Notes on fairness
What is fair and what is foul?
How would you respond if asked: Do you believe in “a fair go for all?” A supposedly antipodean epitome.A spontaneous reply maybe: Yes, fair dinkum, mate.It is a universal desire, perhaps.Only that as in many aspects of a human society, in practice, this notion just cannot be followed through (ie applied), faltering in all circles: Public or private sectors, for or not-for-profit ventures, low community-level or high-volume global initiatives, individual, family or community enterprises frequently suffer unfair favouritism.
Corruptions are exposed nearly every day by the media and society at large as if to fix this irredeemable human feature.Yet, it seems that we are beyond being startled and have accepted it as fait accompli.Much better to grind at something beneficial and productive for us and our immediate clans — why tilt at the windmill?
A long time ago I joined the public service with an indomitable idea that corruption and cronyism — prevailing in my birth nation, regions, and the industries that I was working in (banking, manufacturing) — did not exist in the public sector or, more broadly, in apparently transparent Western democracies.The sector’s sole reason for being is to develop and implement policies and fund initiatives to improve the nation and its people.
And these nations have independent institutions, free press, active civil societies, and most importantly, free elections — when voters are able to evaluate governments’ performance and throw them out if they underperform.Thus the government is not only keen to keep its election promises, in hopes to get re-elected, but also tries to avoid any corruption — perceived or real.
Still obscene corruption tales replete us daily.
Politicians and public officials coddle in salacious debauchery to purloin public funds.Private sector actors proactively and aggressively engage in unethical deeds with politicians, senior public officials, judges, prosecutors, industry peers, and partners to secure favourable policies (deals) at the expense of nations.Coercive thuggery of the powerful (in public or private sector) are regularly revealed.What’s more, the instances of jobbery which go unreported are unquantifiable.
The cursed commoners in less developed places, picked to the bone by colonial and post-colonial native powers, have to settle for ubiquitous unfairness, open malfeasance, bribery, naked nepotism.
But how are proles made to acquiesce in wealthy developed places? Even more so, as they can expect to be heard at impartial courts, including the Parliament.And it is not that they like to be ruled by the powerful nor that they lack courage to stand up to power and history of revolts and revolutions.
It may be that these societies also face consistent corrosion of very systems developed to prevent transgression.
To be clear, I am not an idealist.I understand that dreams of fool-proof, moralistic, sinfree, societies are not only impractical, even childish, but such societies would be colourless, dull, and undesirable.The saying goes: One cannot make ornaments with pure gold; one needs to mix impure elements to get proper (usable) jewellery.
The pertinent question is, then, why the institutions and structures, developed with lessons of perpetual putrefaction that decay societies, are unable to stop the persistent rot.
I suspect susceptibility to vice is an inherently human nature.Though there are teachings — from traditional religious rituals to agnostic morals — to which children, youth, and even young adults are being exposed to, and that school curriculums universally include civics and law, inevitably there are those who choose to ignore the lessons.
Most nations have anti-bribery laws and watchdogs.
Yet, firms widely collude with authorities to win lucrative deals in competitive markets across the world.They suppress truth getting out or conceal wrongdoing intentionally (see a few recent snippets in the footnote below).Driven by the motto “no risk no gain,” firms lobby to gain unfair advantage, in spite of their righteous mission statements and promotional activities promising fairness, accept high risks of getting caught and potential damage to their reputation.
Larger kickbacks beget larger returns, inducing firms to portion significant lobbying budgets.Many firms enjoy market domination — there are few alternatives to Boeing and Airbus, for example.In other words, the prominent and powerful work around checks and balances in place to protect national interests.They bribe to twist those safeguards in their favour.
Notwithstanding reasons and myriad theories for their failures, with most socialist experiments of the past century — spread in far flung places involving many nations and ethnic groups — failed, we have accepted capitalism as the virtuous mechanism to administer nation states.If not completely, almost all societies now offer policies and frameworks which would encourage capitalistic ventures.
Indeed, they are necessary.Without incentives, firms would have no reason to innovate.Can we imagine today’s comfortable living aided by advanced technology without Silicon Valley’s venture capitalists? As in the past (eg the East India Company, tea, sugar, rubber, diamond, or other barons), the desire and endeavours to be wealthy can lift living standards, create jobs and help a vast proportion of disadvantaged to improve or at least likelihood of improving lives.
In plain terms, to continue to improve the lives of the proletariat, steady and continuous economic growth is perhaps necessary.But then as resources are scarce, in this capitalist framework without “special benefits” firms, individuals, businesses would not undertake projects.
Be it a special subsidy or a tax waiver, usually the government (read: Tax-payers or general population) needs to dangle a carrot to instigate movements from firms in most industries.
Also it is the tax-payers who will have to bear any losses from failed ventures of firms, regardless of who was responsible.Think of numerous bailouts offered in recent times.
What about the government and politicians? They are in it for themselves too, save a few with genuine altruistic urge who in most cases are probably at higher rungs of self actualization.Politicians need to develop messages, sugarcoat them, to make “special benefits” palatable to the masses.Usually they offer it as development to the population.Competing with fellow politicians, even within their own parties, fairly or unfairly, they also need to get investment for their electorates to maintain their electability.
After all, in many places your location can determine whether you live or die in a health emergency.
That is the sport.
Indeed, it is a vile and dirty one, seldom suitable for anyone with the faintest of decency, let alone any regard for fairness.However, it is important to note that to govern — which is usually highly complex — in competitive policy settings (ie allocating resources to protect national interests) amid intense lobbying from firms and agitations from activists, politicians often need to settle for less than ideal solutions.
Then there is the incompetence and laxity of regulators.Consider the handling of Covid and associated vaccination sagas across developed nations.Loose regulations around subprime lending is believed to be a major cause of the shocking global financial crisis (GFC) of 2008, when tax-payers bailed out risk taking banks and investors.The Federal Food and Drug Administration, in the US is found to have contributed to the recent opioid crisis.
Perhaps more striking, but also overwhelmingly tolerated, is the rot at religious and not-for-profit social wellbeing organizations.No religious denominations and their governing bodies are free of corruption (with some proven after decades of committing the sins) and abuse of power that people endow them in good faith.
Mishandling of donations, often from the poor, desperate to get divine intervention for a change in their misery, pocketing proceeds by revered religious figures is a perennial phenomenon.Youth and hapless orphans are not spared.
In fact, it would appear, we are all opportunistic.
Our level of proclivities vary — for example, some of us may merely not tell the whole truth about our incomes to tax authorities, some of us may only pinch milk from communal fridges, pocket money found lying or fudge residential addresses to get our children into desirable schools.Akin to white lies, these approaches are widely accepted by society.And some brazenly steal — from siblings, relatives, community, or the country — money, wealth, capital, or property.
Thankfully, the big picture is not all bleak.The majority of people are honest and abide by the rules.
They take leaders on face value.Solemnly believing scriptures or constitutions, they follow the rules (set for them).There is another reason for apparent acquiescence to unfairness.Save the privileged, the activists, and the hobby writers such as myself, no one has the time and energy to think beyond their daily struggle to make ends meet, especially in developing regions.Albeit, and ironically, lack of fairness and due process are holding progress in those places, and making developed places unequal, erodes social cohesion and living standards.
Where to from here then? All of the above likely reasons behind unfairness have partial merits.How best to navigate such fairly common situations?
Survival first, of course.Like generations before us, we will need to continue to keep up the pressure on rogue actors in our societies.We would need to channel our despair to seek more transparency.
The youth of today have forced leaders and firms to take global warming and damage they are causing to the environment seriously.Besides, most in society have anyway accepted that there will be slippage despite established ethical and accountability frameworks.As long as the wrong doers are caught and punished, however few and far between that may be, we will be fine.
In a world increasingly led by power hungry hegemons, it may be useful to have such wholesome consent.
Footnote
A simple search on words “corporate corruption” would return ample juicy, even thrilling, reading.Readers may be inclined to view these as unrelated (isolated) cases of bad examples caused by greedy individuals.
That would be a mistake.Negligence, criminality, disregard for human lives, and intention to maximize profit above anything else has become the norm.Not an exception.Furthermore, firms, governments, or authorities are going to extraordinary lengths to obfuscate their misdeeds.The tenacious work of courageous journalists, activists, and regulators have uncovered a few events, barely making ripples in the ocean of deceit.
Much more chicanery likely goes under the surface, undisturbed and unnoticed.
Moreover while the society (ie social media and press) and the parliaments were incensed, penalties have been limited.A few samples below:
Theranos (Elizabeth Holmes) — serving a jail term for claiming to have a hi-tech product that could diagnose all sorts of ailments with a mere drop of blood.
Luminaries seemed to have foxed include Kissinger, Murdoch etc.There are a number of books and documentaries on this
FTX Trading Ltd (Sam Bankman-Fried) — facing prosecution on charges of defrauding investors via its crypto currency exchange.Sensational turn of fame: From a celebrity altruistic billionaire to a fraudster
Wirecard — accounting skullduggery by this German payments processor.The Financial Times journalist Dan McCrum who helped uncover not only had to face obstructions from the firm but apparently the weight of the whole German corporate establishment which deemed this as an attack on their nation
Boeing — claims of selling 737 MAX planes with unsafe softwares causing fatal crashes; death tolls in excess of 300 people
Volkswagen — cheated on emission tests; partly owned by the German state.
PwC — misused confidential Australian government information to help big multinational companies avoid paying more tax
News Corp Ltd (News of the World) — engaged in phone hacking, bribery in pursuit of stories
Facebook — claims and lawsuits for serious malpractice with user data
Apple, Amazon, Google, Microsoft — claims and lawsuits for predatory approaches, snuff out smaller firms, hindering competition, innovation, and consumer benefits
It would be banal to try to include politicians’ trickery.
Irfan Chowdhury is an opinion columnist..
