Community Capacity, Cause of Corruption: By S.C. Bansal Community Capacity, Cause of Corruption: By S.C. Bansal
Community Capacity, Cause of Corruption: By S.C. Bansal
Community Capacity, Cause of Corruption: By S.C. Bansal
Community Capacity, Cause of Corruption: By S.C. Bansal
Community Capacity, Cause of Corruption: By S.C. Bansal
Community Capacity, Cause of Corruption: By S.C. Bansal
Community Capacity, Cause of Corruption: By S.C. Bansal
Community Capacity, Cause of Corruption: By S.C. Bansal


Chapter 5

P111. Community Capacity -number of members, their financial and educational status, cohesiveness of its association, remains the critical determinant of negotiating advantage for its members in relation to those of other communities of a nation. State Capacity -military, institutional, industrial and natural output and political adaptability, remains the critical determinant for a nation in negotiating its relations with the rest of the world.

Family Capacity -social, material, educational, and physical status and negotiating skill, remains the critical determinant of the fate of its individual constituents in relation to other families in the neighborhood. Individual Capacity -level of conventional education, physical and natural talent, understanding of values, divorcing of the false necessity, remains the critical determinant for an individual to complete the journey of life with lesser pain (Figure 5.1).

Capacity, for an individual, remains the critical determinant in fulfilling genetic and social wants. Highly asymmetrical capacity affects the relation amongst members. Weak capacity results in multiplicity of voices and in diffusion of objectives. Wants are essential force that question capacity.

 

P122. in commercial society, wealth or symbols of wealth are often status symbols. In a society valuing bravery or honor, a battle scar would be more of a status symbol, or owning a small weapon (p81, note 7), etc. 11

This money-symbol can distance individuals from objects but it also provides a means of overcoming this distance (Choice vs. Capacity). Money-capacity allows much greater flexibility for individuals in society -shortens man's walking distance to overcome person-to-person limitations, but in the process it challenges personal identity or social layers.

Boulding argues economic power to be one of the three faces of power at an individual level. It participates in biological and social evolution. 12

Simmel suggests that the spread of the money form gives individuals a freedom of sorts by permitting them to exercise the kind of individualized control over "impression management" that was not possible in traditional societies ...ascribed identities have been discarded, even strangers become familiar and knowable identities insofar as they are willing to use a common but impersonal means of exchange. 13 Thus this money-symbol has both positive and negative implications, i.e., individual freedom is potentially increased, but alienation and fragmentation of the sum may also occur. 14 It proliferates nonviolent means of negotiation to acquire social freedom; rent seeking and rent giving is on the menu.

We must propose distributive criteria to achieve a minimum spread of this symbol to achieve a capacity to allow social interaction and not fragmentation, i.e., spread of compromised means of negotiation.

When man devised the institution of state to promote peaceful negotiation of social living, he unknowingly provided it with the function to hoard, i.e., hoard in cash for redistribution in need (rational). However those who were assigned to manage this institution soon discovered of the force in this art of hoarding and apply it in 'all thinking' (irrational).

This thinking extends to personal affairs, i.e. beyond the state, to the extent that they believe to be a fair owner of this hoard (paradox). We need to obliterate this paradox in re-distributive function (see Chapter 9)

@All copy rights are reserved.