Amid such dispersion, confrontation, and apprehension the seed of a united force was beginning to form in the womb of industrial institutions. This unifying power was the very same labour power, which got transformed into an active force.

Before the rise of large factories in Europe, craftsmen were scattered among many villages and towns. Each performed his small job in houses and in the open air while his wife and children helped. Such craftsmen usually owned a farm and garden, enjoying their physical fruits and deriving contentment from them. After consuming part of what they had manufactured and grown, they sold the remainder to obtain other necessities.

Under the rays of the sun and amidst the fresh air and family warmth and kindness, they lived a quiet and happy life. Desires were few; spirits, satisfied; bodies, healthy: and faith and ethics alive. In the farms and the churches and at social gatherings they lived with independence and with a spirit of sincerity, and the spiritual fathers fanned the spirit of kindness and hope into their hearts soothing them in the name of Christ, peace be upon him. If there were among them those with more capital, they too were craftsmen and farmers who purchased products manufactured and grown by others. And when necessary, they were provided with loans and pre-purchase agreements.

From the middle of the eighteenth century with the creation of industries and inventions, and along with these, acceleration of exploitation, this calm and secure life was transformed into a life of anxiety and stress. Workers and farmers poured into the cities from the villages and mountains and gathered in the midst of noisy, smoky factories and polluted environment. Away from the warm kindness of wives and children, they lived beside the huge and rough wheels of factories. This revolution occurred abruptly and it is called the Industrial Revolution. It first started in England, and then spread to other European countries.

The French Revolution and the Napoleonic wars preoccupied other countries of Europe, while England developed and progressed.

The first invention in the weaving industry was by James Hargreaves1 in 1770, followed by Richard Arkwright's invention of the water frame. James Watt opened the way to the use of steam power in 1769. The discoveries of hydraulics, and later steam power followed by electricity, wrested power from the hands of the workers.

Although the governments and capitalists benefitted enormously from the Industrial Revolution, which allowed them to amass wealth and expand their influence, the condition of the masses of people and workers deteriorated: pressure on them increased, wages declined, heavy were levied on them and prices increased. These workers witnessed from close proximity that the products of their labour ended up in the pockets of those who lived in palaces with comfort and affluence. The advantage of these workers over the workers before the Industrial Revolution was that they now lived closer together and under the same roof. This closeness and cooperation gradually created in them a special spiritual and ethical state, and with respect to their way of thinking and morality, they became a distinguished and united group. Industrial and capitalist pressures further consolidated their ranks. Subsequently, group resistance began and a united front of' workers of the same mind emerged from the bowels of the industrial nations.

At the beginning of the birth of this baby, governments and capitalists used all their powers to choke and stifle workers’ unity. But this resulted in the power of the workers becoming even more concentrated and all workers put aside racial and national differences, and cooperated to obtain concessions and solidarity. In the year 1825 workers' unions were recognized and established in all the industrial nations.

They elected representatives to negotiate for wages and to express concern over work and health conditions, and obliged governments to carry out recommended measures. If governments neglected to carry out union’s demands, they resorted to the weapon of strikes, using their monthly dues to finance them. Sometimes the hardships of life forced them to back down from their demands and at other times the industrialists gave in; but the overall outcome benefited the workers.

In countries such as England, workers possessed communal independence and depended on social cooperation, and in spite of rapid development of industries, noticeable social differences and gaps did not occur and labour was in harmony with industrial progress. Amid such changes and social conditions, workers and wage earners were beginning to participate as accepted members of society.

In countries where there were concerns about labour conditions ad provisions for livelihood, the
working-class had social organizations, selected representatives and attained certain status in the society. In countries less concerned about workers grievances and where weaker social cooperation existed, workers became a distinct and separate class opposing the industrialists and capitalists.

In such conditions, ambitious men and those seeking positions of leadership took advantage of the chaotic situation, the discontent, and the workers’ solidarity to write articles and give speeches depicting the wretched life conditions of the workers and their lack of rights, and compared these to that enjoyed by the capitalists and employers.

Rapid industrial development and the steady rise in workers' power and their solidarity became a source of ideas employed for the benefit and to support this active class. The perceptions of utopia - which were derived largely from Greek thoughts and Christian teachings and had inspired ideas among the adherents – had been gradually forgotten. Now they re-emerged amid the industrial and social changes in Europe. This time the united masses of workers were susceptible to these theories and were willing to support them. In addition, they wielded unprecedented power, having obtained a grip on the wheels of industry.

The proponents of the freedom of ownership - most of whom had their origins in the pre-industrial age and belonged to the classical school - generally were in agreement on the right to private ownership and considered freedom of individual ownership to be in the interest of the society. From this point of view, a society does not possess an identity separate from that of the individuals forming the society2. Collectivists consider that class interests, social justice, and equality must originate from the State.

Despite differences of opinion among them, they agree on such issues as summarized below:

1. That ownership - before representing individual's desire for goods - pertains to economic, social and political relationships.

2. That individual ownership and economic relations are bound within the realm of general social and political relations, and change in the social structure and governments ought to occur in relation to public interest.

3. That the government must represent the public’s interest and take active part in public works and ownership so that it is able to provide for public welfare and eliminate class differences.

The differences among collectivists concern the means of achieving such a government. Some advocate revolution, while others maintain that power should be obtained by working within the existing legal and social order. Another point of contention among them is with respect to the limits of government intervention and the extent to which private ownership may be denied to individuals.

These two opposing theories, ‘absolute individual freedom and private ownership’ and ‘constraints on individuals and a communal and social ownership’, have irreconcilably and distinctly confronted each other since the end of the century. A look at the history of western industrial transformations reveals that theories of collectivism in their later forms appear at the beginning of industrial transformation. As social and industrial transformation continued the proponents of social and industrial collectivism grew and their ideas converged.

John Locke (1632-1704)

Locke says that God bestowed the land free to all men, and anyone who works on piece of land is its owner. The principal issue here rests on land and work.

Jean Jacques Rousseau (1712-78)

Rousseau believed that nature and man's superior instinct (fitrah) are his foundation of happiness3. In every dimension one must return to nature and to superior instinct and the laws, and principles of ownership must conform to nature. He believed that in the state of nature, people possess equal rights. Private ownership, regulations and restrictions have become a source of difficulty and deprivation. If we were to point at the first criminal who originated all crimes, Rousseau says, we must say that it is the person who was the first to erect fence around a piece of land calling it ‘my property’. All of the miserable laws and restrictions emanated from this concept.

Anyone who abolishes the concept of ‘my property’ and destroys the wall and fence will serve society best. Rousseau then confesses that abolition of private property and a return to superior instinct and nature are impossible, but one must try to restrict private ownership as much as possible and create obstacles (i.e.. regulations) in its course of expansion, incorporating it into public welfare so that certain people would not be able to use their wealth to purchase others’ intellectual and physical abilities while some people remained so poor that they would have to sell their physical abilities to secure livelihood.

Maximilian De Robespierre (1758-1794)

Robespierre was one of the leaders of the French Revolution and a disciple of Rousseau. He maintained that since absolute equality and the abolition of private property were impossible, the law must restrict ownership and limit its duration. That is, ownership is to be allowed during an individual's lifetime and after the person's death his property should belong to the state and no one should have the right of inheritance. Such ideas and theories are considered to be the reasons for, as well as the prelude to, the French Revolution4.

Francois Noel Babeuf (1760 - 1797)

Babeuf stated that people have equal rights to property and that private property and inheritance must be abolished.

Count Henry De Saint-Simon (1760-1825)

Saint-Simon advocated that a supreme religious council (following the defeat of the church) must supervise people to ensure equality and safeguard people's rights. A parliamentary government should be established and industries should be owned by the government. Feudal lords had no right to own property and ownership must be limited to the type of work performed. Saint-Simon was a French thinker whose ideas became the focus of a special school of thought.

Johann Gottlieb Fichte (1762 - 1814)

A German philosopher, Fichte described ownership as the relationship between man and useful objects or a contract among people. He recommended equal distribution of work and wealth, and said that governments should stabilize prices. He regarded government responsible for regulating the economy (the German National Socialist Party is founded on his ideas).

Jeremy Bentham (1749-1832)

Bentham was a renowned lawyer and legislator who declared that ownership is a creation of law and has its roots in human nature and in metaphysics. Since natural endowments are meant equally for everyone, by law they must be divided equally and in accordance with abilities of the respective individuals.

Pierre Joseph Proudhon (1809 -1865)

Proudhon was a French thinker adamantly opposed to private ownership of land and strongly in favor of giving workers their rights. He believed that those who took ownership of tracts of land, and the employers who did not pay the workers an amount equal to the value of their labour, were transgressors and thieves. Society, he maintained, must rest on the basis of individual right of ownership to the products of their labour. Governments support oppressors and those who transgress on the rights of others. Therefore, managing the affairs of people should be taken away from governments and entrusted to the people so that unity and order may be restored.

Louis Blanc (1811 - 1882)

A French socialist and historian, Blanc did not believe in the equality of abilities and talents. He rejected the notion of the equality of professions and the benefits accruing from work. Blanc coined the well-known phrase, ‘from everyone according to his ability and to everyone according to his need’, which later became the slogan for most socialists. He proclaimed that the only way to perfect people and society was to implement this slogan. He exhorted workers to form their own government in order to reach this goal and obtain their rights.

Karl Marx (1818 - 1884)

Marx was born into a Jewish Prussian family and grew up amidst the rapid industrial changes of the mid-nineteenth century, which saw unemployment crises and the accompanying stress on workers. Discontent and a state of readiness for revolution - especially in Germany - resulting from workers' organization, had permeated to other classes. Various parties and groups were organized to assist and lead workers in securing their rights.

One such group was the League of the Just, established in Germany, which with the intellectual collaboration of Marx and his colleague, Engels, issued a tract in 1848, which has become known as The Communist Manifesto. It included a statement of principles and call for action. In the Manifesto the class struggle between the capitalists and workers and toilers (the proletariat) is spelled out in historical terms and predicts the victory of the deprived people once they have been able to acquire control over the means of production. It urges the workers to unite and break their chains.

Once the revolutionary movements predicted by Marx failed to occur, he was exiled from Germany and lived a hard life in England writing articles and working as a newspaper reporter. He began to revise and complete his theories until the first volume of Das Kapital was published in 1877. After Marx's death the second and third volumes were published during the period from 1885 to 1895) by Engels. These publications, which have been translated into different languages, were among the theories and changes that had a profound impact on the spread of socialism and provided it with documentary support and justification.

The above discussion of ideas and theories of various thinkers summarizes the theories that have appeared from the dawn of the Industrial Revolution. With regard to these theories, and keeping in mind the social conditions and economic environment in the West, it is certain that all or most of them are derived from the thoughts of scholars within a limited subject area, and cannot be considered as absolute and eternal.

Since the purpose of this volume is to describe the Islamic view of ownership and its system, we are compelled to leave this brief review and further inquiry into these ideas - with their inherent contradictions, shortcomings, and solutions - to the experts. Perhaps the proponents of these ideas themselves do not consider them as universal and absolute. It is only Karl Marx had based his theories on the foundation of class struggle with generalizations applicable both to the past and future. Marx also introduced historical materialism and by so doing expanded the domain of contradiction and motion to the principles of creation and the universe.

• 1. 1720 – 22 April 1778.
• 2. This is contrary to present day Communists who assign an independent identity to the society.
• 3. Jean Jacques Rousseau is an eighteenth-century philosopher whose ideas and opinions profoundly influenced the French Revolution. He firmly believed in God, though he was pessimistic about the church institution. Rousseau believes that human nature has been created pure, free and happy; it is the society that enslaves man, makes him miserable and impure, and ties chains and bridles of laws around his neck. Through these chains and bridles, he maintains, man is turned into the hewer of wood for others. Since these bonds of law cannot be completely broken, man must submit only to a society that he himself has fashioned and seek liberty within that society’s freedom. Man must establish the foundations of governments. Kings have no hereditary or divine right. Human civilization causes greater and greater corruption, bondage and impurity as it progresses. Literature, art and theatre are attributes of corruption, he maintains, because these are instruments and attributes of luxury. Luxuries are the outcome of wealth and inequality where one group plunders the rest and provides for itself with instruments of luxury.

  Rousseau went through various phases in his life. In The Confessions of Jean-Jacques Rousseau and The Reveries of a Solitary Walker he describes the first phase of his life. In The Social Contract he describes his social and political views. During the last years of his life he became so suspicious that he imagined that every action and criticism was an insult to him.

• 4. The French Revolution - which began in 1789 - was a consequence of the industrial revolution and the ideas it spawned, and ended in1795. If the leaders of the revolution were asked about the exact goals of the revolution, they would have responded with only a few negative slogans such as ‘no capitalism’, ‘no monarchy’, ‘no ownership’ and ‘no church’. Relying upon these negative slogans, the revolution began with a flood of blood and flame. The wounded and mad viper of the revolution twisted and turned, killing those near and far, friends and foes. It would even bite its own organs out of fierce anger.

  In the midst of the crises of the revolution, the government stood behind the guillotine and the barrel of cannon. Different groups held the handle of the guillotine and sat behind the cannon carts at different times! A few soldiers of the revolution such as Robespierre, whose ideas were discussed earlier, eliminated their rivals and believed that revolution must continue until land, labour and the means of production were equally distributed among the people. He, too, was sent to the guillotine.

  In 1815, after he had exhausted the last breath of life from France through his military expedition, Napoleon was sent to exile and the revolution ended. In the French Revolution, the king and queen were both sent to the guillotine and the title of monarchy was abolished. The capitalists lost their property. In the name of victory of reason, people plundered churches, imprisoned priests or sent them to the guillotine and church bells (were melted down and) made into cannons and muskers. But ultimately a self-willed despot like Napoleon was enthroned with fanfare! Property passed to new landlords. In 1807, the civil law was codified and signed by Napoleon. Article Two proclaimed that ownership was an inalienable and holy right of man!

  The doors of the churches were reopened with much more splendour and church bells began to roll. Why? Because (the revolution) had no clear goals and plans. (It should be mentioned in passing that) the underlying human passion and sentiments and momentary conditions are ideas and intrinsic human tendencies. Change in activity is gradual and related to other factors:

  “… Lo Allah changeth not the condition of a folk until they (first) change that which is in their hearts….. (13:11)”

  A positive outcome of the French Revolution was the recognition that agitation and revolution were not constructive. Thereafter, minds and intellectual efforts were directed towards practical social economic doctrines.