“We are all floating in the same sea, it’s clear that some are in superyachts while others are clinging to drifting debris”, said the UN Secretary General Mr. Antonio Gunerras while commenting on the inequality in the post-pandemic world (link). Inequality has been repeatedly referred to as one of the significant challenges of the world that stems from several causes, historical, social, and contemporary.
— The historical reason for the inequality includes colonization by the European nations that left an indelible mark on the subjugated nations, their societies, people, communities, knowledge and economies.
— Social reasons include the oppression of certain sections of society, in the name of caste, gender and other divisions.
— The contemporary issues include the expansion of trade globally and technological advances in some countries that have shifted the income distribution in unprecedented ways with no social security whatsoever for those rendered unskilled or whose knowledge has been rendered irrelevant.
Globally though the idea of limits to economic growth was known long ago, Economists have accepted that limitless growth is impossible only recently after the emergency of climate crisis. However in the meanwhile, we have had the emergence of a plutonomy society. A plutonomy society is defined as a society in which majority of wealth is owned and controlled by an ever shrinking few. This has widened the economic inequality in society and the consequences include social unrest, increased crime and debasing of social cohesion. The debasing of social cohesion is seen as one of the biggest risk the world will face in the coming decade. Pathways for economic growth have been proven since long, however the pathway for addressing inequality is not available with clarity, particularly in the western world.
When Sanjivbhai Dholakia, the diamond merchant of Surat started to gift cars and houses to his staff some years ago, suddenly the world got interested in this model of sharing wealth by a corporate head. He was gifting several hundred cars and houses to his loyal employees and wanted to provide them with basic amenities for a happy life. His model was picked up by several others in different parts of the country, where the owners set aside a significant portion of their profit to be shared with the employees. While this may result in the individual owner cutting down on his profits, it resulted in a genuine care for the welfare of the employees. Dholakia mentioned that taking care of the grievance of his employees and ensuring that they are happy was a responsibility of the businessperson. This is in line with the Trusteeship model that was proposed by Gandhiji for the voluntary distribution of wealth by the rich. The model places a moral responsibility of the wealthy to use their wealth for the service of all of humanity and never end up compromising the welfare of the many, particularly the poor and downtrodden for the profit or luxury of a few people.
In India, the modern Indian State has strived to provide an equal playing field and address the historic and social inequalities through constitutional provision, reservation policy, scholarship programmes, institutional support, and subsidies. At the same time, the contemporary drivers of inequality in terms of economic and technological inequalities have grown. That is where the examples of Trusteeship that people like Dholakia act upon, sharing their wealth, sets a different example.
As Swami Vivekananda indicated long back clearly, “Without the knowledge of the Spirit, all material knowledge is only adding fuel to fire, only giving into the hands of the selfish one more instrument to take what belongs to others, to live upon the life of others, instead of giving up one’s own life for them.”
Dharma Institute 