Democracy vs welfare<\/p>\n
\"Economic development is a pre-condition for democracy and
\npolitical development. The main obstacle to the development of
\ndemocracy in Indonesia is the huge proportion of economically
\nweak people and the millions living below the poverty line,\" said
\nNazaruddin Sjamsuddin at the University of Indonesia (The Jakarta
\nPost, March 4, 1996). To this Ignas Kleden commented: \"Can we
\nassume that the huge proportion of economically weak people and
\nthe millions still living below the poverty line will surely have
\ntheir living standards improved if we keep pushing for economic
\ngrowth? This is very debatable.\" (The Jakarta Post, March 14 and
\n15, 1996).<\/p>\n
Although it is hard to digest, it is true that the millions of
\npoor could be an obstacle to the development of democracy in
\nIndonesia. The economically anxious poor can be easily attracted
\nand misled by people of doubtful integrity and principle.<\/p>\n
When I take a look at the slavery and its abolition in the
\nU.S., it appears as if the abolition of slavery was the result of
\ncapitalism winning over feudalism. Of course, missionaries did
\ntheir job. Industrial growth needed the manpower from the
\nagriculture sector and the abolition of slavery was the only
\nanswer. Capitalism and industrialization -- or economic
\ndevelopment -- never had the welfare of people as its main
\nobjective.<\/p>\n
Investors are not missionaries. They invest where the returns
\nare the best. Regardless of the amount of investment, the lives
\nof the poor will not be substantially improved because they lack
\nthe skills necessary to take advantage of industrialization. If
\nthe rich become richer the poor will not become less poor.<\/p>\n
Ignas Kleden stated: \"We can take India as another example,
\nwhere democracy works fairly well, though economic development is
\nstill left behind.\" He further says, \"Democratic participation is
\nthe way which enables and, if possible, accelerates the advent of
\nprosperity.\"<\/p>\n
In India, economic development took a back seat to the
\nsocialist economy. Business development, R&D, productivity
\nimprovements were stopped by legislation like the Monopolies and
\nRestrictive Trade Practices Act, Industries Development and
\nRegulation Act, Capital Issues Control Act, etc. If my memory
\nserves me right, the country that used to export automobiles to
\nKorea in 1960s had the same models of automobiles until very
\nrecently. Complicated tax and labor legislations created talented
\nnon-productive accounting and legal professionals, black money,
\ncapital flight and a brain drain. If this is the case in a poor,
\ndeveloping country, what is happening in a developed country like
\nthe U.S.? It is troubled by the question: Why has the purchasing
\npower of blue-collar workers stagnated in the past 15 years when
\npay increases are stratospheric for top brass? In Japan, with one
\nof the highest per capita incomes, the number of homeless is
\nincreasing. To me, this shows that democratic development may not
\nnecessarily result in improved welfare.<\/p>\n
Another point discussed by Ignas Kleden is minimum wages. Most
\neveryone agrees that workers are human beings, and deserve to be
\ntreated as such. Nevertheless, determining what minimum wage is
\nneeded for workers to lead a good life is subjective.<\/p>\n
Paradoxically, democracy, although not taking care of the
\nwelfare of the people, allows freedom of expression. When a
\nsizable section of the population can be easily tempted to seek
\nimmediate economic benefit does the fundamental right to freedom
\nof expression do the nation any good?<\/p>\n
After reading the views of the two gentlemen, I started
\ndoubting if democracy is the best answer to help society. Can
\nsomeone enlighten me?<\/p>\n
D. PRABHAKAR<\/p>\n
Jakarta<\/p>", "url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/democracy-vs-welfare-1447893297", "image": "" }, "sponsor": "Okusi Associates", "sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com" }