Side by side and along with progress in the sphere of economy, the working classes would also, according to the proven assumptions, benefit directly from such progress. But in the Islamic countries, the situation for the contemporary working classes does not follow this assumption, and therefore, it is totally different. In other words, the quality of life for the working classes in these countries forms a continually downward trend. What we are witnessing here is a kind of “absolutism,” which has also been introduced by the Islamic party of Iran. During this period, which itself is a specific transitional feature of capitalism, there will be an absolute reduction in income and therefore a reduction in consumption and moral degradation at absolutely every level of social life. The sociological term for such a quantitative and qualitative reduction in consumerism and the standards of life is called “absolute poverty.” It could be claimed that, at some stage in the development of capitalism, the gap between the two poles of wealth and poverty will widen to a new high. But this by no means describes the status of “absolute poverty.” Throughout the capitalist era, the trend of the consumption level of the working classes is on the increase while the workers’ share of the Gross National Income (GNI) is continually decreasing. This situation characterizes nothing other than the state of “relative poverty.” The term “absolute poverty” refers to a measure or the occasional deterioration level of consumption by the working classes and does not represent a continuous or a permanent phenomenon. Perhaps at some stage in the development of capitalist economy, or at a time of economic crisis in capitalism, the standards of the consumptions of the working classes will be greatly reduced. But it must be noted that these reductions in standards have always been transitional and short lived. The working classes have never, throughout the length of the history of capitalism, been in an occasional or absolute state of poverty. A short historical review of the working classes in advanced capitalist countries would confirm the fact that there exists a marked difference between contemporary working classes and those of, for instance, the nineteenth century. For instance, the current working classes are not only free of captivity or bondage, but they also enjoy enormous possibilities and can own the following: a house, a car, furniture, refrigerator, television, holiday entitlement, medical rights, educational rights, retirement rights and many others. The incorrect feature of “absolute poverty” does not mean the denial of relative poverty. The workers’ share of the GNI is indeed much less than that of the capitalists. This injustice must be done away with. In order to eliminate such social injustice, today in some countries, the necessary step, via application of heavy taxation on large incomes and also through giving workers a fair share of the capital, are being taken. The author hopes to familiarize his readers with this through identifying incorrect thoughts and also by attracting their attention to the realities. From every social policy, we are aware that the Islamic party has adopted the governing law of unity and antagonistic contradictions and the laws concerning the transition from quantitative changes into qualitative changes, in which the subject of a gradual leap into a new state of mind as a reflection of quantitative changes into qualitative changes are studied. It is worth mentioning that within these social policies the laws of unity and the antagonistic contradictions are not applied to an issue externally, but instead the study is concentrated on the internal properties of the issue.1-2 In the adoption of such a system of cognition, the Islamic leadership assumes that the internal contradiction in each issue determines the overall unity of its constituent elements. In other words, whilst one element opposes the other, its existence at the same time depends on the existence of the others. Ayatollah Khomeini has on many occasions declared that, in their understanding of the system of cognition, each phenomenon behaves such that the existing contradictions within the phenomenon follow the universal laws of unity. It would therefore be considered a mistake to assume one without the other. It is a non-stop and continuous antagonism within the contradictions of a phenomenon, while the phenomenon itself holds its unity intact. With regard to the laws concerning quantitative changes and qualitative conversions, the Islamic leadership assumes that above all else, the internal essence of the issue constitutes the most important element of it, and they are of the opinion that, before a quantitative change can be converted into a qualitative state, the internal essence of the issue must be recognized as playing the most active part in such conversion. In their view, the issue cannot see changes made within it without regard to its essence. The Islamic leadership considers that this system of cognition is equally applicable both to nature and to society. If, according to the Islamic leadership, any qualitative changes in nature are subject to the quantitative requirement of the changes it must therefore similarly apply to society as well. In other words, for any social relationship in a society to exist, the particular social system must already be in existence, and it is only then that any quantitative changes and qualitative conversions could in effect take place. As an example, we refer to a feudal society. Without a feudal society, the particular contradictions as a direct property of such a society could have no meaning. This means that the feudal social system must first be in existence before any quantitative and qualitative changes in connection to that particular system can start functioning. Now, let us examine the practice of the Islamic leadership in its implementation of such a system of cognition that it claims to follow. In the first years of the Islamic revolution in Iran, the Islamic leadership claimed to have inherited a filthy and corrupt capitalist system. Was this evaluation correct and was it based on reality? Or, according to the same theoretical understanding of the leadership of the Islamic republic, have the internal contradictions of the capitalist world in fact seen speedy progress? Has the progress of the capitalist world, for the sake of the Islamic leadership’s desires, stood still? Or is it not true that the speed of the growth of the production forces of the capitalist world has risen many fold? With or without the wishes of the Islamic republican leadership, capitalism has, non-stop, through its discoveries of new technical fields, made astonishing progress within the past few years alone. This is an undeniable fact.
Posted on: Sun, 06 Oct 2013 11:34:41 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015