Starving people do not have the moral courage to fight
Most crimes throughout the world are committed due to poverty, except in countries where the minimum necessities of life have been met. Of course the tendency to engage in antisocial activities because of poverty does not manifest equally in all places or among all people. The degree of such crimes varies according to the moral strength of an individual. But no matter how strongly developed the moral consciousness of a person, if poverty threatens his or her very existence, usually the person will try to attack the prevailing social structure. This being the case, I cannot in the name of human dharma reject the reasons such people give, if they give any reasons at all, in defence of their actions. They demand simply the right to live, and on this human right stands the well-being of society, the justification for its existence. Throughout history millions of people have died due to artificial famines created by other human beings. While walking along a road, weary, plodding legs have given way and a person has collapsed in a pitiful heap on the ground, yet he or she has refrained from stealing. Although a high standard of morality is one reason why the person did not make a last desperate bid for self-preservation, it is not the only reason. Starving people, particularly if they lose their vitality by slow degrees, do not have the moral courage to fight. Knowing the end is sure, they seek refuge in the arms of death. Basing their way of life on incorrect philosophical and religious teachings, they accept their miserable situation as destiny. Perhaps, at that time, if they were led by a spirited leader and inspired by his or her fiery lectures, or if they received guidance about the course of action to take, they would collectively attack the prevailing social structure. In such circumstances, their actions might perhaps be described as immoral, but they certainly would not contravene the dharma of human existence.
shrii Prabhat R. Sarkar