|
Although feudalism is not legally recognized in Syria, there
exists in certain parts of the country a number of economic
and social feudal conditions that threaten the economic and
social welfare of the nation. The Syrian Social Nationalist
Party considers that it is of the utmost importance to put
an end to this state of affairs to safeguard national unity.
The
organization of the national economy on the basis of
production is the only means for the attainment of a sound
balance between the distribution of labor and the
distribution of wealth. Every citizen should be productive
in one way or another. Moreover, production and producers
must be classified in such a way to assure coordination,
participation and cooperation in the widest extent possible
and to regulate the just share of laborers in production and
to insure their right to work and to receive just
compensation for their labor. This principle will put an end
to absolute individualism in Production because every form
of production in society in genuinely a collective or a
cooperative one. Grave injustices can be perpetrated against
labor and laborers were individual capitalists to be given
absolute control. The public wealth of the nation must be
controlled in the national interest and under the
superintendence of the national state. Progress and strength
of the national state can not be achieved save with this
policy.
The
aim of the Syrian Social Nationalist
Party is the achievement of a sound national
unity which enables the Syrian nation to excel in the
struggle for existence. This unity can not be realized if
either the economic or social order is not sufficiently
wholesome. Justice in the judicial, social and economic
spheres is an essential condition for the triumph of the
Syrian Social Nationalist Movement.
Collective production is a public not a private right.
Capital which is the guarantee of the continuity of
production and its growth, and in so far as it represents
the resultant of production, is consequently, in principle a
public national possession. Individuals acting as trustees
may dispose of it and utilize it for further productivity.
Active participation in the process of production is the
necessary condition for the enjoyment of public rights.
Critics of the SSNP,
particularly Marxists, have often raised the issue of lack
of extensive development and detail of the economic plan as
a limitation of the doctrine of Social Nationalism. It is
actually the strength of the doctrine. Considering how
rapidly outdated and consequently injurious detailed
economic plans become, it is more consistent with the
principle of serving Syria best to avoid limiting the energy
and creativeness of Syrians in theoretical economic
formulations. This does not mean that the SSNP and Saadeh
have not delved into the details of economic issues. Indeed,
Saadeh has constantly addressed economic matters as they
arose and there is no period in the available written record
where an article dealing with economic issues is not extant.
This is not surprising from a thinker who was intensely
involved in all the issues that affected the life of the
nation. While it is beyond the scope of the present essay to
examine Saadeh's approach to these different economic
issues, it is to be remembered that the principles were
meant to define aspects and positions that Saadeh considered
essential and immutable. The approach to the details of the
changing world of economy needs to be principled, but
unencumbered. It is for this reason that this principle was
formulated in its current format.
The primordial role of
productivity in the Social Nationalist economic view
illustrates clearly Saadeh's divergence from the utopian
approaches that characterize many of the political movements
in the Near East. Equality in poverty is not a condition
that the SSNP accepts for Syrians. The economic approach
should embody the view of the SSNP for the future of Syria
as a vibrant and viable polity. Equitable prosperity can be
achieved only if the productive forces of the Syrian nation
and the resources of its homeland are activated. The
imperative for such a view rests in what Saadeh has termed
'the will to life'. The survival and success of the Syrian
nation depend among other things on its economic strength
and power.
It is important to note that
productivity is understood in a wide sense. It is
agricultural, industrial, and intellectual productivity.
This broad concept of productivity is a guard against the
disasters frequently brought upon rising nations by an
exclusive and a stubborn attempt at industrialization at the
expense of other components of the economic life of the
nation. While the SSNP recognizes the need for the Syrian
nation to develop industry, the latter is viewed as but one
component of economic growth and advancement. Saadeh has
clarified in his book 'The Genesis of Nations' that the
industrial stage that societies have achieved is superior to
the agricultural stage, but remarks that industrial nations
have achieved superiority by their industry, agriculture and
intellect.
The concept of basing an
economic system on productivity has been interpreted in the
past, naively, to imply regulation of wages according to
work performance. While the latter formulation is acceptable
within the framework of safeguarding the rights of workers,
it is not the correct interpretation of the concept of
productivity. It is likely a formulation made to parallel
the popular communist slogan 'To each according to his need
and from each according to his ability'. Saadeh's
formulation was rather concerned with an economic view for
the society at large, not of the issue of wage regulation.
It is directed at the entire economic life of the nation not
at a regulatory component of a single aspect.
The safeguarding of the
rights of labor is not a call to unionism. SSNP members have
been active in the union movement in Syria since the
inception of unions in the early thirties. The Party has, at
various stages in its history, supported the rights of
workers when presented in the context of union struggle. The
limitations of unionism, however, have also been considered.
Unionism is usually based on a narrow view of economic life.
It is frequently limited to a specific sector of the
economy, and the demands are perceived in isolation of more
general issues. The framework of the national character of
the economy is absent from most union demands. A call for
wage increase, for example, is a frequent union demand. The
consequences of this event on the competitiveness of the
product in international markets is rarely considered. While
many political groups catered to the nascent labor movement
in Syria by uncritical endorsement of unionism,
and admittedly achieved
political gain because of this endorsement, Saadeh had the
intellectual foresight and the political courage to
objectively assess the benefits and drawbacks of unionism in
Syria. His resistance to unbridled unionism is not only on
the basis of the principle of safeguarding primarily the
interest of the entire nation, but also on the realization
that unionism in Syria has frequently been exploited by
political exploiters, duped by capitalists or controlled and
emasculated by 'socialist' governments. Based on these
theoretical and observational factors, Saadeh calls for
organization of productivity and labor on the basis of
specialization, but only as a means of improved productivity
and streamlined management. The economic system, however,
does not call for militant unionism because it presupposes
the application of the economic view within the framework of
a Social Nationalist state.
|