The Devil of Economic Fundamentalism

by Javed Jamil

specific people; He is Rabbul-Aalameen, the Lord of Universes, as is beautifully described in the Holy Qur'an, and the Father of the whole mankind, as is depicted in the Christian scriptures. The whole mankind is one family, the vasud­hev kutumbukam of the Hindu scriptures, and the progeny of one father and mother as described by the holy Qur'an, and also by the Bible. How can one be superior to others on the grounds of race, community, sect, colour, lan­guage, monetary status, etc? The better is one whose deeds are better. Unfortunately, religion-based organisations have often been engaged in arousing communal and sectarian sentiments. These organisations must give up this approach, and if they fail to do so, the law of the land must promptly tackle them.

  Fourth, there are two major components of religion. One is faith and rituals, which are private affairs, and the second is the social principles. It is the latter that need be emphasized upon, because they are usually neglected.

  The importance of religion lies in the fact that, unlike other systems, it has spiritual components also. It is the spiritual status of man that builds his character and strengthens his resolve to perform certain virtuous deeds, even when they may be of no personal benefit to him, and to avoid certain acts, even when they may bring immediate pleasure. A spiritually strong person is not easily overpowered by desires. Selfishness is at its lowest in him, and he is always ready to sacrifice his possessions for others. To work for others, and not for personal aggrandisement, gives him happiness. Even in severe ordeal, patience and endurance do not elude him. He is always serene and calm; his only worry is how to remove the worries of others. Spiritual faith is derived from gnosis of, and unflinching faith in God. God creates all and sustains all, is Bounteous and Merciful and is Just. A firm believer is also just and kind towards others; if he is not, something is wrong with his faith. He rests his hopes not on any human being but on the Lord of the universe. Faith inculcates ac­countability, and belief in the Hereafter prevents him from doing evils, even in private, and from harming others.

  Character-building is thus the essence of religion. Zoroaster, Buddha, Mahavira, Ram, Moses and Jesus highlighted the same truth, and for Muhammad it became a declared objective. If society has to develop, character-building is to be the axis of all schemes of things, and religion must be allowed to play its all-important role in that direction. If that goal is achieved, economic fundamentalism as an ideology will find it hard to survive.

  Some economists have argued that self-interest is the primary motive of human actions, though self-interest may have different meanings for different individuals. By advancing this logic, they seek to enamour selfishness with respectability; for, self-interest is the chief premise on which the believers in neo-classical theory of economics rely. It can be said that even religi­ous persons act in self-interest; when they do sacrifices for others, they do it in the hope of getting due reward, if not in this world, then in the other world. But what is great about this self-interest is that, in contrast to the self-interest of the economic fundamentalists, this self-interest derives its strength from others’ interests. It goes to the credit of religion that it understands the psychology of humans; in order to enable them to act for others’ gains, it convert others’ interest into self-interest. It is this outstanding ability of religion to motivate individuals for service to mankind that has to be appreciated, admired and practised. This alone can provide a befitting answer to the cruel and selfish self-interest of the economic fundamentalists.

  3. Purging of Politics

  Economic fundamentalism has been triumphantly marching ahead owing to the increasing manoeuvrability of politics and administration by the big business. The nexus of industrialists, politicians and bureaucrats has misused democracy for their own advantages. This nexus must, therefore, be broken at the earliest. To achieve this, the political set-up has to be completely purged.. Democracy, in essence, is good and must be preserved. But what is to be ensured is that it brings to power competent, honest and strong persons having emotional consonance with the common people; their suffering must pain their hearts and alleviation of their prob­lems must be foremost in their mind. They must keep aloof from all tyrannical elements and must be ready to challenge them. Economic development is essential but the politicians must ensure that it is redefined to favour the people more than the economic giants.

  What must be done to cleanse politics? The answer is not diffi­cult. While every citizen must have the franchise, right to contest elections must be reserved for those who have proved their honesty and competence, and have admirable record of service to the nation. Almost all the democratic countries have two houses -- the Lower House, or Congress, comprising representatives, directly elected by the people, and the Upper House or Senate, comprising members indirectly elected or nominated. The role of the Upper House has been relatively less important than that of the Lower. It would be in the fitness of things if the Upper House plays the true role of elders. Its subcommittees can be endowed with the constitutional powers to screen candidates for national elections. The criteria of screening must be elaborate, and must be fixed beforehand. Every party must be directed to nominate at least 5 candidates for each seat; the curriculum vitae of each one of them must be made available. The past public record of each nominee must also be sought from independent or government channels, preferably the intelligence agencies. Any person convicted by court must not be allowed to contest elections for at least 10 years after the completion of his sentence. If, during this period, he shows distinct signs of improvement and has done commendable social service, he may be permitted after the expiry of that period. If a person has been charge-sheeted by the court, he must not be allowed to contest till he is proved innocent. Out of the nominees, the elders must select the best one who may then be allotted the party ticket. If the elders are satisfied with none of the five, they may ask the party to nominate another set of candidates. The Upper House, however, to assume this extraor­dinary power, must itself be above any controversy. To ensure this, its membership must be given only to those who have had either brilliant academic records or have been involved in selfless services to the people for a reasonable time. They must not belong to any political party. Retired professors, officials, professionals, social reformers, thinkers, artists and writers would be the ideal choice.

  There has always been a debate on what form of democracy is better -- Parliamentary or Presidential. What is more important, however, is to make sure that only persons of untainted characters enter the political arena. If it can be guar­anteed. any form of democracy will deliver the goods; if it is not, none will succeed. Still, in my view, Presidential democracy is, relatively better because the President is free to nominate the ablest persons, not necessarily belonging to the party he represents, as his ministers or secretaries; furthermore, the people know in advance who would be heading the government. In parlia­mentary democracy, the head of government is elected, after general elections, by the members of the Lower House or more preci­sely, by the members of the political group commanding majority in the House; it often happens that unpopular or relatively unknown persons succeed in occupying the prime ministerial chair. In Presidential system, what the President has to do to prolong his reign is that he must keep an eye on the public perceptions. In contrast, in Parliamentary democracy, the Prime Minister has to keep his flock of ministers and members of Parliament in good humour failing which he may face desertions and defections. This puts the Prime Minister in a dock and he often overlooks the corrupt practices of his party-men and cabinet for fear of losing necessary support.

  Another objective of a true democracy must be to guarantee proper representation of all sections, classes and communities compris­ing the nation. The divisions in population are often such as make it virtually impossible for the minority sections to win election in correspondence with their percentage in population. This discrepancy can be removed by reserving in every election specific seats for candidates belonging to minority sections. To furthe
r strengthen democracy, the winning candidates must get at least fifty percent of the votes polled.

  Two party system is better than multi-party system, because it ensures that at least fifty percent of the people have cast their votes in favour of the winning party. It will also compel the ruling party to provide good governance as it would be hard pushed to maintain its position. In a country like India, two-party system may be preserved for the national elections, while multi party system may be allowed to continue in provincial elec­tions. The provincial elections all over the country may be conducted simultaneously. Only those parties, or fronts, that have emerged as top position holders in the assembly elections, may then be permitted to contest the parliamentary elections. Two party system would help in controlling communalism, regionalism and casteism.

  Democracy is good because it represents the will of the people. But it must be kept in mind that the people are usually selfish and myopic. Further, the majority opinion is not always the best option, especially when the