அறிஞர் அண்ணாவின் முதல்
அண்ணா அவர்கள் கல்லூரி மாணவராக
1933-ல், மே தினத்தைப் பற்றி எழுதிய
முதல் ஆங்கிலக் கட்டுரை.
is the first article written by Perarignar Anna, When he was a
student of the Panchaiyappa’s College, in 1933, which was published
in the College Magazine)
MEET a Soviet citizen and ask him what is the meaning of all the
noise that he makes - why, seek Stalin himself and put him the
same question. “Oh! it is a mighty world revolution against capitalism!
Damn it! We crushed it. Yet we want to wipe it out of the face
of the earth” would Stalin or the Soviet thunder forth.
is Leninism; Leninism is applied Marxism. Arm chair critics may
brand Marx as a dreamy politician and destructive economist. Some
considered him as revolution personified. To the ‘Proletarian
world’, however, he is a demi God. His works, ‘Capital’ and ‘Communist
Manifesto’ are the two testaments to the proletarian. The melody
of Marx, was so sweet, so nice, so hope-giving that the labourer
became crazy when he heard and reheard it. It made him a devil
of course, but in the course of his devilish dance, he did vanquish
the demon of capitalism.
Marx was not a proletariat. In fact the English Fabian Society
tried to brand him bourgeois, son of a rich Jewish lawyer of Rhenist
Germany. Marx had facilities for a sound education. His susceptible
mind had been greatly impressed by the cunning cruelty and ambition
of the capitalist class. He brought to light horrible yet sober
facts about the evils of capitalism. Just as Jean Jacpues Rousseau’s
winged doctrines of Equality--Liberty--Fraternity--so also Marx’s
‘Capital’ supplied the theory of Surplus value’ which forms the
backbone of Socialism of various types. Marx did not get reputation
is the chief source of production of wealth. Without recognizing
the fact, the Capitalist robs the labourers, forces him to live
in slums, and dictates him to be content with a very small share
in a shilling according to Marx. “Capitalists are human parasite
vultures who live upon the flesh of the labourers’, said Karl
Marx in his piping voice. Accumulation of wealth and the subsequent
utilization of the same by rich capitalists, are not an increase
in the National Dividend, for the same could satisfy more intense
wants of the labourer and thus could be better utilized. But the
ratio of distribution is unjustly proportioned.
Capitalism is the apotheosis of civilization is the doing of some.
They argue that since Capitalist gives employment to the labourer,
he helps society substantially. So a capitalist is not a human
parasite but a benefactor and capitalism should not be concerned
but ought to be welcomed. Any elementary book on economic will
tell us that Land, labour, Capital and Organization are the four
agents of production. It is true to say that Capital is as necessary
for production, as labour is. But the problem is which of these
deserves more consideration. A labourer works hard but the direction
comes from the Capitalist. Whether the concern gets profit or
not, a labourer gets his annas and never cares for either the
prosperity of the Capitalist or the comfort of the consumer, whereas,
the Capitalist spends sleepless nights in devising plans, and
determining the nature and quantity of the demand that is likely
to arise. Failure means to him not only a risk of parting with
his capital, but also a good-bye to honour. A failure means an
‘I.P.’ and it is by no means a decent degree. So when through
his efforts, the Capitalist gets profit he demands a greater share
in it. Or, when the Capitalist is not capable of ‘brainwork’,
he hires the services of a ‘D.Com’ and shares the profit with
Bernard Shaw of ‘Apple Cart’ fame shattered the first argument.
Want you to praise the Capitalist? Say you that since he gives
employment to the labourer he ought to be honoured? It is bunkum:
A motor driver by killing a man gives ample opportunity to the
departments of ;police and Judiciary not to mention his great
service to sensation spreaders’. Why, then should we not raise
a marble statue in his honour?” Questions the dramatist. In fact
Capitalists give employment, but never enjoyment to the labourers.
They make life a bed of thorns.
Socialists, as Dr.Marshall ponts out, were men who had felt tensely
and who knew something about the hidden spring of human action
of which the economist took an account. Buried among their wild
rhapsodies, says the same author, there were shrewd observations
and pregnant suggestions from which philosophers and economists
had much to learn. In the Parliament, in the press and the pulpit,
the spirit of humanity, of erring suffering humanity was to be
found. Careful diagnosis will show that in the womb of our modern
society, slumbers the awfully bad child of revolution, ready for
its birth. When Karl Marx, the illustrious theorist of the proletariat’;
said the private property in Capital was both the result of past
spoliation and a means of continuing the same upon the wider scale,
he was only epitomizing the cries of the oppressed Robert Owen,
a century before Marx, who thundered forth that what the Capitalist
calls ‘Profits’ and which economists try to defend was the fundamental
cause for all kinds of economic and social ills. Justice demands
a faith consideration and adaptation of at least some of these
non aggressive and salient facts.
is essential, but not Capitalism, Even Capital is, to quote Panson
‘Labour stored up’, the division of society into rich and poor
is the root cause for all the subsequent evils. Are we into witnessing--the
spectacle of poverty amidst plenty? Is it right for a fashionable
young bachelor to spend lots upon ‘suits’ in continental hotels,
and upon Parisian beauties, while a widow works hard to bring
up six naughty children-getting for her labour less than a shilling
per week? Do we not realize that the very structure of society
is hollow, unsound and inhuman? Then why should we shirk to find
solace in the socialist doctrine? Industrial organization of the
Capitalists is nothing but outrageous robbery. Given proper facilities,
and allowed to move in a good atmosphere, Tom and Harry could
manage things as well as Jones or Smith, for human nature is greatly
modified by environment.
and milk run abundantly because of his labour, ‘Iron-kings’ and
‘Lace-queens’ are having a ‘tete-a-tete’ in a fashionable night
club and the labourer witnesses the ‘tete-tete of his hungry children
and bony wife. This kind of intensified capitalism gave birth
to socialism. The literary prophets first revolutionized the mind
of the labourer. Passing from the cold and calm realm of speculation,
the socialist theories, found a place in a revolutionary realm.
The proletariat agitated. Lenin came! From out of the womb of
agitation, was born the naughty child of revolution. Powers which
were passionately stirred, when unchained, caused a revolutionary
eruption. Law became impotent. ‘Necessity knows no law’ said Niebutin,
and it became only too true.
by hunger, oppressed by tyranny, the proletarian rose with irresistible
force; down came capitalism, and the flag of the labourer was
period of ‘smoke and blood’ passed away. The prior of construction
came. With equal force, did he launch socialism. The process of
socialization of the means of production, distribution and exchange
was adopted. The spirit of brotherhood and goodwill was set up
as the ideal. The motto of St.Paul ‘He that will not work, shall
not eat’ was applied. Plato’s visualization became practicable.
The Russians are now making a new pilgrim’s progress to a land,
where all would be happy, and all would be equals.
the world brands the Russian as a savage; his methods are condemned
and his policy is mocked at. Till recently America refused to
take Russian timber on the ground that their production involved
forced labour. The leading capitalistic nations find an absence
of Christian ethics in everything Russian. But,why all this accusation?
Socialists allow no illegal marriage. They recognize the right
of divorce, give economic basis to every individual, and look
to labour as a dignified method of living. Palaces and pleasure-seats
of plutocrats are kept wide open for the enjoyment of the labourers.
The educational side of socialism won the approval of no less
a person than Dr. Tagore. Then what need is there, for accusing
that system? Is it because the communists drove out idle lords
and extravagant ladies? Is it because they adopted certain cruel
methods during the wait with capitalism?
is the great healer and it would certainly modify things. Anarchy
being a negation of all laws could not remain permanent and since
socialism stands today firmly, it is not anarchism as some suppose
it to be. Paul Vinogradoff, a moderate, assures us that “they
(Russians) will throw the whole weight of their influence in the
scale of international pacification and justice”.
socialistic idea is not Russian in origin. The Fabian society
was started in London and Marx spend his last years by the side
of the Thames. The presence of the I.L. Party, the various labourer
organizations, and strikes go to prove that the labourer of today
is not content with his lot. Without spending years in condemning
Communistic methods, the Capitalistic countries, if they try to
solve the labour problem, by extending State control over branches
of industry, by suppressing ‘red-tapism’ by recognizing the potentialities
of labourers, they would not only get the laudation from labourers,
but could found a paradise upon this earth. Moscow Mob Parade,
with all its grain facts is worthy of study, and is a veritable
warning to humanity at large, and more than that, it is capable
of yielding morals of no mean order.