POVERTY – BRITISH GIFT TO HUMANITY

British colonialism in fact has been the largest contributor of poverty across the world. More people died due to famines in British colonized lands than in wars. It was indeed greed that led to human devastations. Questions the findings of the Noble Laureates, calling them the face saving thoughts of the western world.

This essay takes a view that economic development requires a broader, more multi-dimensional approach than institutional theory alone can provide on the causes of poverty and reviews some of the glaring gaps left out by the Nobel laureates Daron Acemoglu, Simon Johnson and James Robinson in their study. The essay discusses three major contributing factors to poverty, namely technology, famines and colonisation as architected by the British. Included in this discussion is how the poverty cycle in each of above said cases can be broken free to save the society from their ugly wrath.

Colonisation as Architected by British

Greed drove military powers to colonise lands that could feed their appetite for greater wealth. The people of the colonised lands were either plundered or mindlessly taxed to the point that they were forced to sell their assets to meet the demands of their colonial masters. Adverse market conditions not only took away the opportunity to build back but also physically and mentally wrecked them. The result was loss of their lifestyles and finally the ability to feed their families.

India is a good example of how British architected the creation of poverty in the country. The British greed caused famines in India - placed more emphasis on the cultivation of cash crops rather than growing crops that would feed India's huge population. This starved masses, forced them into miserable condition causing poverty. They imported food from other parts of the empire to feed their own people.

Stepping back, we reviewed what different means did the British used to colonize new lands. We found commonality in the methods used and a definite pattern to colonize different countries. This encouraged us to research what made the British so quickly colonize new lands and during this course we identified the key strategies that they had used over the life cycle of their colonization. Interestingly, the underlying philosophy behind each strategy that they used was to initiate and build up poverty, sustain poverty and force the locals into subservience during the different stages of colonization. This was the mantra for sustaining a colonial rule.

Disturbed by the magnanimity of the colonial greed, we undertook deeper research and found that a set of well-lined strategies that they applied to colonize newer lands, which forced us to call them a Poverty Tool Kit. This is what the British used to build an empire, where the Sun Never Sets.

The prime objectives of the Poverty Tool Kit were to usher poverty and psychologically wreck the locals. This essay has identified the strategies forming Poverty Tool Kit that the British employed to cause poverty. Each strategy in fact was a devastating weapon.

Where Have the Noble Laureates Gone Wrong

Let us start with what Amartya Sen has to say about poverty - having an income level that does not allow an individual to cover certain basic necessities, taking into account the circumstances and social requirements of the environment. He further contends poverty is not just about low income - it's about the lack of an opportunity. We are inclined to further elaborate the causes to include “lack of skills and the spirit/initiative that is capable of redeeming the situation”.

Noble laureates Daron Acemoglu, Simon Johnson and James Robinson – have advocated the importance of societal institutions to build up prosperity and appear to believe strongly that the societies with a poor rule of law and institutions that exploit the population do not generate growth or change for the better. 

Poverty in the modern-day societies is a compounded outcome of contributions from deeply rooted complex historical, social, and economic factors, each having a different genesis. This requires a differential analysis to be understood and intelligently addressed. Living in democratic India, the conclusion by Noble Laureates Daron Acemoglu, Simon Johnson and James Robinson come across very obvious but the real challenge lies in understanding the genesis of each contributing factor and how it must be addressed, leveraging the given resources.

We understand the research of the above said Noble Laureates has evolved as a comparative study between the roles of Inclusive and Extractive institutions in reducing poverty and was never intended to provide an in depth and comprehensive understanding of it. This makes it more of a binary study limiting itself to explain the constructive role of the above said institutions in reducing poverty. Their research falls short to explain the impact of the factors like geographic, environmental and epidemics/diseases that shape economic trajectories.

In fact, the Inclusive and Extractive Institutions alone cannot explain the under development of Sub-Saharan region. Acemoglu et al.’s theories, though do explain the historical perspective but are not geared to address the contemporary challenges like technological change in the urban societies both in the developing and developed world.

IS POVERTY THERE TO LIVE?

Poverty is “born” due to economic inequality, lack of access to education, healthcare, job opportunities, and systemic injustices that make it difficult for people to rise above certain socioeconomic barriers. Living in poverty can lead to a vicious cycle where individuals find it challenging to improve their situation because of systemic barriers and limited opportunities – causing generations after generations to live in poverty.

Most poverty in the past was caused by famines and colonialism. British colonialism in fact has been the largest contributor of poverty across the world. More people died due to famines in British colonized lands than in wars. It was indeed greed that led to human devastations.

In today’s interconnected world, the poverty is not inevitable but the persistence of deliberate human neglect gives “life” to poverty. Given the human greed is unquenchable, the poverty appears there to live.

For a copy of the complete article please Whatsapp your request on 975 975 0677