Faith
and Fiscal Transparency
We
have been examining the roots in spirituality of two principles of good
governance on the local level, subsidiarity and fiscal transparency. However,
as our technology becomes more sophisticated the twin principles are showing up
there as well. As the Wikipedia article on subsidiarity points out, computer
programming increasingly makes use of a kind of subsidiarity.
"The
concept is applicable in the fields of government, political science,
cybernetics, management, military (Mission Command) and, metaphorically, in the
distribution of software module responsibilities in object-oriented programming
(according to the Information expert design guideline)."
(<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subsidiarity>)
Object-oriented
programming languages use certain conventions and standards that keep high
level instructions from getting lost in the jungle of details in the
machine-level architectures that carry them out.
The
Importance of Being Transparent
The
other twin principle is fiscal transparency, that is, having "glass
pockets," which assures that everybody, starting with local taxpayers,
knows exactly how their money is being spent. Studies have shown that humans
are naturally more averse to loss than they hope for future gain. Therefore, if
everybody knows exactly how local representatives are spending their money,
there will be fewer junkets, boondoggles and other gross waste of funds that
tend to arise in centralized structures.
This
principle has always been an essential part of science, and with the rise of
the internet it is spreading into technology. When the Internet had hardly
begun the open systems movement, led by the Open Frontiers Foundation, devised
rules for reconciling legitimate property rights with open, communitarian
sharing. Large numbers of volunteer experts now write "open systems"
software, the best known of which is the Linux operating system. The idea of
publishing non-proprietary formulas for products has spread from there to
unexpected products like chocolate bars, beers, soft drinks and gourmet coffee.
These
idealistic volunteers believe that holding knowledge and discoveries back from
the world stifles the freedom that is essential to prosperity, free markets and
creative discovery in science. They are suspicious of the trade secrets, the
non-disclosure agreements and centrist leanings of state capitalism and
oversize corporations.
Openness, by contrast, is part of the same sense of
community and shared interest that led in pioneer days to barn raisings and
quilting bees. The difference now is that helpers need not gather at the same
place and time in order to work together to build something. The Internet
permits volunteers work efficiently together at any time of day, from anywhere
on the planet.
Comenius
and "Forbid them not"
John
Amos Comenius, who lived a century before Adam Smith, traced the lesson of
freedom and openness back to an incident in the life of Jesus. His disciples
came to him and protested that others were using his name to perform miracles.
"Forbid them not," was his reply. (Mark 9:38) When there are
competitors there is no need to oppose, since "ye shall know them by their
fruits." Those who are not against us are for us. Such tolerance, openness
and tentative reservation of judgment has since become a core value of both
science and, in economics, the free enterprise system. Comenius thought that
the "forbid them not" principle means that we should break up all
monopolies, oligopolies and closed systems, be they in religion, the labour
market or wherever else.
"The
early Christians condemned Monotheletes for heresy; today no-one should play
the part of a Monopolist. Everything should be common property except insofar
as is necessary to preserve order and avoid confusion between parties. The same
rule should be observed in the church and in schools. In Mark IX, 38, the
disciples say 'We saw one casting out devils in thy name, and he followeth not
us, and we forbade him.' This should be a living example for modern disciples
... who do not allow the teaching and practice of their doctrines except by
their own members and their own colleagues, regarding them as workmen of the
same tribe. But although this seems a wise order of things (in politics,
religion, and also education), yet it has turned into tyranny, and therefore
the tribes in Belgium wisely rejected it. It should also be abolished in the
church and all over the world. Every kind of work within reason should be open
to all, and the state should profit, no matter who undertakes it. The works
should testify whether anything is reasonably and profitably undertaken."
(Ch. 24, pp. 105-106)
Nor
is this emphasis on openness exclusive to Christianity among the world's
religions. The Qur'an, for instance, teaches that enlightenment stands above
left and right, East or West, right brain or left brain. God's light shines out
on its own; it benefits all, without ownership by human beings.
"Allah
is the light of the heavens and the earth; a likeness of His light is as a
niche in which is a lamp, the lamp is in a glass, (and) the glass is as it were
a brightly shining star, lit from a blessed olive-tree, neither eastern nor
western, the oil whereof almost gives light though fire touch it not -- light upon light -- Allah guides to His light whom He pleases,
and Allah sets forth parables for men, and Allah is Cognizant of all
things." (Q24:35, Shakir)
Transparent
Faith
It
is important to keep in mind the religious foundations of these twin
principles, for no doubt they demand a great deal more faith on everybody's
part, especially those in central, "senior" institutions.
Subsidiarity means that income sources -- taxes for government and profits for
companies -- are indirect; funds pass through several middlemen before coming
into their hands. Transparency prevents the confidential schemes and private
arrangements that are commonplace in the present system. Since everybody knows
how funds are spent, now and in the future, decision making, especially at
first, will tend to be slow, complex, closely negotiated process.
Subsidiarity
gives local governments latitude to spend tax revenue as they please before
passing it on to higher governments. Won't this reward irresponsibility? If
junior governments collect income taxes and only when local needs are covered
pass on the remainder, what is to prevent them from withholding payment
completely? What is to stop localities from spending tax money on junkets,
leaving nothing for higher levels of government?
The
same hard questions apply for owners and managers of corporations. In a
cosmopolitan economy, would not cooperatives be less efficient? Would a
democratic workplace, where workers are allowed to elect their own bosses,
reduce their ability to make difficult choices? Would profit sharing schemes
blur the line between owners, managers and employees?
These
are all legitimate worries. As we shall see, the answer is the recapitulating
decade plan, and its three-way partnership among science, religion and
politics, put forward by John Amos Comenius. Only this is likely to prepare
future citizens to bear the challenges and responsibilities that principles
like these demand.
::
No comments:
Post a Comment