counter What Then Must We Do? (Green Classics Series) - Free Download Books
Hot Best Seller

What Then Must We Do? (Green Classics Series)

Availability: Ready to download

Count Lev Nikolayevich Tolstoy (1828-1910) commonly referred to in English as Leo Tolstoy, was a Russian writer - novelist, essayist, dramatist and philosopher - as well as pacifist Christian anarchist and educational reformer. He was the most influential member of the aristocratic Tolstoy family. His first publications were three autobiographical novels, Childhood, Boyhoo Count Lev Nikolayevich Tolstoy (1828-1910) commonly referred to in English as Leo Tolstoy, was a Russian writer - novelist, essayist, dramatist and philosopher - as well as pacifist Christian anarchist and educational reformer. He was the most influential member of the aristocratic Tolstoy family. His first publications were three autobiographical novels, Childhood, Boyhood, and Youth (1852-1856). They tell of a rich landowner's son and his slow realization of the differences between him and his peasants. As a fiction writer Tolstoy is widely regarded as one of the greatest of all novelists, particularly noted for his masterpieces War and Peace (1869) and Anna Karenina (1877). In their scope, breadth and realistic depiction of 19th-century Russian life, the two books stand at the peak of realist fiction. As a moral philosopher Tolstoy was notable for his ideas on nonviolent resistance through works such as The Kingdom of God is Within You (1894).


Compare

Count Lev Nikolayevich Tolstoy (1828-1910) commonly referred to in English as Leo Tolstoy, was a Russian writer - novelist, essayist, dramatist and philosopher - as well as pacifist Christian anarchist and educational reformer. He was the most influential member of the aristocratic Tolstoy family. His first publications were three autobiographical novels, Childhood, Boyhoo Count Lev Nikolayevich Tolstoy (1828-1910) commonly referred to in English as Leo Tolstoy, was a Russian writer - novelist, essayist, dramatist and philosopher - as well as pacifist Christian anarchist and educational reformer. He was the most influential member of the aristocratic Tolstoy family. His first publications were three autobiographical novels, Childhood, Boyhood, and Youth (1852-1856). They tell of a rich landowner's son and his slow realization of the differences between him and his peasants. As a fiction writer Tolstoy is widely regarded as one of the greatest of all novelists, particularly noted for his masterpieces War and Peace (1869) and Anna Karenina (1877). In their scope, breadth and realistic depiction of 19th-century Russian life, the two books stand at the peak of realist fiction. As a moral philosopher Tolstoy was notable for his ideas on nonviolent resistance through works such as The Kingdom of God is Within You (1894).

30 review for What Then Must We Do? (Green Classics Series)

  1. 4 out of 5

    Moh. Nasiri

    "پس چرا هیچ‌کس‌کاری‌نمی‌کنه؟ :" این‌همیشه‌ ورد زبون‌ام بود. بعدا فهمیدم‌ اون‌ هیچ‌کس، خودِ من‌بودم (استیو ونت‌ورث) پیش‌ از‌ منشورِ حقوق‌ِبشر، منشورِ وظایف ِ‌بشر خیلی خیلی لازم‌ترهست (گاندی) چه باید کرد چه باید کرد یکی از آثار برجسته تولستوی و از پرمعناترین و ژرف‌ترین آن‌هاست. تولستوی در این کتاب با جملاتی ساده و روان یکی از دشوارترین موضوع‌های جامعه خود، یعنی وضع دلخراش یک طبقه از مردم را به تصویر می‌کشد و با صراحت و واقع‌بینی، علل بدبختی و فقر و فلاکت مردمی را که با دیگران یکسان خلق شده‌اند، اما "پس چرا هیچ‌کس‌کاری‌نمی‌کنه؟ :" این‌همیشه‌ ورد زبون‌ام بود. بعدا فهمیدم‌ اون‌ هیچ‌کس، خودِ من‌بودم (استیو ونت‌ورث) پیش‌ از‌ منشورِ حقوق‌ِبشر، منشورِ وظایف ِ‌بشر خیلی خیلی لازم‌ترهست (گاندی) چه باید کرد چه باید کرد یکی از آثار برجسته تولستوی و از پرمعناترین و ژرف‌ترین آن‌هاست. تولستوی در این کتاب با جملاتی ساده و روان یکی از دشوارترین موضوع‌های جامعه خود، یعنی وضع دلخراش یک طبقه از مردم را به تصویر می‌کشد و با صراحت و واقع‌بینی، علل بدبختی و فقر و فلاکت مردمی را که با دیگران یکسان خلق شده‌اند، اما از همه چیز حتی از کمترین امکانات حیات محروم‌اند، تشریح می‌کند "تولستوی در کتابِ "چه باید کرد در سال1886 یعنی 24 سال پیش از مرگ (در 58 سالگی) پشت می‌کند به همه‌ی افتخارات خود و برداشت‌هایش از ادبیات و از کارهای مشهورش مثل جنگ و صلح و آنا کارنینا، و همه را ریاکارانه، بازی با کلمات، فقط شهرت‌طلبانه و برای ارضایِ نیاز به تاییدِ دیگران توصیف می‌کند. در عوض، یکی از مهم‌ترین راه‌کارهای عملی‌اش را معرفی می‌کند: شریک‌شدنِ تمام و کمال در هستی و زندگیِ همسایه، و همان کسی یا گروهی که می‌خواهی کمک‌اش کنی یا بسازی‌اش. در نظرِ نهاییِ او، تعارف‌کردن و تفریحی سر زدن به او و مشتی از ذخائر مالیِ انبوه‌ات را هزینه‌ی امرِ خیر کردن، تقلبی آشکار و ریا کاری است. البته دل‌کندن از یک گنجینه‌ی چشم‌گیر که به آن عادت کرده ای یا برای آن زندگی کرده‌ای سخت است و دشوارتر از تقسیمِ یک وعده غذا با همسایه‌‌ی اهلِ نیاز، هر چند گربه‌ای باشد بی‌زبان! در نگاهِ او و بعدا هم در نگاهِ گاندی، امرِ انسانی، امرِ اجتماعی، امرِ سیاسی و امر معنوی از هم جدایی‌ناپذیرند و برای همه‌‌‌ی این “امر”ها باید با یکپارچگی و صداقتِ درونی و برونی به جدی‌ترین کار اقدام کرد، نه‌‌کمتر و نه بیشتر. داستانی واقعی نقل می‌کند تولستوی: دراوجِ شهرت (شهرتی که از تزار هم بیشتر بوده) و عزت و احترام، به شکلِ ناشناس در جنگلی در اطرافِ مسکو به هیزم‌شکنی مشغول بوده. سه نفر بوده‌اند. تولستوی, سیمیون و یک نفرِ دیگر. حقوق‌شان مثلا سه روبل بوده. روزی سرِ راهِ برگشت به خانه، فقیری جلوی راه‌شان سبز می شود و کمک می‌خواهد. تولستوی یک روبل می دهد. سیمیون هم اسکناسِ سه روبلی‌اش را می دهد و می‌گوید یک روبل بردار و باقی را برگردان. فقیر، پولی در جیب نداشته و به سیمیون همین را می‌گوید. سیمیون با آن وضعی که داشته رضایت می‌دهد همان یک روبلِ تولستوی را از فقیر بگیرد و به راه‌اش ادامه بدهد. (عدد و رقم‌ها ممکن است دقیق نباشند، اما در عنصرِ اساسیِ داستان که بخششِ بخشِ بیشترِ دستمزدِ سیمیون بوده، شکی نیست.). این حادثه تولستوی را تکان می‌دهد. چون در همان موقع، او صدها هکتار زمین و 600 هزار روبلِ طلا در اختیار داشته. در طول روزهای بعد، این تولستوی است که در حال کُن فَیَکون‌شدن از زندگیِ عاریتی و بی‌اصالتِ خود است. در داستانی دیگر، کودکی بی‌سرپرست را به خانه می‌آورد تا سرپرستی کند. خانه‌ای که یک عالمه کلفت و نوکر دارد و یک کاخِ واقعی است. کودک هنوز احساسِ جدا‌بودن می‌کرده. طبیعی بوده، چون اهل خانه که اتفاقا بیشترشان هم بزرگ سال بوده‌اند، پسرک را تحویل نمی‌گرفتند و او را از خودشان نمی دانسته‌اند. حتی خودِ تولستوی هم با او مثل یک مهمان رفتار می‌کرده. نتیجه، آن که پسرک روزی از خانه فرار می‌کند و تولستوی را با آواری از حسرت و پشیمانی پشت سر می‌گذارد. نولستوی از این دو داستان می‌فهمد که برای کمک باید واقعاً لخت شد و در آب شیرجه زد و یا کم‌کم واردِ آب شد، اما در آخرِ کار همه‌ی تن را خیس کرد؛ شترسواری دولا دولا نمی‌شود و شکاف‌ها با تعارفاتِ شابدولعظیمی پر نمی‌شوند. باید کاری کرد کارستان، از آن دست که چند ماه پیشتر از مرگ‌اش خبردارمی شود و آن را تحسین می کند: کسی به اسمِ گاندی در زمینی بایر در آفریقای جنوبی، کمونی ساخته‌است به اسم فِنیکس (ققنوس) و بعدا هم کمون دیگری می‌سازد به اسمِ تولستوی، براساسِ کار و برداشتِ مشترک و همگانی. تولستوی کارزارِ نافرمانیِ مدنیِ گاندی و تاسیسِ این دو مزرعه‌ را در نامه‌ای به گاندی ستایش می‌کند و می‌گوید، “این بهترین کاری است که بشر درکلِ کره‌ی زمین می‌توانست انجام دهد که شما یک‌تنه آن را عملی کردید.” (نقل به مضمون). گاندی هم به همان نتیجه رسید که تولستوی. او بعد از خواندن کتابی (تا این آخرینِ راسکین)، دل به دریا زد و ققنوس را ساخت و چندی بعد‌تر هم تماماً دل به اقیانوس زد، عهدی برای همه‌ی عمر با خود بست (براهماچاریا ۱ و ۲) و مزرعه‌‌ی تولستوی را تاسیس کرد. چند ماه بعد از آن نامه، تولستویِ سالخورده در راهِ فرار از آن کاخ و شروعِ یک زندگیِ درویشانه‌‌ی واقعی، با یک سینه پهلوی ساده و بعد از دو روز احتضار چشم از این جهانِ سپنجِ لبریز از درد و رنج فرو می بندد! لازم نیست بیشتر از توان‌ِات حتما کار خیلی پر سروصدایی برای همسایه‌ها بکنی! اما باید حتما هزینه بدی. (نقل نوشته ها از بلاگ غلامعلی کشانی) من دل‌نگران انسان‌های گوشت و خون داری هستم که می‌آیند، رنج می‌برند و می‌روند (استاد مصطفی ملکیان)

  2. 4 out of 5

    Abolfazl

    کتاب بی نظیری که نشون دهنده صدق گفتار و بزرگی روح تولستوی است. در یک کلام بی نظیر بود. در خواندن آن شک و تردید نکنید.

  3. 4 out of 5

    La pointe de la sauce

    'Surely this is simple enough. If I want to help the poor, that is, to make the poor no longer poor, I must not produce poor people.'   This is a brilliant book that recounts Tolstoy's personal journey in his quest to rid Moscow of it's underclass. Ha. Easier said than done. He finds that despite universal support from his peers, when it comes down to dragging people out of poverty any promised cash never materializes. Tolstoy decides to investigate the state of the underclass himself and takes the 'Surely this is simple enough. If I want to help the poor, that is, to make the poor no longer poor, I must not produce poor people.'   This is a brilliant book that recounts Tolstoy's personal journey in his quest to rid Moscow of it's underclass. Ha. Easier said than done. He finds that despite universal support from his peers, when it comes down to dragging people out of poverty any promised cash never materializes. Tolstoy decides to investigate the state of the underclass himself and takes the opportunity of a Moscow census to get into the slums. What becomes obvious is that the sense of penury dissipates the more he gets to know these people who are mainly countryside peasants who come into the city for a better life and end up losing everything.  He ultimately realizes that it's not money they need but a change of their world-view.  'The unhappy were exactly such unhappy beings as exist among us, that is, unhappy people whose unhappiness lies not in their external conditions, but in themselves, a sort of unhappiness which it is impossible to right by any sort of bank-note whatever.' They had only memories of the past, and expectations from the future, which might be realized at any moment, and for the realization of which only a very little was required; but this little they did not possess, it was nowhere to be obtained, and this had been ruining their whole future life in vain, in the case of one man, for a year, of a second for five years, and of a third for thirty years.    In fact at the end of the census not only is he unable to find one genuinely poor person deserving his charity but he also begins to doubt his own commitment to help the poor. He looks at his lifestyle and that of the landed aristocrats and realizes that the rich are inadvertently producing poor people and in fact his life of luxury in the city is exactly what is poisoning them.  His motive to help the poor, cold and hungry is also in direct conflict with how he 'earns' money which involves the complex trickery by the rich exacting payment from the poor for land and underpayment for the labour they put into production. I see that this enjoyment of the labors of others is so arranged, that the more rascally and complicated the trickery which is employed by the man himself...the more does he enjoy of the labors of others, and the less does he contribute himself'   Tolstoy effectively argues that through the use of various devices the rich are able to take the value of the labour of the poor and secondly that money, rather than being the perfect medium of exchange actually facilitates this theft. Money is a new form of slavery, which differs from the old form of slavery only in its impersonality, its annihilation of all humane relations with the slave. The rich believe they are simply paying for services and the morality of asking the poor to serve in terrible conditions is therefore irrelevant.  'I sit on a man's neck, I weigh him down, and I demand that he shall carry me; and without descending from his shoulders I assure myself and others that I am very sorry for him, and that I desire to ameliorate his condition by all possible means, only not by getting off of him.' Tolstoy as always, doesn't do any fluffing around in this commentary but places the problem in it's setting. We have all at one point or the other wondered what to do about the inequalities in the standard of living between the west and other under-developed nations. I think this book goes a long way in explaining this incongruity. Is it really possible that while some starve others waste tons and tons of food? The absurdity of an Indian child producing CK shirts while he has nothing to wear goes beyond satire.  Tolstoy goes a long way in explaining poverty but unlike  Nikolay Chernyshevsky (who inspired Lenin to right the same titled book) Tolstoy doesn't advance any new class revolution but puts the blame on the rich and the poor and on the social constructs of city life and on money. This book confirms the view that our current concept of capitalism is really enslaving people yet it really fails to advance any radical solutions apart from personal accountability. He echoes Rousseau's 'Theory ofNatural Human' by arguing civilization as artificial, creating inequality, envy, and unnatural desires. Tolstoy's final solution, just like Rousseau's, is that people start producing their own goods for their own consumption. I'm sure this would solve the problem at a basic level and yet I'm left feeling that there must be a better alternative than turning us into solitary apes. 

  4. 4 out of 5

    Ardavan Bayat

    ارادتم به تولستوی بیشتر و بیشتر شد...

  5. 4 out of 5

    Zeynab Babaxani

    من تولستوی رو دوست دارم. ساده و عمیق حرف میزنه. دغدغه هاش رو دوست دارم. من دوستش دارم چون رودربایستی با خودش و مخاطب نداره. میگه «یه وقتی به خودم قول دادم تا حد ممکن آدم صادقی باشم، سعی کنم همیشه راست بگم» من فکر میکنم متعهد هست به این قول و مخاطب این رو درک میکنه که اگر نویسنده یک دغدغه ی درونی رو مطرح میکنه و داره از فضای درونی خودش حرف میزنه، همه ی چیزی که در درونش گذشته رو میگه. بدون سانسور. تا حد ممکن صادقانه. برای همین تولستوی جذبم میکنه. احساس میکنم برای مخاطبش احترام قائل هست. من این احت من تولستوی رو دوست دارم. ساده و عمیق حرف میزنه. دغدغه هاش رو دوست دارم. من دوستش دارم چون رودربایستی با خودش و مخاطب نداره. میگه «یه وقتی به خودم قول دادم تا حد ممکن آدم صادقی باشم، سعی کنم همیشه راست بگم» من فکر میکنم متعهد هست به این قول و مخاطب این رو درک میکنه که اگر نویسنده یک دغدغه ی درونی رو مطرح میکنه و داره از فضای درونی خودش حرف میزنه، همه ی چیزی که در درونش گذشته رو میگه. بدون سانسور. تا حد ممکن صادقانه. برای همین تولستوی جذبم میکنه. احساس میکنم برای مخاطبش احترام قائل هست. من این احترام رو دوست دارم. اما در مورد موضوع کتاب. کتاب در مورد دغدغه ای هست که برای کمک به مردم مستضعف در تولستوی ایجاد میشه. تولستوی تلاش و تفکرش رو توی این کتاب با ما به اشتراک میذاره. و به نظر من به نکات خوبی هم اشاره میکنه. البته من اقتصاد و جامعه شناسی نمیدونم که بگم چقدر حرفش عملی هست. فقط به لحاظ شخصی و در حد خودم حرفش رو پسندیدم.

  6. 5 out of 5

    Salma Bk

    Tolstoy describes in his work the social and economic situation of the working class in particular and the poor in general in Russia during the 19th century. The first part is the staging and description of the miserable state of employees who earn only a few rubles while a limited class of society leads a life full of material wealth while enjoying the work of others. He describes urban poverty in a social and economic approach. Tolstoy presents definitions of money and even criticizes it. ''An Tolstoy describes in his work the social and economic situation of the working class in particular and the poor in general in Russia during the 19th century. The first part is the staging and description of the miserable state of employees who earn only a few rubles while a limited class of society leads a life full of material wealth while enjoying the work of others. He describes urban poverty in a social and economic approach. Tolstoy presents definitions of money and even criticizes it. ''And I came to feel that in money itself, in the very possession of it, there is something evil and immoral; and that money itself, and the fact that I possess it, is one of the chief causes of the evils.'' And, in a second-place poses the big question: What then must we do? For those interested in this essay, I recommend his second work: '' The slavery of our times''. Tolstoy belonged to the noble class, but he was always interested and touched by the miserable lives of the poor. For him, human values ​​constitute the best solution for social and economic development in a world where human rights are inferior to the interests of representatives of the bourgeois class and of government.

  7. 4 out of 5

    Pouria Roshani

    چه باید کرد؟ / لئو تولستوی / راوی کتاب صوتی: بهروز رضوی / تاریخ اتمام کتاب: 28 جولای 2020 / امتیازم به کتاب از پنج: دو و نیم کتاب اعتراضی به نظام سرمایه داری هست که پولدار توی اون پولدارتر و فقیر، فقیر تر. مستقل از اینکه دلیل پولدار یا فقیر بودن این افراد چی هست. حرف هایی که توی کتاب گفته میشد برای نسل ما چیز جدیدی نبود و روایت هم روایت متفاوتی نبود. راه حل هایی توی کتاب برای حل این مساله ارائه شده بود که عملا توی خود کتاب هم گفت که جواب نمیده و اول شخص داستان به تناقضی رسیده بود که واقعا چیکار م چه باید کرد؟ / لئو تولستوی / راوی کتاب صوتی: بهروز رضوی / تاریخ اتمام کتاب: 28 جولای 2020 / امتیازم به کتاب از پنج: دو و نیم کتاب اعتراضی به نظام سرمایه داری هست که پولدار توی اون پولدارتر و فقیر، فقیر تر. مستقل از اینکه دلیل پولدار یا فقیر بودن این افراد چی هست. حرف هایی که توی کتاب گفته میشد برای نسل ما چیز جدیدی نبود و روایت هم روایت متفاوتی نبود. راه حل هایی توی کتاب برای حل این مساله ارائه شده بود که عملا توی خود کتاب هم گفت که جواب نمیده و اول شخص داستان به تناقضی رسیده بود که واقعا چیکار میشه کرد؟ با دوستان که در مورد کتاب صحبت می کردیم یکی از راهکارهایی که پیشنهاد شد گرفتن مالیات بیشتر از افراد پولدار بود اما به نظر من این هم چندان جوابگو نیست و معمولا همین افراد پولدار هستن که دولتمردان رو میارن سر قدرت از این رو اگر دولتی بخواد دست به همچین کارهایی بزنه، عملا داره پشتیبان های خودشو میزنه. به نظر من این فقیر و پولدار بودن و اختلاف طبقاتی چیز از بین بردنی ای نیست و متعلق به جهان ماست. چیز زیبایی نیست ولی وجود داره و تلاش های در جهت ریشه کردنش به طور کل موفقیت آمیز نخواهد بود اونم توی این دنیایی اینقدر پیچیده ی امروزی. شاید توی گذشته ممکن بود. الان آدما هم خیلی پیچیده تر از قبل شدن و عقاید مختلف دارن. در کل کتاب ارزش خوندن و صحبت رو داشت ولی خب فکر نمی کنم جواب قطعی و کاملا موثری برای دغدغه ی کتاب وجود داشته باشه. فقط مجموعه ای از تلاش های مختلف و ریز ریز که نتایج ریز مفید دارن. ورژن صوتی این کتاب رو گوش دادم و هم توی وقت صرفه جویی شد هم اینکه لذت بخش بود شنیدنش با یک صدای خوب.

  8. 5 out of 5

    Ietrio

    During the first chapters I was laughing my behind off. Reading about the abject poverty in the savage and unwashed world of god. Priests and superstition were doing their best. And the misery was reigning. Fast forward a century. Atrocities? The tzar and his favorite priests were doing the same. But the extreme poverty was nearly gone. The land was and still is a theocracy. But the misery was mostly removed. The only change: the science and a kick in the rear for the S&M god. Tolstoy is buildin During the first chapters I was laughing my behind off. Reading about the abject poverty in the savage and unwashed world of god. Priests and superstition were doing their best. And the misery was reigning. Fast forward a century. Atrocities? The tzar and his favorite priests were doing the same. But the extreme poverty was nearly gone. The land was and still is a theocracy. But the misery was mostly removed. The only change: the science and a kick in the rear for the S&M god. Tolstoy is building the best case for atheism. Tolstoy is a disgusting person. He is an idiot. The arbitrary is not an issue with him. Especially if it's "good", meaning on his side. He is an egocentric a-hole with a kink for voyeurism, not sex as it is impure, but for suffering. He does nothing for anyone. Occasionally he is ready to pay for a good story. Yet even those money the Russian Scrooge would count as down payment for the heavens. This way he cheats both the readership and his magical god. The guy practically gets off from restating the difference between him and the miserables. This way he confirms his gentlemanly status and his grace from god who has personally made sure that such a fine individual has a good life. Like any lunatic with an agenda, he cherry picks as proof. After all his education is shallow, just enough to make believe for his aristocratic status. He is constantly deceived by what he sets as bad guys, on whom he checks on to confirm his assumptions. Symmetrically he is constantly saddened by cases which he conveniently does not check. As I was saying, he is a disgusting person. At every page he needs to point out his superiority. At the beggars' house all the way to the aristocrat homes Everyone is at fault. What about him? The others seem to have embraced the "wrong way". And he does fight them. By indulging in his favorite kink. And all he does is selling more books and more articles, increasing his wealth. By his own standard, Tolstoy is morally inferior to those he considers his inferiors.

  9. 4 out of 5

    Omid Milanifard

    آسان برای خواندن و سخت برای فرو دادن و هضم کردن. کاش آن مرد کاپشن پوش هم چنین کتابهایی را خوانده بود..

  10. 5 out of 5

    Fateme zavarikia

    کتاب صوتی بهروز رضوی سوال اتی بدون جواب تفکر تفکر تفکر

  11. 4 out of 5

    Iman Narimani

    تولستوی که از جمله ثروتمندان و اشراف جامعه خودش است و زمانی که برای درمان بیماری اش به مسکو می آید با این واقعیت مواجه می شود که فقرای زیادی در شهر زندگی می کنند و تعداد آنها روز به روز در حال افزایش هستند. او بدون آنکه بخواهد اغراق کند یا خود را انسانی خوب جلوه بدهد قصد دارد به فقرا کمک کند. این در حالیست که این فقر و فاصله طبقاتی برای بسیاری در شهر عادی است و دوستان ثروتمند او با استدلال هایی سعی می کنند او را از توجه به این موضوع منع کنند. انگار فقر را بخشی از زندگی شهری می دانند که باید وجود تولستوی که از جمله ثروتمندان و اشراف جامعه خودش است و زمانی که برای درمان بیماری اش به مسکو می آید با این واقعیت مواجه می شود که فقرای زیادی در شهر زندگی می کنند و تعداد آنها روز به روز در حال افزایش هستند. او بدون آنکه بخواهد اغراق کند یا خود را انسانی خوب جلوه بدهد قصد دارد به فقرا کمک کند. این در حالیست که این فقر و فاصله طبقاتی برای بسیاری در شهر عادی است و دوستان ثروتمند او با استدلال هایی سعی می کنند او را از توجه به این موضوع منع کنند. انگار فقر را بخشی از زندگی شهری می دانند که باید وجود داشته باشد. #تولستوی به محله های پایین شهر میرود و با فقرا همنشین می شود. در تحقیقش درباره زندگی آنها متوجه می شود خیلی از این افراد تنبل هستند تا فقیر. به عبارت دیگر بخشی از آنها بیش از آنکه از فقر مالی رنج ببرند، گرفتار فقر فکری و فرهنگی هستند. با این حال این را هم میفهمد که اگر برخی از آنها تنبل هستند، بسیاری از ثروتمندان نیز تنبل هستند و در طول روز هیچ کار مفیدی جز خوردن و خوابیدن انجام نمی دهند. او متوجه می شود که بسیاری از ثروتمندان در حال استثمار فقرا هستند و این موضوع روز به روز نفرت و فاصله طبقاتی بین این دو گروه را بیشتر می کند. در نهایت پاسخ تولستوی به این پاسخ که چه باید کرد همان حکایت #سعدی است. سعدی در بوستان نقل می کند که فردی نزد حاکم عادلی رفت و گفت بهتر نیست به جای این لباس ساده قبایی از پارچه چینی برای خود بدوزی؟ و حاکم اینگونه پاسخ داد: بگفت: این قدر ستر و آسایش است وز این بگذری زیب و آرایش است نسخه پیشنهادی تولستوی هم برای حل مشکل این است که همه ثروتمندان باید به اندازه ای که نیاز دارند بپوشند و بخورند و بقیه را بین فقرا تقسیم کنند. البته شاید این پاسخ درست یا عملی نباشد اما شجاعت، جسارت و صداقت تولستوی در این کتاب قابل ستایش و احترام است. بخشی از کتاب فهمیده بودم آن فلک زده ها با آنکه برای شهری ها جان می کنند، یک نفرت پنهان هم در وجودشان دارند که از ترس از دست دادن کار آن را پنهان می کنند. مجبورند همیشه تظاهر به راضی بودن از اوضاع کنند تا لقمه شان را از دست ندهند. آری من به آن طبقه از مردم تعلق دارم که دسترنج زحمت کشان را می ربایند و در پرتو آن روبل های افسانه ای به دست می آورند که سبب فریفتن بینوایان می شود. روشن است که اگر من واقعا قصد کمک به دیگران را داشته باشم، نباید آنان را اغوا کنم یا هستیشان را بربایم ولی با استفاده از هر نوع حیله و تدبیر برای خود وضعی ایجاد کرده ام که به من اجازه می دهد بدون هیچ کاری زندگی کنم و صد ها و هزاران انسان را وادارم که برای من زحمت بکشند. من روی دوش یکی از این آدمها سوار می شوم، پشتش را می شکنم، وادارش می کنم که مرا حمل کند و در عین حال که حاضر نیستم از دوشش پایین بیایم برای او دلسوزی می کنم و می گویم در آرزویم این است که به هر وسیله ای که ممکن باشد زندگی او را اصلاح کنم. درحالی که اگر واقعا بخواهم بینوایان را کمک کنم و از فقر و بدبختی نجاتشان دهم، حداقل نباید خود عامل فقر و بیچارگی آنها باشم. به نظر من پول یک شکل جدید و وحشت آور بردگیست و مانند بردگی قدیم، برده و برده دار هر دو را فاسد می کند؛ اما این شکل تازه پست تر و غیر انسانی تر از قیافه سابق آن است، چون در این روش جدید تمام ارتباطات انسانی و شخصی بین برده و صاحبش گسسته شده و از میان رفته است.

  12. 4 out of 5

    Max Lybbert

    Given that Tolstoy was a great thinker, I've been interested in his non-story books. This one covers Tolstoy's view of poverty and how to eliminate it. By the end of the book, Tolstoy acknowledges that poverty won't be eliminated in this world, but he continues to look at what an ideal world would look like. I have to assume that his 19th-century Russian Orthodox beliefs color the analysis (for instance, the last chapter of the book claims that women would be much happier if they willingly accep Given that Tolstoy was a great thinker, I've been interested in his non-story books. This one covers Tolstoy's view of poverty and how to eliminate it. By the end of the book, Tolstoy acknowledges that poverty won't be eliminated in this world, but he continues to look at what an ideal world would look like. I have to assume that his 19th-century Russian Orthodox beliefs color the analysis (for instance, the last chapter of the book claims that women would be much happier if they willingly accepted the commandment given in the Garden of Eden to have children). I enjoyed much of this book. I enjoyed portions even where I disagreed with the analysis (Tolstoy worried that selling his previous books had been immoral on the argument that if the books were good for the soul, then it was wrong to only distribute them for a profit; and if the books weren't good for the soul, then it was wrong to distribute them at all, and especially wrong to do so at a profit; but the people who willingly bought the books thought they did more good for the soul than the money spent on them would have, or as they say in the Cluetrain Manifesto, money is the way to say "thanks" in a market economy). However, there is some analysis that I simply can't recommend even though it is reasonable given Tolstoy's understanding of economics: Tolstoy believed that poor people were exploited by the fact that many had jobs to cater to the silly whims of rich people. He argued that in a better world, the rich wouldn't spend money on silly things (e.g., flamboyant clothes) which would free the poor from jobs to provide them. This may work in a perfect world. What Tolstoy overlooked -- a or at least did not address -- was the fact that the poor people in those jobs chose them willingly. Given the jobs available to them, they decided that they'd rather make flamboyant clothing than, say, clean out septic tanks or farm in a pre-industrial world. The solution isn't to get rid of the kinds of jobs you disagree with, but to find ways to provide more of the jobs you'd like.

  13. 5 out of 5

    Narjes Shabani

    ی کناب کوتاه، ساده اما عمیق بعد از مدت ها ی کتاب خوب خوندم

  14. 5 out of 5

    Shanil

    A tremendous work (except for the last chapter which is dated and I forgive as a historical liability given the era of his raising... it is unfortunate that it ends with that last bit as it IS so antiquated in thinking that it undermines much of the credibility of the text leading up to that point) BUT the first parts are tremendous. A chronology of philosophical growth and social activism. A wonderful expose on universal themes which shape altruism.

  15. 5 out of 5

    Sumeet

    Tolstoy touches issues not one dares to and in this book he talks about money, ethics, poverty and materialism. A must read for everyone who feels that there is something wrong with the way our world works. If you want to know why some people suffer on the hand of others and believe that we have abolish slavery. This is the book you read.

  16. 4 out of 5

    Angus

    Apart from the garbage final chapter in which Tolstoy mumbles on and on about the potential for women who give birth to at least 20 babies to save the world, this is a challenging, powerful work about the ways that people who have much might be able to change their lives to live more authentically, and be kinder too.

  17. 5 out of 5

    Alexan Martin-Eichner

    Excellent critique of liberal charity, Marx's theory of labor, and the state. The weird Georgist economics, odd ethical priorities, and attack on feminism are all a bit hard to read though. Excellent critique of liberal charity, Marx's theory of labor, and the state. The weird Georgist economics, odd ethical priorities, and attack on feminism are all a bit hard to read though.

  18. 5 out of 5

    Nima

    بررسی فقر در جامعه و توضیح بی اثر بودن خیلی از تلاش ها برای رفع آن. این کتاب دید جدیدی از فقر در جوامع به من داد.

  19. 5 out of 5

    Jeff

    This book is sadly out of print in the US, and rather than try to read the online editions I tracked down a reprint edition from the UK. Best decision I've made in a long while. This book is engaging, well reasoned, and full of food for thought even if you aren't ready to join a communal movement with its roots in the late 19th century. The basic idea is that our current (as true now, as it was when this was written in 1886) systems of science, art, and industry create the conditions of slavery- This book is sadly out of print in the US, and rather than try to read the online editions I tracked down a reprint edition from the UK. Best decision I've made in a long while. This book is engaging, well reasoned, and full of food for thought even if you aren't ready to join a communal movement with its roots in the late 19th century. The basic idea is that our current (as true now, as it was when this was written in 1886) systems of science, art, and industry create the conditions of slavery-- or more succinctly, money is the root of slavery. It isn't so much as a critique of capitalism as it is an easily demonstrable fact. Given this, then, what should we do? Tolstoy doesn't propose revolution, as many of his anarchist contemporaries did, but rather that we return to the basic human values of being self-supporting (growing food, making clothes, building houses, etc.) in order to avoid participating in the larger systems that are responsible for human slavery. While this is obviously easier said than done, at least being aware of the fact that slaves built your iPhone/clothes/food if you shop through normal channels and get off your high-horse and do what you can to cut down on the level of human misery that is inherent in the system. That's about the size of it-- it's about recognizing the causes of oppression and human misery and hoping to find ways to minimize it. The sweeping exploration doesn't let anyone of the hook, including the clergy, for-profit science, pompous art, and of course the money-changers among us. It doesn't try to roll back the clock (although many of the people who followed this logic into utopian movements did) but rather raise awareness and poke pins in the fraudulent justifications for our behavior.

  20. 5 out of 5

    HoneyBahram

    تولستوی در بیان کوته‌بینی‌ها، حماقت‌ها و اشتباهات خود و طبقه بورژوا صادق عمل کرده و این موضوع در کنار طنز تلخی که در نوشته‌اش جریان دارد کتاب را برخلاف موضوعی که شاید برای همه پرکشش نباشد خواندنی می‌کند. در ابتدا به نظر می‌رسد با داستان نویسنده‌ای روبرو هستیم که از کنار بی‌نواها و گدایان به سادگی نگذشته است اما در ادامه متوجه تدبیر او در گرفتن ابتدای نخ تا رسیدن به کلاف و نشان دادن این کلاف پیچیده و سردرگم به ما می‌شویم. تقریبا در نیمه اول شاهد احوالات و مشاهده‌های او هستیم و در نیمه دوم سوالاتی ک تولستوی در بیان کوته‌بینی‌ها، حماقت‌ها و اشتباهات خود و طبقه بورژوا صادق عمل کرده و این موضوع در کنار طنز تلخی که در نوشته‌اش جریان دارد کتاب را برخلاف موضوعی که شاید برای همه پرکشش نباشد خواندنی می‌کند. در ابتدا به نظر می‌رسد با داستان نویسنده‌ای روبرو هستیم که از کنار بی‌نواها و گدایان به سادگی نگذشته است اما در ادامه متوجه تدبیر او در گرفتن ابتدای نخ تا رسیدن به کلاف و نشان دادن این کلاف پیچیده و سردرگم به ما می‌شویم. تقریبا در نیمه اول شاهد احوالات و مشاهده‌های او هستیم و در نیمه دوم سوالاتی که کم کم در ذهنمان ایجاد شده به مسئله اصلی بدل می‌شود و منتظر پاسخ نهایی می‌مانیم. خود را در میان مشکل بردگی مدرن می‌بینیم و با زبان داستانی متوجه ارضای نیازهای بورژوای تن‌پرور توسط پرولتاریای زحمت‌کش می‌شویم. حال سوال این است چه باید کرد؟ درواقع زمانی که متوجه مسئله اصلی می‌شویم رها می‌شویم درحالی که گمان می‌کردیم یک بار برای همیشه جوابی برای ریشه‌کن شدن فقر پیدا کرده بودیم. مسئله بی‌پاسخی مطرح می‌شود فقط به قصد درگیر کردن خواننده؟ این فقط پاسخ اولی است که بلافاصله پس از پایان کتاب به آن می‌رسیم و پاسخ اصلی را با ناراحتی در خود پیدا می‌کنیم. خود تولستوی بیان می‌کند که امیدوار است عمری نصیبش بشود تا پاسخ را بجوید و درواقع به‌نظر می‌رسد او فقط قصد داشته با این کتاب پس از شرح مسئله اساسی جهان امروز خوره فکری خودش را به جان مخاطب هم بیندازد که موفق هم عمل می‌کند!

  21. 4 out of 5

    AK

    "How can all this violence secure my liberty, and all this evil promote my welfare?" It does end with some extremely sexist moralizing blah blah about women/whores, but weirdly it does so with the most straightforward acknowledgement and respect for the labor of mothering that I've ever seen by a Canonical Male Author. Tolstoy has a powerful way of drawing you into his moral crisis as a lucky man of wealth in a deeply unequal society, and his shame and frustration at not being able to get to the "How can all this violence secure my liberty, and all this evil promote my welfare?" It does end with some extremely sexist moralizing blah blah about women/whores, but weirdly it does so with the most straightforward acknowledgement and respect for the labor of mothering that I've ever seen by a Canonical Male Author. Tolstoy has a powerful way of drawing you into his moral crisis as a lucky man of wealth in a deeply unequal society, and his shame and frustration at not being able to get to the root of that unevenness. This text was written 131 years ago, and yet on the other side of many revolutions, wars, and crises we've just succeeded in making things even more staggeringly unequal and this work still resonates. Gender politics notwithstanding. I read the Maude translation, which is free online as a pdf.

  22. 4 out of 5

    Leyli

    کتابی بی‌نظیر از تولستوی که اعتراضی هست به این موضوع که، پولدار ها هر روز پولدار تر و فقرا و مستمندان هر روز فقیرتر می‌شوند. و اینکه ثروتمندان بدون توجه به این موضوع که خودشان شاید از هر نیازمندی، نیازمندتر باشند؛ به فکر کمک به فقرا بودن، اندیشه‌ای عبث است. کتاب در عینی که ساده و روان و شاید با موضوعی تکراری بود، ولی پی بردن و عملی کردن این مفاهیم که همگی به آن واقف هستیم، کاری دشوار است.

  23. 4 out of 5

    Sarahasani

    عشق یا به گفته دیگر، تمایل و کشش روح به سوی همدردی بشری و موافقت و پیوستگی مردم، تنها قانون عالی زندگیست... این را همه‌کس می‌داند و در اعماق روحش حس می‌کند و مخصوصاً در اطفال این پدیده آشکارترست....! اطفال تا زمانی که هنوز در میان دندانه‌های چرخ فساد دنیای کنونی خرد نشده، بر این حقیقت واقف است....

  24. 5 out of 5

    vatsal

    A book which explains fundamental forces of society. It also explains why women are crucial for social change. Instead of helping poor by giving them money to alleviate their grief, Tolstoy explains the root cause of such situation. And he finds true way for a person in such situation.

  25. 5 out of 5

    Amit

    Impressed by this book. It is so much true even today after 132 years. That's real Science!! A perfect Classic to read. Impressed by this book. It is so much true even today after 132 years. That's real Science!! A perfect Classic to read.

  26. 4 out of 5

    Fermin Quant

    An excellent thought-provoking book. The conclusions drawn throughout his experiences never cease to amaze you and make you question your way of life. Definitely worth reading.

  27. 4 out of 5

    MohammadReza Jokar

    واقعا تاثیر گذار بود، پیشنهاد میکنم حتما مطالعه کنید

  28. 5 out of 5

    Uzma

    In this book Leo Tolstoy talks about the evil that resides in men - the inherent desire for more power, authority and money. He begins the book by calling reader's attention to the sufferings of the less privileged. How thoughtlessly we spend money on our wants (luxuries of the rich) while the common man is dying of hunger, so much so that young women have to give themselves up to prostitution. He questions, should these women be blamed when the society of the rich and the privileged is unable t In this book Leo Tolstoy talks about the evil that resides in men - the inherent desire for more power, authority and money. He begins the book by calling reader's attention to the sufferings of the less privileged. How thoughtlessly we spend money on our wants (luxuries of the rich) while the common man is dying of hunger, so much so that young women have to give themselves up to prostitution. He questions, should these women be blamed when the society of the rich and the privileged is unable to provide them food, clothing,shelter and respect? Is it that difficult to part with your money? He quotes examples of his encounters with the rich. He desires to start a charity that ensures well-being of the poor taking them away from begging and providing a respectable livelihood instead. When, however, he approaches his rich comrades none of them displays empathy. They are sitting dumbfounded and the only way to ask them for monetary help is by importuning them. He then goes on to discuss the origin of money, why we need it and the human greed. The book ends at a brief discussion of women competing with men in equal opportunities. The only part I would not agree with is where he mentions Prophet Joseph and the famine in Egypt. A Prophet of God will never acquire cunning ways to make people work for him. Prophet Joseph [Yusuf] in Islam is known to be a wise yet forbearing and persevering man.

  29. 5 out of 5

    Parth Bavarva

    આ પુસ્તકમાંથી એક બહુ જ સરસ દરેક માણસે શીખવા મળ્યું છે એ , એ છે કે જાલિમિ અને ગુલામી વચ્ચે નો સંબંધ, અત્યાર ના સમયમાં તેનુ આધુનિક સ્વરુપ અને ગરીબી નાં કારણો એક અલગ જ દ્રષ્ટિકોણથિ અને તેને નીવારણ માટે ના કીનચીત ઉપાયો. અત્યારના સમય પ્રમાણે અમુક જગ્યાએ આ પુસ્તક અવાસ્તવિક લાગે છે,કારણ કે આમાં બિન સ્વાર્થી થવાનું સૂચવવામાં આવ્યુ છે જો સમગ્ર સમાજ એકસાથે અમલીકરણ કરે તો પુર્ણ પરિણામ આવે પરંતું જો 1/2 કરે અને 1/2 નાં કરે તો સરવાળે સ્થિતી તૌ ત્યાં જ પહોંચી જવાની છે જ્યાંથી સરૂઆત કરી તિ ત્યાં. આ પુસ્તકમાંથી આ પુસ્તકમાંથી એક બહુ જ સરસ દરેક માણસે શીખવા મળ્યું છે એ , એ છે કે જાલિમિ અને ગુલામી વચ્ચે નો સંબંધ, અત્યાર ના સમયમાં તેનુ આધુનિક સ્વરુપ અને ગરીબી નાં કારણો એક અલગ જ દ્રષ્ટિકોણથિ અને તેને નીવારણ માટે ના કીનચીત ઉપાયો. અત્યારના સમય પ્રમાણે અમુક જગ્યાએ આ પુસ્તક અવાસ્તવિક લાગે છે,કારણ કે આમાં બિન સ્વાર્થી થવાનું સૂચવવામાં આવ્યુ છે જો સમગ્ર સમાજ એકસાથે અમલીકરણ કરે તો પુર્ણ પરિણામ આવે પરંતું જો 1/2 કરે અને 1/2 નાં કરે તો સરવાળે સ્થિતી તૌ ત્યાં જ પહોંચી જવાની છે જ્યાંથી સરૂઆત કરી તિ ત્યાં. આ પુસ્તકમાંથી એક બહુ જ સરસ દરેક માણસે શીખવા મળ્યું છે એ , એ છે કે જાલિમિ અને ગુલામી વચ્ચે નો સંબંધ, અત્યાર ના સમયમાં તેનુ આધુનિક સ્વરુપ અને ગરીબી નાં કારણો એક અલગ જ દ્રષ્ટિકોણથિ અને તેને નીવારણ માટે ના કીનચીત ઉપાયો. અત્યારના સમય પ્રમાણે અમુક જગ્યાએ આ પુસ્તક અવાસ્તવિક લાગે છે,કારણ કે આમાં બિન સ્વાર્થી થવાનું સૂચવવામાં આવ્યુ છે જો સમગ્ર સમાજ એકસાથે અમલીકરણ કરે તો પુર્ણ પરિણામ આવે પરંતું જો 1/2 કરે અને 1/2 નાં કરે તો સરવાળે સ્થિતી તૌ ત્યાં જ પહોંચી જવાની છે જ્યાંથી સરૂઆત કરી તિ ત્યાં.

  30. 5 out of 5

    Naren Bakshi

    Who touches the book, touches a man.......a quote in the forward written by Kaka Kalelkar. Do you feel guilty when enjoying any kind of lavish lifestyle when surrounded by the waiter, hotel staff, your driver or any other person who YOU think is not LIKE you and are eagerly waiting (or even praying) for them to leave the place ASAP? Then this book is for you. If your answer for the above question was a No and you believe that it is a good thing because many of them are getting jobs due to your li Who touches the book, touches a man.......a quote in the forward written by Kaka Kalelkar. Do you feel guilty when enjoying any kind of lavish lifestyle when surrounded by the waiter, hotel staff, your driver or any other person who YOU think is not LIKE you and are eagerly waiting (or even praying) for them to leave the place ASAP? Then this book is for you. If your answer for the above question was a No and you believe that it is a good thing because many of them are getting jobs due to your lifestyle, then read this book. In short almost all of our excuses are covered in this book, read this and make others read it.

Add a review

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Loading...
We use cookies to give you the best online experience. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies in accordance with our cookie policy.