The Elephant in the Room of Economic Development
June 15, 2010 Leave a comment
A couple weeks ago, David Kestenbaum of All Things Considered reported on the Indian economy, artfully mixing interviews of Indian economic experts with the slice-of-life story of an elderly, impoverished, street-dwelling shoe-shiner Umrao Singh. The words of both the Indian academics and Singh pointed to a shared sense of fatalism. In pondering why the Indian growth rate has in recent decades been much lower than comparable developing economies, the experts jokingly alluded to the “Hindu growth rate . . . maybe it is there in the scriptures.” Meanwhile, Singh justifies his poverty as he looks on the dwellings of his wealthy neighbors by saying, “this is what God has chosen for me.” Like his countrymen, he concedes that “what is written is written, you can’t change it.”
A famous destination for seekers of wisdom, peace, and enlightenment in the 1960s, India has regained the spotlight in recent years as a new wave of thinkers and celebrities have attempted to answer the question of “happiness.” Michael J Fox touted the Indian culture of cosmic acceptance in his 2009 TV special, Adventures of an Incurable Optimist. I even read a New York Times article that somehow was able to proclaim a certain Tibetan monk as if with some degree of scientific authority, the happiest person in the world. Fatalism and acceptance are compelling themes for the frenzied denizens of postindustrial societies. But do these ideas really do justice to the marginalized poor in developing economies? Given the shared outlook of Singh and his nation’s experts, and the fawning enchantment of India’s onlookers, does a problem of justice and marginalization even exist?
In his report, Kesterbaum supposed India’s problem was a lack of manufacturing jobs. And while manufacturing has been credited with building the modern middle class everywhere from America to China, it is not the key ingredient that India lacks. Rather the one thing that will satisfy the technical questions of the economists, the existential needs of the poor, and the postindustrial search for happiness is a proper fulfillment of the Christian concept of Imago Dei. As apologist JM Njeroge noted in a recent interview, this idea is the root of much of human progress in recent centuries.
To answer the economists’ riddle, consider the innovators and the moralists who steered their societies through the original industrial revolution. The scientists who accumulated knowledge of the physical world and the inventors who applied that knowledge as technology took as a given what astronomer-astrologist Johannes Kepler posited in the seventeenth century: because man is made His image, we can “think God’s thoughts after Him.” Likewise, what would become the human rights movement snowballed with the successive propositions of moral philosophers. In the American Revolution, we clearly see ideas and corresponding actions rooted in the affirmation that man is created in the image of God. The same is true for subsequent moral movers, including abolitionists, suffragists, and labor activists. Even when modern authorities on development point to the necessity of institutions like the rule of law, they are indirectly appealing to the outworking of Christian faith.
A society’s confidence in Imago Dei is also the basis for its sense of agency, without which the innovators, capitalists, and producers of wealth will find it hard to be motivated beyond immediate gain. Wherever this notion does not prevail, you will see a society’s actors either jockeying among themselves for a sliver of a fixed socioeconomic pie, or consigned as ones marginalized without
hope for advancement. But where there exists this understanding of agency, it enables those with economic capital to grow the sum of human wealth, and it allows both reformers and the destitute an actionable hope for change. For this reason it is important that we permit ourselves to make meaningful distinctions between cultures and parse through the differing assumptions that animate them.
Whether informed by detached, journalistic diggings like Kestenbaum’s, or the ponderous musings of would-be “happiness” gurus, our notions of human development and spiritual fulfillment will remain incomplete if we forget that the Image of God has been the singularly transforming force for good in our world.