It is no mean achievement to register poverty reduction to 24.3 per cent in 2016 from 31.5 per cent in 2010. The decline in extreme poverty from 17.6 to 12.9 per cent over the same period also looks impressive on the paper. But appearances may be deceptive. First, the rate of poverty reduction has slowed considerably during the period compared to the corresponding previous period. And, second, but more importantly, inequality in people's income has further yawned by this time. This is exactly the crux of the problem.
However, this is not a problem Bangladesh is facing alone. Capitalism is going through a nasty time -a time vitiated by avarice, business malpractice and unhealthy competition for wealth accumulation. In countries where industries are yet to get their firm foothold, business ethics are violated more than they are respected. Politics here works as the main vehicle for advancing personal interests. Collective well-being, particularly of the poor and neglected, is deliberately overlooked. No wonder that even the distribution of foods for the extreme poor and the vulnerable under the social safety net programme is often brought to disrepute by dishonest distributors at the field level.
It is not an equation of the exploiter and the exploited, as was the norm in the past, but a new arrangement where the majority are left out from opportunities and the process of production. In a setting where the supply of labour is many times more than the requirement, the bargaining power lies with the management. In the country's garment sector, formation of trade unions has not been possible until now even after the pressure from the associations of American and European buyers. The cause was not greatly helped by the once monstrous rise of the collective bargaining agents in government controlled banks, mills and corporations. Today, trade unions in Bangladesh have turned toothless tigers.
With the bipolar world crumbling like nine pins following the disintegration of the Soviet Union, the last vestige of socialism also disappeared from most parts of the world. The political doctrine that postulated the rights of the working class people and equitable distribution of wealth, no doubt, failed to deliver but the question is, if it has outlived its message for the world. On the occasion of the centenary of the October Revolution in Russia, the context does not look irrelevant today.
It will be unethical to deny that socialism put tremendous pressure on capitalism to transform from within. It helped capitalism to be more humane. Many of the social and economic programmes introduced for the benefit of workers and employees at the lower and middle level owe to the pressure created by socialism on its rival doctrine. The share of workers in the dividend was hardly recognised before but with socialism favouring an egalitarian society, capitalism took a few steps forward in sharing the profit with them.
Now the world looks all set to take a retrogressive course. Leaders of the so-called free world are turning their back to the liberal economic theories and open market arrangement. Donald Trump, the incumbent US president, shows the way. But the process actually began long ago. Business tycoons the world over have been rewarding the chief executive officers (CEOs) with outrageously fat pay packages and other benefits. Apple, Google and facebook CEOs draw mind-boggling salaries. But at the same time, at the lower level of American society, poverty is making its inroads. Trump drew the attention of the unemployed and poor Americans by promising them jobs and making America great once again. The inherent message is that migrants and foreigners will no longer be tolerated.
Following Donald Trump, the rise of conservative and ultra-right leaders in many countries in the West signals an ominous development in the making. Now it will be interesting to notice how two of the rising powers in Asia, China and India react to the advancement of conservatism. It is time for retrospection for world leaders who believe in a 'one world' where cooperation and sharing of wealth and values count most. If the world loses confidence in a shared system of mutual existence, its impact is bound to be felt on domestic front. The privileged will like to have the cake and eat it too.
The symptoms are clear that polarisation within society is taking at a fast pace. Poverty alleviation cannot keep pace with this if social welfare programme on a wider scale cannot be launched. Education is at the heart of the problem. Mere literacy cannot pull the vast majority out of the rut. Now that digitisation is on the march, smart technology will leave the marginalised way behind. They stand no chance of competing with the technologically smart section of population. Well versed in digitisation the latter will rule the roost.
More worrying is the fact that society is falling back culturally with the aggressive intrusion of smart gadgets. This may prove to be the Achilles' heel ultimately unless regulated use of the technology and devices are ensured. The practice has to be culturally sound. Robotic or humanoid techno wizards may do harm to society on a scale so far unthinkable.