Groups » Democracy

Declaration of Capital Ownership Justice and Human rioghts

• Viswanathan Ekambaram
  Jul 24 2013, 01:44 PM
  Declaration of Capital Ownership Justice
  and
  Human Rights
  
  We the people, solemnly and sincerely, declare that it is the Universal Justice that only the Creators have the Right to claim absolute ownership on their creations and the Right to utilize such creations only for the benefit and welfare of the society in which they are inseparable members.
  And that among the human creations the ‘Capital’ alone is the basic element for the very survival of humanity and genesis for the all human rights and modern civilization.
  Since the ‘Capital’ - the very basic factor of one’s “Right to Live” and “Economic Security” - is collectively created by the people, the ‘Right to own one’s creations’ empowers the people to distribute the capital directly and equally among them as per Natural Law.
  That by securing the ‘Economic Justice’ of ‘Right to own one’s due capital’ (Democrism), we, the people are legitimately endowed with certain unalienable rights in consequence of owning Capital Right and among them are Right to live, Right to work, Right to equality, Right to liberty Right to live with fraternity, and Right to participate in the management one’s working concern and that of political government;
  And that on achieving these rights the Natural Laws have further entrusted us the requisite authority to recapture our own capital which is now illegitimately and fallaciously in possession of some capitalists or in possession of ‘State’, by peaceful and democratic ways or in case of opposition by revolutionary ways because our oppressing poverty and unemployment and ever threatening nuclear holocaust could not wait patiently until the capitalists as well as socialists would find out solution leisurely in the endless time of future.
  That on the basis of different composition of ownership of capital different systems of economy are instituted among us. The national capital is created by the people, only by the people and for the people. Since the people were unorganized and lacking intellectual administrative coherence in the production and distribution of goods and services in the complicated confusing economic setup, the people’s capital was allowed to maintain in the hands of a few individuals and thereby a Capitalistic System of Economy was thrust among us and alternatively when the capital was handed over to the ‘State’, Socialistic System of Economy was imposed among us. We, the people handed over the capital either in the possession of a few individuals or the State with unequivocal hope that they would lead us towards an ideal society.
  On the contrary if both the systems realize that it is a formidable task for them to establish an ideal society even after consuming a reasonable span of time we naturally possess the supreme ‘Right to forfeit our capital’ from them and to keep it under our absolute control to establish a ‘New Economic System’ and to organize it in such a manner to protect our socio-economic justices and to uphold our economic rights which underlie as basic structure of an ‘ideal society’. By retaining our capital in our possession as per Natural Law we march towards a justifiable economic system in which ‘People’s Direct Ownership of Capital’ is ensured out of all contradictions and it is the system which is vibrating perennially through all socio-economic changes from time immemorial.
  
  Why do we demand ‘People’s Direct Ownership of Capital?’
  By the term ‘Direct Ownership of Capital’ I effectively mean ‘equal distribution of capital among the working people’ or ‘distribution of capital according to wages’. In other words we want to proceed one step forward to make perfect the universal truth of principle “ Work according to ability; Wage according to work” by adding with “Capital according to wage” because both consumption and capital goods are manufactured by the workers and their wage should cover the value of both consumption and capital goods. Only the workers are entitled to buy both consumption and capital goods to uphold economic justice. On the contrary if the production and ownership of capital goods are forfeited from the workers by a few ‘capitalists’ or the ‘State’ the workers will lose their ‘Right to work’ and consequently their ‘Right to live’.
  1. Right to live:
  On the outburst of Industrial Revolution during 1750s the mode of production and distribution was completely shuffled by the introduction of huge and complicated machines and division of labor. The village and cottage industries were replaced by factory system. Technological development and miraculous scientific inventions introduced a new concept of ‘mass-ness’ in the socio-economic sphere. There appeared mass production, mass consumption, mass distribution, mass education, mass communication, mass transportation etc. The village and cottage industry workers felt horrible and shocking on witnessing the ‘mass-ness’. In the mass-ness they saw the price was cheap, the quality of goods was superior and there were variety of new goods. These workers realized that they would not produce goods competitively to the factory-made goods with their small and rude capital on which their ‘right to work’ and ‘right to live’ were depending on. Since their capital became futile they had to disown the basic concept of life ‘own one’s capital’ to protect ‘right to live’ and ‘right to economic security’.
  
  2. Transfer of ownership of capital:
  On the destruction of village and cottage industries ‘the direct ownership of capital by the workers’ was transferred to the ‘direct ownership of capital by the capitalists’, a new powerful class emerged on the invent of industrialization. The new capitalist class produced goods for all consumers for profit motive which resulted in naked exploitation of workers. The working class had to depend on the few capitalists for their work, for their wages and for their life and to sacrifice their ‘right to work’ and ‘right to live’ once they enjoyed in their villages.
  
  3. Basic and Super Structures of Society:
  On the transfer of ‘ownership of capital’ which was the basic structure of any society, the ‘super structure of society’ which comprised of all the socio-economic-political elements of society such as mode of production, right to work, right to live, right to economic security, culture and conventions, concepts of religion, education, life style, formation and mode of governments, laws and regulations were also changed simultaneously in the same breath. There was change everywhere and in every elements of life. People especially the working class found themselves in a new world full of embezzlement. The working class realized darkness around them and felt themselves that they had become ‘economic slaves’ of a few capitalists. In the chaos and confusion of industrialization the working class was mystified about their and drowned in utter ignorance of how to retaining their ‘capital right in the creation of new capital’ in the new factory system of production.
  
  
  4. Misguidance by Adam Smith and Karl Marx:
  In the cottage industrial system the workers were able to create or buy their required capital individually because of their simplicity and cheap in value. But in the factory system mammoth and complicated machines were introduced in different types to produce a single commodity. The workers lost their individuality in creation of such machines which required huge volume of money and wealth. But by extending the basic economic principle from ‘work according to ability and wage according to work’ to ‘capital according to wage’ such huge and scientific machines could have been created. And the principle ‘capital according to wages’ could have smoothly, securely and peacefully transferred the cottage system of production to the factory system ensuring the workers to uphold their ‘the capital right of owning one’s own capital’ which would protect their ‘right to work’ and ‘right to live’. The workers of all the countries would have gained ‘economic democracy’ along with ‘political democracy’ and empowered to solve all of their socio-economic problems to establish an ideal society
  During the period of transformation of economy from cottage to factory system the economic systems were in the state of crude and infancy and the economic thoughts were mostly based on theoretical arguments instead of rational facts. An array of theoretical arguments were presented on the question of who should have the ‘right to capital’ first by Adam Smith (1723-1790) and then by Karl Marx (1818-1883). Both of them completely neglected the working class to regain their ‘right to own their share of capital in the establishment of industries under the factory system also’. The reason for dereliction or abandonment of working class from getting their democratic right to own one’s capital during that period might be insufficient infrastructure of economy like banking system and the complete ignorance of people not knowing the epicenter of all economic problems. And the ignorance is still prevailing throughout the world in the midst of knowledge explosion and great scientific wisdom.
  5. Economic Affidavits:
  In the early period of economic-technological ignorance the lack of sufficient economic infrastructure and uncontrolled economic activities might have forced Adam Smith in his book ‘An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of Wealth of Nations’(1776) to declare a ‘Capitalistic Economic Affidavit’ that if the workers surrendered their due ownership of capital to a few capitalists that those capitalists would turn the sand into the gold and lead the workers towards an ‘ideal society’. The capitalists used the advocacy of Adam Smith for their advantage by forfeiting the capital goods from the workers by brutal exploitation in the name of maximization of profit. By insulating legal identity and economic justification for the maximization of profit a few capitalists retained a lion’s share of income and vast majority of workers were paid poorly and pushed into appalling poverty.
  On ascertaining the exploitation of workers had been the breeding source of capital Karl Marx vigorously engaged in a crusade for the workers’ capital right. So he aggressively presented a counter affidavit in the name of Socialism in his magnum opus the ‘Das Capital’(1867) and it was called as ‘Socialistic Economic Affidavit’ in which he advocated “workers’ capital right” as if the capital should be owned directly by the working class. It was so preached that the factory workers would develop an assumption that each factory would be directly owned by that factory workers and the farmers assumed that each agricultural land would be owned directly by the farmers. The innocent socialists thought that ‘each factory for that factory workers and piece each land for that land farmers’. Having such a thought of capital ownership deeply rooted in their mind the so called socialists led the bloody October Revolution in Russia in 1917.
  On the success of the revolution the workers seized the factories and the farmers the lands by physically eliminating the factory owners and the land lords. Since there was no guiding road map to ensure the working class to retain their ‘direct ownership of capital’ the revolution generated chaos and confusion and caused for the collapse of whole economy. Lenin proclaimed ‘All Powers to Soviets’ and forfeited the national capital for the ‘State Ownership’ instead of ‘Workers’ Direct Ownership’. Stalin then suppressed the voice of the working class for their ‘Direct Ownership of Capital’ with his strong iron hand and raised iron curtain to prevent any entry of economic and political democratic principles into the country. The same episode was staged in succession in China by Mao Tse-tung through his ‘Long March’ in 1934-36 and the ‘War of Liberation’ during 1937-1949. In all the Socialist countries the workers were denied the ‘Right to Direct Ownership of Capital’
  However the people’s thought of socialism and Marx’s thought of socialism were contradicting with each other. People were always kept under the illusion that they would retain their ‘Right to Direct Ownership of Capital’ in the socialistic pattern of society. But after the Revolution they experienced the reality was entirely different. At that time the economy was very young, the infrastructure of economy was very weak and the workers and farmers were illiterates. Though Karl Marx was targeting for the establishment of ‘Direct Ownership of Capital’, due to lack of adequate economic techniques to execute the noble principle, he was forced to preach on political platform that the workers should surrender their capital to the ‘State’ under Proletariat Dictatorship and that State would lead the working class towards an ‘Ideal Society’. The socialist leaders followed the Marxian ideology word by word as gospel truth because they were also lacking knowledge on any scientific economic technique to execute “Workers’ Direct Ownership of Capital”. Marx was forced to seek last resort to political violence to solve economic problems of ‘who should own the capital’. Hence ‘Proletariat Dictatorship’ and ‘Statism’.
  Both Adam Smith and Karl Marx had been in perfect coordination in abandoning the working class in retaining its ‘capital ownership’ when the question arose ‘who should own the capital’. Adam Smith’s ‘Individualism’ favored a few capitalists and Marx’s ‘Socialism’ advocated ‘State’ to preserve ‘capital right’ in their absolute possession by forfeiting the capital from the workers. Though the capital goods and consumption goods were produced by the workers they were permitted to receive wages up to the value by which they could buy only consumption goods. Both the capitalists and the State exploited the workers by forfeiting adequate money in the form of ‘profit’ and ‘taxation’ from the ‘gross wage income’ of workers to purchase capital goods. Workers’ ‘net wage income’ was very meager by which they could lead only a poor life with inadequate consumption goods. Even now both the Capitalistic and Socialistic Economic Systems do not allow the workers to retain their ‘capital right’ and to own their due capital. With the historical experience of exploitation of workers by the capitalism and socialism we have now arrived at the following conclusion:
  “We, the people, are now realizing our Himalayan blunder that in contrary to the ‘Economic Justice’ of retaining our capital under our own direct ownership, we have stupidly surrendered it either to a few capitalists in some countries on the strong provocation of Adam Smith or to the State in some other countries on vigorous incitement of Karl Marx that they would lead us towards an ‘ideal society’ and that historical blunder in the past has been now exploding violently for all our socio-economic evils in every corner of the world, in the form of acute poverty, drastic unemployment, ever-widening economic disparities between men and men and between nations and nations, economic insecurity, vicious soaring of price levels and inflations, vehement class struggles, ever-pervading corruptions and economic gambles in the domain of share markets, annihilation of morality for capitalistic advertisements, polluting the atmosphere and destroying even the ozone layer in the guise of economic prosperity, widely triggered terrorism and above all the ever threatening nuclear holocaust to destroy our long preserved civilizations.
  The capital will be divine as long as it will be in the direct possession of the workers the actual creators, and it will become devil as soon as it flows in the ownership of few capitalists and the State.
  
  6. Mode of production and kind of society:
  It is the truth and only the truth that the different kinds of capital ownerships determine different ‘modes of production’ and in turn the different modes of production determine different ‘forms of society’
  At the genesis of industrial revolution when the capital had been exploited by a few capitalists they developed a basic structure of ‘Capitalistic mode of production’ and established on its base a flexible super structure of ‘capitalistic society’, full of inequalities, insecurities and collapse of human moralities whereas when the capital had been forfeited by the ‘State’ it developed yet another basic structure of ‘Socialistic mode of production’ and established on its base a rigid super structure of ‘socialistic society’, full of restrictions on human rights and liberties and collapse of democratic principles. On the other hand if the capital is regained by the workers under the ‘principle of direct ownership of people’(Democrism), it will develop a deep and wide basic structure of ‘Democratic mode of production’ and establish on its base an ‘Ideal society’ full of socio-economic equalities, liberties and fraternities. In short
  “Capitalism is popular and popularly defective,
  Socialism is destructive and destructively popular, and
  Democrism is justifiable and justifiably acceptable”. .
  
  

Reply

You have to be a member of "Democracy" in order to reply.

Join