I’ve been reading the conquest of bread and I can’t understand this excerpt here:

We do not know whether the folk who call themselves “practical people” have ever asked themselves this question in all its nakedness. But we do know that they wish to maintain the wage system, and we must therefore expect to have “national workshops” and “public works” vaunted as a means of giving food to the unemployed.

Because national workshops were opened in 1789 and 1793; because the same means were resorted to in 1848; because Napoleon III. succeeded in contenting the Parisian proletariat for eighteen years by giving them public works—which cost Paris to-day its debt of £80,000,000 and its municipal tax of three or four pounds a-head;[3] because this excellent method of “taming the beast” was customary in Rome, and even in Egypt four thousand years ago; and lastly, because despots, kings, and emperors have always employed the ruse of throwing a scrap of food to the people to gain time to snatch up the whip—it is natural that “practical” men should extol this method of perpetuating the wage system. What need to rack our brains when we have the time-honoured method of the Pharaohs at our disposal?

Yet should the Revolution be so misguided as to start on this path, it would be lost.

ok, I understand doing away with wages, abolishing capitalism and the state and letting people have what they need to live regardless of their ability to give back to their communities (although they should if they are able and if there is a need). But what is the issue with public workshops? cuz that probably means something else in this context but I don’t know what. And what’s with all of these instances of “because”? I really don’t get what he’s trying to say here. Sorry if this was the wrong place to post this but I couldn’t think of anywhere better.