this post was submitted on 28 Mar 2024
189 points (98.5% liked)

Australia

3612 readers
195 users here now

A place to discuss Australia and important Australian issues.

Before you post:

If you're posting anything related to:

If you're posting Australian News (not opinion or discussion pieces) post it to Australian News

Rules

This community is run under the rules of aussie.zone. In addition to those rules:

Banner Photo

Congratulations to @Tau@aussie.zone who had the most upvoted submission to our banner photo competition

Recommended and Related Communities

Be sure to check out and subscribe to our related communities on aussie.zone:

Plus other communities for sport and major cities.

https://aussie.zone/communities

Moderation

Since Kbin doesn't show Lemmy Moderators, I'll list them here. Also note that Kbin does not distinguish moderator comments.

Additionally, we have our instance admins: @lodion@aussie.zone and @Nath@aussie.zone

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
lodion@aussie.zone
Fluid@aussie.zone
bestusername@aussie.zone
eatham@aussie.zone
189
We compared the finances of 30-year-olds now, to 30-year-olds 30 years ago (www.abc.net.au)
submitted 7 months ago by Nath@aussie.zone to c/australia@aussie.zone
34 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

I'm sure this whole article comes as a shock to nobody, but it's nice to see it recognised like this.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] novibe@lemmy.ml 1 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

I feel there is a misunderstanding of what a bourgeois revolution is. Sure, soon before the English Revolution, there was the institution of stock markets and corporations. But bourgeois revolutions don’t “make” capitalism. They institute capitalism as the main power and system.

Before the English Revolution, nobility and owning land was the real power. After it it was owning capital. That’s what makes it a bourgeois revolution.

And sure? There were “capitalists” fighting to maintain the existing power structures, just like there were workers fighting against the bolsheviks in the Russian revolution, right? That’s not a very compelling argument.

The capitalists could, through ideology and propaganda, be working against their own interests. Or they as individuals actually benefitted from the system as it was, despite not being the class in power.

In any case, revolutions happen when the existing dominant class is abruptly removed in favour of another. You can’t say this happened in England before the English Revolution.

Also, if you think Protestantism vs Catholicism has nothing to do with the power structures of late medieval and early modern Europe… idk what to tell you man. Religion is never just religion.

[–] undergroundoverground@lemmy.world 1 points 7 months ago

I understand it just fine and no, the first joint stock company was nearly 100 years before the civil war. Thats not soon before at all. It just really kills the narrative being spun.

Capitalism was nationwide here long before the civil war. Not only in the form of joint stock companies, ending merchantilism, but in the acts of enclosure forcing the yeomanry into the factories and workhouses (capital not land). Again, nearly 100 years before the civil war.

It was a war of religion and wherever you got this alternative narrative from is completely wrong. It was literally just fanatics killing each other over liking the wrong flavour of Jesus. Nothing meaningful changed after the war. Capitalism wasn't ushered in, as it was already here. Capital didn't become the dominant power due to it, as it already was the dominant power. CoE was already the dominant religion too. So, it wasn't changing the power structure of the existing dominant religion. So, wrong on every account that could make it what you claim.

Specifically in the UK, the Catholic/protestant power structure change was that the monarch decided to, essentially, make themselves both monarch and pope. I think you're confusing it with the German wars of religion and they weren't the same.