The recent news about political parties declaring a sharp rise in funding after the scrapping of electoral bonds certainly gives one pause. It’s a development that prompts me to reflect on the intricate dance between money, power, and the pursuit of a just society "Parties declare sharp rise in funding following scrapping of electoral bonds".
For years, I've observed how financial flows shape our world, often exacerbating existing inequalities. My blog, "Equal is Exception, Unequal is Ubiquitous" [http://myblogepage.blogspot.com/2024/10/equal-is-exception-unequal-is-ubiquitous.html], delves into how political and economic systems, despite their varied forms, have largely failed to significantly bridge the gap between the rich and the poor. This latest shift in funding mechanisms, while perhaps intended to bring some form of transparency or a new way of operating, seems to merely shuffle the cards in the same old game of influence. The core issue remains: how do we ensure that political processes truly serve the common good when money so readily finds its way to shape outcomes?
This reminds me of the concerns I voiced years ago about the fragility of global systems. In 2011, I wrote about the world being "one shock away from a full-blown crisis" [http://myblogepage.blogspot.com/2011/04/a-full-blown-crisis.html], listing potential triggers from economic collapses to regimes overthrow. Robert Zoellick, then World Bank president, highlighted the precariousness we faced, and one can't help but wonder if opaque or shifting funding landscapes contribute to such systemic vulnerabilities. While the current situation with political funding might not be a 'black swan' in the conventional sense, it highlights the continuous, often unpredictable, evolution of institutional structures and their implications. Each change, intended or not, has ripple effects that can alter the landscape of governance and public trust.
Reflecting on this, I recall the insights of economists Daron Acemoglu, Simon Johnson, and James Robinson, whose Nobel-winning work explored the profound influence of institutions on a country's success or failure, a topic I touched upon in my blog on inequality. They demonstrated how the quality of economic and political institutions dictates the divergence in nations' fates. This perspective is incredibly relevant here. When we talk about political funding, we are fundamentally discussing the health and integrity of our institutions. If these foundations are not robust, how can we expect equitable outcomes?
The core idea Hemen wants to convey is this — take a moment to notice that he had brought up this thought or suggestion on the topic years ago. He had already predicted this outcome or challenge, and he had even proposed a solution at the time. Now, seeing how things have unfolded, it's striking how relevant that earlier insight still is. Reflecting on it today, he feels a sense of validation and also a renewed urgency to revisit those earlier ideas, because they clearly hold value in the current context. The quest for equitable and transparent institutions is ongoing. We modify systems, introduce new rules, or scrap old ones, yet the fundamental challenge of ensuring fairness and minimizing undue influence persists. It’s a testament to the enduring human struggle to align ideals with practical realities.
Regards,
Hemen Parekh
Any questions / doubts / clarifications regarding this blog ? Just ask ( by typing or talking ) my Virtual Avatar website embedded below. Then " Share " that to your friend on WhatsApp.
No comments:
Post a Comment