बहुसंख्यकों द्वारा अल्पसंख्यकों का दमन
By लेव तोलस्तोय, शंभू जोशी
Summary
The text presents a critique of the use of violence and oppression by majorities against minorities as a means of social control. It argues that the majority perceives its misfortune increasing and sees the suppression of minorities as a logical path to liberation. Those benefiting from the current state justify it with force, supported by religious organizations, while those seeking change also resort to violence to establish a new state they believe will be better. However, the text contends that such revolutions merely replace one oppressive system with another, perpetuating domination, corruption, lies, fear, slavery, and cruelty, often on a larger scale. It observes that while certain violent acts like highway robberies and assassinations have decreased, the number of executions and death sentences has risen. The text claims that state leaders kill far more people than revolutionaries do, yet they believe they have achieved victory without realizing they sustain their false existence through violence and lies. The core problem identified is the use of violence to force individuals into conformity with social organization and moral codes, arguing that coercion only works as long as the oppressed perceive themselves as weaker. Once they feel powerful, they will resist and impose their will on others, leading to ongoing conflict and disorder. The text concludes that violence is a false means of uniting people, as it actually divides them. It notes a shift in awareness: unlike in the past, people today recognize that violence separates rather than unites. Both the oppressed and the oppressors are becoming conscious of this truth, though leaders and the public continue to rationalize cruelty as necessary. Deep down, they sense that their violent activities are moving them away from their desired goals.
Conclusion
This document underscores the profound and cyclical futility of using violence and oppression as tools for social or political change. The analysis reveals that whether enacted by a ruling majority or a revolutionary minority, the suppression of one group by another does not lead to liberation or a just society, but merely perpetuates a cycle of fear, cruelty, and corruption. The core implication is that such methods are inherently self-defeating; they create instability and resentment rather than unity. The ultimate outcome, as the text suggests, is a growing, undeniable awareness among both the oppressors and the oppressed that violence is a force of division, not cohesion. This recognition points toward an inevitable, though difficult, shift away from coercion as a means of governance and toward a more fundamental re-evaluation of how human societies can truly be organized.