Commentary On The Green Book: New Socialist Society

Consists Of Lectures By The Brother Leader Muammar Al Qadhafi And The Contributions Of Other Writers And Thinkers

Volume II
Commentary On The Green Book
New Socialist Society

Introduction:

It is the right man to wonder about the nature of the new socialist society who preach the Third Universal Theory, this theory incite all the forces of the toiling masses of workers, students, peasants, soldiers and other forces of their own exploitation, to the revolution, the People for the realization of socialism, and build societies free diseases of the political and social. Therefore it becomes the right of every human being, whether those forces or others, to wonder: – What is this new socialist society, who paid, communities to sacrifice in order to achieve?

The nature of traditional societies:

In order to identify the nature of the new socialist society, we need to know before what is the nature of human societies existing up to now? We must know, specifically. What is the nature of communities of exploitation? Of either a single sector, public or private, or a two or more, public sector and mixed sector. . Those communities based on their race effort and action.

What is the exploitative society? What is its nature?

What is the new socialist society? What is its nature?

It must be distinct and photographs in order to facilitate comparison between them. May prefer human societies based on the new socialist society if the comparison in favor of existing communities. If the comparison confirms that the new society the best of those communities, the revolt against the existing communities become due. Why do not we crawl rally everywhere of the world in order to reach that community?

Many people believe that the socialist transformation, which incite Fateh Revolution of September Great Revolution by students and workers, peasants and laborers can not be in their favor. And ignorant of many people, rich in particular, the nature of the new socialist society. And the illusion that their interests and the interests of their children and the children of their children, generation after generation can only be achieved in a society of exploitation .. This is a particular error, which is what we want proved.

Exploitation appears in every economic activity undertaken by humans for control of what is right most of the wealth of society. Humans or might seek to build a building or Amartin. May wish. In the construction of Building A, while that its fair share of the wealth of society not more than one house, which is enough to satisfy his need for housing, so why do it? Why does not stop at the point where the right is equivalent to the wealth of the community? The human toil for survival. Proceeding from this principle seeks to achieve the rights guarantees for his life. Humans or anywhere in the world are exposed to death. As the survival of the human alive is not only satisfying his needs, he seeks to distance himself from the specter of death to achieve those needs necessary for survival. The human happiness can only be achieved satisfying his needs and therefore seek to obtain a human needs to live happy in the end.

That works in order to satisfy the hungry and after that it becomes a full happy. And drink to the thirsty work, and after to drink become happy. Tired and works in order to rest and relax when it becomes happy. Thus, human happiness does not feel hungry or thirsty, a, or tired, or slave, or by any pressure from the pressure of physical or psychological. Hunger, thirst, fatigue and all the other pressures are restrictions on the happiness of man, therefore he must break those restrictions and liberated to achieve happiness.

The one who builds a building, or open a shop or trade, which represents a plot of land suitable for construction, or agriculture. Then acquires a piece of a second and a third or more than able to afford it, that’s doing it stems from the instinct to survive, and the pursuit of happiness. Vtkds wealth is not required in the target itself, but behind it is to achieve a goal beyond survival and happiness.

Is Human, which seeks to achieve survival and happiness, a criminal?

Is not a man a criminal simply because it seeks to achieve survival and happiness, it is a legitimate right by virtue of his nature. But that does not mean the same time have the right to encroach on human survival and happiness elsewhere. If the right person is to live happily. The right of others to do so, but the exploitation of communities deviate from this principle to the nature of the human quest deviates from the natural base.

The valuable human exploitation of a society left alone. The society does not provide guarantees of what has to be able to satisfy its needs for survival and happiness of man therefore seeks to achieve that alone guarantees through accumulation of wealth that accumulates at the expense of others, share the wealth of society.

The laws governing the movement of a society based on exploitation of this view, which is all the work done by man in order to accumulate wealth in accordance with a project and therefore can not criminalize the man who seeks to achieve the guarantees of life by the accumulation of wealth. If that happens to transmit to that man, which accounted Alyard for construction or agriculture Aktrmen needs, to court accused of a crime of theft, for example, this Court acquitted of the crime attributed to him in accordance with the laws prevailing in the society of exploitation.

The one who takes the wealth of society, in its own interest is not a criminal and in accordance with the laws prevailing in the communities of exploitation, these laws supports that direction, does not see the flaw of the defects, nor is the man who behaves this way a criminal or deviant.

The one who owns the land suitable for building More needs, and which accounts for arable land more than the extent necessary to satisfy his needs, which seizes on other real estate more than he needs, and who shall in any economic activity for the control of the share More right to the wealth of society stems from the philosophy of achieving guarantees of living. And does so often terrifying for exploitation in itself, but as a result of free economic activity lead to exploitation.

Resolve the dilemma:

The socialism advocated by the Third Universal Theory, put an end to exploitation and bring about the solution which would be spent on the puzzle so that the exploitation of the unconscious raison d’être. If the issue is the fact that the man does not achieve guarantees of living unless compelled to exploit others, Visthoz on what is more than its share of the wealth of society, by what is controlled by the job opportunities which are the rights of others and deny them the socialism advocated by the Third Universal Theory comes the solution that makes the new socialist society to provide a guarantor guarantees of living of all its members. Humans or when asking for the reason that prompted him to build further on the need of Buildings, or for carrying out economic activity in order to accumulate wealth and depriving others of which answer is usually, that the intention behind this is not the exploitation of others, but Toviraldmanat necessary for the living and the livelihood of his children so as not to be in need or be children in need of others, when he fails to provide the necessary guarantees of trying to source provided Musdrakhr Thus, the exploitation of an unintended consequence in itself, which remains to stay away or removal of the causes that led to its existence. This is the dilemma that comes to the new socialist solution.

The new socialist society which is based on the principle of satisfying needs, according to the rules of a natural end to this exploitation, ensuring that this community needs of its members, then there is no justification for the looting and pillage, exploitation and acquisition of greater rights and needs of its share of the public wealth.

Many consumers complain of living conditions and goods which, in humans or anywhere in the world does not want to be consumables are expensive. As long as the man complains of high cost of living, there is no solution but to increase the purchasing power of that man so he can get his needs. The man always trying to increase its purchasing power so that he can buy what they need from him and his family goods. May try to buy and store more than the need for the number of households driven by instinct love to stay. If the new socialist society able to provide a solution to this dilemma, so it offers a practical solution and is ideal for all mankind, to Ogneaúha and poor. Ending all causes of greed, greed and plunder and exploitation. Since become a rich man living who takes your money to ensure the living, are guaranteed in accordance with the rules of the new socialist.

What is the cost of living, who complains of it rights in every country in the world?

The high cost of living is a lack of purchasing power which man can buy their way for his needs. When the rising price of food, clothing, transportation and other necessary materials decreased consumer purchasing power, and becomes what it gets from the human needs of the less-than-gets before the rise in prices? What is the reason for the lack of purchasing power? And how it can be treated? If you knew the reason and possible treatment achieved paradise on earth. The reason lies in the existence of exploitation when you buy a suit and find that the price is high for the purchasing of your ability, and when complaining about the high price of this suit then it complains of exploitation. Valbdlh not be up for it except for the fact that the cost of production prohibitive. Or the fact that you sell Istglk and ask price for double the cost of production, which is free in the price and prompted to do so in accordance with the rules of exploitation, because it Eptga make a profit by what he can withdraw from what you can afford.

If the Third Universal Theory was able to solve these problems, and by creating a picture of a new socialist society in which all the reasons for ending exploitation, it would have blown up all the theories that preceded it, which failed to find a solution to the problems of rights.

The Third Universal Theory, its applications, which starts from the foundations in the Green Book no doubt lead to a final and real solution to the problems suffered by the rights, in particular with regard to the economic Palmchkl.

To illustrate this assume that a country has its factory. And that the factory sells its production to members of the community. Any of the consumers and that this plant under public ownership to members of the community, as it belongs to the public sector, and that this factory, sells its production is too expensive, even turn a profit .. like the private sector. This profit can only be achieved at the expense of consumers, members of the community, where this profit go? Factory can claim that this profit is due to the general budget, and may increase plant production has been working to improve it, and establish a factory last, may expand the factory activity and prevents its profits for the general budget of the activity in or provide services to citizens in health or education or defense, or transportation or other services needed by the members of the community.

This process means. According to the socialist resolve. We take people directly to give them indirectly. The solution is the new socialist who exposes this process. If this plant is designed to serve the community through the sale of produce is too expensive, even expanding. And be able to improve production and provide funds for the general budget. And provide services to members of the community. It achieves all this by what the expenses incurred by the consumer in order to obtain the production of this factory.

That the right solution that can serve as a substitute for that session is feasible is not originally from the people we take nothing for what? If we do not take from the people something and kept it and made ​​it a firm footing, we find that the economic level of people has improved, and become the purchasing power necessary to satisfy their needs are available with them it becomes the duty of institutions socialist farming was the mother of industry in the new socialist society is to continue in production.

Rights may be forced to steal and plunder, fearing for his life and to ensure its survival, what the reasons for this fear? This is due to the difficulty of obtaining needs, man finds it difficult to get his needs and that takes all the measures, which enables it to survive even if he had to steal and plunder and exploitation.

The new socialist liberation those needs, so that it is easy to obtain, Firtah of fatigue and human greed and exploitation of the wealth creation of introduction that can get those needs. When the needs easy access to, then there is no need for all exploitation rights exercised by even become rich at the expense of others.

The real motive of the person who toil in order to be rich is to obtain a guarantee for his living, and when the living is guaranteed in the new socialist society will end the problem for him, and this is why the children of the rich are joining to a crawl that takes place in the community, for their conviction that the exploitation was left justified, because the needs have been liberated, and it became easy to obtain in the new socialist society. Because this trend is in their best interests even if this interest, selfish, man is no longer looking for the purchasing power to ensure that Akdsha to satisfy his needs.

And when convinced that the rich Balotrohat new advocated by the Third Universal Theory, and they realize that these theses check to satisfy their needs will be joining the march played by the knock to achieve a socialist society that liberates people to edit their needs and make them able to get these needs, for they become in the limits of what is available to their PPC, becomes a living so affordable and not difficult, as is the case in societies so far.

How to become a living difficult?

Living become difficult for humans when they are under the control of other needs, man who controls the human needs of the other and controlled exploitation able to exercise. And the society that allowed the seizure of the needs of others allow the sale of these needs to the campus of the control. Freedom of economic activity stems from this rule.

Thus able to control the others’ needs to double the prices of these needs, thus achieving the maximum profit he can, and from that comes the difficulty of obtaining needs. Difficulty of obtaining needs stem from the phenomenon cost of living, resulting from the doubling of prices needs.

If the cost of ten dinars Suit, this suit may be sold twenty thousand dinars, and have need to buy them because they satisfy the need of their needs. And do not have the option of missing the loss of their freedom because their needs. And that there is no other formula in this society based on exploitation of people on the basis of deals, where can people buy the suit, which has monopolized the sale of the merchant, when he does not have a sector of society take care of this need to provide?

The merchant service to society, but what follows Alyhzh service?

The service provided by the trader result in the exploitation of human being to another human being in the merchant Ptgmh needs of members of the community be able to control them, and exploitation of his interests under the existing laws in this society.

Therefore divided society based on exploitation of the poor and the rich being the looting and beyond the border, and that happens in the pursuit of formation and accumulation of purchasing power. Purchasing power is the ability that humans have access to his needs, and that achieve happiness. And accumulate as a result of purchasing power when the rich become poor and unable to get his needs for the loss of that purchasing power.

Vaahadhun are present in all parts of the world because they are losing their purchasing power to obtain their needs. And purchasing power are not available but the availability of money. But the quest for access to money and built up is the same as the factor that leads to exploitation. If socialism was able to find a new solution to this problem, they avoid falling into the community circle of exploitation.

Nokia to humans happy, but if it becomes available and needs of living is guaranteed. Valmokl, clothing, housing, education, treatment and Almarkob .. Each of these needs must be available to humans. But these needs at the present time are only available through exploitation, looting and beyond the border.

The summary of economic applications that take place in the world so far, is the production of the commodity and its price in order to double the profit realized.

These profits come from consumers in the community. If the product is followed by the private sector, it doubles the price to become rich, and be able to get the necessary purchasing power to satisfy his needs. If the product follows the public sector, it doubles the price of the item in order to increase the general income of the state. Thus, we note that the profits came from the same community members who are trying to achieve prosperity to them by the general budget.

The new socialist solution eliminates this long road, Valhajat now sold for double the price of the community in order to achieve a profit to its owner or to the state, but people want those needs cheap. And services available to them and to increase their standard of living. Since the double price of the item means to withdraw the purchasing power of consumers, members of the community, and the solution is thrown new socialist left to the purchasing power they have, effectively doubling the production units, item rather than double the price, the item becomes cheap because of the increased display.

The withdrawal of the purchasing ability of consumers, who being now in most communities by doubling the selling price of goods, is to exploit and plunder and extortion. The list is now in the socialist world is going according to the principle of exploitation in which they operate the same capital .. A principle contrary to the principle you are working with the new socialist that does not aim to double the price of the item, but rather to a doubling of units produced goods, and thus turn the economic activity in the new socialist society of the activity is a production looking for a profit in order to save in excess of satisfying those needs to the productive activity .

If we double the number of units produced item, we meet with a natural base recognized by capitalism itself, namely:

“The increase the width of the product, with the survival of other factors on what they are, lead to lower its price”, this means that an increase in production. Needs makes cheap. And ends as a result of the so-called high cost of living and rising prices, inflation and exploitation … etc..

The purpose of the society, is the new socialist satisfy the material needs of its personnel and turns everyone in this community to produce a product to satisfy his need, and end this problem to the high cost of living arising from the withdrawal of the purchasing power of members of the community. And the process becomes limited to the distribution of production on which the owners of the right of members of the community.

Production incentives:

Third Universal Theory aims at the abolition of rent and free mankind from Abboudatha and return to the normal rules and the transfer of workers into productive partners in production. When liberated, the Working double production because the factor “product” was working for himself he concludes in his work productive without a doubt, because the motive to fidelity in production is the reliance on his own to satisfy the needs of material from the production, which is a partner in it, so the phenomenon of failure facing both the public and the private sector in most countries of the world will disappear disappearance of taxis and wage-earners.

The countries with the public sector, where the worker produces ten units of the item she would give him the state and one unit of this production, reserves and production to the rest of society spends on research and weapons, war, education, health and other services.

As a result, the worker who took a single unit of production, fails to output.

Why more than factor of production, a significant doubling of effort lavished of this effort, but the decision of the community, which is the minimum?

In the capitalist system, the worker who produces for the benefit of the employer for wages does not work only as an opportunity to ensure this work, so that does not appear inaction or failure of production to some extent separated because of work. Thus, the working people in the capitalist system have to produce in order to maintain the opportunity to work.

And capitalists in the capitalist system does not produce, but produces the action they are forced to knock the production for the benefit of the capitalist class.

In a state with a single sector, which deprives the private property, the working people fail to production. Because the community is obliged to provide the minimum standard of living for all its members. Thus, the working people do not produce in order to maintain the opportunity to work as in the private sector.

Owners say that the doctrine gives the state the right to take production workers for the benefit of society that the objective of the State under this doctrine, is to create a human ideal, which produces for the benefit of the community and for the benefit of mankind.

This doctrine is facing a serious turning point, a failure of production, and this position to disband it because society is based originally on the conversion of all its members to Ogerh working people of the state.

. وقد حرم عليهم النشاط الخاص، وسحب منهم حق الملكية الخاصة، وأصبحت الشغيلة ملزمة بالعمل في الملكية العامة عملا جماعيا مقابل أجرة تمثل جزءا من إنتاج الشغيلة وأما الباقي فانه يحول لصالح المجتمع، لكي يتكدس الانتاج

ويصبح ملكية مشاعة للجميع وتتحقق بذلك مقولة: “من كل حسب جهده إلى كل حسب حاجته”.

إن تلك المقولة غير قابلة للتطبيق، ويصعب على الانسان أن يؤمن بها. لأن ذلك المذهب يبنى تصوره على فرض تكديس الانتاج حتى يتحقق النعيم الارضى. ولكن الحقيقة أن الشغيل إذا أنتج عشر وحدات من السلعة. ولم يعطه المجتمع إلا وحدة واحدة فانه سوف يتقاعس عن الانتاج حتى يصل به إلى حده الادنى، ويصبح تكديس الانتاج، نتيجة لذلك أمرا مستحيلا، ولذلك نجد أن أصحاب ذلك المذهب يبحثون عن حوافز تدفع الشغيلة للانتاج.

مشكلة البطالة:

نجد في المجتمع الرأسمالي أن فرص العمل غير متوفرة للجميع، حيث توجد البطالة، وذلك لأن فردا ما من أفراد المجتمع يمكنه أن يأخذ من فرص عمل الآخرين. فإذا وجدت في المجتمع فرصة عمل واحدة لكل فرد من أفراد المجتمع، وأخذ فرد ما فرصتين، فان ذلك يعني وجود اخر بدون عمل. وهكذا إذا كانت فرص العمل مليوني فرصة واستطاع فرد ما أن يحصل على مليون فرصة فإن مليون فرصة فقط تبقى للآخرين، ويعني ذلك وجود مليون عاطل إذا كان عدد أفراد المجتمع مليوني نسمة. وهذا هو ما يجري في البلاد الرأسمالية، حيث تقوم المظاهرات والاضرابات وتوجد البطالة نتيجة لعدم تساوي فرص الأفراد في العمل وفقا لقوانين الاستغلال القائمة. ونتيجة لذلك، نجد عاملا غنيا لانه أخذ فرص عمل عدد من العمال الآخرين، ونجد في مقابل ذلك عمالا فقراء بعدد فرص العمل التي استولى عليها ذلك الغنى.

ان ظاهرة البطالة في أي مجتمع ليست نتيجة لعدم وجود فرص العمل في المجتمع، وحتى لو وجدت فرصة عمل واحدة فقط لوجب تقسيمها على أفراد المجتمع.

ومن ثم، إذا وجدنا أفرادا عاطلين عن العمل في مجتمع ما فإن ذلك يعني أن هذا المجتمع قائم على الاستغلال وغير عادل لانه سمح بالاستيلاء على فرص العمل الخاصة بأولئك العاطلين عن العمل من قبل أفراد آخرين. وإذا وجدنا في المجتمع أغنياء وفقراء، فمعنى ذلك أن الأغنياء قد استولوا على حق الفقراء، وأن هذا المجتمع لا توجد فيه عدالة اجتماعية.

وإذا وجدنا في المجتمع من يملك المنازل التي تزيد عن حاجته ووجدنا من هو محروم منها. فان ذلك يعني أن هذا المجتمع به خلل، وأن الثروة فيه ليست مقسومة على عدد السكان، قسمة طبيعية. فاذا كان المجتمع يستطيع أن يوفر منزلا واحدا لكل مواطن وسيطر مواطن ما على أكثر من منزل واحد، فانه بذلك يكون قد استحوذ على حصة مواطن آخر، وإذا كانت إمكانات المجتمع تكفى لبناء حجرة واحدة لكل مواطن، وسيطر مواطن ما على أكثر من حجرة واحدة، فانه بذلك أيضا يكون قد استحوذ على حصة مواطن آخر، ولا يمكن أن يتحقق ذلك إلا عن طريق العملية الاستغلالية التي تمكن من ممارستها في المجتمع الاستغلالي الذي تبيح قوانينه النهب والاستغلال.

أين تتجه الثورة؟

هل تتجه الثورة إلى من قام بعملية الاستغلال؟

إن الثورة تتجه إلى تحطيم قواعد الاستغلال التي يقوم عليها المجتمع الظالم.. تتجه إلى تحطيم القوانين الظالمة.

إن قوانين العمل في دول العالم الرأسمالي تسمح بسرقة جهد العمال. وتعطي في صورتها الاصلاحية التلفيقية، للعامل حق المشاركة في الأرباح والادارة. مادام القانون يسمح بوجود رب عمل وعامل، ولا يعنى ذلك شيئا بالنسبة للعامل، لان هذه العلاقة لا تقوم إلا على سرقة جهد العامل، ولان رب العمل لا يستطيع تحقيق الربح إلا بسرقة جهد العامل، وبالرغم من حماية العمال من الفصل التعسفي حيث لا تسمح القوانين المتبعة في عقود العمل بفصل العامل إلا عن طريق نقابة العمال وبعد إنذار بذلك، فان المشكلة لم تحل بعد، لان هذه القوانين ما زالت قائمة على الاستغلال، وعلى النظام الطبقي، حيث يوجد سادة وعبيد، ولكن السيد هنا لا يطرد عبده إلا بشروط هي كذا وكذا.

إن إضفاء بعض الزينة على هذه العلاقة لكي تصبح براقة ومغرية، كما هو الحال في كثير من المجتمعات، لا يعنى القضاء على المشكلة. إن المشكلة لا تنتهي إلا بالقضاء على هذه العلاقة نفسها، ولا تنتهي المشكلة إلا بإلغاء رب العمل ليصبح العمال منتجين”شركاء لا أجراء” وهي قاعدة تهدم قاعدة الاستغلال.

لقد تحول العمال، في الدولة الماركسية إلى أجراء للدولة بعد أن كانوا أجراء للرأسماليين. كما أن الدولة التي يوجد بها قطاع عام وقطاع خاص لا يفصل فيها العامل فصلا تعسفيا بل يشارك في الارباح، وفي الادارة ويعمل في إطار قاعدة الاستغلال التي تعنى رب عمل وعاملا، سيدا وعبدا، طبقة غنية وطبقة فقيرة، طبقة تملك الحاجات وطبقة تحصل على حاجاتها نظير خدمتها لهذه الطبقة.

تقرر قوانين الاستغلال أن على العامل أن يتنازل عن عدد من ساعات عمله للسيد الذي يسمح له بالعمل حتى يربح هذا السيد، وهي بذلك كأنها نقول”هذا السيد يجب أن يربح على حساب هذا العبد”.

أن منطق الثورة يقول “إن الذي أعطاك حق التصرف في عملي لابد أن يعطيني أنا أيضا نفس هذا الحق. فمن أين جاءك الحق لكي تصبح رب عمل ولا أصبح أنا كذلك رب عمل”؟

إن وجود رب عمل وعامل قاعدة، سواء قررها المجتمع أم لم يقررها، لا مبرر لها إطلاقا، فالعمل يجب أن يقسم على جميع أفراد المجتمع، وهم شركاء فيه لان فرص العمل يجب أن تقسم بالتساوي على أفراد المجتمع، حتى يكونوا كلهم أرباب عمل أو يكونوا كلهم عمالا.

إن التسهيلات والامكانات والقروض والضمانات التي تقدم لارباب العمل، والي تمكنهم من استغلال غيرهم هي من حق جميع أفراد المجتمع، ونصيب كل فرد فيها مساو لنصيب غيره، ولذلك لا يصح استخدامها وسيلة من وسائل استغلال الآخرين.

الثورة والحرية:

إن الثورة الحقيقية هي التي تهدم تلك القواعد، وهي التي تدمر مجتمع الاستغلال وتبني بدلا فه مجتمعا جديدا ليس بين أفراده عبيد، وتكون الحرية فيه حقا مكفولا لجميع أفراده. وحيث إن الحرية تكمن في توفر حاجات أفراد المجتمع، فان صاحب العمارة يجب أن تصغر عمارته حتى تصير منزلا يكفي إشباع حاجته، دون أن يعتدي على حاجة الآخرين من أفراد المجتمع.. وبذلك يجد نفسه في مستوى أفراد الشعب، لان كل فرد له حق في منزل واحد. والذي يملك أرضا للبناء ينبغي أن تتقلص هذه الارض التى استحوذ عليها حتى تصير قطعة تكفي لبناء منزل واحد ذلك لان هذه النظرية تهدف إلى إيجاد مواطن حر يملك حاجاته ولا يسمح لغيره باستغلاله. وهذا التوجه هو الذي يحقق الاشتراكية الجديدة. أما الاشتراكية المطبقة في النظم الماركسية فهى ليست اشتراكية وليست شيوعية. لقد تصور ماركس حلا حاولت بعض البلدان تطبيقه فأصبحت ماركسية. ولا يمكن تسمية هذه البلدان الماركسية شيوعية. لأن الشيوعية فكرة طوباوية قديمة وجدت قبل وجود ماركس نفسه. ولم يكن ماركس نفسه شيوعيا قبل انضمامه إليها أخيرا.

وعند تحليل المعطيات الموجودة في المجتمعات الماركسية نجد أن هذه المجتمعات لم تحقق إلا ما يمكن أن نطلق عليه”رأسمالية الدولة”. وقد حلت هذه الرأسمالية الجديدة محل رأسمالية الأفراد، ولكن الماركسية قد تتراجع لتصبح اشتراكية عندما تتبنى مقولات الفصل الثاني من الكتاب الأخضر. أما البلدان التي لا هوية لها والتى هي ليست ماركسية وليست رأسمالية كما هو الحال في معظم البلدان النامية. والتي ليس لها القدرة والاقتناع بما يجعلها بلدانا ماركسية أو رأسمالية. فمثل هذه البلدان تحاول أن تتبع خطا إصلاحيا، فهى أنظمة إصلاحية رأت مساوئ الرأسمالية، فوقعت فيها حركات سياسية تغييرية ليست بالثورات وإنما هي حركات هدفها تغيير نظام سياسي بنظام سياسي اخر. وقد حل في مثل هذه البلدان حزب يسارى محل حزب يمينى، وطبقة جديدة محل طبقة أخرى يحكم فيها الراديكاليون أحيانا، والعسكريون أحيانا، والطبقة المتعلمة التي يشترك معها بعض الماركسيين أحيانا أخرى.

تلك النماذج هي التي تحكم الآن هذه البلدان، خاصة ما كان منها مستعمرا من قبل البلدان الرأسمالية. فلا اشتراكية في هذه البلدان تطورها ولا رأسمالية تأخذ بها. هذه البلدان تحاول رفع مستوى الطبقات الكادحة عن طريق كبح جماح الرأسمالية، وتقريب الفوارق بين الطبقات، وتحديد الملكية، وتجديد الدخل، والضرائب التصاعدية، وخلق فرص عمل جديدة، ومشاركة العمال في الادارة والأرباح، وتأميم بعض المشروعات ..هذه العملية هي عملية تلفيقية إصلاحية. وعند تحليلها نجد أنها خليط من الرأسمالية والاشتراكية والشيوعية. لأن قوانين العمل موجودة إلى جانب التجارة الحرة والاستغلال والقطاع العام الذي تملكه الحكومة، وهذا ما يجري في معظم البلدان النامية.

إن العمال فى المجتمعات الماركسية يتقاعسون عن العمل والإنتاج لأنهم أجراء عند رب عمل واحد وهو الدولة، والدولة تكفل لهم الحد الادنى من المعيشة، الامر الذي يؤدي بالانتاج إلى الانخفاض حتى حده الادنى، ويضع المذهب الماركسي أمام طريق مسدود.

والحزب، الذي قرر أن يقود المجتمع حتى يحقق الشيوعية، غير قابل للتغيير وليس له معارضة، لان المعارضة تعني عند هذا الحزب برجوازية.. وهي ردة عن الماركسية اللينية يجب سحقها. ومن ثم لايتمكن المجتمع من حكم نفسه بنفسه. ولن تقوم فيه سلطة الشعب، وإنما تبقى سلطة الحزب الشيوعي إلى الابد، لان تنازل الحزب عن السلطة لصالح الشعب يعني انتهاء التحول نحو الشيوعية.

إن طبقة العمال (البروليتاريا) ليست هي الطبقة التي تحكم وإنما الذي يحكم هو الحزب الشيوعي. الذي سخر طبقة العمال للقضاء على بقية الطبقات حتى تصبح طبقة العمال هي قاعدة المجتمع. وانتصب الحزب بعدها حاكما على هذه الطبقة، وهو الذى يقودها. وقد كانت مهمة العمال هي القيام بالثورة لكي يصل الحزب الشيوعي إلى السلطة. ولكن بمجرد وصول الحزب الشيوعي إلى السلطة ينتهي دور البروليتاريا، وتصبح المهمة التاريخية هي مهمة الحزب الشيوعي، الذي يبقى إلى الابد على رأس المجتمع. وهذا الوضع يعتبر وضعا ديكتاتوريا أبديا يملك في الحزب الشيوعي السلطة والثروة والسلاح.

والدولة في البلدان الماركسية هي الحزب الشيوعي كما أن ملكية الدولة تعني ملكية الحزب، فالحزب هو السلطة. أما المجالس الشعبية (السوفيتات) فان أعضاءها يختارهم الحزب، وكذلك الحال بالنسبة للجنة المركزية والمكتب السياسى والامين العام للحزب، هؤلاء كلهم من أعضاء الحزب الشيوعي، وكذلك يكون الجيش العقائدي هو جيش الحزب.

فالماركسية إذن، لاتحقق الشيوعية ولاتحقق الديمقراطية. وهذا الحزب الدائم يخلق البيروقراطية، التي يعلو ركامها عاما بعد عام حتى يقتل كل شىء. كما أن مشكلة التقاعس في الانتاج تؤدي بهذا النظام إلى الطريق المسدود.

وهكذا نرى أن النظرية الرأسمالية قد قامت على الربح والجشع والاستغلال في حين حاولت النظرية الماركسية أن تتجنب هذا باعتباره رد فعل للرأسمالية، ولكنها أيضا فشلت في إيجاد الحلول النهائية لمشاكل الانسان.

أما النظرية العالمية الثالثة فهى تعود إلى النواميس الطبيعية النى تعتبر الانسان واحدا، والتي تعتبر أن الحرية لا تتجزا.

إن النظرية العالمية الثالثة ترجع إلى القواعد الطبيعية وهي تنادي بالعدل المطلق، بغض النظر عن إمكان وقدرة أي مجتمع على توفير الحاجات، لان توفير الحاجات يتطلب شعور الناس بعدم الظلم حتى يصبحوا قادرين على زيادة إنتاجهم.

لايمكن في مجتمع الاستغلال توفر ما يكفي لاشباع حاجات المجتمع، لان الغالبية الساحقة تشعر بأنها مستغلة، ومن ثم لا تبذل كل جهدها من أجل الانتاج. فاذا زال الاستغلال عن الانسان أعطى هذا الانسان كل جهده، وهو ما يسمح بتحقيق جو مثالي لتوفير الحاجات وهذه هي الاشتراكية الجديدة.

Archive Link

Advertisements