Dr. Ambedkar, an economical expert denounced communism on the following context.
Means: Even though Dr. Ambedkar accepted the communists claim of establishing the dictatorship of the proletariat for which the Russian Revolution was enacted, he could not find any justification in the means they adopted. He believed that the communists in order to achieve one particular end, ended by destroying most of the good ends too. For example the destruction of the private property and human lives to establish the dictatorship of the proletariat.
Can the Communists say that in achieving their valuable end they have not destroyed other valuable ends? They have destroyed private property. Assuming that this is a valuable end can the Communists say that they have not destroyed other valuable end in the process of achieving it? How many people have they killed for achieving their end. Has human life no value? Could they not have taken property without taking the life of the owner?
State: Failure of the communists to explain when would the State wither away and what would replace the position of State, once it withers.
The Communists themselves admit that their theory of the State as a permanent dictatorship is a weakness in their political philosophy. They take shelter under the plea that the State will ultimately wither away. There are two questions which they have to answer. When will it wither away? What will take the place of the State when it withers away? To the first question they can give no definite time.
The Communists have given no answer. At any rate no satisfactory answer to the question what would take the place of the State when it withers away, though this question is more important than the question when the State will wither away. Will it be succeeded by Anarchy? If so, the building up of the Communist State is a useless effort. If it cannot be sustained except by force and if it results in anarchy when the force holding it together is withdrawn what good is the Communist State.
Anathema to religion: Dr. Ambedkar disagreed with the communist anathema towards religion. He criticised the communist for their inability to distinguish between the religion which are helpful to communism and religion which are not. Dr. Ambedkar describes that the communists had carried their hatred of Christianity to Buddhism too and failed to understand that the allegations they placed on Christianity cannot be levelled to Buddhism.
Failure of the Communists to in cooperate spiritual values. Dr. Ambedkar had well explained how the communists who stood for economic values failed to understand the need for spiritual values, due to their anathema towards religion.
Dr. Ambedkar strongly believed that humans cannot be merely satisfied by mere economic comforts. He believed that only religion could sustain the communist state after the withdrawal of force.
Absence of liberty and fraternity: Dr. Ambedkar propounded that communism doesn’t promote liberty. Hence the concept of equality fails, in the absence of liberty and fraternity for which the Russian revolution stood for. In short absolute equality means no liberty. Thus equality, liberty and fraternity cannot co-exist in a communist state.
We welcome the Russian Revolution because it aims to produce equality. But it cannot be too much emphasized that in producing equality, society cannot afford to sacrifice fraternity or liberty. Equality will be of no value without fraternity or liberty. It seems that the three can coexist only if one follows the way of the Buddha. Communism can give one but not all.
According to Dr. Ambedkar communism lacks morality
“The Prime Minister has been depending upon what may be called the ‘Panchsheel’ taken by Mr Mao and recorded in the Tibet treaty of non-aggression. Well, I am somewhat surprised, that the Prime Minister should take this Panchsheel seriously. The Panchsheel, as you, Sir, know it well, is the essential part of the Buddhist religion. If Mr Mao had any faith in the Panchsheel, he would certainly treat the Buddhists in his country in a very different way. There is no room for Panchsheel in politics, and secondly, not in the politics of a communist country. The communists’ countries have no morality. Today’s morality is not tomorrow’s morality.”
Communism in India: Dr. Ambedkar had clearly explained in his masterpiece “The Annihilation of Caste” that the communists cannot hope for a mass economic revolution when the workers are divided on the basis of caste. Suppose if they were able to succeed in igniting an economic revolution, they would be forced to tackle the problem of caste to sustain further. Because in order to bring equality, fraternity is needed. However, liberty and equality cannot be guaranteed without fraternity, but fraternity is not possible with castes.
Source: Buddha and Karl Marx by Dr. Ambedkar (DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR WRITINGS AND SPEECHES – VOL. 3)
Source: Buddha and Karl Marx by Dr. Ambedkar
ALSO READ:
- What are the contributions of Dr. B. R. Ambedkar towards India?
- What is Ambedkarism and which facts will completely change your views about Dr Ambedkar in a positive way?
Author: Ānanda Bashu
