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!