. . . e.g., The Parable of the talents
The global economic crisis has resuscitated the old debate: Capitalism is bad. And greed is the flashpoint.But is greed really about our humanness, e.g., Adam and Eve? What about the tsars? Were they capitalists or virtual monopolists? Those visiting the Palace of Catherine the Great or Peter the Great or the State Diamond Fund museum in the Kremlin or the State Hermitage Museum would sense the reality of: our humanness, power and greed? But the tsars lasted less than 200 years, shorter than successful global businesses, i.e., ideas and knowledge – not power – make for sustainability. (The same values espoused by Andrew Grove, the man behind Intel, whose family had to escape from the Nazis. And at New York’s City College he learned to reject hierarchy.)
The Soviets then saw that socialism did not work either: investment and production are not immune from the law of nature – resources must be replenished! Ignoring resource-replenishment via giveaway pricing guarantees failure – their inability to ration bread to their satellites; despite the wheat farms in Ukraine being as extensive and breathtaking as those in Washington State. Is it why the Vatican and the Archbishop of New York are savvy financial managers? (Much closer to home, our failure in reforestation – replenishing resources – has guaranteed devastating floods; and we are doing hoot?)
The good news is the world has learned from the Great Depression and has collectively intervened to rebalance the outcome or excesses of human greed. And once again the Asian tigers, given strong economic fundamentals to begin with, have led the world with a robust rebound. They were not debt-ridden and thus were able to aggressively pump-prime and create domestic demand. Australia and Norway are resilient as well.
In the Philippines, hopefully we don’t fall into the trap of justifying our failings – by invoking ideologies and treatises more apt for academic discourse. Even Bernanke has realized that what seemed sound within the confines of Ivy walls (e.g., central banks could override and extend boom periods via aggressive monetary intervention) would not necessarily match the realities of the global economic crisis – i.e., unfortunately, it could engender greed and create a humongous bubble.
Ex-communist countries likewise have learned their lesson and have become outward-looking and unsurprisingly, are now more competitive than we are. They: (a) have not become economic liberals, (b) don’t claim any form of ideology and (c) are merely seeking a better life. And in the process have realized that they need to be competitive. That competitiveness is a state-of-mind and that true competitiveness does not stop at the nation’s doorstep. It must be carried beyond to achieve its real potential: They have experienced: (a) the reality of economies of scale and (b) the interdependence of nations, e.g., they need oil and gas which they don’t produce – two fundamental realities that we don’t seem to delve on, i.e., we have yet to experience global competition? To these ex-communist countries globalization is about pragmatism and competitiveness or “blocking and tackling” – and not about sophistication or intellectualization.
Do we instinctively fear competition because we are small? Is it because being sheltered is safer? Is it because we have not tested our ideas beyond our shores? Or is it because we want to preserve the status quo – unwittingly perpetuating a nation of haves and have-nots?
Fortunately, companies like Jollibee and Splash have not taken an inward-looking bias. They should be our 21st century model; their mindset is that of a competitor – not a monopolist, from a bygone age.
No comments:
Post a Comment