296 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES
We study history with a view to know the errors people have made and how they could be avoided. History is not always an example. More often it is a warning.
“Labour is bound to say that the example of Russia is entirely out of place in a discussion about labour standards in a country in which industry is run as a private enterprize working in pursuit of private and personal gain. In Russia, industry is a State enterprise and the profits of industry go to fill the Treasury of the State and not to swell the private fortunes of individuals. Where the profits of industry belong to the State, the subjects of the State may well be asked to undergo, during an interim period, reduction in wages and other standards of life in order that the State industries may be stabilised. No worker would mind such a sacrifice knowing that, in the end, the industry would belong to the State and that he would be able to share in the prosperity of the State. How can the workers be asked to agree to reduce standards of life in an economy in which the profits which are to result from such reduced standards are to go to private individuals. I am sure you will agree that an agrument on these lines has great force.
Funds For Labour Welfare
“The plea that we have no administrative machinery to give proper effect to labour laws cannot be admitted to be a strong plea. It is liable to be attacked by labour from many points and you will find it vulnerable at every point. The State maintains a large body of police force to maintain law and orders; the State maintains a body of Revenue Officers to collect taxes. Labour may well say, why should not the State maintain a force to see that labour laws arc given effect to ? Is the duty of the State to be confined merely to collecting taxes and punishing persons who disobey its laws ? Does not the duty of the State extend to the maintenance of terms and conditions of employment, which arc in consonance with civilised life ? If that is the duty of the State, is it not obligatory on the State to create and sustain such machinery ? The lack of machinery is too weak a plank to stand on.
“The argument about the capacity to bear the burden of the cost involved in labour legislation is an argument of very serious import, and labour will have to take note of it. At the same time, the question is about the faith behind the argument. Is it a bona fide argument ? or