Global Capitalism in Crisis
Globalisation and Business for the Common Good
Theology and Economics
working together
By
Kamran Mofid
Economist, Oxford, UK October 10, 2002
TFF associate
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 presents 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.
