|
Global
Capitalism in Crisis
Globalisation
and Business for the Common Good:
Theology and Economics working together
By
Kamran
Mofid
Economist, Oxford, UK
TFF
associate
October 10, 2002
God has put humans on Earth to be
his administrators of
the land, to cultivate it and take care of it…
In a world
evermore interdependent, peace, justice and the
safe-keeping
of creation cannot but be the fruit of a joint
commitment of
all in pursuing the common good.
Pope John Paul II. Castel Gandolfo, 25th
August, 2002
A reasonable estimate of economic organisation
must
allow for the fact that, unless industry is to be
paralysed
by recurrent revolts on the part of outraged human
nature,
it must satisfy criteria that are not purely
economic.
R.H. Tawney, Religion and the Rise of
Capitalism
The anti-globalists are right to
remark that the 'feeling' in
our economy is not very good. This is because our
economy
lacks any sort of spiritual inspiration…People
need to look
for meaning in life, as well as just doing
business.
Dr.
H.J.Witteveen, ex-President of IMF, in
Het Financieele Dagblad, Jan.
2002.
The practices of the unscrupulous money-changers
stand
indicted in the court of public opinion, rejected
by the
hearts and minds of men…faced by the failure
of credit,
they have proposed only the lending of more money.
They
have no vision and, when there is no vision, the
people
perish. The measure of the restoration lies in the
extent to
which we apply social values more noble than
mere
monetary profit.
President Franklin Roosevelt, Inaugural Address,
1933.
From the dawn of our creation, it has been our
ultimate desire to find happiness. This desire is in the
nature of things, common to all of us, at all times, and
in all places. Nature, the material of the universe, is
modified by us to create wealth so that this desire might
be satisfied.
Today, at the dawn of the Third Millennium, our
civilisation has scored its greatest success in the
material sciences. Its glory is the willing application
of these teachings to daily life. In them it has found
the way of truth, but in the study of the forces
governing us, it has shown little aptitude.
So tragic is this failure that we have turned the
masterpieces of the material sciences into engines of
destruction which threaten to annihilate the civilisation
which produced them.
This is the challenge of our time; either we must find
the way of truth in the government of our relations one
with another, or we must succumb to the results of our
own ignorance.
As has been observed by many philosophers and
theologians throughout history, we should be aware that,
there are two forces at work in society, the material and
the spiritual. When either of these two halves are
ignored or neglected, so that they appear to be at odds
with one another, society tends inevitably to run down
and become fragmented, divisions and rifts manifest with
greater force and frequency.
This, it seems clearly, is exactly what has happened
today; leading to a situation of disequilibrium and
disharmony. Only the reawakening of the human spirit,
love and compassion will save us from our own worst
extreme. Physical wealth must once again go hand in hand
with spiritual, moral and ethical wealth.
Today, despite a five-fold increase in economic growth
and a twelve-fold increase in global trade since the
Second World War, there exists a massive economic
inequality, which many call an "economic apartheid", both
within and between nations. Currently the globalised
world economy faces catastrophic socio-economic,
political, cultural, spiritual, environmental and
security crises that are threatening the fabric of
society and life itself.
What are the main crises faced by modern society?
There are global problems of abject poverty, famine,
starvation, Aids, inequality, greed, injustice,
marginalisation, exclusion, crime, corruption, sleaze,
spin, anxiety, fear, depression, loneliness, mistrust,
drug and alcohol abuse, intolerance, xenophobia and
environmental degradation and destruction. There is also
much amiss with the Western capitalist model as
highlighted by the recent scandals in multinational
corporations such as Enron, WorldCom, Xerox, Tyco,
Dynergy, Arthur Andersen, Global Crossing, Adelphia,
ImClone, AOL, to name but a few from a long list of
disgraced businesses.
Of course, it should be emphasised that the fall from
grace of many American top businesses, due to fraud and
false accounting, is not an American disease only. It is
prevalent in all parts of the world. In the UK for
example, according to detective superintendent Ken
Farrow, head of the City of London police Fraud Squad,
fraud and related crime is very serious and it is
becoming a real concern. According to superintendent
Farrow, the cost of corporate fraud, very conservatively
speaking, is as high as £14billion a year. However,
as many British firms are reluctant to report fraud,
especially when it has been carried out by insiders,
makes it very difficult to gauge the full extent of the
problem. This, according to recent research by corporate
investigations agency, Risk Advisory Group, suggests that
British companies' first instinct is to cover up internal
scams so as to avoid bad publicity. The research also
found that senior executives were involved in nearly
three-quarters of frauds worth in excess of
£1million. All this secrecy surrounding British
corporate irresponsibility makes it very difficult to
accept the views of those who want us to believe that
what happened in the US will never happen here.
In short, the greed-motivated world is spinning out of
control. Maybe it is time for us to try to redefine our
values. Looking at the problem of market capitalism and
its values from a religious perspective, it has been
suggested that these can be identified as twofold:
namely, greed and delusion. Within the domains of modern
economic theory and the kind of market it promotes, the
moral concept of greed has inevitably been lost; "today
it seems left to religion to preserve what is problematic
about a human trait that is unsavoury at best and
unambiguously evil at its worst". Religious traditions
have tended to accept greed as part of the human
condition, but rather than give it free reign they have
seen a great need to control it.
This should come as no surprise to those with a more
traditional orientation to the world. By far the best
critique of this 'greed' is provided by the traditional
religions of Buddhism, Hinduism, Judaism, Christianity,
Islam as well as others, such as Sikhism, Sufism,
Zoroastrians, Baha'is and the 'primitive' animist
religions of the Mayas of Central America, Aborigines
from Australia, Maoris from New Zealand and native
peoples from Africa, Canada and the US. They all offer a
wealth of teachings and recommendations as to how we
should ethically and morally lead our lives, and how we
can achieve happiness away from greed and delusion.
The limited benefits of neo-liberal globalisation,
based on individualism, greed, self-interest motives and
economism (regarding human societies primarily as
economic systems in which economic considerations alone
govern our choice and decisions) have been mainly on the
economic and business side, while other equally important
aspects have remained, by and large, much neglected:
values such as faith, spirituality, justice, love,
compassion, sympathy, empathy and cooperation.
It should be noted that the individualism, so much
valued by the neo-liberals as a fundamental force for
good in global capitalism, as many studies have shown,
has a major destructive impact on well-being. This is
through a lack of appropriate sources of social identity
and attachment, which leads to a tendency to promote
unrealistic or inappropriate expectations of individual
freedom and autonomy. Thus, so much unhappiness is
associated with the people who have suddenly become super
rich; by any means, fraud, winning the lottery,
inheriting large sums, etc.
Furthermore, it should be emphasised that, neo-liberal
capitalism is also anti-democratic and extremely harmful
to the noble principles of democracy. Democracy believes
in equality when it gives one vote to one person
regardless of their colour or creed. It does not matter
who that person is; smart, intelligent, educated or not;
the best-informed or the least informed etc. However, in
contrast, neo-liberalism believes that rewards should go
only to the most talented and the most successful people.
Thus, it very openly clashes with the most fundamental
principle of democracy, namely, as noted, one man one
vote.
Moreover, neo-liberalism, by promoting individualism
and selfishness, is in turn against the principle of
community and society. From their point of view, what
matters is individual preference. For them, those who put
all their money into conspicuous consumption to satisfy
their so-called desires are just as noble as those who
use their riches to help their neighbours and other needy
fellow beings, for example.
To expand the above observations the following is most
revealing:
"In 1923, a very important meeting was held at
Edgewater Beach Hotel in Chicago. Attending this meeting
were 9 of the world's most 'successful' financiers and
businessmen. Those present were: the President of the
largest independent steel company; the President of the
largest utility company; the President of the largest gas
company; the greatest wheat speculator; the President of
the New York Stock Exchange; a member of the President's
cabinet; the greatest 'bear' in Wall Street; the head of
the world's greatest monopoly; and the President of the
Bank of International Settlement. This, we must admit,
was a gathering of some of the world's most successful
men - or at least men who had found the secret of making
money. Twenty five years later (1948) let us see what had
happened to these men: the President of the largest
independent steel company had died, bankrupt, having
lived on borrowed money for five years before his death;
the President of the largest utility company had died a
fugitive from justice, penniless in a foreign land; the
President of the largest gas company was insane; the
greatest wheat speculator had died abroad - insolvent;
the President of the New York Stock Exchange had recently
been released from Sing Sing penitentiary; the member of
the President's cabinet had been pardoned from prison so
that he could die at home; the greatest 'bear' in Wall
Street had died - a suicide; the head of the world's
greatest monopoly had died - a suicide; the President of
the Bank of International Settlement had died - a
suicide."
All these men learned well the art of making money but
none of them learned how to live, commented the original
compiler of this list. Furthermore, this demonstrates how
correct were the people whom I have quoted at the
beginning of this paper: namely, Tawney who observed
there is more to life than purely economic values;
Witteveen who noted that in order to find meaning in life
we must have spirit in business; President Roosevelt who
observed there must be a vision in our life and when
there is no vision people will perish and the Pope who
said in a world of evermore interdependency we must show
a joint commitment in pursuing the common good.
It seems the business world who should know better,
given what was described above, has changed not one iota.
For them economic growth and the corporate bottom line
and the pursuit of self-interested motives are what
matters most. More recent studies have shown that,
self-interested pursuit of wealth causes much unhappiness
and misery. Since 1950, the time of much growth and
increased wealth creation in the West, there has been a
ten times increase in the likelihood of people to be
affected by depression, while there has been a massive
rise in the number of people suffering from sub-clinical
neuroses, anxiety or a profound discomfort with
themselves.
However, as it has been observed, in many
poverty-stricken parts of the world, such as Southern
Ethiopia, for example, where the poorest of the poor
live, the streets, the fields, the mud houses, crackle
with laughter. Here, and under severe conditions of
poverty, people engage more freely, smile more often,
express more affection than we do in our luxurious homes,
surrounded by technology and remote controls. Moreover,
they have also never heard of and have never used,
Prozac, Seroxat, etc. Furthermore, they do not spend
billions of dollars on diet and slimming products to
combat obesity and do not engage in cosmetic surgery in
an attempt to become something or somebody else.
This is not to suggest that poverty causes happiness,
it is only to say that in contrast to us in the
supposedly developed world, these people who are short of
money and materialism are rich in spirituality and love
for their neighbour. Let us pray that neo-liberalism
never reaches them. However, they should be helped to
climb out of the vicious circle of poverty. They
desperately need better healthcare and sanitation, better
housing and better education which respects their
culture, tradition and way of life and is sustainable
with total respect for the environment and ecology.
Thus, through the teachings of the neo-liberal
ideology, we have created a globalised world in which we
have all been dehumanised and turned into producers and
consumers devoid of any true human values; where the main
cultural activities are: shop 'til you drop; obsession
with oneself and with celebrity; watching 24 hour junk
television; eating junk food and the promotion of
hopelessness and helplessness in that there is no
alternative to the current junk way of life. There has
especially been a marked decline in traditional religious
values in general. This decline with the accompanying
rise in materialism, the pervasive philosophical
incoherence and the scramble to pursue happiness under
false assumptions, have produced a generation of
spiritual nihilists, forever substituting aesthetic or
emotional pleasure for authentic human purpose. The
absence of spirituality and love in the economics of
globalisation is profoundly harmful, as it has frozen our
imaginations.
In order to succeed in reversing the crises associated
with economic globalisation, we have to awaken a desire
in people to ask deeper and bigger questions about life
and its purpose. Globalisation today desperately and
fundamentally needs a conscience, morality, ethics and
spirituality. This is where religion, faith and theology
come in, where they can make economics, politics,
business and the world of globalisation more relevant and
acceptable.
Why should we try to relate religion and economics
together? Because, both have the same end, that all may
live in happiness, although they employ different methods
for its achievement. One, through money theism,
materialism and consumerism and the other through
spiritualism, love and compassion. Religions could - if
they speak with their original source of inspiration -
greatly contribute to restore the balance between the
material and spiritual elements, thus opening the way for
living in a full human life in a peaceful, just and
sustainable society.
There must, therefore, be a serious attempt to connect
economics and theology. In modern neo-classical economics
there is no such connection. Neo-classical economics
tolerates religion only if it narrows its focus to
individual salvation; the wider social concerns which
preoccupied Moses, Jesus, Mohammed and the rest are not
considered within its sphere. For neo-classical
economists anything that interferes with their true
religion, namely the market is blasphemous. How
conveniently they have forgotten that their supposed
mentor, Adam Smith, 'father of modern economics' was
first and foremost a Professor of Moral Philosophy at
Glasgow University and before he wrote Wealth of
Nations, was already famous for his great work,
The Theory of Moral Sentiments.
In this regard, economic life had formerly been
regarded as one branch of moral life of the whole
society. But, today, in the new dispensation, it has been
declared a moral-free zone. In shaking ourselves free
from many forms of tyrannies, we have achieved one kind
of emancipation, but in the process we have delivered
ourselves into the hands of a philosophy which has
destroyed the basis for any common social purpose by
emancipating economic activity from the realm of moral
regulation. In the world today, the main problems are not
economic or technological. What is really wrong with
modern society, is the fact that it is morally sick.
Today, similar to what R. H. Tawney had described as
'acquisitive' societies, the whole tendency, interest and
preoccupation is to promote the acquisition of wealth.
Rights are divorced from the performance of functions and
the unrestricted pursuit of economic self-interest is the
ruling ethos. A society of this kind which has taken the
moral brakes off, assures that the individuals see no
ends other than their own ends, no law other than their
own law and desires and no limit other than that which
they think advisable. Thus, it makes the individual the
centre of his/her own universe, and dissolves moral
principles into a choice of expediencies. We can more
fully appreciate the significance of what was just said,
when we relate this to the self-interested, morally
impoverished behaviour of the so many chief executives
and the businesses that they lead in many parts of the
world.
In our economic world today, there is much emphasis on
wealth creation, but in the materialistic environment
that has developed, there is no room for the creator and
there exists no proper relationship between creator and
creation. We should not forget that our most important
economic resources owe nothing to human labour and
manufacture or economic factors in general. The land, the
air, the sea and vital natural resources such as oil, gas
and coal and more are all God's gifts; for the benefits
of all God's creation.
Violence, aggression, selfishness and greed, as well
as disrespect for values based on common good principles
have made a mockery of that. Modern economic theory which
has no religious foundation and has created its own god:
"Mammon is God", has seen to the destruction of all God's
creation in the name of market, profit maximisation and
uncontrolled growth. What a bitter harvest this has
become!
If we succeed in aligning the most powerful force in
capitalism, namely profit, with social, moral, ethical
and spiritual objectives, by bringing economics and
theology together and make them jointly work for the
common good, then, the world will be a much better and
safer place and globalisation will become a force for
good. If we interlink theology, economics and business,
we can make these subjects far more effective than if
they were continued to be studied, as they are now, in
isolation and separately from each other. Therefore, in
this sense, we should not seek to reject economics,
politics, business, profit, trade, etc per. se. We should
only seek the globalisation for the common good, where
everybody becomes a stakeholder and where everybody
benefits.
As a lecturer of economics and business studies, with
a wide range of teaching experience in different parts of
the world, I have first-hand knowledge of the crisis
associated with Godless, faithless, spiritually
impoverished teachings of business schools and economic
departments.
If our students are only trained in neo-liberal
ideology, divorced from spirituality and respect for a
transcendent power, greater than their own, then, in my
view, we cannot blame the students when they badly manage
the Enron, WorldCom, Marconi and Railtracks of this
world. A more ethical and caring environment would result
when the education of potential future leaders includes
the bigger picture.
Although I defend certain positive benefits of a
well-regulated and accountable market economy, I also
maintain that there can be no civilised marketplace
without morality, ethics, spirituality and religion. I
believe that the solution to the current socio-economic
global crises is not technical. It needs to be looked at
again in a fresh way that will embrace true human values
such as love, sympathy, empathy and ethics. This is in
total contrast to the current dominant neo-liberal
prescription of greed, selfishness and individualism.
This is not a new observation. Well before the rise of
the so-called "prestigious" business schools and their
"must have" MBAs, it was very much the tradition of the
successful business people to play a vitally important
part in the daily life of their community. Is it the
post-war rise of secularism which has changed the world
of philanthropy, caring and charity?
In the past, more often than now, it was the
philanthropic and business success of the Sainsbury,
Cadbury, Marks and Spencer and John Lewis dynasties (to
name but a few from a long list), who showed how business
in religious context could power lasting social change.
These businessmen living in the shadow of the previous
century's revolutions and upheavals showed that only
peace and social cohesion within a strong shared culture
of moral and ethical values could provide the stable
conditions for a harmonious environment in which their
businesses, workers and their families could flourish and
achieve their potentials. They well-understood that they
are all part of the community and the environment in
which they live and work, benefiting from both and owing
to them in return. Moreover, without having any kind of
MBA, (in contrast to a must-have culture of today's
business), they also well-understood what is for the
common good.
They all showed an impulse to give back some of their
fortune back to society: either by improving their
employees' working life, or, also like the Sainsbury's,
as patrons of the arts and sciences. Philanthropy among
the self-made rich has been common enough from Andrew
Carnegie to Bill Gates, but it is curiously rare in
benefiting a family company's own workers and as has been
noted there aren't many Bourneville's in industrial
history, and even fewer John Lewis partnerships. For
example, since 1824, when John Cadbury first opened his
tea and coffee house in Birmingham's Bull Street, four
generations have poured a consistent stream of talent and
commitment into the business and the community as well as
the life of their workers. Moreover, it was the second
generation of the John Lewis family, who gave his entire
inheritance, voluntarily, over to his employees, to
ensure the continuity of the vision of fairs hares and
happiness at work for all. What a contrast this is to the
neo-liberal super-rich of the Enrons and WorldComs.
At this stage it should be noted that it must be
heartbreaking for old-fashioned academics with a vision
to create a better world, by providing an ethically and
spiritually based education for their students, to see
the takeover of many academic institutions by the
neo-liberal ideology and its practitioners. This is very
serious and in turn very harmful to every aspect of life,
especially when it comes to the education of the future
leaders.
Nowhere can this be seen better than in the 'mother'
of all 'prestigious' universities, namely, Harvard, where
many of the chief executives of American companies, who
have fallen from grace, received their MBAs. Harvard
University has been accused of harbouring people from
Enron and benefiting from their association. It is
suggested that the university through the assistance of
an Enron employee netted $50million. Of a more serious
nature, as far as students and their families who pay
huge sums in fees are concerned, is the belief that Enron
shaped Harvard's research and teaching agenda,
contributing millions of dollars to the university's
centres that advocated the deregulation of the energy
industry and therefore justifying the workings of Enron
and the principles behind it.
According to the well-known social and ethical
campaigner, Ralph Nader, championing the rights of
consumers, "companies like Enron have learned that small
investments in endowing chairs, sponsoring research
programmes or hiring moonlighting professors can return
big payoffs in generating books, reports, articles,
testimony and other materials to push for and rationalise
public policy positions that damage the public interest
but benefit corporate bottom lines…it is time to
establish boundaries that establish precise limits on the
university's corporate entanglements. There is need for a
clear and comprehensive policy on the limits of
commercialism on Harvard University and for pro-active
efforts at the university to spur research-guided by
public-spirited rather than mercantile values".
At this point, I would like to emphasise that, Harvard
is not the only university taken over by the corporate
agenda. There are many more in every country the world
over. This is why we need a global attempt to rid our
places of education from these types of questionable and
potentially harmful activities and sponsorship.
This is not to say that universities and places of
higher education should not seek the support of any
business whatsoever. It is only to say that the support
sought must only be from those who will give for God and
the common good only and not for their own glorification
and promotion. Therefore, there should be no more Enron
or WorldCom, for example, Chairs of Business Ethics or
Arthur Andersen Professors of Accounting etc., promoting
these companies and their modus operandi. In all, the
support should be given with no strings attached and only
for the purpose of promoting the objectives that are
already established to be truly ethical and in harmony
with the common good.
It is my belief that the only way to reverse the
crises associated with inhumanity, injustice and
environmental degradation is to acknowledge God, the
Ultimate Reality. It is only by seeing the 'other' and
the earth as God's creation, created in his own image,
that we will stop abusing and exploiting them for our own
self-interested gain. As it has been noted, "Surely, when
the Great Creator looks down on the Earth, He sees all of
His children playing together from the Red, White, Black
and Yellow races. He does not see the superficial
differences. He sees the beauty of each one of His
children." This is the 'right road' in life, interpreted
as the Spiritual Path, where all life, created by the
Great Creator, connected and sacred, is nurtured,
restored and held in trust for the generations yet to
come.
As for example, Edy Korthals Altes, amongst others,
has so eloquently observed, our secular society, has
alienated itself from its spiritual roots. For many
people 'Transcendence' has no longer any meaning. The
autonomy of man is considered to be the ultimate standard
in life. But this one-sided exultation of the sense of
self - this mentality of 'I only' - undermines the basic
condition for a truly human existence. As human beings we
are inextricably linked to the 'Ultimate Reality'. That
is why the great philosopher Hans Jonas, considered the
denial of transcendence in all probability the greatest
error in human history. Vaclav Havel noted in the same
vein, during his years in prison before he became
president of Czechoslovakia. He wrote "I am persuaded
that (the present global crisis)… is directly
related to the spiritual condition of modern
civilisation. This condition is characterised by loss:
the loss of metaphysical certainties, of an experience of
the transcendental, of any super personal moral
authority, and of any kind of higher horizon. It is
strange but ultimately quite logical: as soon as man
began considering himself the source of the highest
meaning in the world and the measure of everything, the
world began to lose its human dimension and man began to
lose control of it."
When respect for the sublime evaporates and
quantifying and measuring become the benchmark, we are
left with a 'flattened world', in which banality thrives.
Romano Guardini, a well-known thinker and theologian, has
warned insistently about the grave consequences of our
indifference towards transcendence. If we ignore Ultimate
Reality, he wrote, we will lose our centre and thus our
sense of orientation. With the loss of the name of the
living God, man loses his own name and as an inevitable
consequence, the purpose of his life and way to live.
Once we have grasped that our identity is firmly rooted
in God, there is no need any more to prove ourselves by
amassing wealth, position or power. This truth will set
us free from the craving for more and more, so typical
for our secular and consumer society in the Western
world.
If we look at so much human misery, physical,
emotional and spiritual, as well as the destruction of
all God's other gifts, surely we must in all honesty
admit that we are guilty and a very wasteful custodian of
what we have been given. Maybe we will have the wisdom
and the foresight to see our wrongs and choose the
pathway from destruction and to create a world with a
nobler future. However, no amount of neo-liberal
economics can correct the injustice when it is at the
heart of the problem.
This is the challenge we face in this new century.
Successful and ethical businesses should be congratulated
and admired for their good work, and they in return
should be invited and encouraged to play a fuller role in
ensuring the common good of the community and the people
who have played a vital role in the creation of wealth,
with a total respect for the environment and God's gifts.
This coincides with God's vision of his kingdom in which
the leading perspective is not the profit of the fittest,
as in neo-liberal ideology, but a level playing field for
all.
So, if we truly want to change the world for the
better, all of us, the business community, politicians,
workers, men, women, young and old, must truly become
better ourselves by sharing a common understanding of the
potential of each one of us to become self-directed,
empowered, and active in defining this time in the world
as an opportunity for positive change and healing and for
the true formation of a culture of peace by giving
thanks, spreading joy, sharing love, seeing miracles,
discovering goodness, embracing kindness, practicing
patience, teaching tolerance, encouraging laughter,
celebrating and respecting the diversity of cultures and
religions, showing compassion, turning from hatred,
practicing forgiveness, peacefully resolving conflicts,
choosing happiness and showing love, sympathy and empathy
to others.
It must also be noted that as part of God's creation
we are therefore all equal and nobody can claim a
monopoly on righteousness and civilisation, regardless of
how powerful they perceive themselves to be. The greatest
threat to humanity is annihilation. Today collectively we
spend more than ever before on military expenditure,
creating tools of our own destruction. We now have enough
power to eradicate life many times over. This doomsday
capacity has been recently combined with strategic
doctrines widening the possibilities for the actual use
of the tools of destruction. This, combined with the
adoption of the doctrine of pre-emptive strike, based
mainly on self-interested motives, as well as the present
over-emphasis on military power for solving conflicts,
together with simplistic notions about good and evil
nations, is sooner or later bound to lead to collective
disaster and destruction. Might is never right. It is
only when we admit this, that we can have a fully
inclusive globalisation for the common good, embracing
all of us, leading to a harmonious world.
Finally, it is my intention to conclude this paper on
a positive note and with much hope that, indeed if we
want, we can collectively change the world for the
better. In what follows I will provide some necessary
steps to be taken towards the achievement of this
goal.
Above, I discussed the first and most important step,
which is to change ourselves for the better by becoming
instruments of peace, without which nothing else is
possible. In the following I will highlight some other
important steps that should be taken:
2. All God's gifts, us, the human beings, the
land, air, sea, natural resources, forests, the
environment and more should be used for the common
good of all and not abused, as it is now for the short
sighted profit of a few. This means the adoption and
implementation of internationally binding regulations.
Free riders and other abusers should be identified,
penalised and put to shame as rogue nations.
3. As I have discussed, and I hope clearly, the
damage neo-liberal ideology is causing, my third
recommendation is to drop this harmful and
self-interested philosophy. We have to promote
policies that respect human dignity, are tuned with
true human values of love, co-operation and the common
good. We need to adopt a philosophy that recognises a
higher purpose and loyalty to, not merely, the
shareholders and the chief executives, but to
stakeholders, including workers, their families, their
community at large, ecosystems and the planet. We have
to discard the madness of free market fundamentalism.
We have to understand and accept that market is not a
religion, mammon is no God and the chief executives of
self interested corporations are no prophets and the
dubious accounting books are no holy and sacred texts.
We need a socially co-hesive philosophy to replace the
present divisive one. One which gives its rightful
place to God, religion, ethics, justice and the common
good. Here, I would like to recommend Henry George,
the American social reformer and economist (1839-97)
author of Progress and Poverty. His work
accords with that of Adam Smith, David Ricardo and
John Stuart Mill, though Henry George took their
studies a stage further by pointing to the cause of
poverty.
4. We should say loudly and clearly no to free
trade and yes to fair trade. Free trade has been used
by neo-liberals to engage in a new form of slavery.
The countries that most fervently lecture others on
free trade are the ones who have the highest tariffs
as well as barriers to trade, while at the same time
provide the highest amount of subsidies to their own
industries. If this embarrassing double standard and
unethical behaviour is not a witness to the
uselessness of free trade, then what else could
be?
5. The globalised economic apartheid of the last
fifty years or so has resulted in billions of people
becoming enslaved to indebtedness, especially in the
third world. Servicing the debt, which is the main
pre-occupation of the World Bank and the IMF, has
meant that in most cases, there is too little left to
provide for the basic human needs in many countries of
the world. Therefore, my fifth step calls for monetary
justice and debt cancellation in the third world,
especially as nearly all of the loans are in the
interest of the creditor nations and were/are given
often to corrupt, unelected, unaccountable and
undemocratic regimes for questionable purposes. This
recommendation has a very important historical
parallel elsewhere, and it is useful to remember it.
As it has been observed, when the United States had
problems with unpaid bonds on the London Market and
were unwilling to reach an agreement, the United
Kingdom appealed to an international board of
arbitration at the League of Nations in the late
1920s. However, to the dismay of the British
government, this initiative was vetoed by the US
Congress to which it was referred for ratification.
They argued that there had been a referendum in
Mississippi in 1852 in which the population had voted
against repaying the debt because they did not know
how it had been raised or how the money had been used.
Given this historical precedent, it could surely be
argued that the third world debtor nations should be
entitled to hold referendums in which their people
could legitimately express the opinion that their
debts should be cancelled because they did not know
how they were raised or how the money was used!
6. I strongly believe that globalisation, as long
as is not the same as Americanisation, can become a
positive force for the good. This is so, if policies
adopted are based on, and are in harmony with, the
principles of the common good. In my view, amongst
others, this can only be achieved if institutions such
as the IMF and the World Bank, dramatically alter the
way that they operate; not by promoting neo-liberal
ideology of "austerity programmes" that are bleeding
the already impoverished and vulnerable to death, but
by promoting policies that empower and enable the poor
to participate fully in the world economy by adhering
to global justice. Therefore, my sixth step calls for
the drastic reform of these two institutions. The
first reform act should be the "de-Americanisation" of
these two institutions by cutting the umbilical cord
that connects these two so closely with the US
Treasury. I suggest that their headquarters should be
moved from Washington to other countries in
Latin/South America, Africa or Asia, so that the
neo-liberal advocates of these institutions can see
and feel at first hand the results of their
recommendations. These institutions must demonstrate
more transparency and a greater willingness to examine
more closely their actions away from dogma and
fundamentalism. I also recommend that, people like
Joseph Stiglitz be invited to direct and lead these
reformed bodies. Stiglitz, an accomplished economist
and academic, served for four years on President
Clinton's council of economic advisors and then three
years as chief economist and senior Vice President of
the World Bank. He was dismissed and excommunicated by
the Bank for simply expressing and questioning the
consequences of the Bank's policies on those most
affected by them. He is a man of inside knowledge,
integrity and has shown concern for the common good.
The reform of these institutions and being led by
people such as Joseph Stiglitz, in my view, can act as
a force for the good, leading to the achievement of
globalisation for the common good.
7. As an educator engaged with young people over
the last 20 years or so, I have become extremely
concerned about the attitude of many university
students towards the common good and public services.
Most of the graduates these days see success in merely
monetary terms and wish to have a job in the city or
the privatised industries, where they think they can
earn the highest salary and bonuses. They also
tragically equate happiness with the size of their pay
cheque. This deplorable attitude has caused major harm
to the overall wellbeing of society. In order to
reverse this, I propose that university graduates
should be encouraged to work in those sectors which
promote common good ideas. This could be achieved, if
the government proposed that every graduate working in
schools, for example, the national health service,
local government and community-based organisations, as
well as for non-governmental organisations (NGOs),
such as Cafod, VSO, Oxfam and Christian Aid, or as
peace workers overseas, will have their student loans
repaid by the government. Therefore, in this way, the
graduates will not only find a paid job in sectors
that are currently short of manpower, but they will
gain useful experience. This can be a very positive
way of introducing the common good to young people
which in turn will have a major positive impact on
society as a whole.
8. There is no further need to emphasise that the
world is facing a huge challenge both in terms of
environmental degradation and the plight of the
billions living in poverty. Although, I support the
view that we cannot live in isolation and we need to
engage with one another in trade and encourage
investment, but given what is happening, especially in
the Third World, I strongly believe that the status
quo must be reformed rapidly. Therefore, my 8th step
calls for the establishment of an international
regulatory body, to oversee the application and
implementation of universally approved standards of
conduct by multinational corporations when investing
in the Third World. All operations must be subject to
"Social Impact Audits" (SIA), addressing and covering
corporate ethics as a fundamental component of any
business activity. In this sense, there must be a full
transparency and openness based on respect, honesty,
fairness, justice and environmental responsibility. In
all, the emphasis should be on universal reporting
standards. Multinationals and other businesses in the
Western world must be required by law to adopt
corporate social responsibility, so that, in turn they
can accept SIA for their overseas operations.
Companies must be required to produce regular reports
on the environmental, social and economic impact of
their activities both at home and overseas and to
consult major stakeholders about key decisions. Once
and for all company directors, by law, should be made
responsible for social/ethical issues as well as
financial probity. When they fail, like anybody else
in society they should be tried, and if found guilty,
go to prison. Just to resign with a huge golden
handshake, pension and share options, should not be an
easy escape route from justice any more. Nothing short
of this will do. As long as "big business" is only
interested in, and accountable to, a minority of
shareholders, the chief executives and their salaries
and bonuses with the bottom line mentality, there will
be no reversal in environmental degradation and the
persistence of abject poverty. In short, there must be
a new vision on global corporate governance. Can one
imagine, what the world could have been like, if
instead of the WTO promoting neo-liberal,
self-interested ideology, benefiting the already
wealthy, an international body promoting the good of
all? One thing that is certain is that there would
have been far less worry about environmental
degradation and poverty. Least of all, there would
have been no need for so many people spending tens of
millions of dollars, mostly at the taxpayers expense
crisscrossing the world to South Africa trying to
solve these problems; not a very useful gathering, as
since the first of such a meeting in Rio, ten years
earlier, there has been a huge rise both in poverty
and environmental degradation in many parts of the
globe.
9. In my final recommendation, I want to mention,
as an example, how a successful business can develop
today, similar to the past, in a religious context
that could power lasting social change. Here, I wish
to highlight the Economy of Communion, founded in 1991
by Chiara Lubich, which is part of the great works of
the Focolare Movement. The Economy of Communion or the
Economy of Sharing, manifests itself in the 'culture
of giving of the Gospel put into practice' in economic
activities. Adhering to this principle and philosophy,
the entrepreneurs are asked to use their skills and
creativity to produce useful, quality products and to
run their businesses honestly, without damaging the
environment or being drawn into unethical forms of
competition. The business people are asked to use the
profits made, not only to strengthen their businesses,
but also to share them voluntarily with the poor in
their community, and to spread a spirit of solidarity.
They are asked to divide any future profits three
ways. One part would be kept for the current costs as
well as the future development of the business and,
from what remains after tax one part would be given to
the poor to lift them out of the vicious cycle of
poverty so that they can become able also to
contribute more fully to the community and the final
part would be used to finance the formation of people
with this new mentality. In other words, the economy
of the communion would be an economy based on a
commitment to grow together, rather than on the
neo-liberal survival of the fittest. It means risking
money and sharing inventiveness and talents, based on
a culture of giving. It is a transparent economy
which, in the current economic climate offers a real
alternative. In 1991, many people showed their usual
negativity and pessimism, believing that there was no
alternative to the self-interested motives. Many
people thought that Economy of Communion will not only
succeed but it will never take off. However, the
Economy of Communion has gone from strength to
strength. There are now hundreds and hundreds of such
businesses in countries such as Brazil, Philippines,
Italy, Germany and elsewhere. More businesses are
being developed each year in different countries. The
Economy of Communion has succeeded where others have
not, because in this type of business, there has
developed a new model of the human person, who finds
fulfilment in relationships rather than in individual
egoism and self promotion. The Focolare movement, the
Economy of Communion and the associated businesses are
true examples of the social function of businesses
according to Catholic social teaching, where love,
justice, solidarity, subsidiarity and the common good
are the main driving forces for the business and the
people associated with it. There is a common good in
all religions. There must be a serious attempt to
bring all the examples of the 'Economy of Communion'
in all other religions together, so that we can more
fully and effectively work for the global common
good.
In conclusion, in this paper I have argued that,
today, at the dawn of the third millennium, the
globalised world economy, despite many significant
achievements of the last few decades in areas such as
science, technology, medicine, transportation,
communication etc., is facing catastrophic
socio-economic, political, cultural and environment
crises. I also argued that neo-liberalism has been the
vehicle in which we have travelled together to the
wasteland in which we live today. I also noted that this
philosophy of individualism, selfishness and greed, has
little respect for, or understanding of, the true human
values of community, solidarity, morality, justice and
the common good. It was also argued that neo-liberalism,
despite a false and a dishonest picture that it projects,
has deprived us of knowing God and of appreciating the
important role that religions can play in our everyday
economic, political, business, cultural and social lives.
How could this have been otherwise, when this philosophy
has so 'successfully' promoted its own religion of market
and its own God, Mammon.
I also noted that, we should seriously attempt to
bring economics and theology together, so that once
again, we can restore the balance between the material
and spiritual elements in our lives in order to find true
happiness. It is important at this point to note that, my
arguments should be seen as inclusive rather than
exclusive. I strongly believe that it is only by
empowering others to share with me, that I will empower
myself to share with them, and by empowering others to
teach me, that I will empower myself to teach them. In
all, there is in my view, a 'common good' in all of us
and in all religions. Many religious leaders have spoken
eloquently on this matter, including Pope John Paul II,
amongst others. Recent international inter-faith
gatherings at Assisi, are examples of religions working
together to promote a global peace and security.
At the end of 1999 at the Parliament of the Worlds
Religions, in Cape Town, South Africa, Dr. Karan Singh,
Chairman, Temple of Understanding touched upon these
issues. Because of its significance to this paper, I
should like to quote part of his speech here. He notes
that: "Impelled by science and technology, all aspect of
life on our planet are, for better or worse, undergoing a
process of globalisation - whether it is politics or
economics, commerce or industry, environment or
communications, language or music, or any other. The
great religions of the world also have burst geographical
boundaries and have assumed global dimensions. While we
are thus being irresistibly propelled towards a global
society, the consciousness needed to sustain such a
society is still imperfectly developed. It is this
dangerous time lag which is at the root of much of the
tumult and turmoil that we see around us today, and if
the truly religious impulse is creatively projected it
can go a long way in forging a new consciousness that
would unite rather than divide the peoples of the
world.
Religion has always been a major factor in the growth
of human civilisation. Whether it is art or architecture,
music or literature, philosophy or law, moral codes or
spiritual texts, many of the glorious achievements of the
human race can be traced back to the tremendous impetus
of the world's great religions. But we have to admit that
there have also been terribly negative aspects - mass
killings, pogroms, inquisitions, torture, persecution,
vandalism and bigotry have all, at some place or time,
been perpetrated in the name of religion. And the crowing
irony is that these have been done in the name of a
divinity which every religion looks upon as being
beneficent, merciful and compassionate!
This being the case, the question before us is whether
we are going to revert to the medieval pattern of
religious wars and internecine conflict, or move onwards
to a new dimension of Interfaith dialogue , harmony and
understanding.
The task of Interfaith dialogue has become all the
more urgent because around the world a number of
fundamentalist and fanatical religious groups have
emerged with the avowed intention of using violence to
subvert constitutionally established regimes and
terrorise whole populations. This rise of fundamentalism,
while it obviously threatens civil society, in a deeper
sense is an even greater threat to the religions
themselves, because if they become associated in the
public mind with violence and terrorism, it will be a
major hurdle towards building a sane and harmonious
global society in the century that is beginning.
The universal values inherent in all the great
religious systems of the world need to be clearly
articulated in terms of contemporary consciousness and
the compulsions of the global society. For this, it is
necessary to highlight the golden thread of mysticism and
gnosis that runs through all the great religions of the
world. Whether it is the glowing vision of the great
Upanishadic seers or the Jam Tirthankars, the luminous
sayings of the Buddha or the passionate outpourings of
the Muslim Sufis, the noble utterances of the great
Rabbis, or of the Sikh Gurus, the inspired utterances of
the Christian saints or the insights of the Chinese
sages, these and other traditions of ecstatic union with
the Divine represent an important dimension of religion.
It is, in fact, this spiritual dimension that ultimately
links all human beings into one, great extended family -
Vasudaiva Kutumbakam - as the Vedas have it. Fanning the
glowing spark of potential divinity within each person
irrespective of race or religion, sex or nationality,
into the blazing fire of spiritual realisation is,
indeed, the true role of the great religions of
humankind.
It is only with such an inclusivist approach that
religions will fulfil their true dual purpose to lead us
inwardly towards the spiritual light and outwardly
towards peace, harmony and global consciousness. Let us
all who are present here, men and women of religion,
pledge to work for furthering the universal principles of
love, harmony and mutual understanding, and in opposing
all types of fundamentalism and fanaticism. Then only
will we fulfil our true Dharma in this exciting and
extraordinary age in which we are privileged to be
living, as we hurtle headlong into the future astride the
irreversible arrow of time."
Moreover, it is worth remembering the wise words of
the Persian poet, Sa'di, who centuries ago said:
The children of
Adam
are limbs of one another;
in terms of creation
they're of the self-same Essence.
This poem is inscribed at the entrance of the
Secretariat of the United Nations in New York.
Dr. Kamran Mofid, received his PhD in Economics
from the University of Birmingham in 1986. In 2001 he
received a Certificate in Higher Education in Pastoral
Studies at Plater College, Oxford. He has been teaching
Economics and Business Studies at university level from
1980. He is author of a number of books including
Globalisation for the Common Good,
(Shepheard-Walwyn, London, March, 2002), and is convenor
of the Annual International conference on An
Inter-faith Perspective on Globalisation, Plater
College, (July 27-Aug.3, 2002; St. Petersburg, Russia
2003 [in association with Dr. Tatiana
Roskoshnaya]; and Barcelona 2004 [in association
with Dr. Josef Boehle]). He is currently seeking to
establish an international Centre for the Study of
Economics, Politics, Business and Faiths. For further
information please visit the website http://commongood.info
* The main source for this article is the author's
book, 'Globalisation for the Common Good'.
This paper is a revised version of an original
paper prepared for a series of lectures in Europe, North
America and Japan, September - December 2002.
A shortened version of this article will appear in
the World Faiths Encounter, April, 2003.
©
TFF & the author 2002
Tell a friend about this article
Send to:
From:
Message and your name
|