The Devil of Economic Fundamentalism

by Javed Jamil

of millions of children by way of abortion every year. The truth is that the so-called family welfare programmes are aimed at the disintegration of the family system because the family system is not consistent with the “devel­opment” model. The weaker the family system the more likely the members of the family are to spend money in the consumer and sex-market helping the “development” in the process.

  After population control, human rights have been the most popular issue at the global level. The modern concept of human rights also originated from the West. Superficially, it again looks a very attractive slogan. West feared that the kind of economic fundamentalism it had decided to aggressively pursue had same very serious adverse effects. It would engender barbarism in society in the form of steep rise in all forms of crimes including mur­der, rape, robbery and bribe. It would also enhance societal tensions as well as psychiatric illnesses. If these really happened, it would give a bad name to their ideology. To counter this, the economic fundamentalists sought to impart a new meaning to ‘human rights’ so that the darker face of their civilization could not come to the fore; and they could use the brighter side to attack the systems tat were unwilling to accept the West’s economic hegemony. The result of such re-orientation has been that the human rights situation in a country is not assessed on the basis of crimes in that area but on how the accused in various crimes are being treated by the governmental institutions and agencies. Apparently, the human rights organisations argue that they safeguard the people against excesses. But in reality, they only serve the criminals and saboteurs of social peace. What happens to the victims of a crime and their relatives does not bother them; their function is only to follow the trial of the accused. It has already been discussed that the economic fundamentalists have vested interests in the paralysed legal system because the criminals and crimes form an indispensable part of their operations. The criminals are supported in more than one way. If they or their crimes have any political dimensions the champions of human rights are quick to label their trial as 'political vendetta'. While it is true that the governments tend to be less kind towards their opponents and often use the stick of law to punish them, it is equally true that all political forces have some nexus with the criminals who are used to creating ugly situa­tions for the ruling party or coalition. This side of the coin is however intentionally ignored. The human rights organisa­tions never publish reports on the crime-situation in different countries and never pressurise the governments to drastically reduce them so that the common people can pass their lives with­out fears. Such reports would unveil their own faces and fingers will be at against Western ideologies.

  “Women’s Rights” is yet another extremely favourite subject with the Amnesties and the Human Rights Watchers. And it is needless to repeat that the major aim behind all the raucous is to assist the merchants of sex and barons of consumer industry. Why is it that “purdah” annoys them but prostitution does not? Why has the Amnesty, the self-proclaimed champion of human rights, never bothered to tell the world that there cannot be a bigger crime against womanhood than its sordid commercialisa­tion and a civilization cannot claim to be a true human civilization if it creates a social environment, in which women have to sell their bodies? It takes extraordinary pains to highlight the cases of rapes in police custody or in prisons but its eyes do not bleed at the thousands of rapes the innocent women have to suffer daily all over the world. If it begins to describe the strategies of the commercial exploitation of women nothing else would be required to prove its credentials. But the truth is that the Amnesty is damnesty, which is only a mouthpiece of the economic fundamentalists; its aim is limited to glorify Western­ism and degrade every other system .One of the issues Amnesty and other organisations have con­tinuously been raising at different platforms is that of child labour, an issue ostensibly inspired by humanist sentiments. There can hardly be anybody not moved by the concern shown for the innocent children who, instead of going to schools, have to earn their livelihood in factories and fields. They often have to work in highly wretched conditions. The situation needs prompt redress. But, is this concern for child labour the only or the real motive behind the worldwide campaign? The economic fundamentalist support many good causes but only when this “good” is also in their interest. The actual motivating force in the Child Labour issue is the strategy of big industries to throttle the small sector so that they can expand their own market. They know that the small scale industries may be individually small but combined they have a sizeable share in the world economy. They reckon that these industries survive only because they can get relatively cheap labour in the form of young children; once this labour goes beyond their reach, they would not be able to compete with the big industries and would be left with no option but to wind up. Why should the circulation of money remain confined between the owners of small scale businesses and their clients without the involvement of big business? The economic fundamentalists neglect the fact that these children are the bread-earners for themselves and their extremely poor families where each member has to financially contribute to survive. According to the UNICEF’s the State of the World’s Children 1997 Report, child workers worldwide are estimated to be more than 400 millions. The majority of them live in the Third World countries of Asia, Africa and Latin America. Some of them are also there in the developed countries like the US, the UK and France. In India, these children form a major part of the bangle industry in Firoza­bad district of Uttar Pradesh, in which 25% of 50,000 workers are children in the beedi industry, carpet industry, slate indus­try, match industry, silk industry and wood carving industry in Saharanpur. These figures clearly indicate that these children are performing extremely important economic activity in the develop­ing countries. If child labour is strictly and effectively banned, who would suffer? Of course, the families of these children and the small industries in which they are involved. Once this is done, the fundamentalists know, even if it involves spending of a few hundred million rupees for the education of these children (which would mean that these children would then be fit enough to serve the big industries), the way will be clear for them to expand their own carpet industry, synthetic clothes industry and cigarette industry; many other industries will also benefit. This in truth is the crux of the whole matter. As the multina­tional companies expect to ultimately capture the whole market of the developing world, the developed world has vested interests in turning the mole into a mountain. If one is really serious about the welfare of child workers, one should first ensure that the small scale industries earn enough to hire labour at reasonable costs and the parents of these child-workers make enough money to provide them with nice education. They must also feel secure that their children, if educated, will get good jobs or will be able to establish their own businesses. The small scale industries may thrive only if their products receive due coverage in the media and incessant efforts are made to popularise their products. They can do this only if the government comes to their rescue. But the MNCs would never permit this. Unless the small scale industries are effectively promoted, it will be suicidal to lure the child-workers away from their present work. It will kill the small-scale industries, and will create insurmountable problems for their families.

  There always exist some elements in society whose hearts bleed at the sight of the plight of the weak, the oppressed and the downtrodden. They also have the brain and the will required to recog­nise the real forces behind the oppression, the poverty and the exploitation; and possess indomitable courage to challenge them. Their desire to set things right and alleviate the problems of the common people often bring them face to face with the economic fundamentalists. And the fundamentalists, who have many skeletons in their cupboard, prefer to avoid a direct fight; they use alternative methods to outsmart their opponents. This will be explained with the help of a few examples.

  When the medical experts discovered that cigarette smoking was extremely dangerous for health and caused several diseases like lung canc
er and chronic bronchitis and enhances the chances of heart attacks and peptic ulcers and, in case of the mother being a smoker, has also a damaging effect on the foetus, there was an outcry against smoking all over the world. Several health organisations and institutions campaigned for a blanket ban on smoking. The enormity of evidences against smoking as a killer was too much to give the industries any chance to muster argu­ments to the satisfaction of the foes of smoking. But they were not ready to bear the loss that would occur if the tobacco indus­try was closed. Money was dearer to them than the lives of peo­ple. And they had handy support for them in the government, which also benefited from the tobacco industry. The media was already in their hands and there were a large number of intellectuals who had the pen to manufacture logics. If money comes their way, they would produce fascinating logics against ban on smoking. The first of their arguments was that the individuals had the right to choose whatever they liked; others