Communism in the Field of Practical Application

We have already discussed the merit of communism and the judgment which reason passes on it. We have also realized that it tries to prevent reason from being effective by using it in the service of something already believed in.

After it had become apparent to them that they had not been active in pursuit of reason they did their utmost to find the truth. But they failed to reach their goal, either because they lost their way or because the truth itself lay on a path other than theirs. They were misguided and misled and their intentions blinded them to the right path. This they admitted later on.

They cannot be excused the consequences simply by pretending that, due to the power of their adversaries, they were obliged to be so obdurate and extravagant in their attempt to achieve victory by means of falsehoods. This state of affairs has deprived them of the qualities of true research workers, within the meaning of the term, who are worthy of a position of technical and intellectual leadership.

Having ascertained that, we find ourselves in no need to discuss their theories from an intellectual point of view.

Our goal is to find out the truth which has to be accepted by the contumacious and fanatical. It is now necessary to discuss that theory from the point of view of practical application. Its advocates pretend that it is the basis of conduct and behavior and not merely a theory. In this study we will deal with its fundamental principles and their position in practical life, after they had the opportunity to govern, for nearly half a century, a vast expense of land inhabited by two hundred million persons.

  1. Communism denies the existence of anything else except that which can be felt and seen. It denies the existence of Allah, soul and virtues, etc. Although it attributes everything to matter, it does not interpret one thing. The communists never tried to discuss or interpret matter itself - the only thing they did was to tread over it and shout (This is the matter in which we believe and within which we live). By so doing, they were influenced by some impulse which made them speak hurriedly and without thinking; they did not realize the foolishness of their theory. People who are well-versed in such subjects know today that the question of spirit was not so difficult a question for the mind to interpret as the question of matter. What is matter? Is it a color or a body? Does it have a weight? Is it an extension?

    No, it is not color, for color is a passing attribute resulting from light and vision it changes according to illumination and sight. Bodies on the other hand are atoms which split and change into vibrations in the ether. Even the term ether is beyond finite knowledge - it has no color, taste or motion. Those who have knowledge of the subject find no difference in the definition of «ether» and that of «space». It is a fact that beyond the gravity barrier everything loses weight. Extension is something understandable; it is neither extremely short nor extremely long. It is not known whether it is extension in time or in place.
  2. In an attempt to make communism something sacred to matter, it denied laws, morals and religions on the pretext that all of these are nothing but bourgeois notions with which the proletariat were deceived and intoxicated. The historical facts prove otherwise. when slavery was practiced, morality required condemnation of slavery and revolt against the practice. During feudalism, morality required glorifying the highborn and despis ing the lowly and to the capitalists it meant the excessive glorifying of wealth and despising of want and poverty. All these definitions of morality were quite understandable. But the question which is beyond comprehension is that if morals were the creation of the bourgeoisie bow did they come to exercise influence and sovereignty in themselves.
  3. According to this, communisms ascribes to material conditions the responsibility for interpreting all historical events and theories, but while doing so it does not give even one example of one known event which did not depend more or less on (feelings).

    Take for example the immigration of people into America after its discovery. They either escaped from poverty or were unable to enjoy the freedom of belief in their homeland. One would like to know why some of them had left their countries while some others remained? Was the factor of securing material profit the aim of all? There is no doubt that the whole question turns, more or less, on the difference of peoples' feelings towards poverty and the suppression of liberty of belief.
  4. In sanctifying matter communism denies the existence of religion. Not only that it fights it vigorously. Events have shown us how Marxism incriminated religion in its practical application, although at the same time, communist leaders relinquished some of their materialist arrogance. Though narrowly limited in extent, this was a sign of defeat and a proof of the falseness of that important principle of the Marxist theory.

    In 1943, Stalin, who previously declared that religion was the opium which was given to peoples to intoxicate them, stated that religion sows in the hearts the seeds of sacrifice, courage and velour. When war broke out between Hitler and Russia, he admired that Russia had made a mistake in the past and that it had to correct that mistake and allow the practice of religions and recognition of Allah. At that time, the Russian broadcasts began a new to praise religion which had to recreate in the people a spiritual power which was inherent in orthodox Russia. In this way, Stalin aimed at bringing about a balance between the Vatican's power and that of the Orthodox Church taking into consideration that the Balkan States had, at that time, about forty million members of the Orthodox Church. In September 1943, Stalin also revived the (Sacred Convention) after its final closure by the Bolsheviks. He appointed for The Muslims a (Mufti) and for the Christians a Patriarch and sent his loyal subordinates of the Communist Party to villages and provinces to ask people to believe and have faith in Allah. All over the world, in the East and in the West, it was widely said that Russia has restored religion. Sultan off one of the members of the Russian diplomatic mission in Egypt, embraced Islam.
  5. Marxism has declared private ownership to be illegal since it was responsible for the existence of classes. In the view of the psychologists each system which is based on opposition to the original instincts of man can no longer survive. The practical application of Marxism proved the truth of this view. Lenin abolished the class of small owners. Later, in 1917, the first year of his rule, Stalin did the same, but, in 1921, he was obliged to allow private ownership to reappear. In 1926, he again abolished it and in 1932 he revived it. Abolition and then restoration several times, clearly show how difficult it was to apply the system.
  6. The Marxist state controls the entire economy of the country. This results in economic disadvantages can be proved by statistics.

    In his book «The Spirit of Socialism» Gustav Lobon says that the estimate of expenditure on pure manufactured articles made by companies and expenditure on manufactured articles made by government, are matters of paramount importance. Estimates, collected over a long period, proved that the cost of goods manufactured by the government itself was higher than those manufactured by individuals by 25%. There were many reasons for the high cost of government manufactured goods, among which there was a psychological reason which added to the complications created by the government routine work. It refers to man's carelessness concerning projects in which he has no personal interest. Most of the schemes which were undertaken by middlemen failed because no individuals interested in their success took over their change. Another result of this is the diversity of management.
  7. The declaring of private ownership to be illegal was followed by declaring inheritance illegal too. Inheritance is one type of ownership and ownership, they say, is the source of all calamities. In saying this, they forget that inheritance is one of the most important and sound means for breaking up holdings and is a practical means for destroying capitalism. To abolish inheritance is like contradicting human nature itself which enjoins that sons should inherit their fathers' characteristics, of health power, illness, weakness, intelligence, stupidity and so on. On the other hand, declaring inheritance to be illegal removes hopes and incentives from both individuals and groups of people. If this is to be the case that would motivate the worker to spend more and more of his energy to build up rewards of which he and his sons will be deprived.

    The communist system could not stick to that principle for very long. In 1946, it recognized the right of a testator to leave his bequest, through a will, to anybody he selected in case of the absence of near relative. Article 10 of the new Russian Constitution stipulates that the right of ownership of the incomes and savings of citizens, accumulated through work, and the right of ownership of homes, domestic articles and equipments and articles of personal effect and comfort, together with the right of the inheritance of private possessions, is a right safeguarded by law.
  8. Then comes the question of the worker's wage in the communist system. All the people are considered as workers; wages are the same either of those who do manual work of those who do intellectual work and the principle is that from everybody according to his potentiality, to everybody according to his need. Here, one may ask How can activities differ without affecting the wages? The communist system says that all workers are people who should get equal wages. This is wrong, because in determining equal wages for all workers they also determine that all of them are equal in strength, weakness, intelligence and creative ability. This statement is denied both by thinkers and by events.

    By what right does a worker making shoes or textiles be equal to a scientist such as Eddison who spent all his life in research work invention? Such an equality will surely result in slackening of effort. Since equality in terms of wages is guaranteed, there will be no need for increasing or improving production.

    Some measures would have to be taken to avoid such a situation. Supervisors may be appointed to incite workers to increase production. The supervisor may succeed in his mission in certain fields, but it is impossible for him to carry out his mission successfully on the farms. If such a principle is to be applied, can we set beside each farmer one supervisor who has to control his work? And can this be done in vast lands where farmers and cultivators are scattered here and there? To solve this problem they are forced to send spies everywhere to terrorize people and threaten them by using agents of the secret police. People may also be threatened with death should they lag in their work.

    Another solution of the problem may be in laying down a minimum level for production without which no worker can get a wage. But this is complete foolishness for how can we draw a level for minimum production whilst there are people who have physical and mental powers which enable them to produce more than the quantity prescribed? And again, how can this happen while there are other people who are incapacitated by weakness and, accordingly, are unable to produce? In such a case, society will be deprived of the extra production which could be brought about by able men. It is natural that people wish to take it easy, especially if work is to be done without getting a reward. In applying such a principle, the weak will be condemned to death by starvation since they will be unable to produce as required. This led Koestler to describe the Marxist society as a structure composed of production at a lower stage and another higher, and intellectual one, with no grades and stages between them.

    In fact, the principle of equality of wages was nothing but a bluff which lured the workers who suffered from unemployment under capitalism. But it was a bluff which did not live long. In 1931, Stalin revealed to a conference of financiers and economists who were supervising production in the USSR that progress had been handicapped due to negligence and carelessness on the part of workers. At that meeting, he held economists responsible for that start of affairs and asked them to admit that the new conditions required new ways and to adopt, in a bid to increase production, a new system of differing wages. By doing so, Marxism ignored one of its original principles which stipulated that something was to be taken from each person as much as he could afford, and something should be given to someone else to satisfy his needs. Article 12 of the new Soviet constitution stipulates a new system for wages. It stages that wages are to be given according to the capacity and type of work done by a worker.
  9. Marxism is a war waged against classes, because one class is the end of the whole history of man. But to stress this meaning, Marxism distorted many aspects of life. when they applied their system in the practical field it became easy for everyone to see for himself how they tried to deceive and intoxicate the people by their call for the abolishing of barriers between classes. On April 28th, 1984, the weekly «Akhir Sa'a» reproduced a statement released by the Soviet News Agency TASS which reads as follows : «The Stalin Award for music amounting to one hundred thousand rubles was granted in 1974 to Joseph Kutta for his song «The Song of Stalin» and the Stalin Award for photography amounting to one hundred thousand rubles was granted to Larakali Towidtz for his picture (Stalin Speaks at the 24th Anniversary of the October Revolution). The third prize, amounting to fifty thousand rubles, was awarded to painter Parkrafetshinko for his painting (Gorki Reads His Story before Stalin, Molotov and Vorochilov). The Stalin Award for sculpture, amounting to one hundred thousand rubles, was given to Nicolai Tomoski for his statue (Stalin). Second and third prizes were also given to musicians, painters and sculptors for their musical compositions and statues of Stalin. The total of prizes granted by the State (the state of the communists and the paradise of the poor and needy) in the name of Stalin, and for pictures and statues amount to about forty thousand pounds. They were granted by the Soviet Council, presided over by Stalin).

    In a thesis about the new Soviet Constitution prepared by Mr. Foad Shibi, the ex-press-attaché' at the Egyptian Legation in Moscow for his M.A. degree, the following information appeared. The examination board at that time included Mr. Kamel Abdel Rehim, ex-minister plenipotentiary for Egypt in Moscow. The thesis stated that the monthly pay of the Russian peasant was 300 rubles (each ruble equaled about 5 Egyptian piastres) from which 150 rubles were taken by the government to strengthen industries. Dramatists, dancers, men of literature and writers, the thesis continued, were called the intellectual class and drew high salaries amounting to 20,000 rubles per month. The cultured class, which was about 7-8% of the population, drew about 43% of the wages. The sons of that class were admitted to universities, either free of charge or with charges, but the sons of peasants were deprived of that concession. This is how the communist state fights the existence of classes in conformity with Karl Marx's principle.
  10. Communism pretends that it would save workers from the humility and oppression they suffer under capitalism. This claim proved to be a bluff by which they distorted facts and lured the people, especially the working class. Here are some of the facts which show communism's stand vis-à-vis the worker.

    On October 11th, 1930, a decree was issued to the effect that a worker had to accept any job assigned to him in any toward in any place. On 24th September 1930, 9th October 1930 and 10th August 1940, other decrees were issued prohibiting any worker from leaving the work assigned to him on his own accord, otherwise he would be considered as a deserter and would be subject to ten years imprisonment in forced work camps. The decrees of 16th December 1932 and 26th June 1940, provided that if the worker absented himself for one day, or if he came to his work late three times in one month, such a worker would be dismissed and deprived of the union card which indicated his profession and gave him the right of lodging and food. He would also be subject to imprisonment for a period ranging from six to twelve months.

    The two decrees issued on 1st June 1932 and 2nd June 1942, stipulate that workers are financially responsible for any damage suffered by factories or equipment and as sessed by the manager only. The cut in the worker's pay, in such a case amount to ten times the value of the damages or loss.

    The Supreme Soviet Law issued on 26th June 1940, gives the manager the right to pass sentence for imprisonment on any worker for a period of four months without standing trial or investigation.

    All such things occur under a government which pretends that it works for the welfare of workers.

In the early years of its rule, Marxism passed from one defeat to another. It continually forsook its principles one after the other. Year after year it abandoned, without exception, all the doctrines and beliefs on which its system had been established. If Marxism had not taken that turn, it would not have made any progress in industry or in agriculture.

The success of Marxist experience in a big communist country is due more to forsaking original communist doctrines than to adopting them. All that which now exists in the communist state, forty years after its inception, proves that the forbidden things which Marxism was established to remove have become permissible. when the war broke out, religion and nationalism were recognized and the atheist leaders soon became aware of the importance and influence, of religion and nationalism. After removing exploitation which was exercised by the capitalists, the ruling class which they fought to destroy and for whose cause they committed every crime, remained untouched. On the contrary many other classes have been created and standards of living differed accordingly.

Marxism was given sufficient opportunities to prove its practical power in the field of application. It was allowed to exercise its power during a period of forty years and two hundred million people were put at its disposal and a space double that of the whole of Europe - about sixth of the whole world - was also allotted to it. Notwithstanding, it incurred heavy debts; it also left the field after changing its fundamental principles and forgetting the elements of communism.

This theory was an extension of the other materialist movements known in ancient periods of history. All of these movements arc identical in their goals, means and principles, and even in the nature of the people who preached their ideologies.

The proper definition which may be given to such movements is that they were an unhealthy manifestation which appeared as a result of an unhealthy society and at the hand of an unhealthy group. These people believed that framing constitutions based on science and enforcing laws derived from reason were sufficient to recreate the world. Only through coercion could they dominate a rebellious people who could hardly ascertain the facts since they were still in the throes of revolt against Tsars. But soon the facts were revealed and the people tried to raise their voice, even though muzzled, to warn their human brethren of the dangers they themselves were facing.

In his book «Dr. Zhivago», the Russian poet Pasternak criticizes materialism in general and Marxism in particular. That book was the direct cause of hastening the poet's death. The book earned him the Nobel Prize for Literature in 1958, but was not welcomed by the Kremlin, with the result that he was soon dismissed from the Writers Union. He was about to stand trial but was saved after he refused to accept the prize and apologized to his government.

Pasternak says : «The divine wisdom creates soul and spirit by which salvation or destruction comes about. It is not its function to give preference to a group of people over another».

«Historical materialism is a doctrine in which theories and life's facts are found far distant from each other».

«We were given life to live and not to use it as a means of implementing the words of idealists».

«History is a ghost which is created by the imagination of man to represent a chain of events. It is not its concern to drive peoples from the past to the future in an attempt to make them forget the present».

«Vitality is the basis of all art and consciousness. It is the fountain which springs from inside. It could not be influenced by any external motive».

President Gamal Abdul Nasser says in the introduction of the book «Truth about Communism». : «When communism became a system adopted by a government it changed into something which was not anticipated by its advocates. Many are the theories which lure peoples, but as soon as they are in practical use they uncover themselves and reveal painful facts».

The only benefit the communists obtained from their communism was that they became machines in the general system of production, after they had been human beings with their own will. They denied religion because they believed it to be nothing but a legend. They denied the existence of the individual because they had faith only in the state and not in the individual. They also denied freedom because it was a proof of the individual's confidence in himself. Man, in the communist system, has neither being nor will. They did not believe in equality within the framework of the state, because in the constitution of communism the state is a pyramidical structure at the top of which sits only one man, and at the bottom there are millions of people.