Contemporary Man and His Capability To Solve The Social Problem - Part 3
THE MARXIST VIEWPOINT
Marxism sees man to be spiritually and intel- lectually conditioned to the method of production and the type of producing powers. Being independ ent of these powers, he cannot think in social terms, nor can he know the best system ...! The producing powers, according to Marxism, dictate to him such knowledge, allowing him to answer the essential ques- tion we laid out in our Introduction above, and he, in turn, will recur their echo carefully and faithfully.
The windmill (Marxism argues), for example, inspires man to feel that the feudal system is the best system for him. The steam mill that succeeded it teaches man that capitalism is worthier of imple- mentation. Today's electrical and atomic means of production give the society new intellectual concept, believing that the social system is the fittest ...
Humanity's capacity to conceive the best sys- tem, then, is exactly its own capacity to interpret the social outcome of all producing powers, recurring their echo!
As for the old conventional conception, it is now wrong, since a more modern social conception has been invented! What secures the Soviet man his view's accuracy is the belief that such view represents the new aspect of the social awareness, expressing a new stage of history; so, it has to be correct, unlike old views!
It is true, though, that some social views may seem to be new - in spite of their falsehood - such as the Nazi view in the first half of this century, as it seemed as if it were expressing a new develop- ment in history! But how fast are such veiled views uncovered, proving through experience that they are nothing but an echo to the old views, an interpre- tation of outworn historical stages, not new views per se!!
Thus does Marxism assert: the "modernity" of the social view, i.e., its birth as the outcome of newly-formulated historical circumstances, is the guarantor of its accuracy as long as history is in escalating advancement! There is something else, and that is: today, for example, humanity's perception of the social system, as being the fittest, is insufficient, according to Marxism, to put it to practise unless and until the class that benefits from it more than others (this, according to this example, is the proletariat), a vio- lent class struggle will take place against the class that benefits from keeping the old system. This mad struggle interacts with the concept of the fittest system; hence, such struggle will get fiercer as long as that concept grows and becomes clearer and, in its turn, it deepens the concept, helping it grow as it gets more strong and prevalent!
This Marxist viewpoint is based on the material- istic historical ideals which are criticized in our broad study of economical Marxism.'
What we add here is that history itself proves that the social ideals concerning identifying the type of fittest system are not created by the producing powers; rather, man has his own originality and creativity in this sphere, independent of the means of production. Otherwise, how can Marxism explain to us the ideas of nationalization, socialism, and state ownership during distant and separate periods of history?! If the belief in the idea of nationalization - as the fittest system, according to the Soviet man today - is the result of the sort of today's producing powers, what is the meaning of the appearance of the same idea in remote times when these producing powers were non-existent?!
Did not Plato believe in communism, imagining his ideal city on a communist base?! Was his con- ception the outcome of modern means of production which the Greeks never possessed?!
What can I say?! ... But the social ideas two thousand years ago reached a stage of maturity and depth in the minds of some great political thinkers to a degree which paved to them the way of their i mplementation just as does the Soviet man today, with only few adjustments!
This is Woo-Di, the greatest of China's emperors from the Han family, believed, out of knowledge and experience, in the social system as the fittest. He put it to practise during the period from 140-87 B. C., making all natural resources the property of the nation and nationalizing the industries of salt extrac- tion, iron mining and wine-making! He wanted to put an end to the authority of commissioners and commercial competitors. He established a special system for transportation and exchange under the auspices of the state, trying thereby to control trade in order to be able to avoid sudden price changes. The state workers themselves used to undertake carrying and delivering goods to the respective owners throughout the country, and the government itself used to stock whatever was left of the nation's need, selling them when their prices rose above the necess- ary limit and buying them when their prices fell down! He set to establish great common institutions to create jobs for the millions of those who could not be absorbed by the private industries.
Also, in the beginning of the Christian era, Wang Mang ascended the throne and became enthusi- astic to the idea of emancipating slaves and of putting an end to both slavery and feudalism, just like what the Europeans believed in doing at the beginning of the capitalist era. He abolished slavery, took the lands from the feudal class, nationalized arable lands and distributed them among the peasants, forbade buy- ing or selling lands in order to avoid repossession. And he nationalized mines and some other major industries, too.
So, could Woo-Di or Wang Mang have derived their social inspiration and political policies from steam power, electricity or the atom, the powers Marxism considers to be the bases of social think- ing?!
So do we derive this conclusion: perceiving this system or that - as the fittest - is not the making of this producing power or that ... !
Also, the advancing movement of history - the one whereby Marxism proves that the "modernity" of thinking guarantees its accuracy - is nothing but another myth of history, for certainly reactionary and melting trends of civilization are numerous indeed ... !
Adopted from the book: "Contemporary Man and The Social Problem" by: "Ayatollah Muhammad Baqir Al-Sadr"
Share this article