I
wrote (and write) the
manifesto
before I met the
book, “Why
nations fail” but
the book help me to answer some questions, so I would like first
thank Daron
Acemoglou and James Robinson
for their
research that
gave me the answers.
I have started this manifesto after Stavros Theodorakis' calling (the leader of a new party “the river”) for proposals from citizens. The manifesto has the influence of the people who I met personally and through the internet and my own experience of working and leaving in Greece and sometimes abroad.
I have spent a big part of my previous life with the dream of a better world, but when I got out of the circle of my friends I met a competitive world which I have to adapt to leave on. Furthermore a lot of the people I met they wouldn't like a better society, but their own interest indifferent for the others except their family.
My question was how the competitiveness of the man lead to the inclusive institutions of the succeed nations.
The book “Why nations fail” gave the answers to me and help me to clear facts from the history of the humanity. There was critical junctures and coincidence of the history, where people struggle to make the institutions first more pluralistic and afterwords more inclusive. A lot of times the driving force was not the dream for a better world for everybody, but the need to participate in the share of power.
After centuries of struggle a part of the humanity through the success nations pass first from the rule of law and after from the inclusive institutions for the most of their citizens.
Before I will go on, I would like to make a criticism for the period of time before the beginning of our civilization. Indigenous people were leaving on earth with great sense for the earth and their community with institutions very different than the extractive institutions of Aztec and Maya.
About the future it is sure
that China or Russia... will try to keep their extractive
institutions for ever, using a mixed economy. Nobody
knows if they succeed at the end, putting in the
same dream the rest of the world.
The last thing is that extractive democracies as Greece, Argentina, Mexico, Russia, .. need special study for understanding them. I hope Daron and James (if they have time) and other researchers put their attention for a better understanding.
The above criticism have nothing to do with the value of “Why nations fail” since it gives to the reader the chance to see how the small differences at the critical junctures of the history lead to more inclusive institutions from the beginning of our civilization till today. I would like to write what I have understand from the book “Why nations fail” and how this fit to my experience.
Every trial for a better world, in a big scale, with the incentive to include all the citizens without competition has failed.
My experience says that there are some people among us who would do everything for succeed and there is no way change them with education or prison. These people may be your father, your sister, your neighbor, your boss or yourself. The only way to deal with them is to give the chance to compete with the others but under the rule of law, and if they would like to be monopole to block them. From these people sometimes comes the talents.
To have a world without competition sounds nice for a lot of people but simple is no possible. The competition exist in every society even if it is outlaw. The competition is in the core of some human beings and the best way to deal with it is to accept it. The succeed nations develop the rule of the law and the inclusive institutions for big scale government. In small communities may we have one no competitive world, or with friends, family, … but in a big scale every attempt to have planed world with security for everybody without competition was a failure and deprivation of freedom.
May be the most of the people don't like the competition and the free markets and there are ready to change the security of a permanent job (without real evaluation) with their freedom. If there is no the faceless free markets together with the rule of law and the inclusive institutions, who will govern their life?
You see here in Greece as in Mexico or Argentina, Russia, Turkey... the institutions are extractive the competition exist but is hidden and in the most of the cases there is only one way for easy success: to find a job in the state or in privilege “private” companies, or to have good relations with the politic system, or be inside the politic system and of course to avoid tax payment.
The manifesto is the voice of the voiceless every were in the world, when the people understand that somewhere exist another reality and they wish to leave in. With that meaning some Ukrainian citizens today wish to have the freedom, the safe, the welfare state of the North European countries, that the wish of manifesto for Greece.
Unfortunately is no easy to be a succeed nation by adapting the best Constitution if you have no change the institutions to inclusive.
I think that Guy Verhofstadt have understand the matter. The Germans also Know very well the matter since they have change the extractive institutions of East Germany to the inclusive institutions of the West Germany. There was not a plan for the integration of Europe for the rest countries.
I can say that the history is in a critical juncture for the Europe the Greece and the rest countries. The Europe looks at it's own problems how to keep the welfare state without deficits, but maybe the answer is in the problem of Greece.
If Europe have the plan to change the institutions for the bankrupt and candidate countries, may have answers for its own problems.
The manifesto is a simple, innocent, experiential, intuitive and not complete text that says rational (mathematical) solutions to make the crisis opportunity to change institutions. Has not the accuracy of a professor of economics and you can keep whatever you like and disregard whatever you don' like.
I will start with the condition in Greece as I understand it.
Greece has extractive institutions even if it has democracy, as Argentina Mexico, Russia...
In
Greece the job market is closed for the good jobs. The good jobs
belongs to the public sector, public utilities and big private
companies who have close relations with the politicians.
The same happens with the businesses where the only way to deal is to have good relations with the politicians or with the entrepreneurs who have grow up with the help of politicians and they ought to them. The people who have study business administration know very well that the Greek companies have a different management even though they look normal.
I think that this condition is going on because the Greek citizens prefer the security of a permanent job than the competitiveness of the open markets. They cannot understand that the security jobs and the privileges for an individual or a group extract resources from the rest. They cannot understand that their security is payed from their children who can not find a work or find work in degrading conditions.
It is important to see an exploitation factor which is not understood. In Greece there are two types of workers protected and unprotected, and it happens in the public sector, Public Utilities, banks and many private sector enterprises.
In Greece, the source of exploitation is temporary contracts in public sector and outsourcing that occurs in the public and "private" sector. That is that creates two kind of workers. In the same organization (eg ministry, hospital, electricity, banks, ... and private companies) even for the same jobs there are the insiders and the outsiders, the protected and the unprotected.
It is not strange that people are not rioting since most live in the hope to find protected jobs. Further more since their brothers working on safe work, is easier to rebel against austerity than their families members.
The trap that Greece has fallen in and it is difficult to get, is associated with the desire of many people for a better world without competition for all citizens. This is not possible on a large scale. Free markets need a small percentage of unemployment and mobility and that is the only way leading to development.
The unemployed should have a guaranteed minimum subsistence income to be less than the income of the employee (eg half)
The most important for the integration of the Europe is to deep the inclusive institutions in every country and special in bankrupt and the candidate countries to change the institutions from extractive to inclusive.
The change of institutions in the bankrupt and the candidate countries should be the cost for enter in the EU. The people by referendum should accept change in their institutions if they want to enter the common currency.
I can call manifesto liberal left, liberal because it accepts the free markets and left because speaks for every citizen.
In this point I will introduce the reasonable leaving expenses (rle) a statistic calculation of the cost of dignified life (without housing costs). Actual the banks (with the governments) use the rle to restructure red loans for citizens.
for
simplicity I will call RLE the add of rle+housing cost (rent or loan
installments)
The RLE may be associated with reduction factors related to the trade deficit and the collectibility of taxes.
The important is to have a point of reference for all the citizens and families.
In the future, if I have the time I would like to write more even if my English is poor.
I have started this manifesto after Stavros Theodorakis' calling (the leader of a new party “the river”) for proposals from citizens. The manifesto has the influence of the people who I met personally and through the internet and my own experience of working and leaving in Greece and sometimes abroad.
I have spent a big part of my previous life with the dream of a better world, but when I got out of the circle of my friends I met a competitive world which I have to adapt to leave on. Furthermore a lot of the people I met they wouldn't like a better society, but their own interest indifferent for the others except their family.
My question was how the competitiveness of the man lead to the inclusive institutions of the succeed nations.
The book “Why nations fail” gave the answers to me and help me to clear facts from the history of the humanity. There was critical junctures and coincidence of the history, where people struggle to make the institutions first more pluralistic and afterwords more inclusive. A lot of times the driving force was not the dream for a better world for everybody, but the need to participate in the share of power.
After centuries of struggle a part of the humanity through the success nations pass first from the rule of law and after from the inclusive institutions for the most of their citizens.
Before I will go on, I would like to make a criticism for the period of time before the beginning of our civilization. Indigenous people were leaving on earth with great sense for the earth and their community with institutions very different than the extractive institutions of Aztec and Maya.
“...the
political institutions of the Tswana, in particular the kgotla,
also encouraged political participation and constrained chiefs.
...the
political history of another of the Tswana states, the Rolong... in
practice these rules were interpreted to remove bad rulers and allow
talented candidates to become chief.
...Aboriginals,
possibly as many as one million at the time of the founding of New
South Wales. But they were spread out over a vast continent, and
their density in New South Wales was insufficient for the creation of
an economy based on their exploitation.
...in
eastern Nigeria the Igbo peoples had no chiefs when the British
encountered them in the nineteenth century.
...the
Powhatan Confederacy, a coalition of some thirty
polities owing allegiance to a king called Wahunsunacock.
...the
Yaqui people of Sonora, in the hinterland of Nogales. Between 1900
and
1910,
possibly thirty thousand Yaqui were deported, essentially enslaved,
and sent to work in the henequen plantations of Yucatαn." extracts from "why nations fails"
All
the above and many others, as the today’s Zapatistas have different
institutions.
The
bottom line is that our culture has not followed the hunters and
gatherers. Of the time given the ability to man to store wealth
simultaneously with the development of reason and ego the conflict
came in the field. Until the people understand that apart from the
conflict there is the controlled conflicts through sport, or trade, or
inclusive republics spent millennia.
At
this point I want to express my respect for the Zapatistas who seek
democracy, while at war.
But
most people today are different from the Zapatistas and seek safety
first, then wealth and freedom end.
Not
all people are competitive. Those who are not competitive fall into
traps desperately seeking communities without competition and end up
paying for the expense of their freedom, they just think that people
can change with education.
The last thing is that extractive democracies as Greece, Argentina, Mexico, Russia, .. need special study for understanding them. I hope Daron and James (if they have time) and other researchers put their attention for a better understanding.
The above criticism have nothing to do with the value of “Why nations fail” since it gives to the reader the chance to see how the small differences at the critical junctures of the history lead to more inclusive institutions from the beginning of our civilization till today. I would like to write what I have understand from the book “Why nations fail” and how this fit to my experience.
Every trial for a better world, in a big scale, with the incentive to include all the citizens without competition has failed.
My experience says that there are some people among us who would do everything for succeed and there is no way change them with education or prison. These people may be your father, your sister, your neighbor, your boss or yourself. The only way to deal with them is to give the chance to compete with the others but under the rule of law, and if they would like to be monopole to block them. From these people sometimes comes the talents.
To have a world without competition sounds nice for a lot of people but simple is no possible. The competition exist in every society even if it is outlaw. The competition is in the core of some human beings and the best way to deal with it is to accept it. The succeed nations develop the rule of the law and the inclusive institutions for big scale government. In small communities may we have one no competitive world, or with friends, family, … but in a big scale every attempt to have planed world with security for everybody without competition was a failure and deprivation of freedom.
May be the most of the people don't like the competition and the free markets and there are ready to change the security of a permanent job (without real evaluation) with their freedom. If there is no the faceless free markets together with the rule of law and the inclusive institutions, who will govern their life?
You see here in Greece as in Mexico or Argentina, Russia, Turkey... the institutions are extractive the competition exist but is hidden and in the most of the cases there is only one way for easy success: to find a job in the state or in privilege “private” companies, or to have good relations with the politic system, or be inside the politic system and of course to avoid tax payment.
The manifesto is the voice of the voiceless every were in the world, when the people understand that somewhere exist another reality and they wish to leave in. With that meaning some Ukrainian citizens today wish to have the freedom, the safe, the welfare state of the North European countries, that the wish of manifesto for Greece.
Unfortunately is no easy to be a succeed nation by adapting the best Constitution if you have no change the institutions to inclusive.
I think that Guy Verhofstadt have understand the matter. The Germans also Know very well the matter since they have change the extractive institutions of East Germany to the inclusive institutions of the West Germany. There was not a plan for the integration of Europe for the rest countries.
I can say that the history is in a critical juncture for the Europe the Greece and the rest countries. The Europe looks at it's own problems how to keep the welfare state without deficits, but maybe the answer is in the problem of Greece.
If Europe have the plan to change the institutions for the bankrupt and candidate countries, may have answers for its own problems.
The manifesto is a simple, innocent, experiential, intuitive and not complete text that says rational (mathematical) solutions to make the crisis opportunity to change institutions. Has not the accuracy of a professor of economics and you can keep whatever you like and disregard whatever you don' like.
I will start with the condition in Greece as I understand it.
Greece has extractive institutions even if it has democracy, as Argentina Mexico, Russia...
The same happens with the businesses where the only way to deal is to have good relations with the politicians or with the entrepreneurs who have grow up with the help of politicians and they ought to them. The people who have study business administration know very well that the Greek companies have a different management even though they look normal.
I think that this condition is going on because the Greek citizens prefer the security of a permanent job than the competitiveness of the open markets. They cannot understand that the security jobs and the privileges for an individual or a group extract resources from the rest. They cannot understand that their security is payed from their children who can not find a work or find work in degrading conditions.
It is important to see an exploitation factor which is not understood. In Greece there are two types of workers protected and unprotected, and it happens in the public sector, Public Utilities, banks and many private sector enterprises.
In Greece, the source of exploitation is temporary contracts in public sector and outsourcing that occurs in the public and "private" sector. That is that creates two kind of workers. In the same organization (eg ministry, hospital, electricity, banks, ... and private companies) even for the same jobs there are the insiders and the outsiders, the protected and the unprotected.
It is not strange that people are not rioting since most live in the hope to find protected jobs. Further more since their brothers working on safe work, is easier to rebel against austerity than their families members.
The trap that Greece has fallen in and it is difficult to get, is associated with the desire of many people for a better world without competition for all citizens. This is not possible on a large scale. Free markets need a small percentage of unemployment and mobility and that is the only way leading to development.
The unemployed should have a guaranteed minimum subsistence income to be less than the income of the employee (eg half)
The most important for the integration of the Europe is to deep the inclusive institutions in every country and special in bankrupt and the candidate countries to change the institutions from extractive to inclusive.
The change of institutions in the bankrupt and the candidate countries should be the cost for enter in the EU. The people by referendum should accept change in their institutions if they want to enter the common currency.
I can call manifesto liberal left, liberal because it accepts the free markets and left because speaks for every citizen.
In this point I will introduce the reasonable leaving expenses (rle) a statistic calculation of the cost of dignified life (without housing costs). Actual the banks (with the governments) use the rle to restructure red loans for citizens.
The RLE may be associated with reduction factors related to the trade deficit and the collectibility of taxes.
The important is to have a point of reference for all the citizens and families.
In the future, if I have the time I would like to write more even if my English is poor.
Δεν υπάρχουν σχόλια:
Δημοσίευση σχολίου