Saturday 25 July 2009

Moosa Sai Marx Tak

Moosa Sai Marx Tak
Marx and Engels devised the term scientific socialism for their political thought, and idealistic socialism for ‘old fashioned’ socialism, which encompassed the reformist plans which European thinkers offered from time to time. The plans had not been inferred from the conditions on the ground, but were a reflection of their subjective aspirations. Scientific socialism, on the other hand, was derived from, and logical conclusion of existing (Sibte uses the term Maroozi Hallat). Its principles of evolution had been derived from a deep study of the capitalist system.
Scientific socialism refers to a social system in which all means of production-land, minerals, factories, banks, trade-are collectively owned by the society, and the produce is distributed according to the qualitative worth of the work performed by physical and intellectual cadres.
Communism is the next stage of scientific socialism, under which means of production and the produce is so advanced that the measure of distribution is not worth, but need of the people.
Foes of socialism have tried to malign it by asserting that it does not allow any personal possessions. That is far from the truth. Socialism does not permit exploitation of labor for accumulation of wealth by individuals or groups, for example control over land, minerals, manufactories and finance. Private property is sacrosanct under the feudal and capitalist systems (and supported by all religions), where as the core (asaas) of socialism lies in abolition of such private ownership and transferring it to social ownership (state).
Private ownership has created so many social evils that public ownership is being promoted even in capitalist societies ( nationalization of essential services and welfare). Means of production were nationalized (in post WW II Europe) and Asian countries (though have backtracked at the behest of neo-cons).
The other private ownership pertains to items of personal use, like clothes, utensils, home, books, bicycle, radio (TV, computers) etc. Under a capitalist system, people do not have adequate quantities of items of personal use (even in rich societies)
. A socialist society, on the other hand aims to provide people with sufficient quantity of items of personal use.
There is no equivalence in people’s productive or inventive (takhleeqi) capacity, so the income of each and every one under a socialist system will not be the same.
Socialism does not repress individuality, in fact it encourages it. Only exploitation of labor for personal aggrandizement is proscribed.

Chap 1: Early Communism
Europeans ‘discovered’ America, and traveled to India in the early 15th CE. They gained great material wealth, and gained important knowledge and information. The general public was entranced by the stories of travelers, and though they contained more half truths and outright lies, than facts, the general public listen developed great interest in exploration of the world unknown to them, and the greed to acquire wealth.
The mind set induced Sir Thomas Moore to write his classic “Utopia”, which relates experiences of a fictitious sailor, who happened to land in a far off island, where people lived in a communist society.
The same instinct led the English novelist Daniel Defoe to pen “Robinson Crusoe”, and Swift to write “Gulliver’s Travels”.
During mid-17th CE Hobbes, Locke and Rousseau wrote on the concept of social contract (muahida umrani), which indicated that political scientists were greatly helped in their conjectures (Qayas ariyaan) by the conditions in Asia and America.
The discoveries of new instrument and technology in the nineteenth century led to new industries and new branches of sciences. Agents of industrialists went around the world seeking raw material. With advances in the mode of travel, academics and archeologists traveled to old seta of civilization like Iraq, Iran, Egypt, Palestine, Mexico and Greece. They dug old sites, and found skeletons, statues, instruments hierolographs (Katbe), jewelry, and utensils. They could derive the knowledge of ancient history from the finds. They also found strange birds, four legged animals, fish, sea shells, insects, flowers and plants. The most valuable were the skeletons of animals which roamed the earth, millions of years ago, but were now extinct.
The knowledge culminated in the theory of Evolution, which shook religious beliefs (that the earth was only 6,000 years old) and people developed new insight into the origin of human kind.
The concept of evolution was not knew. The writings of Heraculates, Empodocles, and Aristotle do offer a vague (Dhundhla) concept of evolution. But the Greek concept of evolution ran on a ‘ladder’ pattern, the highest rung occupied by humans, then land animals, followed by sea animals, plants and on the lowest rung were rock and earth (Jamadiat), with no possibility of rise from one to another, and from ever discrete from each other.
The creationists (Suhf e Samavi) claimed that god had created the universe in six days, and there could never be a change in the creations. Christian clergy stated with utter confidence that the world was 6,000 years old, that Adam was the first human, who lived in the paradise, and tricked/tempted by the Satan, he ate an apple/wheat, and was expelled to the earth (Creation of Mankind-Robert Basalt).
The French scientist Jean Lamarck, was the first one the theory of evolution in 1809. He claimed that simple organs evolved out if non-organic (Ghair namiati) material, but higher animals have evolved out of simpler animals. He proved by the example of several animals and plants that continuous use of a part of the body strengthens it and increases its mass, for example heavy laborers have highly developed leg muscles, while sailors, bakers, butchers and carpenters have highly developed arm and shoulder muscles. Swamp birds like the crane have long necks, beaks and legs. Non use makes the organs redundant over time. These changes are inherited too. He, however, believed that plants and animals have an inherent instinct to develop into the higher level. Science was not free of meta-physics, yet. (ma badiul tabiaat).
But the definitive work on evolution was done by Charles Darwin (1809-82). The 50 years between Lamarck and Darwin and produced many scientists who proposed theories of evolution.
Darwin published his epoch making work “The Origin of Species” in 1959. it represented 28 years of investigations and analysis (tahqeeq wa tafteesh). Darwin had traveled the world for 5 years and had collected all kinds of birds, plants, shells, rocks and bone skeletons, and on his return had studied the methods horticulturists-animal culturists. (afzaidsh e nasl). He offered the principle of natural selection. The underlying cause of the changes was the change in weather and geographical conditions. The plants and animals which could adopt to the changes, survived, others became extinct.
Darwin theorized that the shape of animals and plants was not same from the beginning of time, but had changed over hundreds of millions of years.
Darwin explained ‘natural selection’ with reference to the techniques used to improve animals, plants and grain, which have resulted in increase, not only in quantity, but also quality of the species. The wheat, rice and barley, we consume today, were once the seeds of jungle grass.
Human being are no exception to this natural selection, and have evolved from their nearest evolutionary kin, the ‘monkeys’.
It did not remain too difficult to deduct from Darwin’s work that all live beings-plants, animals including humans, were not the creations of a ‘superior’ being but had evolved from inanimate material (namiati maadda).
Darwin’s work encouraged the academia to research ‘social’ evolution. In 1836, a French academic, Christian Thomas, assigned three stages to social evolution, based on
the derivation of instruments of production. In his view, humans of the first period made them from stone, wood and bones-the stone age. The nest was that of the use of metal, called the Bronze age. The third was Iron age, which continues to the day. This was an appropriate method to judge the status of development, as means of production determine human relations and societal structure.
The status of primitive human societies in the current age is akin to that of ice age animals to modern ones. Most of the societies did not adopt to changing conditions and disappeared like ancient animals did. But the study of remnants, existing in parts of Americas, Africa and South East Asia, indicate the mode of living of prehistoric man. Depending upon varying physical and geographic conditions, some subsist on wild fruit and vegetation, other are meat eaters, even man eaters, and still others keep animals and practice primitive agriculture. Some tribes are patriarchal, others matriarchal, some monogamous, others polygamous, or polyandrous. Most believe in magic and other superstitions. A few go around naked, others cover up with leaves and bark. They use stone, wood or bone equipment, and live the life of primitive socialism.
Humans have existed as such on this earth, for 1.6 million years, but anthropologic research indicates that they have always lived a communal life in units ranging from a family to a tribe or larger groups. Interdependence led to social consciousness.
Human innovations and inventions like language, use of fire, agriculture, poetry, music and craft do not have an individual inventor and have, of necessity, been the result of collective efforts.. The skills developed out of collective needs and desires.
Primitive society worked on the principles of ‘primitive’ communism. Arguably the oldest such tribe is the Tasaday, a group of 100 people ‘discovered’ in 1961, in the hills of Mindau Island of the Philippines. The area is covered with dense trees and vegetation and is difficult of access. They still live in the stone age. Their homestead is a 50ft wide and 30 ft deep cave, and they subsist on coconut and bamboo shoots. They have no agriculture, keep no animals, and have never eaten rice, wheat, maize, and are not aware of salt, sugar or tobacco. Though they live on an island, yet have never seen the sea.
They are entirely pacific, don’t have any arms, and their vocabulary does nor words for enemy, war, murder or evil. They have one word for good and beautiful which sounds like ‘mafion’. They do not follow any religion, and for art and craft, they have a bamboo musical instrument called “kobung”. They procure food together, and though have family units of parents and unmarried children, yet they all live together. They take joint decisions, and women and men have equal rights.
They are healthy, of short stature, and do not suffer from TB, Malaria or dental problems. ( Time magazine NY 10/18/1971 and 6/30/1975).
Another primitive tribe is Wemang in Malayan forests and hills. They live in groups of 20-30, with huts spread over a wide area, and subsist on fruits and vegetation. They do have bow and arrow which they use to hunt birds, squirrels and rats.
Several such tribes live in Americas as well. One called ‘Paiute’ live in tents and subsist on hunting, and after a good hunting expedition, they celebrate with song and dance. Another Yokot lives in California. Ten to twelve families live together in big halls. After marriage, the husband moves with the wife’s family. Black foot live on Canadian-American border, hunting buffalo is their livelihood. They don’t have chiefs, but listen to the health and shrewd members of the tribe.
In Columbia South America, a tribe of fishermen, by the name of Nootka live on river banks, live together in groups on a 100, in huts built collectively.
Before the Russian revolution a tribe named Yokaghir lived in Siberia. They hunted (Bara Singha) and deer, and lived together.
In Nigeria, two tribes Yoruba and Boloki number about 2 million. They hunt, keep animals. Women do farming and make utensils. Land is joint property, and may not be sold or bought. Men hunt and look after animals.
The tribal chief is called Alorfin. If he gets sick, he commits suicide. If the tribe no longer wants him as chief, they harass him so much that he either runs away or commits suicide.
Eskimos, who live in snow laden plains of Canada and Finland are the most known practitioners of primitive communism. Though the tribes live hundreds of miles apart, they have strikingly similarities in language and culture. They are no more than about 55,000 and live on Seal and Beers hunting. They wear skin garments, live in skin tents or underground homes, do know the use of fire, but eat raw meat. They breed dogs and Reindeers (Bara Singha), and their wheel less vehicles (sledge) are pulled by reindeers too.
They do not have permanent chiefs of the tribe, but seek guidance from the intelligent and experienced among them. all property, is jointly owned (Columbia Encyclopedia 1968, 670).Greed and selfishness are deemed the biggest failings.
Stone age tribe live in the Indo-Pak subcontinent too. There are the Gond, Bheel, Santhal, Khasi, Mong and Pondae. They rub stones to get spark of fire, some do no farming, and live on fish and animal husbandry. Up to the first two decades of the 20th CE, people in the Frontier redistributed tribal land every 30 years.
An American Humanities professor spent many years in the 1950s among the Marri tribes of the Baluchistan. He published a book “The Social System of the Marri Baloch”. They live in small villages, every member of the tribe has equal rights on grazing grounds, water wells and streams. In some sections of the tribe, the land was still a joint holding, and it was redistributed every 15-20 years among all the males.
Gypsies (Khana Badosh) of the area are called Panda, the tribal chief is called Hilk Waja, and his wife is called Waja. They have a tent, called IIaq assigned to guests, and share all material belongings and produce of the land, and proceeds of the sale of animals and crops. They have a common kitchen, and eat together, and live like an extended family.
The idea of this discussion is not to idealize primitive communism, but the inference that definitely be drawn is that private ownership of means of production is not an eternal or sacred code of life, but is a product of division of labor, for which there was little scope in primitive communism.
With out division of labor, it was not possible to increase production. Development of society and increased demand due to increase of population necessitated division of labor. The inner contradictions of the primitive communist society also required transformation of means of production to private ownership.
Now the inner contradictions of the society are so deep, that with out reversion to social ownership of the means of production, these contradictions can not be resolved, nor can the human society develop further.

Chap 2: Remnants of the Shariah of Moses.
The book of Genesis says that when famine struck Palestine, Jacob (Yaqoob) took his eleven sons and their progeny to Egypt where his youngest son Joseph (Yusuf) was one the ministers of the Pharaoh. Joseph welcome them Though sheep herders (Galla Baan) by calling, he got the Pharaoh’s approval to resettle them in Jashn, a very fertile region of Egypt.
They flourished and in due course the descendents of the twelve sons of Jacob became the 12 tribes of Israel..
The tribes lived in /Egypt for 430 years (Exodus), but did not adopt Egyptian religion or mores. They carried on as animal herders, and followed their own religion, traditions sedulously. When their population grew to hundreds of thousands, they had to work as heavy laborers in Egyptian towns.
The rulers of Egypt did not appreciate their exclusivity, and were no longer kind to them. They started treating them like slaves, and robbed them of animals and made work without wages.
At this critical juncture Moses was born. He persuaded them to return to Palestine. Milk and honey flowed in the country, he told them. and the god Yahweh (Yehudah-Jehovah) had promised the land of Palestine. (book of Istesnaab). Ben Israel agreed and left with bag and baggage Exodus) in 12th BCE. They numbered about 600,000 at the time, but the belief in the academia is that they were no more than 40,000.
Ben Israel led the life of animal herders. Each tribe was a social and economic unit, led by a wise man as the chief, who set the rules which everyone had to obey. The chief took the responsibility of security of his people. All assets were the joint property of the whole tribe, and every individual had equal rights (Max Beer: Social Struggles in Antiquity London 1922; p 20).
The journey from Egypt to Palestine took 40 years. They had to pass through hot deserts, waterless and desolate, devoid of any greenery. They were desperate and moaned that they were better off as slaves in Egypt; they at least got to eat twice a day.
God took pity on them, and manna ‘man wa salvah’ rained on them (Exodus-16). Moses told them to take only what they needed…and not accumulate.
The inference of the story is the concept of tribal equality (masawat). If any one accumulated out of greed, his store rotted (Exodus-16b). They finally Canaan, and raised tents in the planes of Moab, across the river Jordan. And God told Moses to tell them “to occupy the land, and to distribute the land amongst yourselves through a lottery (Quraa)., giving more to the ones with larger family…”
That indicates that Ben Israel had passed the collective land ownership phase, but the egalitarian concept of more to larger families and transparency of division through a Quraa.
Moses collected them in a tent, and taught/explained the Shariah -?commandments to them over several days, not to flout the Shariah, not to worship any but Yahweh, give to charity, and look after widows and orphans, forgive loans every 7 years, don’t lust after your neighbor’s possessions, free any Latin man or woman slave in the seventh year, after they have served you for six years, but do let them go empty handed, appoint only the just as rulers and judges, don’t violate justice, don’t accept bribes or practice cronyism, you may accept one of you as a king, but let him not acquire many horses or wives and not let him accumulate gold and silver. He should follow Shariah. Don’t charge interest from Israelis, be kind to servants, and pay wages to laborers before the sun sets (In Islam, they have to be paid before the perspiration dries on their forehead, or so I am told).
An analysis of the economic instructions would indicate that Israelis had developed a class society and the concept of private property, even before they got to Canaan. Some of them, slaves of Egyptians till the other day had stated aspiring to kingship. The rich offered loans, but were not allowed to charge interest. There were slaves and their owners, though freedom after 7 years was mandatory.
Jehovah told them after they had captured Canaan, that they would not want for anything (Istisnaab).
But in a class ridden society all means of productions are in the control of a class. Under the system, an owner may treat his slave like another human, but can not give up his rights as an owner, or he would no longer be an owner. The landowner may not be cruel to his peasants, but can not distribute his land or he would not remain a landowner.
The core contradiction of the Moses Shariah is that it wants Ben Israel to live a happy and contented life, but legitimates class distinctions as well.
While the tribal leaders captured farms, orchards, cities, palaces, industries and markets, the ordinary Jew got only left over. In fact their plight got worse, because they lost the protection and equality of the tribe. Now every one was free to starve.
Tribal laws treated all equally. Now the rich were favored.
But the leaders always condemned injustice, and raised their voice for the down trodden. One was Aamoos bin Saheban, who openly criticized the rich for living it up, and warned them that if they did not give up the life of luxury, God will punish them. He gave a call, “gather together on the hills of Samaria, and observe the mayhem and cruelty…God declares that enemies will a siege on your country…and your palaces will be ravaged “ (Aamoos)”. And Josiah shouted on the top of his voice that, “Palestine is devoid of righteousness, affection and the fear of God. Bad mouthing, breach of trust, blood letting, stealing and dishonesty is the norm”. Josiah was of the view that the chiefs have sown mischief and they will reap bad character, and ate the fruits of lies. If they want to get out of … they should be follow the path of honesty, love and affection…” (Josiah 10-b).
And Micah was furious, “Oh Ben Yaqoob’s (Jacob’s progeny) tribal chiefs and rulers, you skin people, and pick the flesh off their bones…Jerusalem will be devastated (Micah 3-b).
Like the current rich, who think that God will be pleased with their ostentatious expenditure on religious ceremonies, the rich Jews felt that Jehovah will be pleased with their displays. But they did not know better. “ O’ rulers of Sodom, I have no use for… the sacrifice of you sheep, I am sick of the fat of your goats, and the blood of your bulls do not please me….refrain from evil acts, follow the straight path…help the victims of injustice, seek justice, listen to the wails of the orphans, support the widows, your chiefs are murderers…and seek bribes and riches…(Isaiah 1-b).
Jewish leaders were not, in principle against private property, but condemned the excesses of the system. They did not oppose kingship, but wanted the king to protect and guide the people. They favored traders, but wanted them to be honest. They did not ask the rich to distribute their wealth among the poor, but only to give some of it to charity. They did not oppose a class society, but only offered reforms to ameliorate the conditions of the poor.
This social unevenness led to the emergence of sect variously called ‘Hashaim-the silent ones, Isaiah-the practical ones, Binyamin-builders. In Greek, Latin and English they are termed Essene. Al Beruni (d-CE 1048) and Shahristani (d-CE 1153) called then cave dwellers (Mogharia). This sect adhered strictly to the principles of socialism, and tried to persuade others to do the same. According to Max Beer, this sect emerged in second century BCE. Three famed historians of the first century CE, Fallot (20 BCE-50CE), Josephus 37-95 CE), and Pliny the elder (23-79 CE) have documented eye witness account of the followers of the creed. Fallot was a Jewish philosopher from Alexandria, “Four thousand pious people lived in Palestine. They were called Essene. They avoided cities and lived in villages, because the cities were infested with ‘Fisq wa Fujoor’…
They were primarily agriculturists, though they followed other peaceful vocations too. They did not accumulate….they did not indulge in war, did not trade…no one was a slave, or an owner…they hated rulers…because they had given up on the natural faith…they preached love of god, love of righteousness and love of mankind, they owned property jointly…kept an open house…and looked after the old and the infirm”.
Josephus lauds them in similar terms.
They did participate in public affairs, and fiercely resisted when the Romans attacked Palestine.
There are a lot of conjectures about these people. Some aver that they adopted Pythagoras’s concept of socialism. Others thought that were influenced by Buddhist monks. But the prevailing opinion is that that they were only following ancient Jewish traditions. But their ideas could as well have been reinforced by Pythagoras and Buddha, as Palestine had trade relations with Greece, Italy and India.
The sect is not referred to in Palestinian history after the second CE.
They were not able to overturn the private property based Palestinian society. You can not wish away the riches and property of the ruling class. They have to be forced to give up the privileges by force, and the power to force them can be acquired only by the unity and social consciousness of the people. So their experiment at socialism died with them.
Between 1947 and 1952, some skin parchment were discovered in Qumran, on the western bank of the dead sea. The parchments are 2,000 years old, and throw light on the mode of living and belief systems of the socialist sect. Archeologists also dug out remains of the Cave peoples from the Qumran hills, which are situated only 20 miles from Jerusalem. This habitation was established about 135 BCE and lasted for about 200 years.
In the second century BCE, Palestine was under the control of the successors of Alexander the great. In the year 135 BCE when the king Harswanus forced the Jews of Jerusalem to adopt the Greek culture, the cave people had sought shelter in the hills of qomran. Their leader was called Al Sidduq-the truthful one. The people called themselves Sidduqi or Ben Sidduqi (T.M. Allegro-Dead Sea Scrolls, 1958).

Chap 3:Sparta’s Military Communism
Plutarch “ the second bold reform of Lai Kirgis was the redistribution of land. There was gross inequality in his time. Most people did not have even a small patch of land. Wealth had accumulated in the hands of a few…He persuaded the citizens to accept the cancellation of all old distributions of land…”
In ancient times, the Southern region of the Balkans was called Sparta. A people called the Dorians inhabited it. They were basically farmers. Athens was in the north of Sparta. Ionians lived there. The whole country was therefore called ‘Unaan’, and the people were called ‘Unani’. People of Athens were businessmen, and no body could compete with them in sea trade.
Ionians and Dorians were rivals and their respective states were in constant wars with each other.
Herodotus (484-425 BCE) was the first to refer to the social reforms of Sparta in his “History” (Chapter 1;p 37). “in the ancient times the worst government of all the regions of Greece was in Sparta. They did not hold any truck with strangers. But now it is very good”. Offering reasons for this surprising change, he attributes it to a distinguished citizen of Sparta, name Lai Kirgis. Kirgis once went to the Delphi temple. The chief priest revealed to him the methods of the system of governance. But Spartans claim that when Kirgis was appointed the advisor (Ataleeq) of his nephew Leonis, who was the king of Sparta, he borrowed the laws from Crete…in a way that no body could rescind them in the future. He also reorganized the army, and introduced collective ‘Langar Khana’ in the country.
Kirgis is semi-historical/mythological figure in Greek history. His date of birth or death are not known. Historians estimate that Kirgis was born 800-900BCE He is believed to have traveled to Egypt, Asia minor and even India. History does establish that he was the king’s counsel. Will Durant (The life of Greece;1939 p 77) asserts that the reforms were not the work of an individual, but owed their existence to the enactment of different rules and traditions that were already prevalent.
Kirgis divided the land into 39,000 equal parcels, and allotted them to peasants. He also tried to redistribute movable property like gold and silver, but did not succeed in that. He, however, proscribed the use of precious metals as currency, in stead introducing iron. At the same time he reduced the price of the metal so much that for 500 of the local currency required a full room to keep equivalent iron in. Gold and silver lost, thus lost considerable value.
Kirgis regulations required that all citizens eat together the same food in the Langar Khana. The food consisted of bread, cheese, wine, figs, vegetables and meat. Citizens were mandated to provision the Langar Khana, in equal measure, or else they would lose citizenship’s rights/privileges.
The political set up in Sparta was different from that of other city-states in Greece. It had two kings, with nearly equal powers. There was a consultative assembly which, including the two kings, had 30 members. The members had to over 60 years of age. The body was elected by all citizens, but only the elite could contest for membership.
In addition, there was city assembly, of which any citizen over the age of 30 could become a member. This assembly met at least once a month and appointed magistrates and ‘Mukhia’, decided on war and peace. On paper the assembly was all powerful, in practice, however, Mukhias ruled the roost. They could summon kings to their court, constituted the highest court, and administered law, order and security services.
Initially Sparta was constituted by five villages with a Mukhia in each, that led to the custom of keeping five of these personages in larger Sparta as well.
Not all residents enjoyed citizenship rights, which were exclusive to a few thousand Dorians. A large majority of the people were called ‘Helots’. These were the indigenous people or slaves. They served the citizens like unpaid laborers.
A strange custom was the annual murder (Qatl e Aam) of slaves. Rebellious and Khud Sar slaves, pointed out by informers, were targeted for mass killings.
Sparta was, as a matter of fact, ruled by armed gentry (Ashrafia). So the thrust of Kirgis’s reforms was on producing good soldiers. the gentry had transformed the whole country into a military cantonment. Citizens were trained to be healthy and strong, with no ideas in their head, except to follow rules.
Boys were taken away from homes at the age of 7, kept and brought up by the state in barracks till the age of 30. they were taught wrestling, swimming, riding, (teer aur naiza challana). To grow rough and tough, winter or summer, they had to sleep in the open on rough mats. They were flogged every year at the festival of Artemis, till the ground was tinted red with their blood. They were given scanty education, with no lessons in drama, poetry or art and literature.
Women, in contrast to the ones in Athens, were no delicate, home bound creatures. Girls competed with boys on equal terms. There was no stigma in conjugal relations with men who were not their husbands, the only requisite was production of healthy children. Professor Bury, “girls and boys, nearly in the nude, trained in gymnastics together… the4y remained chaste, but were ever ready to produce children if ordered to do so (J.B. Bury;A history of Greece, p 133, NY 1944).
New born children were deemed property of the state. Sick, weak or deformed infants were thrown off cliffs and killed. Plutarck says that Kirgis ridiculed Athenians that ,” they look after their horses and spend a lot to produce high bred animals, but keep their women locked up in their homes, so as to produce legitimate progeny, though they be weak and sick idiots.
The Sparta regime lasted nearly 200 years (560-380 BCE). They defeated Athenians innumerable times, but the loot (maal e ghanimat), offered only to a hundred families, only accentuated the class divide,. Sparta faded away.
In the 3rd BCE, one young member of the royal family named Agis, decided to revive Kirgis’s reforms. Max Beer has called him the ‘first communist martyr’.
When he ascended the throne in 240 BCE, he felt that it would be exceedingly difficult to excel other kings in pomp and show. I could, however, do better than them in simple living, and high mindedness and eclipse them by redistributing the land equally among the citizens.
He proposed to the assembly that all loans be forgiven, land be divided in 19,500 equal portions, 4,500 for citizens, and 15,000 for worthy indigenous people and resident foreigners, and revive eating in Langar Khana, as of old. He handed over all his, his mother’s and grandmother’s estates to the assembly.
This initiative of Agis was vociferously lauded by the young people, but led by the other king Leonidas, fiercely opposed by the elite and feudal landowners. The assembly and majority of Mukhias supported the other king.
Agis took refuge in the temple of Neptune, from where according to ancient tradition, no body could be arrested. But Agis was. When they clashes with class interest, laws of little consequence, even foot the people who promulgated the laws in the first place.
Agis was tried behind closed doors, and asked to recant. But he kept to his word, and was hanged. His mother and grand mother were subsequently murdered.
His son Cleominis ascended the throne five years after his death, and prevailed on the army to support him and forgave loans and distributed the land. But the rich and the landowners conspired with the king of Macedonia, and persuaded him to attack Sparta. Cleominis was defeated, and the administration of the country was handed over to the ruling class.
But the importance of the social experiment can be minimized. Plato called it an exemplary state, and wrote his “Republic” with Sparta in view.
A modern academic, Max Beer, also called it a communist system, though he conceded that, “ under their system, there was no communal sharing of wealth, not communist sharing of the means of production.
Equal distribution of land, forgiving loans and Langar Khana, are not the characteristics of socialism, rather they are those of tribal societies (George Thoson: Aechylus and Athens p 426 London 1946.
Lapara

No comments:

Post a Comment