Articles Archives

Democrats and Republicans

I’m ready for something other than a Donkey or an Elephant. What would be a Michael Bloomberg, 3rd party, symbol anyway? Does he need one? The bottom line is that we know all too well how the four leading candidates for the two positions fare in the public eye. Each of the four candidates left standing are just too predictable and only one (Obama) seems to have any chance at uniting the masses.

The Republicans go through the primary season letting whomever wins the majority of the votes, get the spoils. The Democrats go through the priamry season spending tens of millions of dollars only to allow all that to be offset by the Super Delegates who are back room play-makers, and political croonies that can flaunt the will of the people and do whatever they please.

The Democrats are split on demographic lines, between blacks and Latinos, old and young, upscale and downscale. The Republicans are split over attitudinal lines: conservatives vs. liberals. Huckabee caters to the fundamentalist-evangelical crowd. McCain caters to the patriotic and war-oriented. Hillary caters to the “establishment”- the down-n-dirty let’s win at any cost crowd. Obama caters to those that are tired of business as usual.

What would Bloomberg bring to the table?

Harold Ickes was all for kicking Florida and Michigan out of having any delegates (9 months ago). Now that his candidate is behind (Hilalry), he wants them in. It’s hard to find any integrity in politics. The current rules came out of the 1988 contest, in which Jesse Jackson felt his voters were underrepresented. The problem is that the contest between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama has been so close that neither has built a significant lead — or is likely to do so in the contests still to come.

You can hear the cries now, echoing the Florida controversy of 2000. “Count every vote” will be Clinton’s cry — the argument Al Gore’s forces made. “Don’t change the rules after the game is played” will be Obama’s cry — the argument of the Republican lawyers. The Florida fiasco polarized the nation because the arguments that each side made were in line with its basic ideas of fairness. A brokered democratic convention is just what this nation needs. NOT!

Are we ready to do this all over again?

Obama fans will see this as an attempt to steal the nomination from the people’s choice. Clinton fans will argue that denying representation to the nation’s fourth and eighth largest states, both closely divided in the last two elections, would be political suicide. The Democrats’ determination to design a system all their constituencies would consider fair threatens to produce a confrontation whose result, whatever it is, will be bitterly regarded by large and important party constituencies as profoundly unfair.

Ah the best laid plans of mice and men, donkeys and elephants, Democrats and Republicans!


 Every country stands for its own development. For this purpose the state introduces and implements new policies and programmes such as Special Economic Zones Act. After 60 years of its independence India with its 110 core population has evolved a new paradigm of its political economy which is confusing. The policies and programmes initiated by Indian government to create a ‘global village’ based on free market economy and free trade among nations cutting across all barriers, abolition of national boundaries and dismantling the nation –state system giving priority to ‘market’ over the ‘state’ . After the enactment of Special Economic Zone Act 2005, it created tremendous effects on political economy of the country.

            The term ‘political economy’ came from the two Greek words ‘Politiko’ and ‘Oikonomia, where ‘Politiko’ stands for the state and society and ‘Oikonomia’means managing the house hold economy. Political economy thus means a study of the state, society and house hold economy. The concept of political economy arose historically as the economic doctrine of a new class – the capitalist class. It has been evolved since the days of Aristotle who gave a model of public good through guaranteeing each person private possession of what he was rationally and morally entitled. Private property was elaborated later by Locke, Adam Smith, Ricardo and the physiocrates, who came to be known as the Laissez Fairists in Economics, or, the liberal democrats in politics. Adam Smith referred to political economy as a branch of the system of civil government. It was concerned with public policy.

            In Marxian view, political economy can be regarded as a subject which studies the social relations evolves between different classes of people in course of production, distribution, exchange and consumption. Political economy belongs to the broad land of economics, which opens on to political science. After a prolonged period of hibernation, the subject has again been resurrected.

Marxist political economy makes a study of how the productive forces are used under the given relations of production taking account of the lines and trends in technical progress; political economy studies the influence of production relations on such progress and its socio economic consequences. Marxist political economy starts from the assumption that human vital activity is objectively based on social material production which includes man’s interactions with the nature and whole range of relations which arise in the process. It has been realized that every political action has its obvious economic repercussion, and every economic action has had its political implications.

 The liberal school of political economy offers economic implications of political facts and factors. The liberal school has economized politics. The liberal system focuses on the atomistic individual as the relevant unit, on the description of economic behavior in terms of subject choices among alternatives, on the notion of social welfare as the maximizations of individual utility sums. The socialist system views the entire economic system as the basic unit, views economic progress in terms of the growth of the forces of production and focuses on ‘relations of production’ ‘surplus value’ and the rapid increase of social product.

By contrast the Gandhian system eschews both the notions of the atomistic autonomous individual maximizing his utility in a self regulating economy and the notion of processes of production autonomously effecting changes in the organization of production ,class relationship and the magnitude and distribution of social product instead of the Gandhian model suggest that the fundamental attribute of human economic behaviour lies in the relationship of individual to socioeconomic micro groups and the relationship of micro groups to society .The basic economic act is neither the choice between economic alternatives nor the social division of natural products, but the adjustment between individual and the micro groups to which they belong, and of those micro groups to society .It is this collaboration which is the basic theme of the Gandhian system of political economy.

The Gandhian system is viewed in micro groups that are fundamental constituents of the economic system and given full scope to develop their potential in the context of no coercive forms of political control. Social welfare is defined in terms of the functioning of the collaborative micro groups vis –a-vis its members. Gandhi believed that the introduction of technology and patterns of development must be consistent with the full employment objective.

Today economist speaks of sustainable development and ecological values. Gandhi was not against industry but as he predicted it could not give people more employment. His constructive programmes were to give employment to all people whether it be kadhi, gobar gas or tree plantations, where all can be engaged in constructive work. Gandhian economics is an alternative to overcome the exploitation of both capitalism and communism for the exponents of human social order.He was against the large scale use of machinery which kept millions without work. Swadeshi is one of the core elements in the socio-economic organisation of Gandhian system.

Gandhi observes

                       “Life here will not be a pyramid with the apex sustained by the bottom, but it will be an oceanic circle whose centre will be the individual, always ready to perish for the village, the latter ready to perish for the circle of the villages, till at last the whole becomes one life composed of individual, never aggressive in their arrogance, but ever humble sharing the majesty of the oceanic circle of which they are integral units’. The idea of the circle stands for integrating, fullness and self-sufficiency. He wrote that independence must begin at the bottom. Thus every village will be a republic or Panchayat having full powers. It follows therefore, that every village has to be self sustained and capable of managing its affairs even to the extent of defending itself against the whole world.”

 Politics and economy are considered as two basic factors in determining the nature of the state and society. They are interrelated to such an extent that the changes in one affect the other, and hence both are ‘dynamic’ and ‘flexible’ ingredients of the national and the international systems. Politics and economy taken together as political economy refers to ‘managing the economy of the state’. Conceptually political economy connotes the relationship between the state, society and the economy, the cause–effect relationship between technological change and the process of development, the economic relations among the different nations of the world.


            A special economic zones is a geographical region that has economic; laws more liberal than a countries typical economic laws. According to the SEZ Act 2005, A SEZ is a ‘specially delineated duty free enclave and shall be deemed to be foreign territory for the purpose of trade operations and duties and tariffs. A SEZ also been viewed as “a geographical region with different economic laws than a countries typical economic laws with the main goal of attracting foreign investment’. “A SEZ or a Free Trade Zone (FTZ) is typically an enclave of units operating in a well –defined area within the geographical boundary of a country where certain economic activities are promoted by a set of policy measures that are generally not applicable to the rest of the country”.

            The concept of special economic zones is not new. In an International Labour Organization (ILO) report traces the roots of the concept to 13th centaury Spain and in more recent times to Ireland and Puerto Rico, which established Export Processing Zones (EPZ). Export Processing Zones is the former name of the Special Economic Zones. The countries like China, United Arab Emirates, Malaysia, India, Jordan, Philippines and Russia have utilized the concept of SEZ. In 1986, there were 176 zones across 47 countries. Now the number has increased to over 5000 across 147 countries.  

The zones are known by different names in different parts of the world. Most often these are Free Trade Zones  (FTZ),Industrial Free Zones (IFS) Export Processing Zones (EPZ) Bonded Free Zones and Special Economic Zones (SEZ).

          Export Processing Zone is the ancestor of SEZ. An Export Processing Zone is relatively small geographically spread area within a country. The purpose of which is to attract export oriented industries, by offering them especially favorable investment and trade conditions as compared with the reminder of the host country. The EPZ is just an industrial enclave but SEZ is an integrated township with fully developed infrastructure. The UN Industrial Development Organization (UNID) identifies five basic attributes of EPZ s are:

 ? EPZs are dominated by market mechanisms.

 ? EPZ are restricted to a limited region.

 ? EPZs specialize in the production of exports goods and offer special incentives for such production.

 ? Their major aims are to attract foreign investments, earn foreign exchange and to  generate employment

? Secondary aims are technology transfer, development linkages and regional             development .

Policies taken by the governments for the development of the nation obviously affect the people. SEZ policies are for the development of the country. These Developmental projects have economic, political and social impact. In Gandhian political economy, village level development is needed. Land needed for the establishment of the SEZs projects also affected the political economy of the country. Tax incentives, Foreign Direct Investment, New type of employment generation also affect the political economy of the country. The macro economic changes driven by SEZs will push the countries down the path of increasing socio-political crisis.  


India became independent in 1947 and chose self- sufficiency along with economic autonomy. The Industrial Policy Resolution of 1948 marked the beginning of the evolution of the Indian Industrial policy. The Resolution not only defined the broad contours of the policy. But it delineated the role authority of the state in industrial development both as an entrepreneur and as an authority

The industrial policy Resolution of 1956 gave the public sector a strategic role in the economy. It categorized industries, which would be the exclusive responsibility of the state or would progressively come under state control and others. Earmarking the pre-eminent position of the public sector, it envisaged private sector coexisting with the state and thus attempted to give the policy framework flexibility. India opted for a planned economy with emphasis on state sponsored industrialization. The argument was that capital being scare in India, it was essential to regulate the flow of the available capital in to socially desirable channels. This was achieved by an elaborate system of industrial licensing and state monopoly and control over key industries.                                                                                                                        

More than 80% of the Indian population is still living in agricultural field. Agri-centered model of development was prevalent during the 1950sand the 60s. Agriculture contributes approximately one-fifth of total gross domestic product (GDP). It provides the means of livelihood to about two-thirds of the country’s population. The Sector provides employment to 59 percent of the countries workforce and is the single largest private sector occupation. Agriculture accounts for about 10 percent of the total export earnings and provides raw material to a large number of industries.

During the Jawaharlal Nehru’s period, foreign collaborations were promoted in certain sectors and foreign investment was encouraged. First Export Processing Zone (EPZ) was set up in 1965 at Kandla, in Gujarat. This was a predecessor of the Special Economic Zone in India. The Santa Cruz EPZ in Mumbai became operational in 1973.

After the death of Jawaharlal Nehru, Indira Gandhi became the prime Minister of India in 1966. She also did a lot for the economic development of the country. The Foreign Investment Board was set up in 1968. In 1973, Foreign Exchange Regulation Act (FERA) was enacted.. India set up the Santa Cruz Electronics Export Processing Zone (SEEPZ) between1973-74. It was the first EPZ which was dedicated to the electronic industry.

Doors of the Indian economy were opened during the 1980s, by Indira Gandhi and later by Rajiv Gandhi. From 1984 to 1989, the policy was to enable the middle class to consume more so as to raise the internal demand. This resulted in the raise of imports and the growth of Foreign Direct Investment. The government tried to raise the level of exports in order to balance this phenomenon. In 1984, the Free Zone policy received a fresh start. By 1991, the Indian economy was opened up for linking up the Indian market with the world leading to free flow of trade and commerce .The multilateral Financial Institutions like the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund while assisting the developing countries like India also insisted upon restructuring the polity and the administrative machinery. Following a change in the policy regime in this period and the formation of the World Trade Organization (WTO) with India becoming its founder member, it opted for a liberalized capitalist strategy. There had been introducing policies since July 1991 particularly in the industrial sector.

De-reservation of industries for the public sector was one of the major step taken by the government as part of the policy changes in the industrial sector. It was against the earlier 17 industries were reserved, there are now industries like defense production, atomic energy, coal and lignite, railways and mineral oils reserved for the public sector. Core industries like iron and steel, electricity, air transport, shipbuilding, and heavy machinery industries such as heavy electrical plants telecommunication cables and instruments are now open to private sector participation. Besides, equities held by the government in selected public sector enterprises like ONGC etc are now available to mutual funds, financial institutions, the general public and workers through a policy of divestment

In1998, the first private SEZ started its operations in Surat .This was under the jurisdiction of the Mumbai (SEEPZ)Development Commissioner, who was a nominee of the central Government.

From the beginning of the 21st century, most of the developing countries in the world have recognized the importance of facilitating international trade for the sustained growth of the economy and increased contribution to the GDP of the nation. As part of its continuing commitment to liberalisation, the Government of India has also adopted a multi-pronged approach to promote foreign investment in India. The Government of India has pushed ahead with second-generation reforms and has made several policy changes to achieve this objective.  The annual growth rate ranged between six and nine percent.

Bharathiya Janatha Party (BJP) government decided to re-launch the Free Trade Zone Policy in 2000. It changed the name of Export Processing Zone (EPZ) to Special Economic Zone (SEZ). The policy intended to make SEZs an engine for economic growth supported by quality infrastructure complemented by an attractive fiscal package both at the Centre and the State level with the minimum possible regulations. 

The salient features of the SEZ scheme are:

v No licenses required for import

v Manufacturing or service activities allowed.

v SEZ units to be positive net foreign exchange earner within three years.

v Domestic sales subject to full customs duty and import policy in force.

v Full freedom for sub contracting.

v No routine examination by customs authorities of export/import cargo.

  The United Progressive Alliance (UPA) government Currently in power enacted Special Economic Zone Act, 2005 which was passed in June 2005 and came into force on 10th February 2006 with the notification of the SEZ Rule in 2006. The Act provides for drastic simplification of rules and single window clearance on matters relating to the union and state governments .The state governments have also been enacted their own SEZ laws to cover State subjects.

The Act provides for single window clearance mechanisms for developers and operators for ensuring orderly development of SEZs, the responsibility is assigned to the Board of Approval, constituted by the union Government. The Union Government may set up a SEZ on its own or on the basis of proposals of the state government or private developers after the Board of Approval has duly screened them .At the regional level, the Development Commissioner and his /her office will exercise administrative control of SEZs. The Labor Commissioner’s power is also delegated to the Development Commissioner. There is an approval committee to approve /reject /modify proposals for setting up units in SEZs. All suits of civil nature and notified offences in SEZs will be tried and settled by specially notified courts and affected parties may appeal to high courts against the orders of the designated courts. The  corporate units operating under SEZs will enjoy special privileges and protection granted by law.

          The Act offers a special fiscal package to the units set up in the SEZs. This package includes, exemption from customs duties, central excise duties, service tax, central sales taxes, and securities transaction tax to both the developer and the units set-up, tax holiday for 15 years like 100 percent tax exemption for five years ,50 percent for next five years, and 50 percent for the ploughed back export profits for the next five years.100percent income tax exemption for 10 years in a block of 15 years for SEZ developers.

 There is a three-tier administrative structure. On the top, a Board of Approval at the level of the Union Government has been set up for the functioning of the SEZs. Next an authority has been created by the state governments for creation and promotion of the infrastructure within each state. Finally, in SEZ mechanism /authority is provided for single window approval.   According to the 2005 Act, these zones can be set up by the developers, who could be private real persons, companies, both Indian and foreign, as also the State governments or the central government by themselves or jointly with private parties. It is also being envisaged that some of the existing Export Processing Zones would be converted into Special Economic Zones.  The SEZ Act, 2005 supported by SEZ Rules, has come in to effect on 10th  February 2006.


In India SEZs are divided in to three categories, Multi-product SEZs Sector specific SEZs, Free Trade and Ware housing Zone (FTWZ). The first category signifies a SEZ where units may be set up for manufacture/rendering of services of two or more goods in a sector or good/services falling in two or more sectors. For multi-product service SEZ, a contiguous area of 100 hectares or more is required. 

The second category defined as a zone meant exclusively for one or more product/services. The minimum area requirement is 100 hectors of contiguous and vacant land. Within sector specific SEZs, Bio-technology, Gems and Jewellery, Non conventional energy, electronics, hardware and software SEZ-including IT can be set up with minimum area has been relaxed to 50 hectares for Assam, Meghalaya, Nagaland and, Arunachalpradesh, Uttaranchal, Sikkim, J&K, Goa and the Union Territories.

 Free trade and warehousing zone (FTWZ) is the third category which minimum area requirement is 40 hectares of contiguous and vacant land. Built up area should not be less than 10 hectares.

There are 19 functional SEZs in the country which were set up prior to SEZ Act, and 154 SEZs that were notified under SEZ Act 2005. The maximum numbers of SEZs are coming up in the IT sectorThe total land requirement for the formal approvals granted till date is approximately 44,268 hectares. Out of this, about 87 approvals are for State Industrial Development Corporations (SIDCs) State Government ventures which account for over 21,169hectares 


One of the main issue is related with SEZ is locating land for SEZs. Many state governments are in the process of establishing SEZs. The issue of displacement, that of compensation or land price, rehabilitation, residential property development and land speculation, the threat of possible relocation of units from other parts of the state to SEZs and the consequent loss of revenue have been flagged . Farmers are protesting against the forced acquisition of their lands. The development of SEZs would lead to the destruction of employment of peasants whose land will be acquired and will create very little employment for high tech or high skilled persons and total net employment generated may well be negative. Handing over thousands of hectares of land cheaply to promoters of industry and relaxing the laws of the land, including those that relate to the welfare of the industrial workers, protection of the environment, taxation, etc, would automatically promote industrialization and solve the nagging unemployment problem of the country overnight. The farmers/peasants in various states such as West Bengal, Orissa, Maharastra, and Punjab have opposed acquisition of their land for SEZs. The highest level of opposition has been observed in West Bengal when land was acquired by the state government for the Tata group at Singur and Salim group of Indonesia at Nandigram.  Besides the loss of agriculture land, concerns have also been raised about the project affected People.

Using water for SEZs is one of the major problems rising from different parts of the country. Mundra SEZ as per official website of the SEZ, it expects to get at least 6 million liters per day from the Sardar sarovar project, as promised by Gujarat water infrastructure Ltd.

The another main issue is rising from different parts of the country, the labour laws applicable to the rest of the country have been relaxed for the SEZs. The existing laws are well intentioned and they promote worker welfare. Relaxing such laws exclusively for the SEZs shows the government’s lack of conviction in its own commitment to social justice.

In some SEZs, the state governments are joint venture partners. In the case of some, special incentives by way of concessional electricity and water tariffs have been offered .In almost all the cases, valuable lands have been given away at concessional prices.

Considering the SEZ Act, it violates the letter and spirit of the Indian Constitution; it infringes the Fundamental Rights of the citizen guaranteed in part 3rd of the Constitution. Relaxation /inapplicability of many labour Laws (including under the Industrial Dispute Act, Contract Labour Act, Factories Act, Minimum wages Act, Trade Union Act), Environment (Protection) Act is inapplicable to SEZs ,No environmental clearance needed.  Violates  Panchayat Raj Act (1996) for local self government, violating laws granting rights and control to adivasi communities over their land, violating many international conventions on human rights.

To sum up, SEZs and other emerging developmental issues can be seen in a broad perspective and theoretical underpinnings of neo-liberalism. As far as Indian polity is considered the implications emerging from SEZs may cause increasing socio-political crisis because the society is far more complex than we assumed and that will result in organized or unorganized resistance and that may even cause anti-neo liberal political forces. So, in order to avoid the polarization of the society, civil society should engage to create a consensus on developmental issues. More over, in order to understand the continuities and changes that are taking place in the developmental scenario it needs further study.     


Bijoiny Mohanthy and S.C Hazary(Ed), Political Economy of India Retrospect and Prospects (New Delhi: APH Publ).

 S.C Hazary, Political Economy of India Retrospect and Prospects, ( New Delhi: APH Publi,1997.)


Sukhendu Mazumder, Politico-Economic Ideas of Mahatma Gandhi  (New Delhi: Concept Publishing House, 2004.).

B.Mohanan,(Ed), Gandhis Legacy and New Human Civilisation, Gyam publishing house, New Delhi,1999.

Vineetha Sharma, ‘Implications Of A Special Economic Zone on Project Affected People a case study of Reliance Haryana SEZ”, Man & Development, Vol.39,Dec,2007.

Jermy Grasset and Frederic Landy, ‘Special Economic Zones in India Between International integration and Real Estate Speculation’, Man &Development, Vol. 39,No.4, Dec, 2007.

India 2008, A Reference Annual, Publication Division, Ministry of Information and Broadcasting , Govt:of India, New Delhi,2008.

Partha Mukhopadhyay, “The promised land of SEZs” Seminar, Jan, 2008


Sheetal Sharma and Kishan Pratap,  “ The Prosperous Few and the Pauperized Many: A Perspective on Special Economic Zones”, Mainstream, February,23-March,1,2007.


Jipson V. Paul

MA. Politics and International Relations from M G.University Kerala

MPhil. Politics and Intrrnational Relations from M G University Kerala

Doing PhD in Pondichery Cental University Puducherry.

Latest Hindi News automatically aggregates Hindi News headlines from various Indian and international newsprint, internet resources. We want our active Indian readers to contribute to this try by informing us of available Hindi News sources and reporting broken feeds on our news website immediately. We advise our Indian visitors to help us improve our other Indian regional language news sections (Marathi, Gujarati, Bengali, Punjabi, Kannada, Tamil, Telugu) in a comparable way. provide News in different categories like Top Headlines, Business, National News, International News, Sports News, Entertainment News, Health News. These categories news update regularly from different different News sources and get the latest News. A complete News source. Here you Get Latest News Updates from India and World. Breaking News from India, Latest India News, Latest World News, Daily News, Top News Stories, Business News, News Updates, Latest Stock News, National News, Sports News, International News and Indian Business News. News Page you can personalize also as for your convenience and get more proper formatted News sections. If you interested bollywood news or sports news the arrange accordingly. Get Latest Entertainment News, Latest Bollywood News, Hollywood News, Bollywood Celebrity Gossips, Latest Movie Reviews, Latest Movie News, Indian Entertainment News, Music Release, Online Celebrity News and more. India National News, India Political News, Latest India News, Indian News, Latest News, India Politics News, Daily India News, India News Headlines, Political News, Indian Political News, India latest News, India Latest News, Latest News India all Updas avilabel on Here you get Hindi News, Tamil News,  Marathi News, Telugu News,  Malayalam News, Kannada News, Punjabi News, Gujarati News, Bengali News, Latest News 

Author is request you to see Hindi Website for Hindi News, Bollywood, Sports, Astrology and many more

Moderate Republicans of the World, Unite!

From every study I’ve read or heard, and from my own personal observation, most of the country is moderate. Not wishy-washy. Just not convinced that the extreme side of an issue is necessarily the correct one. You wouldn’t know it listening to radio or watching TV. Everyone is polarized and extreme. It makes for better TV and radio.

An extreme stance on an issue usually isn’t very productive. Not only is it politically impractical, but it’s often not all that sound. Life seems to be designed so that most of the time there are no easy answers. This notion galls purists, like libertarians, who want all issues decided by nice neat little formulas.

But zealots get more attention. Zealots in the media on issues like immigration would have us believe that they speak for the “People.” They tell us what the “base” wants. They know because they’ve been out on book tours, and everyone who shows up for book signings echos what they believe. What a surprise. So when a political issue comes up they don’t like, they stir up anger and unleash their loyal listeners on key Senators and Congressmen, who get flooded with email and phone calls, and are eventually cowed. And voila, the voice of the “People” has spoken!

This Blitzkrieg method of influencing public policy has worked pretty well. The accepted wisdom apparently is that candidates for the Republican nomination must now be hardline on immigration if they want to win. Even John McCain appears to be distancing himself from his once tenacious position on immigration reform. The position on his website now seems to fall in line nicely with the acceptable talking points. The President is one of the few major Republican figures who apparently hasn’t been fazed by the constant drumbeat in the new media and talk radio.

What’s so startling is that this issue is not new, and Bush was elected, not once but twice, making his position well known. What is new is that the so-called spokespersons for the Republican Party, pundits and talk-show hosts, have handed down their edicts on the matter, and that seems to be that. Don’t let the “Elites” shove reform down your throat!

There’s no question that something must be done to curb illegal immigration. But is the country really draconian on how to deal with the hard-working, decent ones who are already here? Or are we hearing a vocal minority? The way the Republican Party took in it the shorts in 2006 suggests the latter. Senate Republicans, who had been more willing to compromise on the issue, did not take near the hit the Congress did, where Republicans felt the political heat to be intransigent. Several politicians who ran on a hardline stance were defeated. J.D. Hayworth and George Allen had been shoe-ins in the past until they became shrill on the issue.

Whenever he has run for office, Pat Buchanan has been clear as a bell on issues: a staunch social conservative, protectionist, immigration hardliner, anti-Nafta, etc. He would appear to mesh well with the vocal crowd that claims to speak for the “People.” We all know his political track record. Maybe the “People” are not as hardline as many try to tell us.

The problem is: how do you coalesce moderates? It’s a little easier to unite those who see issues like abortion in black and white. “All abortion is murder!” “ No, it’s my body – I’ll do what I want!” What would be the slogan of the moderate on the abortion issue? “As much as I personally find abortion horrifying, it should be legal in the first trimester, although there should be parental and spousal notification and informed consent, and the health of the mother should be considered, and states should have a say-so, and courts should interpret law not make law?” That wouldn’t fit very well on placards or bumper stickers. There’s not even a label for a middle-ground position. You’re either pro-life (like Mitt Romney) or pro-choice (like Mitt Romney).

What label could you have for the middle ground? Pro*? Kind of like the name Prince went by a while back? (I can’t find that symbol on my keyboard).

On immigration, the moderate position likewise does not fit well into a sound-bite: Strengthen the border, stem the flow of illegal immigrants, provide for an ID system and stronger work-place enforcement, and provide a path to legal status for those who have been here for some time and have shown themselves to be decent members of society, provided any back taxes and a fine is paid. A little cumbersome. But you would think such a reasonable approach would at least be worth putting to a vote in Congress. Nope, it makes idealists livid. You might as well ask Inspector Javert to cut Jean Valjean some slack.

Moderates, probably by definition, don’t generally have knee-jerk reactions to issues. They ponder them, discuss them, and modify their position until they believe they’ve reached the correct one. While they’re pondering, the black and white crowd has already mobilized and taken to the streets. The moderate position is nuanced and therefore doesn’t lend itself well to the formation of a grassroots movement. How does a groundswell movement spring up on a middle-ground position? “Some, but not all, abortion should be illegal! Come on guys, let’s go!”

It’s much easier for extremists. For the pro-choice zealot, any restriction on abortion, no matter how reasonable, is heresy. For the hardliner on immigration, even the DREAM Act, a bill which would have provided a path to citizenship for individuals who came to this country when they were children and had no choice in the matter, was an outrage. Let them continue to live in the shadows even though the U.S. is their home. Too bad! Life’s not fair! What part of illegal don’t you understand?

Is a moderate approach sometimes not the best course of action? Of Course. Fighting Islamic terror is a good example. Even moderation needs to be exercised in moderation! The point is that every issue needs to be examined on its own, and the tendency to automatically align with the extreme side of an issue is not productive.

Whether the vehemence of the pundits and bloggers on immigration is reflective of the will of the people will soon be seen. In the meantime, the GOP, in Wile E. Coyote fashion, is strapping the hardline stance on its back and getting ready to head for the cliff. Maybe this time it will resonate with the American people . . .

So where does a moderate go to be heard on the issues? To the polls.

H.C. Coburn is an attorney practicing in Southern California and a freelance writer.

Economic Justice and Democratization of Economy to create Ideal Society

Prof Viswanathan,
International Socio-Economic Research Bureau
(E Mail Id :


We, the people of all the countries, in harmony with the sovereignty of the Universal Justice hold these truths to be self-evident that every creator has inalienable ‘Right to Ownership’ on his creations and the Natural laws empowers the creators that only he should use his creations exclusively for the welfare and uplift of the human society as a whole, in which he is an inseparable member.

We declare with all judicial power derived from Natural laws that among all creations of man, his creation of capital alone has enormous ‘economic power’ capable of transforming all the socio-economic-political structures and reconstitute them to suit the aspirations of the owners of capital.

We further declare in unequivocal terms since the capital is created by the collective labor of the people as a whole it should be directly owned by the people and then only the people would secure equal ‘Economic power’ and requisite ‘Fundamental Economic Rights’ with which they could establish an ‘Ideal Society’ in the way in which they desire.
In accordance with ‘Economic Justice’ when the capital is directly owned by the people, we declare that the people would naturally secure what we consider the best among the ‘Fundamental Economic Rights’ like ‘Right to live’, ‘Right to work’, ‘Right to Economic Equality’, ‘Right to economic liberty’, ‘Right to Economic Security’, ‘Right to participate in the management’, ‘Right to capital creation’, ‘Right to live with fraternity’, and requisite ‘socio-economic-political rights to pursuit of decent happiness’

We further proclaim when the people secure the above mentioned ‘fundamental rights’ they would succeed ultimately to establish an Ideal Society or Just Society for which they were tirelessly striving in transforming one form of society into another since the dawn of civilization, and to execute their noble concept of ‘One World, One Government, and One Humanity’ and in the end the people would be victorious in choosing what form of ‘Economic System’ that would be the best of all other systems for the establishment of an Ideal Society for which they would secure all requisite authorities of Natural laws that bestow on them.

1. Emergence of Economic Systems:

Different economic systems had emerged on the horizon of the history of mankind whenever different kinds of ‘Capital Ownership’ sprang up. Especially capitalism and socialism emerged after industrial revolution on the determinant factor of ‘capital ownership’. Generally in all economic systems ‘the ownership of capital’ forms the ‘basic structure’ of a society on which the fabrics of super structure of society are determined. The super structure usually exhibits the qualitative fabrics of society such as religion, culture, education, laws, customs and conventions etc. which are determined according to the aspirations of the owners of capital. In short the social elements are dependent factors of capital ownership.

During the turbulent period of 1750s when Industrial Revolution burst upon the England and other European countries it introduced gigantic machines – a kind of capital – in the factory system of production of goods and services. It engulfed the mankind like huge deluge and tossed the world societies and changed each and every super structural elements of society in such a manner not to even to trace out their originality. We, the people, at that period were deeply perplexed and confused what to do as we were in the vicinity of utter economic ignorance.

2. Two Economic Affidavits:

During Industrial Revolution the economic environments in the factory system was not only in muddle but also demoralizing the societies. No one had any knowledge how the economy was operating and how should it be operated. Everyone was expecting for the worst to come. Whole Europe was plunged into utter ignorance. At that crucial period of time it was Adam Smith, the Father of Economics, published his famous book ‘An enquiry into the Nature and Cause of the Wealth of Nations’ in 1776.

3. Economic Affidavit of Adam Smith: In his book Adam Smith spelt out an ‘Economic Affidavit’ solemnly and sincerely that if we, the people, entrusted our capital to a few capitalists in the name of ‘Capitalism’ (Individualism), they would not only change even the sand into gold but also drive the mankind to march towards an ‘Ideal Society’ by modernizing production potentialities with the help of scientific technologies and division of labor. Completely ignoring the working class who constitutes the society, Adam Smith concentered and focused his interest on a few capitalists and advocated that they without the interference of State would accumulate wealth of nations with the help of division of labor using modern machines and assured that the few independent capitalists would moreover create a favorable climate for the establishment of Ideal Society by increasing production many folds. Adam Smith completely neglected the equitable distribution of wealth to the mass working class. He linked the establishment of an ideal society with the mass production but not equitable distribution of wealth. Thus he misguided the whole world convincingly and decisively for a long period during which the working class was thrown into appalling poverty and horrible living hood.

Ricardo and Malthus, drawing he thread of arguments from the wisdom of Adam Smith, eloquently presented their views in favor of a few capitalists and equally convinced the people to surrender their capital in the possession of capitalists who would solve all the socioeconomic problems of mankind. Thus when the people entrusted their capital in the hands of a few capitalists a ‘Capitalistic Mode of Production’ emerged with strong magnitudes in England and some other European countries. This capitalistic mode of production, shattering hitherto existing highly valuable cultures and customs of people, created a complex and conflicting, and highly demoralizing ‘Capitalistic Society’.

The newly emerged ‘capitalistic Society’ forced the social elements such as law, art, culture, customs, religion, education and other economic and political rights and liberties to work for the benefit and security of a few capitalists because on their welfare the welfare of mass working class was depending on. The capitalistic mode of production converted the ‘Right to live’ of mass working class into a dependent factor of the security of the capitalist class who owned the capital and modern factories. This was because if a capitalist collapsed with his factory, the livelihood of the workers working in that factory would also collapse. So all the social elements ranging from culture to human liberty had to work for the security of a few capitalists. Thus the Ideal Society which the people dreamt for long span of time became a myth and mirage. In the capitalistic mode of production the Ideal Society was meant by ‘Capitalistic Society’ representing a few capitalists.

4. Counter Economic Affidavit of Karl Marx:
Having abundant flow of sympathy on the exploited mass working class and endless stream of hatred on the capitalists who caused for the appalling poverty of workers the mentally and morally agitated Karl Marx and Engels declared a ‘Counter Affidavit’ in 1848 in their ‘Communist Manifesto’ and Karl Marx alone in 1867 in his magnum opus the Das Capital. In their counter affidavit they advocated that if We, the people, forfeited our capital from the few capitalists with the help of Bolsheviks (communists) and entrusted the capital in the hands of the ‘State’ under the control of ‘Proletariat Dictatorship’, that the ‘State’ would lead us ‘Towards an Ideal Society’ and establish ‘One World’.* Believing their ‘Counter Affidavit’ word by word, in the October Revolution of 1917 we forfeited our capital from the few capitalists and handed over it to the trustworthy of the ‘State’. The State introduced a ‘Socialistic mode of production’ and on the basis of this, a fearful and subjugating ‘Socialistic Society’ emerged. The working class was engulfed with awe and fearsome and terribly perplexed on the outcome of the ‘Revolution’ and utterly disappointed for not even tracing any hope of achieving ‘Ideal Society’ which their Bolshevik masters promised during the ‘Revolution’.
*In the words of Karl Marx : “ In a higher phase of communist society, after the enslaving subordination of the individual to the division of labor, and therewith also the antithesis between mental and physical labor has vanished; after labor has become not only a means of life but life’s prime want; after the productive forces have also increased with the all-round development of the individual, and all the springs of cooperative wealth flow abundantly – only then can the narrow horizon of bourgeois right be crossed in its entirety and society inscribe in its banners : From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs!”
– Marx(1875), pp 21-23

Karl Marx and Engels were not alive at that time of October Revolution. They were great champions for working class and ‘buts’ about it. They worried wept for working class, they suffered for working class, they sacrificed everything for the working class, and above all they were exiled, especially Karl Marx, from country to country for the cause of working class, and they really wanted to see the working class of all the countries in an ‘Ideal Society’. But the ‘October Revolution’ in Russia proved that their ‘Theory and Practice’ did not coordinate with each other and did not function in harmony. There was something wrong in the ‘Theory and practice’ which resulted in utter collapse of Socialism at the end process. What was the fault that penetrated for its collapse?
I have same streak of opinion in respect of Adam Smith and Malthus as well. I believe when they advocated that we, the people, should entrust our capital in the possession of few capitalists, they believed that the capitalists would not exploit the working class. But when their theories put into practice it was the selfish capitalists who manipulated their theories as convenient and convincing tools to exploit the mass working class. It was the capitalists who portrayed the theories in a darkest dark when they put them in practice because of their selfish motives. In other words there was unbridgeable disparity ( a deep wide chasm) between the theory and practice which the capitalists utilized it to fulfill their selfish motive of maximization of profit in exploiting the mass working class. What was the terrible fault that was penetrating here also?

Though the original proponents of capitalistic and socialistic theories were not enemies of working class, the executors of these theories, the capitalists on one hand and the ‘State’ on the other hand misled the working class for their selfish motives. The primary fault was that we, the people, instead of retaining the capital with us, separating ourselves into two diametrically opposite poles, surrendered our capital to a few capitalists in West European and North American countries and to ‘State’ in Russia, China and other East European countries.

The inherent contradictions that deeply and widely penetrated in the theories and practices of the two economic systems originated a fierce vicious spiral and exploded like a ‘Big Bang’ and scattered away violently but suddenly all the socio-economic problems throughout the world like inextinguishable fire balls. Instead of establishing an ‘Ideal Society’ these two systems, even after a prolonged period of experiments, have pushed the mankind at the verge of nuclear holocaust and wide spread day – to-day terrorism.

5. Democrism – People’s Direct Ownership of Capital:

As long as more than 200 years, Capitalism had left no avenues unexplored to establish an Ideal Society but disastrously collapsed during 1930s throughout the world due to the pressure of its own weight of self contradictions and brutal ambition of maximization of profit. On the same footing, Communism too after exerting all methods of cruel tortures (Stalin’s roughshod treatment of the kulaks) in the name of ‘Proletariat Dictatorship’ for nearly 75 destroyed itself in 1992 in its own breeding place. As both the systems are now struggling for their own survival, they have now decided to end the ‘cold war’ between them. Since the both the systems pushed us into great disappointments and they did not effective economic techniques to solve our economic problems in accordance with ‘Economic Justice’, we, the people, hereby declare to forfeit our own capital both from the capitalists and the ‘State’ and retain it under our direct ownership in peaceful manner or by force if necessity demands and create a ‘new economic system’ known as ‘Democrism’ on the basis of people’s Direct Ownership of Capital and we, further declare the Natural Laws have entrusted upon us all executive powers to do so as our birth right.

On the People’s Direct Ownership of Capital a just economic system known as ‘Democrism’ will in the world and it will provide us ‘Democratic Mode of Production’ which is an inevitable must for the establishment of an ‘Ideal or Just Society’. I venture to say in short,

“Capitalism is popular and popularly defective;
Socialism is destructive and destructively popular;
Democrism is justifiable and justifiably inevitable.”

Whatever race we relate to, whatever language we speak to, whatever color we cover to, whatever religion we follow to, whatever nation we belong to, we are always being influenced by justice and by its emphatic authority of supremacy. The laws may be in transient from time to time, and vary from country to country, but the concept of justice remains illuminant everywhere. We want justice, only the justice and nothing but the justice. Throughout the long passage of history we have honored justice; we have kept in high esteem the men of justice right from king Solomon to Gandhiji . We have unshakable faith that justice is perpetual and ever pervading. We have always fought for justice and it has united us without any discrimination. In his book ‘Anatomy of Liberty’, William O. Douglas, the Justice to the United States Supreme Court, says this truth in every respect as follows:

“The appetite for justice is indeed a cementing influence amon all races, whatever language they speak, whatever of their skin”
-Douglas,William O. “Anatomy of Liberty” (p: xxiv) : (1965)

The universal fact is that if there is justice there will be harmony and immortality. The scientific facts are immortal because they are based on experimental truths. On the other hand if the socio-economic-political principles want to be immortal they should based on justice, only the justice and nothing but justice and perhaps on natural justice. The capitalistic and socialistic principles lack application of justice and therefore they struggle vainly to solve our life problems and they are marching towards their last destiny – the inevitable grave yard. Keeping the above facts in mind I have with utmost care and concern formulated the economic principles on the natural justice in the name of ‘DEMOCRISM’ which will secure universal acceptability. The genesis of all natural justices is to uphold ‘People’s Direct Ownership of Capital’ for which we have to forfeit our capital from the few capitalists and the ‘State’. Why?

“People’s Direct Ownership of Capital : Why do we want?”

1. Denying the natural justice of ‘Right to live’ by Capitalism and Socialism: (Capital promotes and intensifies war)

We, the people of all the countries, unanimously hate intensely the wars which germinate in any form or for any cause. Naturally we are peace loving people. Despite our strong protests the wars have been fought all over the world and billions and billions of innocent people having no association with the war, have been brutally killed and massacred and the skeletons of these people have been heaped like mountains in graveyards. What cause underlies for these wars? The answer is simply one word – ‘the capital’. It is the ‘Ownership of Capital’ by a few capitalists or the ‘State’ that attributes for all kinds of war that negates one’s ‘Right to live’ in the name of patriotism in particular.

Let us for time being set aside the wars fought before Industrial Revolution. The factory system facilitated for the production of ‘weapons of mass destruction’ that can be employed from the land, from the ocean and from the air. The whole world turned into open battle field for the nuclear bombs, ballistic missiles, supersonic jets, various kinds of military rockets and the military satellites orbiting the earth. Whatever might be the causes of First and Second World Wars, but their consequences were horrible that pushed the mankind to the very verge of its extinction from the earth planet. Why?

Wars before and after Industrial Revolution: Before the industrialization the wars were fought on a particular battle fields and between two hostile warriors only. The range of destruction was very narrow and limited in coverage because the warriors used only spears and swords. The weapons were manufactured in cottage industries or by the warriors themselves. Natural boundaries like mountains, rivers, oceans and great deserts prevented the enemies to enter into a independent country.

After industrial revolution, weapons of mass destruction were produced with the help of highly sophisticated technologies with help of huge capital in factories owned by a few capitalists and the ‘State’. The natural bounties disappeared and the whole world became open battle field. These weapons were maneuvered only by the highly skilled technocrats. The technocrats used these weapons on the common innocent people to terrorize the enemy-governments to surrender immediately. For example, in World War II USA used nuclear atom bombs to bombard on millions of Japanese civilians and terrorized the government to surrender without fighting in the battle field. Nowadays the battle fields are disappeared and the whole world has become open battle field in the face of mighty ballistic missiles and nuclear atom bombs. They can be produced only with the help of scientists and huge capital owned by the ‘State’ and a ‘few capitalists’. As long as the capital is owned by the ‘State’ and ‘few capitalists’ we cannot escape from nuclear holocaust. Originally Capital was created by the working class to assist them to increase their productivity of consumption goods. As soon as the capital went into the illegal ownership of ‘State’ and ‘Capitalists’ it was used for the production of mass destructive weapons. If we scrutinize the expenditure of the world governments we can detect that a large portion of government expenditure has been allocated for ‘military up gradation’ than for the ‘promotion of education’ and ‘elimination of poverty’.


Firstly “if the accumulation of destructive capital increases the temptation for war will increase and vice versa”. The destructive capital means the capital that is used for the production of destructive weapons used by military forces. Secondly the difference in economic ideology of a country prompts it to increase its military power to show its ideological success over the other country and spread its ideology over other countries through war. For example USA and Russia used war as a weapon to spread their capitalistic and socialistic ideologies over other countries. The pages of recent past history will illustrate the fact and also the reason for accumulation of nuclear weapons and other variety of scientific weapons of mass destruction. Thirdly on the globalization of world economy the capitalist rich countries invest huge volume of their excessive capital in poor and developing countries. In order to protect their huge capital from nationalization by the beneficiary countries a mighty military force is required by the investing countries. For instance the American war and threatening of war over Arabian countries to protect her huge capital invested in exploration of petrol and fuel industries. Now American capitalists are investing billion and billions of dollar in I T industries of India and other developing countries. The American capitalists believe that they can protect their capital by their country’s military power. If any country try to nationalize these industries it will result in war. Fourthly the over production of industrial goods by rich countries force them to dump their over production in poor countries through their military power.
Economic reason for two world wars : Virtually after Industrial Revolution in most of the European countries the capital was owned by a few individuals. Since the very aim of capitalism was ‘maximization of profit’ the workers were paid less and it resulted in deficiency of effective demand which caused for ‘over production’. These European countries occupied the poor countries by their military power and converted them as their ‘political colonies’ and with the concept of ‘Free Trade’, they dumped their over-production in the colonies and also exploited the wealth of the colonies. India was the notorious example for that.
With the help of exploited wealth these ‘mother countries’ strengthened mainly their military power. The safety and security of the other ‘Dictatorial European countries’ which had ‘State or less individual Ownership of Capital’ were in jeopardy and unprotected in front of the mighty capitalist countries. On detection of the geographical track these countries found that there were no countries in the world to occupy them as their colonies for exploitation in order to increase their wealth and thereby their military power. These lately wakened dictatorial countries sniffed the fact that their ‘political and military supremacy’ would be pulled down rapidly on the downward track. In order to surpass the supremacy of the Capitalistic European Countries the ‘Dictatorial European Countries, found no other alternative except ‘war’ on the Capitalistic European Countries and on their colonies all over the world. The ‘lust for supremacy’ over the other countries forced them to wage two world wars. Napoleon and Hitler waged war against all of Europe because for the sake of supremacy.
Ayn Rand emphatically points out the genesis for the two world wars in his book ‘Capitalism’ as follows:

“……World War I was started by monarchist Germany and Czarist Russia,
who dragged in their freer allies. World War II was started by alliance of
‘Nazi’ Germany with the Soviet Russia and their attack on Polland” *
- Rand Ayn :“Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal” (New American Library-1967) p:37

In this nuclear age we witness a political and economic turbulence all over the world for a mad race for military equilibrium and economic supremacy. Both the Capitalism and Socialism have no blue-print to terminate the opportunity for Third World War. The rich capitalist and socialist countries want to become richer and richer by pushing the vast majority of poor countries to become poorer and poorer as per World Economic Reports. At present the silent turbulence boiling in the poor countries will burst into a Third World War which will be fought between the rich northern countries and the poor southern countries of the world and result in nuclear holocaust. That is why the USA is very keen on preventing the proliferation of nuclear technology among the southern countries using its military might. The only way left for the mankind to stop the flow of ever threatening danger of nuclear war is the execution of economic equality by rich countries in extending their helping hand to poor countries to pull them up from poverty and to reduce the economic imbalance between rich and poor. The capitalist countries will not permit the economic equality within and without but fight for upholding their economic supremacy which will be the ultimate cause for the Third World War.

We, the people, therefore, have no other alternative except to forfeit our capital from the capitalists and the ‘State’ and retain it under our ‘Direct Ownership’ to coordinate with the command of Natural Laws to save the mankind.

2.1. Consequences of World wars and destructive capital:

The First World War was fought between 1914 and 1918. During the span of 4 years the war was fought violently 120 million seconds. Nearly 48 million people (including soldiers) were dead and wounded.* In other words in every 10 seconds 4 people were killed either dead or wounded.
· Nehru, Jawaharlal : “Glimpses World History” : p.637

In the Second World War When the war was virtually approaching its end, on 6th August, 1945 an Atom bomb by name ‘Little Boy’ – a new war machine that the mankind hitherto never experienced – was dropped on Hiroshima. With in 10 seconds one million innocent people were killed. The first world war took 10 seconds to kill 4 people but the second world war, at its end, took 10 seconds to kill one million innocent people. The annihilation depends on the density of population of a city on which an atom bomb drops on. The Super Powers like USA and Russia, have now heaped in their arsenal million times more powerful atom bombs than the one that was dropped on Hiroshima.

No doubt the atom bombs that dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki were invented by the nuclear scientists. The billion dollar question is whether the scientists produced them with their bare hands or in cottage industries or in sophisticated industries created by huge capital. No capitalist will ever afford such huge capital for the production of weapons of mass destruction because their aim is always ‘maximization of profit’. Only the State can siphon huge capital for the production of atomic bombs only with the help scientists to threaten the other countries and to enjoy the status of ‘super powers’.

Though the atom bombs are the brain-children of atomic physicists the capital required to manufacture them is funded only by the governments secretly against the wishes of the people. As long as the capital is owned by the governments, irrespective of Socialist or Capitalist governments, they spend huge capital for the production of atom bombs in order to achieve military supremacy over other countries or to attain at least an equilibrium in military power. Extensively it is the hard-core radical politicians brain wash the people under the guise of ‘patriotism’, ‘National security’ and ‘National pride’ for the production of atom bombs and other ballistic weapons. Since most of the atomic scientists are the government scientists they have to produce atom bombs at the insistence of governments in the name of national security.

“In 1943 the Manhatten Project Laboratory at Los Alamos, New Mexico, with
J.Robert Oppenheimer as its director, was assigned the task of developing an
atom bomb. The first test at Alamogordo on July 16, 1945, was an outstanding
success (the desert sand was fused to glass for hundreds of yards around the
the site). In August two atom bombs were dropped on Japan”.

“Hiroshima inaugurated not only a new age of science but a new kind of scientists
-the government servants whose knowledge and talent are an important part of the
national arsenal. Furthermore, the scientists were now much more conscious of their
social position and responsibilities. This was true in all advanced industrial countries,
put particularly in the United States and the Soviet Union. Presumably, Soviet
scientists were satisfied to follow the dictates of government leaders, but after World
War II, Oppenheimer and other American scientists entered into a great debate over
the human, political and social implications of atomic science and a profound searching of their own consciences. Oppenheimer resisted the building of the hydrogen bomb – a much more devastating weapon than the bombs used against Japan – in the early
1950’s, and he made important enemies. When Oppenheimer’s security clearance was
withdrawn in 1954, a great outcry from his colleagues expressed more than personal
indignation. The Frankenstein myth appeared to be true, and the monster had locked
the scientist out of his own laboratory. Certain branches of scientific research are not
only secret today, they are expensive secrets; the cyclotrons and reactors of the 1960’s
are far beyond the means of any university or other institution without government support”.*

( * – Cantor, Norman F. – “Western Civilization : Its Genesis and Destiny” III –1970; pp:528-529)

I can arrive two conclusions from deducing the above historical facts:
Firstly, we have to free the atomic scientists from the clutches of governments.
Secondly, we have to forfeit our capital from the hands of governments and to keep it under our own control and possession.
Unless we, the people, forfeit our own capital from the governments and restore ‘people’s direct ownership of capital’ we could not prevent the governments from the mad race for producing ‘weapons of mass destruction’ ranging from AK-47 to atom bombs (of 20,000 megaton attack)

When we pay the tax-money to the governments, we intend tacitly that they would spend it to solve our poverty; but they do not do so. In a speech on April 16, 1953, President Eisenhower said :

Every gun is fired, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed …
The cost of one modern heavy bomber is this: a modern brick school in more than thirty cities…… We pay for a single fighter with a half million bushels of wheat. We pay for a single destroyer with new homes that could have housed more than eight thousand people…………
This is not a way of life at all, in any true sense. Under the cloud of threatening war, it is humanity hanging from a cross of iron…….”

Professor Dallas W. Smythe of Illinois said, “Billions for defense but not a cent for socialism. It is not socialism to have the government spend 50 billion dollars for weapons; it would be socialism if the government spent the same amount for education or for public works”.

When we entrusted our capital to the capitalist as well as the socialist governments we constituted a tacit ‘Economic Contract’ with governments. The first and foremost element of the ‘Economic Contract’ was that the governments should utilize our capital to solve our basic economic problems such as poverty, unemployment, economic disparity etc. But the governments in violation of the Economic Contract have spent our capital to destroy our own survival by engaging in the production of weapons- mass-destruction. The governments with the help of scientists produce variety of ballistic missiles and nuclear bombs and test them day in day out to display their scientific genius and military power to other governments. The accumulation of such deadly weapons have now pushed the mankind to the very verge of nuclear holocaust. We, the people of all the countries, therefore, want to recover our capital from the governments and to keep it under our own control and ownership to preserve a perpetual world peace, our birth right.
“Little Boy” is the nick name given to the atomic bomb dropped on Hiroshima on August 6, 1945. It was Monday morning. Little Boy was dropped from the Enola Gay, one of the B-29 bombers that flew over Hiroshima on that day.
Little Boy
After being released, it took about a minute for Little Boy to reach the point of explosion. Little Boy exploded at approximately 8:15 a.m. (Japan Standard Time) when it reached an altitude of 2,000 ft above the building that is today called the “A-Bomb Dome.”
The July 24, 1995 issue of Newsweek writes:
“A bright light filled the plane,” wrote Lt. Col. Paul Tibbets, the pilot of the Enola Gay, the B-29 that dropped the first atomic bomb. “We turned back to look at Hiroshima. The city was hidden by that awful cloud…boiling up, mushrooming.” For a moment, no one spoke. Then everyone was talking. “Look at that! Look at that! Look at that!” exclaimed the co-pilot, Robert Lewis, pounding on Tibbets’s shoulder. Lewis said he could taste atomic fission; it tasted like lead. Then he turned away to write in his journal. “My God,” he asked himself, “what have we done?” (special report, “Hiroshima: August 6, 1945″)
note: Paul Tibbets was Colonel, not “Lt. Colonel,” when he was the pilot of the Enola Gay.
The Little Boy generated an enormous amount of energy in terms of air pressure and heat. In addition, it generated a significant amount of radiation (Gamma ray and neutrons) that subsequently caused devastating human injuries.
The people who saw the Little Boy often say “We saw another sun in the sky when it exploded.” The heat and the light generated by the Little Boy were far stronger than bombs which they had seen before. When the heat wave reached ground level it burnt all before it including people.

The strong wind generated by the bomb destroyed most of the houses and buildings within a 1.5 miles radius. When the wind reached the mountains, it was reflected and again hit the people in the city center. The wind generated by Little Boy caused the most serious damage to the city and people.

The radiation generated by the bomb caused long-term problems to those affected. Many people died within the first few months and many more in subsequent years because of radiation exposure. Some people had genetic problems which sometimes resulted in having malformed babies or being unable to have children.
It is believed that more than 140,000 people died by the end of the year. They were citizens including students, soldiers and Koreans who worked in factories within the city. The total number of people who have died due to the bomb is estimated to be 200,000.

The A-Bombs used over Japan; Little Boy (left) and Fat Man (right)
Just three days after the bomb was dropped to Hiroshima, the second atomic bomb called “Fat Man” was dropped to Nagasaki. Though the amount of energy generated by the bomb dropped to Nagasaki was significantly larger than that of the Little Boy, the damage given to the city was slighter than that given to Hiroshima due to the geographic structure of the city. It is estimated that approximately 70,000 people died by the end of the year because of the bombing.
We strongly believe that the world must learn about weapons of total destruction. We hope that the information presented here will help you understand the pain and devastation that nuclear weapons can cause. We don’t want you to just feel sorry for the people of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the war inflicted untold pain and suffering on many people in Asia and the Pacific. Rather we want you to work with us to ensure that all of us can live in a safe world.
We hope this document helps you understand what it was, what it means and what we have to do.

2.2 The cause for dropping atom-bomb on Japan:

There are two theories for dropping atom bomb on Japan. The first is to take retaliation on Japan for its attack on Pearl Harbor. The second is to prevent Socialist Russia to capture Japan. The first theory do not sound reasonable because :

Hitler committed suicide on 30th April, 1945. Immediately on 7th May the Germans agreed to unconditional surrender. Moreover Mussolini and his mistress were killed on April by anti-Fascist Italian partisans. Japan’s position was now completely helpless, and the emperor supported a party in the Japanese government that wished to seek a negotiated peace. The second world war was more or less approaching to its end.
The second theory sounds well because :

On 16th July 1945 President Harry S. Truman - who had assumed office on Roosevelt’s death on 12th April, – was informed that an atom bomb had been successfully tested in New Mexico. The U.S. military found that no other weapon was so awful in destructive power as that of the atom bomb.
At the same time the military forces of Socialist Russia were rapidly advancing towards Japan – the border country of Socialist Russia – to capture it.

The Capitalist America was now in great distress that the Socialist Russia would not only capture Japan but also convert it a Socialist state. To uphold its supremacy America thought that it had no other choice except to execute two things:

1. to prevent immediately the invasion of Socialist Russia on Japan;
2. Instead, it had to capture Japan without sacrificing any more lives of American soldiers in the invasion of Japan.

In order to fulfill the above aims, the Capitalist America was left with only one option that was to use the awful new weapon – the atom bomb – on the civilians to force Japan to immediate surrender. Persuaded by the military strategy, Truman decided to use the bomb and it was dropped on the Japanese city Hiroshima on 6th August, 1945. About 80,000 civilians were killed immediately. Nearly 200,000 died later of radiation or were maimed for life.On the sudden turn of events, Soviet Russia sensed that Japan would go out its hand though it was within its reach. So two days later, on 8th August, Russia declared war on Japan and crossed the Manchurian frontier as the Japanese army remained committed to a fight to the finish.

Since there was a race for supremacy between Socialist Russia and Capitalist America to capture Japan and moreover Russian army crossed the Manchurian frontier, the Capitalist America was forced to act swiftly. So, a second atom bomb – Fat Man – was dropped on Nagasaki on 9th August, 1945 by Capitalist America. Nearly 70,000 civilians died immediately. The following day the Japanese government offered to surrender. On 14th August the terms laid down at Potsdam were accepted and the Second World War was over.

The truth is still solid and sound that the atom bombs were dropped on Japanese cities not because Japan would succeed in the second World War but because the governments of Capitalist America and Socialist Russia were arrogantly desirous to show their supremacy over the other as their economic systems were quite contradictory with each other. Both Capitalism and Communism wanted to prove that it was their system that ultimately led the Second World War towards victory. This ideological conflict between the America and Russia, at the end of the war, resulted in nuclear holocaust of Japan.

There is no assurance to the people of all countries that another nuclear war will not burst out due to the ideological conflicts between the countries or to show their supremacy or for some other reasons the time will decide. Not only America and Russia but all the nuclear countries do not now wish either to destroy all their nuclear weapons or dismantle the industries which produce such weapons of mass destruction. Under these circumstances and ground realities how can we believe and console ourselves that yet another nuclear war will not threaten mankind and cause to vanish the very existence of mankind on the earth. So, we, the people of all the countries, declare to forfeit our capital from the few capitalists and the State and to keep it with ourselves. When we have ‘direct ownership of capital’ we will not allow our capital for the production of nuclear weapons or any other weapons of mass destruction.

3. Economic Justice in jeopardy and in peril:

When we handed over our capital to a few capitalists, we were under strong presumption, that they would in certain sense, solve at least our basic problems of poverty and unemployment. On the contrary, since the very basic aim of capitalists is ‘maximization of profit’ they execute all kinds of nefarious designs to exploit the laborers and treat them like other business commodities. So with the enrichment of new technologies the capitalists always intend to replace the workers or minimize the labor force by sophisticated machines. The capitalists never show any interest to promote the economic justice in solving the human problems like poverty, unemployment, economic inequality, unequal distribution of income and wealth etc.

But now the capitalists in some way or other have promoted the welfare of society only by way of promoting their own self interest. In other words if and only if the capitalists are assured that their self interest would be promoted then alone they will allow the betterment of welfare of other members of society. The welfare of huge majority of society is always considered to be a ‘dependent factor of a few capitalists’ in the system of private ownership of capital.

In other words the Welfare of Society (WoS) operates as ‘function of Interest of Capitalists (IoC)’. We can write it as

WoS = f(IoC) ……………. 1

The Interest of Capitalists, in turn, depends on their ‘Maximization of Profit (Max o P). So the equation becomes

IoC = f(Max o P) ……………. 2

The Maximization of Profit (Max o P) by the capitalists results in the ‘Exploitation of Working class’ (EoW). It may written as

Max o P = f(EoW) ……………. 3

The Exploitation of Working class (EoW) creates ‘Maldistribution of National Income’ (Md o NI).

EoW = f(Md o NI) …………….. 4

The degree of maldistribution of national income exposes how the workers are exploited in a country. Generally speaking in most of the countries the top 10% of population enjoys 80% of the national wealth and only just 20% of national wealth is distributed to a vast majority of 90% of population. The maldistribution of national income has always kept the vast majority of people to suffer with low purchasing power and in due course it results in over production. Due to over production the producers are forced to reduce their volume of production and level of employment. On finding the disequilibrium that the goods are not consumed at the rate at which they are produced the producers are forced to close their industries. The very aim of capitalists, the maximization of profit, not only crushes them but also the whole society. Therefore, the private ownership of capital will be dangerous to the whole society and the national capital capital should be equally distributed among the people for the welfare of the mankind. So, Betrand Russel says:

“Private ownership of land and capital is not defensible on the groundsof justice or on the grounds that is economical way of producing what the community needs”
– Russel, Bertrand : “Political Ideals” (p ; 35)

Equally the Marxian theory of “State Ownership of Capital” lacks perfection and threatens human rights. Marxian theory is formed on adamant and inflexible principle and it will not coordinate with the changing world conditions. It preaches a kind of ‘economic fundamentalism’ which wants the elements of society to remain in rigidity for ever. So Loucks rightly states:

“Errors in the theoretical of Marxian thought are so serious and so basic that they cannot be corrected by interpreting or modernizing Marx not can they be considered superficial”
Loucks : “Comparative Economic Systems” ( p : 166)

Poverty in the midst of plenty:

We, the people of all the countries, have accumulated capital more than enough and the goods that could be produced with the help of that capital is more than adequate to eradicate poverty in the world. The statistics of “World Development Report – 1991” substantiate that if we distribute the goods produced equally among the people of all the countries, each one would receive the goods approximately worth of Rs.300 per day, which is more than enough for one’s needs. But in contrary with this fact, two third of world population is now subjected to appalling poverty and suffering with hunger and various diseases for want of adequate notorious food.

The poverty prevails not only between the countries but also within the countries irrespective of whether the country is developed or developing. As there is darkness below the burning candle so is the poverty even in the affluent society due to maldistribution of income and wealth. John Meynard Keynes criticizes the capitalistic system with this ever prevailing paradoxical element of “poverty in the midst of plenty”. Since the capitalism do not know how to distribute income and wealth equally among the people, the capitalists have no moral right or legal right to keep our capital with themselves. They have to honestly return us our capital and we know how to solve our problems under ‘people’s direct ownership of capital’.5.

Absence of Right to Live:

Throughout the length and breadth of the world we can notice the youth both in rural and urban areas bearing great agony in their eyes, having no value for their education are wandering desperately on the streets in seeking employment. The unemployment has pushed them to strip away their dignity, self respect and equal status among others not only in the society but also in their own family. Everywhere they are treated as insignificant trivial and above all less than a human being. In the economic systems, both in capitalism and socialism, they feel that they have deprived of the possession of ‘Right to Live’ at all.

6. Origin of terrorism and economic crimes:

It is partly true that unemployment generates economic insecurity among the youth. But by and large it victimizes the youth an easy prey to drug addiction, trafficking, terrorism, and other socio-economic evils.
The universal accepted fact is that capitalism cannot solve unemployment. The function of capitalism is such that if we want to adhere with capitalism we have to live with unemployment at certain level. The advocates of capitalism have now proved that full-employment in capitalism is only a myth and mirage. Hence as long as capitalism is prevailing in the world, so long as the socio-economic evils will also be pervading in the world as its by products and they will be deteriorating all the well-nurtured cultural fabrics of society. If we want capitalism, we have to learn to live with terrorism and other socio-economic evils.
7. Economic Equality is a Mirage :

It is evident throughout the world, the economic inequality among the people not only within the country but also between the countries is going on widening with an accelerated momentum. In 1982 the per capita income of developed countries in average was 42 times more than that of developing countries like India and China, but the gap was still widening 56 times in 1989. As the gap is going on increasing the poor countries are becoming still poorer and rich countries are more richer. It is natural not only among the people but also among the countries to develop strong feeling of jealousy and hatred, and an impression of inferiority complex and a sentiment of economic slavery. In the complex and confused modern economic systems, the concept and reality of ‘economic equality’ is rushing over beyond the orbit of one’s reach. In this context, our strategic fiscal and monetary policies are reducing to be insignificant to face the challenges. Hence Jawaharlal Nehru rightly blames the capitalistic system of economy for the economic equality:

“Normally speaking it may be said that the forces of a capitalist society, if left unchecked, tend to make the rich, the richer and the poor, the poorer, and thus increase the gap between them”
- Nehru, Jawaharlal : “The Years of Power” (1960) p;294

It would be faulty conclusion that the economic inequality is inseparable function of capitalism alone; even in communist countries we can notice wide economic disparities among the people. Prof.P.T.Baur states:

“….. But there are evident wide differences in income in communist countries after decades of communist rule. And in Soviet Union (a country often thought to be dedicated to the removal of economic differences), the differences in income and living standards are quite as pronounced as in some market oriented societies and this after more than half a century of mass coercion”.*
-* Baur, P.T. : “The Grail of Equality”

The economic equality is one the three basic necessities of ‘Equality, Liberty and Fraternity’ for the establishment of an Ideal Society. But neither capitalism nor communism do not know any effective economic technique to ensure us ‘economic equality’. Hence I venture to say it is futile to allow our capital to remain in possession of some individual capitalists or the State.

8. No Right to Work :

Invariably the ‘Declaration of Independence’ of all the countries proclaim that man has ‘Right to Live’. On the introduction of ‘Division of Labor’ in the modern production system, no one can produce all the goods that require even to lead a very simple life, or a single whole commodity one needs.

On the Division of Labor, everyone is trained to produce only a part of a commodity for which he can receive his wage and with which he has to buy the necessary goods in the market to lead his life. Since a man cannot produce whatever he wants to live, his ‘Right to Live’ solely depends upon his ‘Right to Work’. But no Constitution of any country is powerful enough to provide ‘Right to Work’ as one of the ‘Fundamental Rights’ because the economic systems that the countries pursue are basically defective and incompetent to face the economic challenges. In the absence of ‘Right to Work’ irrespective of what kind of economic system a country follows, the employers never consider man as a man and not even as a commodity. On the other hand they treat man as a ‘rental commodity’ that can be engaged by paying wages as ‘rent’. The defect of economic systems have reduced man and humiliated him as mean and ignoble thing. With full of depression in heart, P.A.Samuelson exhibits the real condition of man as follows:

Since slavery was abolished, human earning power is forbidden by law
to be capitalized. A man is not even free sell himself; he must rent himself at a wage” *
-* Samuelson, P.A. : “Economics” (p : 52)

9.Absence of Stable Just Price :

Universally in all economic systems – whether it is market oriented economy or State controlled economy – the prices in the market are behaving erratically and disorderly. Especially the prices of consumption goods of poor people are always enhancing. But the income of poor people is not increasing as much as the increment of price of their consumption goods. Consequently this economic phenomenon is horribly crushing the purchasing power of the poor. Hence the fact is universally accepted that ‘the poor people are born in poverty, live in poverty and die in poverty’ Whenever the governments declare that they have contained or reduced the rate of inflation it seems always to the benefit of the rich. The economic systems, existing now, do not know any economic techniques to sustain a just price level at stable for the welfare of the vast majority poor.

10. Injustice to Working Class:

In Jerusalem I heard the Israeli Supreme Court say : “It is better that ten guilty persons be acquitted than that one innocent person be convicted”.
This legal justice should not be confined only to the courts of justice but it should be equally extended to govern both the economic justice and economic systems. The economic systems, on the contrary, conveniently permit the economic criminals to escape from punishment and in turn punish the innocent workers who perform their social duty.

The utmost duty of a worker is to produce socially needed goods and services only; but it is not the duty of the worker to bear the responsibility whether the goods and services he produced are sold out. On the other hand it is the duty of the consumers to buy the goods and services that are produced for their consumption at a just price and at the rate at which the goods and services are produced for them.
On the contrary, the consumers, as a whole, behave in the market, guided by their erratic psychological factors, create time lags in purchasing the goods that are produced for their consumption and sometimes neglect the goods to buy at all. These negative and duly non-responsive factors affect the economy severely and ultimately result in the stagnation of goods in the markets. Due to the stagnation of goods in the market an equal volume of goods stagnated are not produced in the subsequent round of production. On the reduction of production of goods the workers who have fulfilled ‘the production – duty’ of the economy, have to lose their employment. The unemployment of a worker not only affects his ‘Right to Live’ but also of the whole family that depends on him. The unemployment of a worker ruins the education of his children, their future ambition in life and their morality and social dignity and their future economic security.

The present economic systems are not competent and efficient enough to secure and save the “Right to live” of the workers who have honestly accomplished their ‘production-duty’ of the economy.
To strengthen my argument I like to quote the words of Prof. Mrs. Joan Robinson :

It is true, with adequate organization there need be no unemployment … There is always something useful that can be done even with a man’s bare hands”*
*– Prof. Mrs. Joan Robinson : “Economic Philosophy” (p : 114)

Joan Robinson too finds fault on the economic systems for wide range of unemployment; in other words, the economic systems that we pursue now are the primary reasons for the failure to provide “Right to Live” to the workers throughout the world. In the present economic systems and economic conditions ‘employment’ and ‘Right to Live’ are synonymous or just the same.
What is the basic cause, today, throughout the world, for billions of youth are crushed by the burden of unemployment? It is the cause :
“Every person, only up to the standard of education and technical training that the society has offered to him, can produce socially needed goods with his bare hands or with the help of small and simple capital that he can afford by himself and thus create ‘self-employment’ opportunities and secure right to live by himself. The creation of self-employment creates an expectation in the mind of the of the worker that the society i.e. the consumers should behave with a sense of ‘economic responsibility’ by consuming the goods at the rate at which he produces, at a reasonable price to sustain the livelihood of the worker. But every self-employed youth knows that the ‘economic responsibility’ is absolutely lacking in the minds of consumers. What is deeply rooted in the minds of unemployed youth is ‘a fear about the future’ that the consumers or the society that he belongs to would not perpetually and automatically accept the goods at a reasonable price that he produces by ‘self-employment’. The ‘fear about the future’ in the minds of the youth who wants to venture in ‘self-employment’ is reasonably justifiable. Due to ‘fear on the future’ the unemployed youth are not venturing in self-employment competing with the highly sophisticated industries. It is then whose fault if the youth are unemployed? The present economic systems have no economic techniques or ‘action programs’ to evacuate the ‘fear of the future’ in the minds of the unemployed youth and to induce ‘economic responsibility’ in the minds of society to save the ‘self-employed’ youth from the competition of well-organized industries.

I have to point out it is the fault of the economic systems for the cause of unemployment and moreover I wish to state that the capitalists and equally the governments should not lay blame on the ‘fate’ of the youth for their unemployment. On the other hand the capitalists and the governments are persistently blame the fate of the youth and try to escape from their ‘economic responsibility’. So we have no other alternative except to forfeit our capital from the them and retain it with ourselves as we know perfectly well how to solve our unemployment and other economic problems.

11.Economic Gambles:

The basic intention leading for the invention of money is it should be used as a ‘medium of exchange’ in buying and selling goods and services. On the contrary, our present economic systems have invariably paved way for the money not only to be used as a ‘medium of exchange’ but also at a large extent as a ‘Medium of Economic Gambles’ throwing away the honesty and morality of societies to the winds. The multi-millionaires, today, have idly and futilely invested billions and billions of money in the stock markets as a medium of gambles uprooting the very noble function of money. The electronic media and the news papers extensively propagating the stock market indices for the benefit of the rich gamblers, the economic criminals, who want to earn quick and easy money with out shedding even a drop of sweat. The present economic systems have accepted this kind of economic gambles without any shyness.

In addition, in the cradles of civilization, especially in the places of sports and games like cricket stadium, Tennis courts, Football grounds, Boxing arenas billions and billions of money are set into circulation as a ‘medium of gambles’. With the help of the ‘capital-power’ the capitalists today have vigorously transformed the noble arts, skillful sports, beautiful games and wonderful cultures into easy-money-earning centers instead of promoting these symbols of civilization. The capitalists in the name of ‘promoters’ have developed strong hatred not only in the minds of ‘players’ but also in the minds of ‘audience’. This kind of economic gambles is now rapidly spreading like dangerous virus in all four corners of the world. For example, the ‘Statesman’ in its 10th October 1978 issue states as follows :
“Britain is a gambling nation. Nearly 94 percent of population indulge in an occasional flutter on races, at the gambling tables, on foot-ball pools or on a variety of other sports. 39 percent of all Britons are habitual gamblers. In 1977 an estimated $ 800 million were stated on races and gamblers. In 1977 an estimated $ 800 million were stated on races and other sports”. Instead of producing socially needed goods and services and creating employment opportunities, the capitalists are utilizing ‘our capital’ for economic gambles extensively and demoralizing our long cherished cultures and civilizations throughout the world.
The capitalists now adopt a new business strategy to exploit the consumers : ‘First kill the civilization and then sell the goods’. The capitalists know the consumers will become a easy prey for sexual exposition. So they in all their advertisements use ‘women in half naked beauty’ to enchant consumers to buy their commodities. We know the capitalists are misusing ‘our capital’ to ‘sexually assault’ the consumers to maximize their profit at the cost of cultural destruction and spreading demoralization. With deep mental agony I like to state that millions of young women have now turned as prostitutes as a source of employment and the International Labor Organization (ILO) now recommends to accept prostitution as ‘flesh industry’ which contributes reasonable amount of foreign exchange for many countries.

12.Class distinction and failure of economic machinery :

In lieu of promoting fraternity among the people the present economic systems create various class distinctions such as 1. proletariat and capitalist, 2. consumer and producer, 3. savers and investors. The class distinction between proletariat and capitalist is always underlying at the bottom of strikes, lock outs and innumerable industrial disputes. The class distinction between ‘consumers and producers’ is attributable for the failure of determination of ‘just price’ in the market and for uneven distribution of goods among the people. The class distinction between ‘savers and investors’ is harmfully preventing the requisite acquisition of investment to eradicate poverty and unemployment expeditiously in the world. The present economic systems are full of contradictions without which they can not function. Our capital in the possession of few capitalists and the State is the root cause for all class distinctions. Once the capital comes under the ‘direct ownership of people’ all the class distinctions will disappear

13.Maximization of profit destroys morality of society:

In the present economic systems the industries project their ‘volume of profit’ as the ‘balance of judgment’ of their determination of ‘industrial success’ The industry which earns more profit is considered to be more successful. The mental attitude forces the capitalists even to destroy the natural environment extensively in order to produce goods cheaply. With the sole aim of maximization of profit, the capitalists have no even an iota of concern over the future welfare

Retrieved from “

(ArticlesBase SC #447002)

Prof Viswanathan -
About the Author:

Director, International Socio-Economic Research Bureau, India


Rate this Article


4 vote(s)



Article Tags:
natural law, fundamental economic rights, economic contract, great depression, one world, dual monetary system, capitalistic mode of production, socialistic mode of society, democratic mode of production, economic contrat, poverty in the midst of plenty

Related Videos

Latest Economics Articles
More from Prof Viswanathan

Alex Merced on Economics #7 – Supply and Demand Side Economics

Alex Merced discussing economics

learn more @: (05:47)

David Nour – Connecting The Dots – Part 2

Your personal and professional success depends on the quality of your relationships with others. That’s where Relationship Economics comes into play. Relationship Economics isn’t about networking. It’s about learning how to invest in people for an extraordinary return. It’s about understanding relationship currency, accumulating reputation capital and building professional net worth. It’s about learning the art and science of relationships. (05:53)

Financial Analysis Using Excel – Part 3

This video is the 3rd in a 4-part series that presents the essentials of investment decision-making. This series shows how to evaluate investments, particularly those associated with projects. Part 3 covers the BCR (benefit cost ratio), the MCR (maximum capital at risk), and payback. (09:38)

Financial Analysis Using Excel – Part 4

Description: This video is the 4th in a 4-part series that presents the essentials of investment decision-making. This series shows how to evaluate investments, particularly those associated with projects. Part 4 shows how to use financial indicators to make investment decisions. (08:34)

Financial Analysis Using Excel, Part 2

This video is the 2nd in a 4-part series that presents the essentials of investment decision-making. This series shows how to evaluate investments, particularly those associated with projects. Part 2 covers the NPV (net present value) and IRR (internal rate of return). (09:58)

Military Spending Remains Untouchable – By Anthony Ricigliano

By Anthony Ricigliano: As the national debt continues its upward trajectory, now projected at over $13.6 trillion, military spending is moving to the front of Washington spending and policy battles.

Anthony Riciglianol

News and Society>
Sep 15, 2010

Despite The ‘Poverty’, Sierra Leone Is Still Africa’s Most Generous

Based on this index, Sierra Leone is on top on the African continent and worldwide we are ranked eleven. Interesting, how comes a country termed by economists as one of the poorest of the poor come out so generous? The answer is; Gallup’s analysis of the data found that giving money is more strongly correlated with happiness than with a nation’s gross domestic product or opulence.

Muctaru Wuriel

News and Society>
Sep 15, 2010

Economic Reform Needs Reason And Sense

I’ve noticed an interesting trend lately in U.S. national politics: Republicans manage to look and sound stupid while saying smart things, while Democrats look and sound smart while saying stupid things.

Michael Humel

News and Society>
Sep 15, 2010

One Million Public Jobs Lost as Cuba Re-Shuffles Economy

The news of the Cuban government cutting one million jobs comes after news of Fidel Castro saying that the Cuban economic model failed.


News and Society>
Sep 14, 2010

Economic recovery depends on the spirit of innovation

Global economic recovery is still in a difficult manner, but for most developed countries, the recovery seems increasingly like a long march.Economic recovery, what we need to do?


News and Society>
Sep 13, 2010

military records

In June of 2005 the United States authorities together with a number of different supporters sponsored a home coming for Vietnam Veterans. This was to mark the 30 yr anniversary since American troops left that country. During the week long celebration there were many veterans that had been looking for their navy information and those of fellow soldiers


News and Society>
Sep 13, 2010

Li-Ning’s new branding strategy

In June, Chinese sports brand Li-Ning held a brand revitalization event in Beijing and unveiled its new logo and slogan.


News and Society>
Sep 10, 2010

The President Obama Complaining, “They Talk About Me Like A Dog”

In a Labor Day 2010 speech the President Obama admission he went off his prepared remarks and whined, “They talk about me like a dog,” is proof he knows he is guilty of undermining the CONSTITUTION and AMERICAN LIBERTY with his socialistic wealth redistribution and huge government spending programs. He doesn’t care.

Delwyn Lounsbuyrl

News and Society>
Sep 10, 2010

Business Ethics of Capital Distribution and Creation of Investment

The Distributive Justice of capital is the basic Business ethic. The Business ethics covers all just economic activities like Just Price, Creation of Investment, Justice in workers management,The concept of ‘Each Industry for All and All Industries for Each” to estabish Indistrial Democracy, The just way of Price Determination, Wage Justice,Work Justice, Constitution of Natural Laws.

Prof Viswanathanl

Jun 17, 2008
lViews: 166

Economic Justice and Democratization of Economy to Create Ideal Society

The Economic Justice requires that the national capital should be distributed equally among the people for not only smooth operation of economy but also elimination of poverty. Both Adam Smith and Karl Marx misguided the world in the name of Capitalsim and Communism. The Natural Law requires PEOPL’S DIRECT OWNERSHIP OF CAPITAL to eetablish an Ideal Society for which mankind has been struggling for thousands of year since genesis of civilization.

Prof Viswanathanl

News and Society>
Jun 12, 2008
lViews: 414

“how to Solve From Poverty to Nuclear War” – Democrism – the Third Theory

Democrism,by its Dual Monetary System solves all human problems from poverty to Nuclear war. It advocaltes the national capital should be owned directly by the people to establish the economic rule of the people, by the people and for the people.
Direct Ownership of capital will establish “all Industries for Each and Each Industry for all”
Theis Concept will create Industrial Democracy and Workers Managemnet in evey industry.Workers will get dual income:Dividend for capital and wage forlabor

Prof Viswanathanl

News and Society>
May 29, 2008
lViews: 571
lComments: 4

Add new Comment

Your Name: *

Your Email:

Comment Body: *


Type the verification code::*

* Required fields

Director, International Socio-Economic Research Bureau, India

<!– @page { margin: 0.79in } P { margin-bottom: 0.08in } –>


Plenty of people are finding fault with the Arizona law SB1070 signed by Gov. Jan Brewer,(1) but evidently they haven’t considered, or are trying to hide the fact that the Federal law ICE287 is essentially the same law.(2)

There needs to be no question why the ACLU, and other entities have been protesting SB1070, because they also protested the federal ICE 287 program.(3)


When Senor Wences, Felipe Calderon, from Mexico criticizes Arizona’s law, something is blatantly wrong. How can Mexico’s President, who enforces harsh immigration law/s, and knows little about Arizona’s problems be given creditability?(4)


When Eric Holder calls SB1070 possibly unconstitutional, without reading the law, something is blatantly wrong.(5)


If people did read the bill they would find racial profiling is specifically addressed, and prohibited.

Why is it OK for a fed program to crack down on illegals, but if Arizona wants to enforce the same rules, Arizona is racist?


As Governor Brewer has said “I just keep questioning the fact of the continuation of misleading, I believe, the American public on the facts. It’s very clear, it’s been in federal law for decades, and it’s something that we implemented in here to use as another tool to get our borders secured — and if it was illegal or it was racial profiling here in the state of Arizona, it would then have been illegal and racial profiling decades ago for the United States. ….We are out here on the battlefield getting the impact of all this illegal immigration, and all the crime that comes with it, and no one… We have, I have repeatedly, sent letters to the administration and to the president of the United States with absolutely no response… We have borders for a reason. A nation without borders is like a house without walls. It collapses. We need help, Mr. President.”(6)


Are we a nation of children, allowing our nanny state to MISlead us? It’s evident the media is not researching all the facts. When will people admit they are getting abused; states are getting forced to protect themselves, because the federal gov. is not doing its job.


Arizona’s Gov. Jan Brewer has tried to help her constituents — people need to try watching at least one political program a week/register for e-mails from their reps., or do something to know what their gov. is doing —- if we don’t know the truth, we don’t know how to vote, and who the corrupt are, in order to BOOT THE CORRUPT OUT.


[1]. -azgovernor-gov/Governor Brewer Announces Arizona Border Security Plan April 22, 2010

-azgovernor-gov/STATEMENT BY GOVERNOR JAN BREWER April 23, 2010


-nytimes-com Arizona Enacts Stringent Law on Immigration April 23, 2010

-foxnews-com Top Official Says Feds May Not Process Illegals Referred From Arizona 5/21/2010

-washingtonexaminer-com On immigration, Obama backs Mexico, not Arizona May 21, 2010

- lvrj-com Sheriff says pact makes Arizona law unnecessary May. 09, 2010 Arizona Immigration law IS Constitutional – 2007 Cobb Co.Georgia & 287(g) 2010 April 29

[2]. -ice-gov/partners/287g/A Law Enforcement Partnership

-en-wikipedia-org Section 287(g) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA)

-thelandofthefree-net Arizona immigration law: Politicians and activists deception exposed 5/17/2010 AZ Governor Jan Brewer blasts critics, dispels law myths May 6, 2010

[3]. - investors-com Hypocrisy On ICE 05/20/2010

[4]. – washingtonexaminer-com On immigration, Obama backs Mexico, not Arizona May 21, 2010

-resistnet-com profiles blogs Obama sides with Mexican president against Americans Thursday, May 20, 2010

[5].- corner.nationalreview-com Holder Profiles Arizona Friday, May 14, 2010

-hotair-com Holder admits: No, I haven’t read the Arizona law I’ve been dumping on May 13, 2010 Mr. Holder, It’s Time for You to Go May 14, 2010

[6].- Obama Honors Señor Wences, But Won’t Speak to Jan Brewer May 21, 2010

-resistnet-com blogs President Obama Meets with Arizona Governor 04 June 2010

-cnsnews-com Senate Democratic Whip Compares Sealing the Mexican Border to Trying to Keep Drugs Off of I-95 Thursday, May 20, 2010 Obama administration poised to challenge Arizona immigration law June 26, 2010

– Administration Weighs Bypassing Congress to Let Illegal Immigrants Stay June 24, 2010

-resistnet-com blogs The Arizona Immigration Law And The Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution June 4 2010


-foxnews-com politics June 18 2010 Obama Administration to File Suit Against Arizona Immigration Law

-resistnet-com profiles blogs Obama apologizes to China for Arizona illegal laws….Gulags versus the LAW May 17, 2010

-resistnet-com profiles blogs A beneficiary Of Vote Fraud Throws Out The Samje Tired Old Racist Label on Those Supporting Arizona’s Immigration Law June 4 2010

-resistnet-com profile blogs DHA Warns Somali Terrorist May Cross U.S.-Mexico Border June 3 2010

-resistnet-com profiles blogs Opposition to the Arizona Law Is a Smokescreen for What? May 25, 2010

-resistnet-com forum topics republicans not supporting az forum topics Obama’s Speech Misleads Americans on Illegal Immigration & Amnesty 7 1 2010

– dailycaller-com eric-holder-refuses-to-say-radical-islam-motivated-times-square-bomber 2010/05/14

-breitbart-com Jun 22 2010 Mexico asks court to reject Ariz. immigration law

-kansas.-watchdog-org June 3 2010 AG Six announces run; hasn’t had time to read Arizona immigration bill

The current situation is not a matter of democrat verses republican party; currently we are in a situation that puts capitalsim/private enterprise at the mercy of/in opposition to a very big government bureaucracy/threat.

US immigration laws

<!– @page { margin: 2cm } P { margin-bottom: 0.21cm } –>

Immigration means the movement of a foreign individual into a country to live on a permanent basis. Each individual who wish to enter a country must seek permission to enter the country and abide by the law. The immigration law refers to the government policies which handles the immigration to the United States. All the US immigration laws are handled by the United States Citizenship and Immigration services , commonly called as USCIS is a division of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). The USCIS performs many administrative services carried out by the Immigration and Naturalization Services (INS).

If an individual seeks to enter United States on a temporary basis or to stay permanently , he/she is required to have a valid passport and in most cases requires a visa by the law. The laws determine what a person must do in order to enter United states and stay for the authorized period of time. The individual who seeks to enter United States may enter with either immigrant or non – immigrant visa. An Immigrant visa is used by people who wish to travel to live permanently in US . Non- immigrant visas are issued to people who wish to travel to United States on a temporary basis for business or pleasure.

The USCIS is in charge to make sure the law is being followed by all immigrants and non – immigrants. This includes tracking of the illegal people in United States and ensures that the legal people follow the rules for becoming a permanent resident or a citizen of the United States.

Understanding immigration and its benefits

The law is regulated with the rights that the law will be followed by each individual. An immigration law judge may control or oversee the requests to become a US Citizen. To explain this clearly if a person in a refugee status wishes to obtain permanent residency based on the individual facing prosecution by race or nationality, and is permitted to obtain permanent resident status by the law, the immigration law judge may preside over the case to determine whether the individual truly deserves the amnesty.

If a person violates the immigration laws, penalties are decided per the rules either the person to be deported for entering United States illegally or to be prisoned if attempting to obtain citizenship or permanent resident through improper means.

Being an immigrant an individual is benefited in many ways. The individual may increase in cultural diversity, provide economic gains , increase in the standard of living in the part of immigrants, adopt a younger worker force , skilled workers in much needed sectors, obtain social security and various other benefits.

This also includes the national health law program where it provides health care or medicaid to all the employees , workers , people with disabilities and elderly people of the United States .

Immigration means more workers , more consumers and a larger economy for United States. This leads to lower process and much more increase in the purchasing power.

Even though immigration does have disadvantages such as poverty, education costs, increase in crimes , the positive outcomes of the immigration does outweigh the disadvantages.

We provide you with information on immigration laws. We also provide you with information on different immigration issues and help in completing the immigration forms

BJP should become a secular political party

     BJP should become a secular political party

                       Dalip Singh Wasan, Advocate.


          Time has come when BJP in India should adopt secularism and if they fail, they are likely to go to dooms because the people of India have already accepted this secularism and we have noted that in spite of all preaching they are not having a majority in elections.  Shri Atal Behari Bajpayee knew this fact and therefore, when so many Muslims were killed in Gujarat, he condemned these mass killings of one community and felt ashamed that such a tragedy had been there during his regime.  He felt sorry for these killings.

            BJP should become a political party and they should not obey orders issued from RSS headquarters because their targets are not the same which have been before the BJP.  The people of India are not in a position to write off RSS from this country, but since the people have vote power, they have already rejected the policies of RSS and the BJP people must understand that  the people of India shall discard them if they follow the same policies as have been ordained by RSS.

            The old people in BJP are not fit to lead this party and therefore, young people come forward and at present Sushma Swaraj must take up the reign and must lead this party and must bring it at part with secular political parties and must take with them all Hindus, Muslims, Sikhs and Christians and they must also have an introspection and they must come to the conclusion that the Dalits are also going apart from the main stream because they have got their own grievances and complaints against the soclled higher clases amongst the Hindus.  The joint population of Muslims, Sikhs, Christians and the Dalits is not less than 85 percent of total population in India and this 15 per cent pure Hindu population is ruling the country and all these groups are not liking this rule of the minority.  Therefore, time has come when BJP people shall have to rethink and shall have to see that they are not Hindu fundamentalists.

            So BJP must obtain freedom from RSS and their allies and must turn secular without any further delay and at the same time they must appoint Sushma Swaraj as President of BJP.  I hope she would be able to lead this party and shall give a life and a new outlook to the party.

                       101-C Vikas Colony, Patiala-India-Punjab-147003


 Page 925 of 925  « First  ... « 921  922  923  924  925