at the bottom of class society once again.
According to Marx, Engels, Lenin and any other respectable communist.
Capitalism is a historical progression rather than something you adopt willy nilly, and it has expanded productive forces significantly allowing us to produce stuff far more efficiently in far higher quality and complexity. With feudalism, it’s mode of production was far more individualized, with peasants essentially producing for their and their family’s subsistence only, and artisans in guilds would only work in small groups, limiting to what they can produce.
Therefore, this expansion of productive powers in capitalism in theory leads to better life quality, less socially necessary labor time to provide for everyone, less mortality given how we can now produce things like insulin in complex labs, etc.
Keyword is in theory - in practice, everything else in the system goes against that, leads to overproduction and having us proletariat work for much higher hours than is socially necessary, it concentrates wealth to private owners giving them immense political power. That’s what communists are trying to do - progress forward so we produce not for profit, but for use based on need which would solve these issues.
Btw, comparison between feudal peasantry and proletariat is flawed - peasants were based in countryside and essentially were the middle class of it, owning a small amount of land that they worked for themselves. Proletariat are urbanized, work in factories they don’t own and produce for thousands of people. A more apt comparison in work hours would be proletariat vs guild apprentices - their exploitation and work hours were essentially the same and this system was precursor to capitalist wage labor.
Concerning peasants, some (serfs) didn’t own any land, while others (freemen) did. Serfs could be better off than freemen though.
Progressive =/= better. The Capitalist social relation inevitably reproduces itself across the globe because of the social forces. Not because it is an improvement.
Regardless of the debate that these modern conceptions can be attributed entirely to a change in the mode of production rather then simply the inevitable progression of humanities technological knowledge, Marx actually argued Capitalism inevitably immiserates the proletariat rather than advancing quality of life.
You try to hedge this by saying “in theory”, yet not even in theory. It is a lie of the bourgeoisie the proletarian slavery is an improvement over peasant slavery. In theory, Capitalism is simply the reproduction of the capitalist social relationship and the replacement of the nobility class with the new bourgeoisie class.
The comparison is not to equalize the proletariat and peasantry in their relationship to the means of production, but in the demographic comparison for who is the majority of the planet. In Feudal times, peasants, including serfs make up the majority of people. And serfs are decidedly not middle class. Peasants were an exploited class under feudalism, duped by the bourgeoisie to support the inevitable capitalist revolution that would “improve their quality of life”, only to find themselves alienated industrial laborers and at the bottom of class society once again.