To all the Participants of fhe Liberal Roundtable held in Hyderabad on 6-7 September, 2007
From: Sauvik Chakraverti
1. Since we hold that all solutions lie in the market, and no solutions lie in this State, our political strategy must be one of chipping away at government restrictions and controls: the first of which must be the customs department. Therefore, our first direct political intervention must be aimed at free trade.
2. My idea is simplicity itself: First, we engage in pamphleteering, and circulate Frederic Bastiat's "Candlemakers' Petition" in each and every coastal town on our western seaboard – from Kutch and Porbandar down to Cochin. With the engagement of some local agent provocateurs, the mass of the city will immediately conceive free trade as in their own self-interest – as also their "ancient tradition". Furthermore, they will all see the customs department as an obstruction that should be removed. This widespread "opinion" will be our greatest strength, apart from the clarity of our views. Two other essays of Batsiat against "reciprocity" in trade should be circulated as well. There is also my "Walled-in Ideas: We No Longer Need Economists", about The Wall around the port of Mangalore. Two of my recent "Antidote" columns also endorse free trade with simplicity and clarity. All these should be translated into the local languages and put into the public domain in each and every one of these coastal port cities and towns.
3. Next, we "facilitate" trade between any one of these port cities and Dubai. Merchants in the Indian city will pay for merchandise in Dubai which will be loaded on to a ship called "RAINBOW WARRIOR HAJI MASTAN " that will then set sail for that city. In the meantime, the climate of "opinion" in that city will be one of joy and optimism – that "my ship is coming in". When the ship arrives, I do believe the customs department will get out of the way, as the entire mass of that city approaches the port shouting "Rukawat Hatao". This "event" will be reported in the media.
4. The rest will be the stuff of history: a thousand ships will set sail for all these liberated ports of India; they will be followed by thousands of cargo planes headed for the inland cities and towns. These "merchant ships" will dominate public discourse and the "pirate ship" of the State will steal away from the scene. As was said of one of the last Mughal Emperors: "Poor old Shah Alam / He rules from Delhi to Palam," Instead of "Dilli Chalo" the cry will be "Dilli Chhoro" as the Great Konkan Gold Rush makes people respond to economic incentives and shift bag-and-baggage to the hundreds of booming coastal towns that will mushroom overnight.
5. There is another advantage: We need not raise any funds. The merchants will themselves pay for the cargo, freight etc.
6. Lastly, this "idea" came to me during the meet. I had not conceived of such an idea before. So thank you all for stimulating my mind so beautifully.
7. Next on the "Hit List": the excise department.
8. Then, the RTO… and so on and so forth.
9. "Liberty or Death", said Patrick Henry. That should be our battle-cry.
Friday, September 14, 2007
Thursday, September 13, 2007
THE MORE THE MERRIER
SAUVIK CHAKRAVERTI
I am pasting below an extract from my new book:
NATURAL ORDER - ESSAYS EXPLORING CIVIL GOVERNMENT & THE RULE OF LAW
This extract is from the first chapter that describes the natural order, from a section called 'the more the merrier': that is, a view fundamentally opposed to those neo-Malthusians who declare that humanity faces a 'population problem':
"It needs to be emphasized that the secret of success in the competitive environment of the natural order is to go on adding more and more 'friendly strangers' to the overall order. This can be understood at many levels.
For example: the apple growers of Kulu have very little to gain if they trade their apples among themselves. There are far greater gains to be had if these apples could be sold in far-away cities like Bombay or Calcutta , where no apples grow, and where they are highly prized. If fruiterers in these cities could be included in the Kulu order, gains would significantly increase.
Another example: Suppose we are all competing fruit-sellers in a city market. Do we gain if only our regular local customers drop by? Or do we gain if exceeding numbers of 'friendly strangers' drop by for our wares, people from Afghanistan, Uzbekistan, Azerbaijan, Turkmenistan, Kazhakistan and all the other stans, including Pakistan (but friendly strangers only)? If we look deep, in the market, we sellers actually hate each other – we compete relentlessly. Our overall 'community' would be enriched (and our purses too!) only if we add more and more outsiders to it. Xenophobia is devoid of economic logic. It is actually uncivilized.
At another level, the more the number of people in a city, the bigger the market, and the greater the scope for highly specialized niches in the social 'division of labour'. This means more products and services being added to the general pool from which all can draw: that is, greater wealth.
Further, with more and more migrants, local property prices increase, and the city flourishes. The US housing bubble would never explode if the US declared free immigration. Americans would also have domestic help. Thus, a future of competing cities – competing, that is, for citizens – makes complete economic sense. It is this competition that will keep local city governments on their toes, not 'democracy'.
What this means for India is that we have huge gains to make from tourism (the biggest industry in the world) – if we remain friendly with all 'friendly strangers'. Further, we must also welcome foreigners to our real estate markets, encouraging them to settle down within our overall order. Our institutions must protect all individuals, irrespective of faith or nationality. Our country will only gain – in profits as well as real, usable knowledge – if we as a people reject narrow nationalism. Globalization is the way to go." (End of quote)
It follows that if 'friendly strangers' are good for India, then our own children must be made even more welcome, for they are the ones we love, and whom we value more than all material wealth, and who will be our support in old age, better than any pension scheme governments can think up.
Lastly, the california gold rush occurred because of an economic incentive.
Uniulateral free trade will also work like an economic incentive, prompting many people to shift to the coast and build more and more new cities and towns there.
Finally, we Indians will possess 'HABITAT' in what is actually a very beautiful country.
BOOM SHANKAR!
I am pasting below an extract from my new book:
NATURAL ORDER - ESSAYS EXPLORING CIVIL GOVERNMENT & THE RULE OF LAW
This extract is from the first chapter that describes the natural order, from a section called 'the more the merrier': that is, a view fundamentally opposed to those neo-Malthusians who declare that humanity faces a 'population problem':
"It needs to be emphasized that the secret of success in the competitive environment of the natural order is to go on adding more and more 'friendly strangers' to the overall order. This can be understood at many levels.
For example: the apple growers of Kulu have very little to gain if they trade their apples among themselves. There are far greater gains to be had if these apples could be sold in far-away cities like Bombay or Calcutta , where no apples grow, and where they are highly prized. If fruiterers in these cities could be included in the Kulu order, gains would significantly increase.
Another example: Suppose we are all competing fruit-sellers in a city market. Do we gain if only our regular local customers drop by? Or do we gain if exceeding numbers of 'friendly strangers' drop by for our wares, people from Afghanistan, Uzbekistan, Azerbaijan, Turkmenistan, Kazhakistan and all the other stans, including Pakistan (but friendly strangers only)? If we look deep, in the market, we sellers actually hate each other – we compete relentlessly. Our overall 'community' would be enriched (and our purses too!) only if we add more and more outsiders to it. Xenophobia is devoid of economic logic. It is actually uncivilized.
At another level, the more the number of people in a city, the bigger the market, and the greater the scope for highly specialized niches in the social 'division of labour'. This means more products and services being added to the general pool from which all can draw: that is, greater wealth.
Further, with more and more migrants, local property prices increase, and the city flourishes. The US housing bubble would never explode if the US declared free immigration. Americans would also have domestic help. Thus, a future of competing cities – competing, that is, for citizens – makes complete economic sense. It is this competition that will keep local city governments on their toes, not 'democracy'.
What this means for India is that we have huge gains to make from tourism (the biggest industry in the world) – if we remain friendly with all 'friendly strangers'. Further, we must also welcome foreigners to our real estate markets, encouraging them to settle down within our overall order. Our institutions must protect all individuals, irrespective of faith or nationality. Our country will only gain – in profits as well as real, usable knowledge – if we as a people reject narrow nationalism. Globalization is the way to go." (End of quote)
It follows that if 'friendly strangers' are good for India, then our own children must be made even more welcome, for they are the ones we love, and whom we value more than all material wealth, and who will be our support in old age, better than any pension scheme governments can think up.
Lastly, the california gold rush occurred because of an economic incentive.
Uniulateral free trade will also work like an economic incentive, prompting many people to shift to the coast and build more and more new cities and towns there.
Finally, we Indians will possess 'HABITAT' in what is actually a very beautiful country.
BOOM SHANKAR!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)