------------------------------------------------------------------------
* G * O * A * N * E * T *** C * L * A * S * S * I * F * I * E * D * S *
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sangath, www.sangath.com, is looking to build a centre for services, training 
and research and seeks to buy approx 1500 to 2000 sq mtrs land betweeen Mapusa 
and Bambolim and surrounding rural areas. Please contact: [email protected] 
or [email protected] or ph+91-9881499458
http://lists.goanet.org/pipermail/goanet-goanet.org/2009-July/180028.html

------------------------------------------------------------------------
SWAMINOMICS' MORAL BLUNDER ON PAPONOMICS
Chhotebhai Noronha
August 2009


When I first read Swaminathan S Anklesaria Aiyar's piece "The Pope's moral 
blunders 
on outsourcing" (STOI 2/8/09) I was furious with the Pope for blundering into 
an 
area that is not his core competence - economics. I was inclined to believe 
Aiyar's 
opening line that religion and business rarely mix well.

I belong to a Christian family that has been doing business for 150 years, 
hence am 
acutely conscious of how difficult it is to do business, while upholding 
religious 
or moral principles. On the other hand, being in the literary field, I also 
believe 
that it is important to go to the actual sources of information, to arrive at 
the 
truth. Accordingly I went to the Vatican website to see for myself the papal 
encyclical that Aiyar has quoted.

It was promulgated by the present Pope on 29/6/09, entitled "Caritas in 
Veritate". 
That is the Latin title, which in English would read, "Love in Truth". The 
title is 
misleading. It is infact a socio-economic treatise from a moral or spiritual 
perspective, in response to the current world economic crisis.

It was now my turn to be furious with Aiyar, for a blatant distortion of truth. 
I 
was shocked at how Aiyar has grossly misinterpreted the encyclical, and arrived 
at 
his own distorted conclusions. It seems to be a deliberate attempt at defaming 
and 
maligning the Pope, and thereby the billions of Catholics worldwide.

To begin with, Aiyar bases his arguments and conclusions on just one line from 
a 48 
page encyclical. Even a dispassionate reading of that one line alone proves 
quite 
the contrary to what Aiyar has tried to deduce. Infact, Aiyar advances all his 
own 
opinions, and then quotes the Pope towards the end of his article. By then he 
has 
already prejudiced the reader into seeing the Pope's statement in the light of 
his 
(Aiyar's) own terribly subjective observations. Aiyar is entitled to his 
opinions, 
but he has no business to palm them off as the Pope's teachings. Let us examine 
some 
of them.

He alleges that the Pope criticises western countries for outsourcing business 
to 
developing countries. He opines that this has an ethnic slant that echoes the 
concerns of the western white labour aristocracy. He wonders why westerners 
don't 
protest outsourcing to other white countries like Poland, Latvia and Bulgaria. 
Why 
is the protest aimed only at black, brown and yellow nations, queries Aiyar? 
Colourful adjectives. But not from the Pope, who has made no such observations 
or 
insinuations. Aiyar goes on to say that the Pope has "parroted the bogus claims 
of 
the white labour aristocracy". How has Aiyar arrived at such bogus conclusions?

The "offending quote" used by Aiyar from para 40 of the encyclical states; "The 
so-called outsourcing of production can weaken the company's sense of 
responsibility 
towards the stakeholders - namely the workers, the suppliers, the consumers, 
the 
natural environment and broader society - in favour of the shareholders, who 
are not 
tied to a specific geographical area and who therefore enjoy extraordinary 
mobility". 
Aiyar's entire hypothesis is based on this one quote! It is infact the 
antithesis of 
what Aiyar labours to portray. If Aiyar were to read what the Pope had said 
before 
and after this particular quote he would have understood it in its correct 
perspective. The Pope expresses genuine concern for the stakeholders (black, 
brown 
and yellow workers included) and is infact urging restraint on the shareholders 
(the 
capitalists, who in the context of outsourcing would largely be the white Anglo 
Saxon). So Aiyar has got his colour fix all wrong.

This is what the Pope says in the next line; "Business management cannot 
concern 
itself only with the interests of the proprietors, but must also assume 
responsibility for all the stakeholders - the workers, the clients, the 
suppliers." 
So the Pope is actually speaking up for the underprivileged, the colour of 
their 
skin notwithstanding.

As for the so-called white labour aristocracy, the Pope says; "National labour 
unions, which tend to limit themselves to defending the interests of their 
registered members, should turn their attention to those outside their 
membership, 
and in particular to workers in developing countries where social rights are 
often 
violated"  (Para 64). So Aiyarji, the Pope is actually advising the white 
labour 
aristocracy to expand their area of concern to all those black, brown and 
yellow 
workers, who may not be privileged aristocratic trade unionists!

Aiyar concludes his piece with another personal opinion, that it is a 
perversion of 
morality to penalise non-American workers in order to promote US jobs. I agree. 
So 
does the Pope. Aiyar ends by advising the Pope to have the courage to say so in 
his 
next encyclical. The Pope doesn't need Aiyar's advice, because he has said much 
more 
than Aiyar in support of the underprivileged and marginalized, in his present 
encyclical. Aiyar could perhaps take a leaf out of the papal encyclical for his 
next 
piece, and courageously admit that he was wrong about the Pope, just as he had 
earlier admitted that he was wrong in projecting Mayawati as India's next P.M. 
We 
are all human, and prone to error. What say Aiyarji?




* The writer is a former National President of The All India Catholic Union, 
that 
represents 17 million Indian Catholics in public life.









Reply via email to