All World
Gayatri Pariwar

In principle, it’s the masses, the people, who form the ‘society’, whose collective energy should shape and nurture socio-economic system, and whose ascent and welfare should be at the root of socio-economic developments. However, due to various factors, it has not been possible in the modern system. We often find the majority only at the receiving end. As the documented history of the world shows, the socio-economic developments since the past thousand years or so have been dominated by the political system, industrial development and market dynamics. 

Earlier it was the dynasty-based rule of mighty kings/emperors. Like other domains of people’s life, the socio-economic system too was subject to their mercy. If the king had prudent vision, strength of character, and might, if he/she was kind and caring towards the public, the state used to happily progress on all fronts including socioeconomic development; else, most often people had to face oppression, exploitation and suffering in one form or the other. Such an Imperial System was certainly not good and consistent; it has almost vanished in the revolutionary tides of time. 

At present most of the socio-economic systems prevalent across the globe are either Communist or Capitalist. Each has its merits and demerits in terms of economy. However, both have not achieved the ‘conceptually claimed’ goals; worst part is that both have hampered the social values of humanity. 

The exponents of communism might argue that it is only communist model of socio-economic system that would ensure people’s collective participation and development. However the reality check shows fallacies and flaws in this claim. Several years ago, some scholars at the National Centre for Scientific Research (CRNS: Le Centre Nationale de la Recherche Scientifique) at Paris had published an eye-opening historic book based on thorough study and review of communist system. English translation of this book was later on published by Harvard University as “The Black Book of Communism: Crimes, Terror, and Repression”. This book has exposed many facts based on real data, has posed many questions, which would make one think and find out a better alternative for viable socio-economic system for people’s collective participation, progress, and welfare. 

The authors, some of whom are themselves communists, have thoroughly authenticated the data presented in this book. Among the other facts, the data on ‘mass killing’ under the communist rule/dominance is most disturbing. The numbers of victims of oppression of Communist Administration presented in the book are as follows — In (erstwhile) USSR: about 20 millions, China: about 65 millions; Cambodia: about 2 million; Vietnam: about 1 million; Eastern Europe: about 1 million; Africa: about 1.7 million; Afghanistan: about 1.5 million; Latin America: 150 thousands. The official number of people killed by communist parties and revolutionary activities in some democratic countries is about 10 thousands. If we also include the number of people killed during the revolutions that led to establishment of communist rule in several countries, the total number of killings due to Communist rule across the world since past 70-75 years would be around 100 millions. This number would be much more if one also includes the number of people killed by Naxalites and Maoists. 

Who were those killed (or are being killed almost every day)? The counts are not only of the defense or police staff, but mostly common people, intellectuals, students, writers, journalists, artists, farmers, businessmen, traders, scientists, diplomats, laborers, and even the communist volunteers/activities. The list includes those who protested against the wrong doings, who spoke for democratic freedom, human rights, and even the innocent ones, who failed to follow the authoritarian rules due to some personal compulsions/unavoidable circumstances. The punishment/penalty given by communist regime is mostly immediate death (shoot at site or hang) or some kind of slow poisoning/torture, etc. 

Do these killings indicate some straying away from communism? Not quite. As the records, especially those of Stalin’s period in the USSR and Mao in China, show, these were very much part of strict disciplinary actions recommended under the communist regimes. The above referred book has systematically analyzed the authentic reports and data on the cause, mode, circumstances, official and/or judicial orders, along with other convincing proofs. These bitter facts have torn the popular conviction that ‘The principles and goals of communism are good; it’s only some flaws and hindrances in their implementation that led to negative results’. 

If one regards the count of about 100 million killings due to or for communism as an exaggeration/overestimate and considers only 10% of it as correct, even then the number is sizable and cannot be ignored. Which ideal or principle is so sacred for which the killing of 10 million people is justified? In the views of some analysts, “the eye-opening facts indicate that the red color symbolizes not only the revolutionary emergence of communism, but also the bloodshed reality of communism”. 

Some hardcore Marxists considered violence as the nurse of revolution. Their teachings justified violence as natural component of struggles for revolutionary changes. But, then why there should be violence even after their ‘successful revolution’? Why should such large number of killings take place in the communist countries even now? Those killed after establishment of communist governments were neither capitalist nor feudal lords. What was their crime? Only that they used to think differently or were unable to follow ‘conservative Marxist’ rules imposed by communist regimes! Unfortunately, even in the 21st Century — the Century of high-tech development and globalization, the scenario has not quite changed in countries like China, North Korea. 

Communism emerged with dreams of people’s society sans any hierarchy, centralized power, or governing authority. But all such thoughts and principles seem to have remained confined only to conceptual papers and intellectual discussions far away from practicality and reality check.