Panama Papers shows a sham democracy of the capitalism
3/5/16
Is it the people, represented
by their elected government? Or is it the leading players in the world of
finance, who are the beneficiaries from the legal loopholes revealed by the
recent leaks from Panamanian law firm Mossack Fonseca?
Clearly, in a so-called
democracy of the capitalism it should be the former — people should hold the
power. The Merriam Webster Dictionary’s definition of democracy reads as
follows: a government in which
the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised by them directly or
indirectly through a system of representation usually involving periodically
held free elections.
Well, in the United Kingdom —
and throughout the majority of the Western world, I would suggest — we have a
“government”, we have a “system of representation” and we have “periodically
held free elections.” No complaints on any of those fronts.
But what we do not have is
“supreme power … vested in the people and exercised by them.” Supreme power,
when you peel back the layers of bureaucracy and examine what lies beneath, is
in the hands of the corporate world, and especially the financial world.
That is not always clear.
Most of the time, we chug along, living our unremarkable day-to-day lives, laboring
under the illusion that just because we are sometimes given the opportunity to
elect and dismiss our governmental officials in free elections, we are living
in a well-functioning democracy.
Occasionally, however, the
truth reveals itself. The most obvious recent example came with the global
credit crisis of 2007-8, which was essentially caused by banks getting greedy
and chasing quick and easy profits by lending money which didn’t exist. The
second part of that sentence might be contentious and the overall causes of the
crisis, which deeply damaged the lives of millions of people, are not easy to
pinpoint in a few words.
What remains beyond doubt,
however, is the first part: the crisis was caused by banks. It was not caused
by governments, or monarchs, or the armed forces, or mafia gangs. It was caused
by banks.
And what happened? Ordinary
people — the people who should, remmember, hold the power in a democracy — were
forced to come running to the banks’ rescue with a series of “bail outs” funded
through the tax system. The banks which had caused the crisis were rescued by
the people who they were supposed to be serving because, we were repeatedly
told, they were “too big to fail.”
Really, what should be “too
big to fail” is democracy; but by forcing people — who were given no choice in
the matter and had been seriously adversely affected already — to pay for the
rescue of the banks, we saw where the power really lies.
And now we’re seeing it
again. The Panama Papers have revealed the fine details of something we already
knew: how the super-wealthy are able to evade their tax obligations by taking
advantage of loopholes which are, no surprise, only open to the super-wealthy.
It’s hardly surprising.
Everybody knows that “crown dependencies” such as the Cayman Islands, the
Virgin Islands and Bermuda are tax havens. Everybody knows that Swiss bank
accounts are dodgy. Everybody knows that countless major corporations do not
pay enough tax. We have known all of that for years.
Defendants of these practices
would argue that the investors or corporations concerned have not done anything
illegal. But that’s a petty, small-minded argument — if legal loopholes allow
certain members of the privileged and powerful elite to dodge tax, the laws
should be changed to close those loopholes.
If the majority of people
didn’t like these practices — which we don’t — and wanted to prevent them, it
would not be difficult. Laws are not forces of Nature: they are made by people,
and can be changed if people don’t like them.
The mass data leak
which has been christened the Panama Papers is one of the largest in history.
It contains enormous amounts of information, much of which concerns the
financial arrangements of powerful and famous people. Many of them are
politicians, even national leaders. The response in the press, and from the
publics of many countries, has been correspondingly outsized.
The Prime Minister of Iceland
has stepped down; David Cameron, Britain’s Prime Minister, has faced a very
difficult week indeed, including many awkward questions about his father’s
financial dealings. Many other international figures have been caught up in the
ensuing scandal. On Tuesday, 5th April
2016, the Prime Minister of Pakistan, Nawaz Sharif, addressed the nation to
calm heightened anger over the Panama Papers’ leak. He tried to prove that his
family is not involved in any financial corruption.
The Panama Papers exposed the
fact that because of Democracy, rulers and powerful people throughout the
world, whether they are from the West or East, whether they belong to the
developed or underdeveloped world, transfer their wealth with ease to places
where their wealth will not be taxed or scrutinized.
In Democracy, people who are elected in the name
of the people use their legislative authority to fulfil the interests of their
masters, cronies and themselves. Democracy gives the right of legislation to
the representatives of the people, so these representatives use this authority
to declare a thing or an act Halaal (allowed) or Haraam (prohibited). Today a
discussion is taking place throughout the world as to the need for legislation
to compel the rulers to pay tax on their wealth, so that the common man can be
relieved from tax burdens. However, one fundamental question that has been
overlooked which is that how on earth will people who have been given the right
to legislate, make laws against their own interests? Therefore whenever this
sort of scandal surfaces, the ruling elite make more “stringent” laws or
announce judicial commissions to calm public anger, but always leave loop-holes
so that their interests remains unharmed in the long term. Moreover, Democracy
allows the rulers to usurp the wealth of both the public and the state, through
privatization. And Democracy makes this all possible and is clearly rule for
the rich by the rich to get even richer. It is the nature of Democracy of the
Capitalism./.
All comments [ 0 ]
Your comments