Social murder: Difference between revisions

From Leftypedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
m (changing title in source)
(reworded lede a bit)
Line 1: Line 1:
'''Social murder''' is the untimely death that occurs ''indirectly'' due to the ''deprivation of necessities'', owing to the capitalist stratification of classes. Social murder, as a political phrase, has its oldest known surviving use in a written publication by [[Friedrich Engels]], in his 1845 work ''[[The Condition of the Working Class in England]]''. However, in the first passage<ref>[https://marxists.info/archive/marx/works/1845/condition-working-class/ch04.htm Friedrich Engels, ''The Condition of the Working Class in England'' (1845), Chapter 4: ''The Great Towns''], [https://archive.li/9au7d archived]</ref> where he uses the phrase, he attributes the creation of this phrase not to himself, but to the English working class:<blockquote>[. . .] '''indirectly, far more than directly''', many have died of starvation, where long-continued want of proper nourishment has called forth fatal illness, when it has produced such debility that causes which might otherwise have remained inoperative brought on severe illness and death. '''The English working-men call this "social murder"''', and accuse our whole society of perpetrating this crime perpetually. Are they wrong?</blockquote>Later in the work<ref>[https://marxists.info/archive/marx/works/1845/condition-working-class/ch07.htm Friedrich Engels, ''The Condition of the Working Class in England'' (1845), Chapter 7: ''Results''], [https://archive.li/p72Tz archived]</ref>, Engels speaks on the subject matter more thoroughly:<blockquote>When one individual inflicts bodily injury upon another such that death results, we call the deed manslaughter; when the assailant knew in advance that the injury would be fatal, we call his deed murder. But when society places hundreds of proletarians in such a position that they inevitably meet a too early and an unnatural death, one which is quite as much a death by violence as that by the sword or bullet; when it deprives thousands of the necessaries of life, places them under conditions in which they cannot live – forces them, through the strong arm of the law, to remain in such conditions until that death ensues which is the inevitable consequence – knows that these thousands of victims must perish, and yet permits these conditions to remain, its deed is murder just as surely as the deed of the single individual; disguised, malicious murder, murder against which none can defend himself, which does not seem what it is, because no man sees the murderer, because the death of the victim seems a natural one, since the offence is more one of omission than of commission. But murder it remains. '''I have now to prove that society in England daily and hourly commits what the working-men's organs, with perfect correctness, characterise as social murder''', that it has placed the workers under conditions in which they can neither retain health nor live long; that it undermines the vital force of these workers gradually, little by little, and so hurries them to the grave before their time. I have further to prove that society knows how injurious such conditions are to the health and the life of the workers, and yet does nothing to improve these conditions. That it knows the consequences of its deeds; that its act is, therefore, not mere manslaughter, but murder, I shall have proved, when I cite official documents, reports of Parliament and of the Government, in substantiation of my charge. </blockquote>
'''Social murder''' is the untimely death that occurs ''indirectly'' due to the ''deprivation of necessities'', such as food, clean water, clean air, shelter, or medication, as result of the stratification of classes in capitalist society. Social murder, as a political phrase, has its oldest known surviving use in a written publication by [[Friedrich Engels]], in his 1845 work ''[[The Condition of the Working Class in England]]''. However, in the first passage<ref>[https://marxists.info/archive/marx/works/1845/condition-working-class/ch04.htm Friedrich Engels, ''The Condition of the Working Class in England'' (1845), Chapter 4: ''The Great Towns''], [https://archive.li/9au7d archived]</ref> where he uses the phrase, he attributes the creation of this phrase not to himself, but to the English working class:<blockquote>[. . .] '''indirectly, far more than directly''', many have died of starvation, where long-continued want of proper nourishment has called forth fatal illness, when it has produced such debility that causes which might otherwise have remained inoperative brought on severe illness and death. '''The English working-men call this "social murder"''', and accuse our whole society of perpetrating this crime perpetually. Are they wrong?</blockquote>Later in the work<ref>[https://marxists.info/archive/marx/works/1845/condition-working-class/ch07.htm Friedrich Engels, ''The Condition of the Working Class in England'' (1845), Chapter 7: ''Results''], [https://archive.li/p72Tz archived]</ref>, Engels speaks on the subject matter more thoroughly:<blockquote>When one individual inflicts bodily injury upon another such that death results, we call the deed manslaughter; when the assailant knew in advance that the injury would be fatal, we call his deed murder. But when society places hundreds of proletarians in such a position that they inevitably meet a too early and an unnatural death, one which is quite as much a death by violence as that by the sword or bullet; when it deprives thousands of the necessaries of life, places them under conditions in which they cannot live – forces them, through the strong arm of the law, to remain in such conditions until that death ensues which is the inevitable consequence – knows that these thousands of victims must perish, and yet permits these conditions to remain, its deed is murder just as surely as the deed of the single individual; disguised, malicious murder, murder against which none can defend himself, which does not seem what it is, because no man sees the murderer, because the death of the victim seems a natural one, since the offence is more one of omission than of commission. But murder it remains. '''I have now to prove that society in England daily and hourly commits what the working-men's organs, with perfect correctness, characterise as social murder''', that it has placed the workers under conditions in which they can neither retain health nor live long; that it undermines the vital force of these workers gradually, little by little, and so hurries them to the grave before their time. I have further to prove that society knows how injurious such conditions are to the health and the life of the workers, and yet does nothing to improve these conditions. That it knows the consequences of its deeds; that its act is, therefore, not mere manslaughter, but murder, I shall have proved, when I cite official documents, reports of Parliament and of the Government, in substantiation of my charge. </blockquote>
<references />
<references />

Revision as of 06:24, 10 November 2023

Social murder is the untimely death that occurs indirectly due to the deprivation of necessities, such as food, clean water, clean air, shelter, or medication, as result of the stratification of classes in capitalist society. Social murder, as a political phrase, has its oldest known surviving use in a written publication by Friedrich Engels, in his 1845 work The Condition of the Working Class in England. However, in the first passage[1] where he uses the phrase, he attributes the creation of this phrase not to himself, but to the English working class:

[. . .] indirectly, far more than directly, many have died of starvation, where long-continued want of proper nourishment has called forth fatal illness, when it has produced such debility that causes which might otherwise have remained inoperative brought on severe illness and death. The English working-men call this "social murder", and accuse our whole society of perpetrating this crime perpetually. Are they wrong?

Later in the work[2], Engels speaks on the subject matter more thoroughly:

When one individual inflicts bodily injury upon another such that death results, we call the deed manslaughter; when the assailant knew in advance that the injury would be fatal, we call his deed murder. But when society places hundreds of proletarians in such a position that they inevitably meet a too early and an unnatural death, one which is quite as much a death by violence as that by the sword or bullet; when it deprives thousands of the necessaries of life, places them under conditions in which they cannot live – forces them, through the strong arm of the law, to remain in such conditions until that death ensues which is the inevitable consequence – knows that these thousands of victims must perish, and yet permits these conditions to remain, its deed is murder just as surely as the deed of the single individual; disguised, malicious murder, murder against which none can defend himself, which does not seem what it is, because no man sees the murderer, because the death of the victim seems a natural one, since the offence is more one of omission than of commission. But murder it remains. I have now to prove that society in England daily and hourly commits what the working-men's organs, with perfect correctness, characterise as social murder, that it has placed the workers under conditions in which they can neither retain health nor live long; that it undermines the vital force of these workers gradually, little by little, and so hurries them to the grave before their time. I have further to prove that society knows how injurious such conditions are to the health and the life of the workers, and yet does nothing to improve these conditions. That it knows the consequences of its deeds; that its act is, therefore, not mere manslaughter, but murder, I shall have proved, when I cite official documents, reports of Parliament and of the Government, in substantiation of my charge.