Hammer and sickle
Hammer and sickle are a symbol of solidarity with industrial workers - proletariat and agricultural workers - the peasantry. This symbol was designed by a Russian artist Yevgeny Kamzolkin for Mayday celebration in 1918. It was adopted as the state symbol of the Soviet Union on 6 July 1923 and also became a symbol of communism globally. The survival of human beings depends on industrial and agricultural products, yet almost the entire world has disavowed this symbol as a symbol of oppression. The reason was simple. The practice of communism was characterised by political repression, authoritarianism, mass killings and economic failures. What people failed to recognise was that the practice of communism in the 20th century considerably differed from its original theory. But it was not the forte of communism alone. Such atrocities, suppression of the public, the poor & minorities and anyone against aristocracies were the target of violence throughout history during various empires and colonialism. Is the situation any much different today with the illusion of democratic free world we think we have?
Many philosophers from Germany, Switzerland, France and England debated on different models of political-economic governance systems against the face of harsh economic conditions of the improvised working class and the wasteful lifestyles of the owners of Capitals. The concept of socialism was coined by French philosopher Pierre-Joseph Proudhon in 1830 and the concept of communism was coined by another French philosopher Louis Blanc in the mid-19th century. They both were advocating for reforms with alternative forms of socio-political-economic governance to close the inequality gaps. The idea of communism got some recognition with the publication of 'The Communist Manifesto' in 1848. The idea of socialism evolved in different ways during various political movements with emphasis on 'social ownership and democratic control of the means of production' but the idea of communism remained dormant until the time it was adopted as a governing system by Russia in 1917, the first communist government. But all forms of governance with the idea of closing the inequality gap remain unfulfilled even today.
The communism adopted by Russia influenced many other countries in the 20th century in Cuba, Eastern Europe and Asia and became an ardent opposition to capitalism. Many countries also adopted socialist policies without calling them socialism throughout the 20th century, leading to a range of social democracies in Western Europe and elsewhere.
The centrally planned economy of the communist system during the 20th century resulted in inefficiency resulting in widespread shortages of basic consumer goods, possibly due to bad management practice with lack of delegation. Together with economic failures the spread of authoritarianism and political repression became the noose for failure of communism. With the collapse of the Soviet Union almost all communist countries transitioned to market economies with some form of 'democratic' governance. The People's Republic of China and Socialist Republic of Vietnam, Cuba and Laos morphed into a reformed system of communism while Democratic People's Republic of Korea remained in its original shape and form of communism. In retrospect one might ask, would communism be saved had there been well educated and well-meaning human resources adhering to the original principles of communism?
(Maslow's) Hammer and nail
With the collapse of communism in Eastern Europe the idea of democracy accompanied by free market economy and privatization were pushed globally by the West with no fear of opposition. Collapse of communism strengthened the self-confidence of democratic countries on the borderline of arrogance and made them believe that they are invincible and can impose their views locally and globally on any issues. The behaviors of many present-day democrats are undermining the tenets of democracy itself by misapplication of democracy. They have become a hammer that can hit hard anywhere anytime at will with no opposition.
The metaphor 'hammer and nail' was aptly described by President Obama when he said 'just because we have the best hammer does not mean every problem is a nail' while addressing West Point Military Academy on 28th May 2014 in the context of US Foreign Policy and the use of US military force abroad. But as we know from history, walking the talk is difficult including Nobel laureate Obama who defied his own preaching. We are witnessing the rise of many democratic dictators globally where they see any difference of opinions as a nail which they hit hard, militarily, economically, politically or by any other means just to demonstrate their political and economic strength. Let us be reminded that these leaders are elected by the general public not by the Polit Bureau like in China or Vietnam.
Such behaviors will eventually contribute to deterioration of the rule of law and even collapse of democracy altogether. Uneven application of law and corrupted judiciary are not uncommon in democratic countries. In the current environment of democracy, people appreciate press freedom but ironically the governments itself are known to spread mis- and disinformation to mislead the public. This is not press freedom. The hammer like behaviors of democrats also created political polarization leading to violence and breakdown of rule of law. Frequent exercise of hammer like behaviors of elected leaders by exploiting legal loopholes, such as manipulating of judiciary, etc. could lead to erosion of the constitution. Inculcating fear and manipulation through strength cannot be a national policy in democratic governance.
We often complain about surveillance of citizens in dictatorial countries but the statistics show a different situation. The density of government accessible CCTV cameras in Washington D.C is 44/1000 population, London - 73/1000 population, Beijing - 16 /1000 population, Dubai - 2/1000 population, Hanoi - 3/1000 population. While such cameras are installed to monitor and deter crimes, the footage can be and have been used for purpose against the civil liberties of individuals.
One of the worst actions of democratic dictators, the hammers, is the imposition of their will on foreign countries' internal affairs which polarizes people's political views and stability creating crises that could lead to political collapse. The ongoing crisis in Sudan, DRC, Ukraine, Syria and Palestine are just a handful of examples.
Solutions?
The rise of hammers can be controlled only by the population who elect them to ensure that people are not misled so that democracy can survive as it should. It requires serious civic education and political awareness of people from an early age so that susceptibility for their manipulation by the hammers is minimised. But in today's rat race economy and bloated cyber technology which is promoting individualism more than cooperation and collaboration, people have been devoid of time for essential formal and informal civic education. It needs sober collaboration between local academics and the general population to promote citizens' responsibility to make democrats accountable for their decisions not to see too many nails around them. Is it possible?
Read more articles by Ramesh here.
Or contact Ramesh at ramesh.chauni@gmail.com
Labels: Ramesh
Congratulations, you now have at least two readers.
ReplyDeleteYour essay begins with the hammer and sickle, that emblem of gulags, bread queues, vanished dissidents and tractors that never worked, and you invite us to consider whether the world has been a bit unfair in treating it as a symbol of oppression. After all, you say, humans rely on agriculture and industry, and the hammer and sickle represent those. Quite.
You then treated us to, communism wasn’t really tried, the theory was pure but the practice messy, and anyway, other empires were nasty too. A century of communism didn’t fail. It performed exactly as intended, glorious equality achieved by making everyone equally miserable, except the secret police, who enjoyed excellent healthcare and the best apartments. Your tour of 19th-century European thinkers may add intellectual depth, but reflect on the fact that Communism gave us the Khmer Rouge. You throw in the Obama quote as moral ballast, though I am tempted to suggest that if you are reaching for Barack Obama as your patron saint of restraint, you may wish to read up on recent history.
You then inform us that elected leaders sometimes behave badly, which, while true, is hardly a revelation. Western democracies, imperfect as they are, at least can remove bad leaders.
And as for “democratic dictators” meddling in foreign affairs, yes, countries pursue their interests abroad. The idea that Sudan, the DRC, Syria and Ukraine are primarily the fault of Western democracy rather than local tyrants, Russian expansionism, Iranian militias, jihadist factions, and failed governance requires tunnel vision.