Diktat of Unanimously Agreeable Governance and
Unified Philosophy Necessary for Individual Freedom

Dr. Sankarshan Acharya
Founder, Pro-Prosperity.Com and Citizens for Development

March 6, 2015. Updated March 7, 2015

March towards Unanimously Agreeable Governance

The humanity was once captivated by Leon Walrus’ theoretical idea of Benevolent Dictator (central planner) who could collect data on preferences and constraints of all individuals to make economic choices for the latter in order to attain first-best efficient level of production.  Central planning was vigorously experimented in several countries after the crash of Laissez Faire Capitalism-unbridled robbery of private and public wealth-in USA and Europe led to World War II.  Central planning could not attain efficiency because even inherently efficient individuals misrepresented their preferences to fetch more resources to produce less. 

After World War II, the US and Europe experimented with Regulatory Capitalism by (i) giving freedom to individuals to create wealth, which attracted talents from all over the world and (ii) facilitating a few Robber Barons to usurp private wealth through surreptitious financial shenanigans. Regulatory Capitalism crashed in 2008.  The US Congress-appointed Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission blamed the Regulators, Robber Barons and established academic experts for their failure to avert the manmade (avoidable) crisis.

Unexpected poll verdicts around the world since 2008 show a lurch towards a unique and unanimously agreeable diktat of No-subsidy Mantra in Governance which seeks to disband subsidies based on privilege and social status.  The unprivileged common people (the rich, middle-class and poor) have realized since 2008 that the diktat of unanimously agreeable No-Subsidy Mantra in governance can beget an efficiently competitive economy and uproot the source of decreed privilege, i.e., legalized robbery of public and private wealth.  This realization has resulted in election victories for any individual or party that pledges to uproot the established system of robbery or to undermine such victory of a winner deviating from his pledge to change the system after rising to a position of privilege:

  • For illustration, Mr. Barack Obama was an underdog in the 2008 US presidential polls. Then the market crashed, causing massive loss of private wealth.  People responded positively to Mr. Obama’s call for change of the established system.  His party, however, lost in a Democratic senatorial bastion in Massachusetts in 2010, as soon as people observed Mr. Obama negotiate nontransparently backdoors with healthcare insurance companies and union leaders.  The Massachusetts seat was retaken by a Democrat, Ms. Elizabeth Warren, pledging to penalize Wall Street, the source of privilege.
  • Mr. Narendra Modi in India rose to power from modest upbringing. But Mr. Modi was vigorously opposed by the very source of privilege in USA and VIPs in India due to their fear that he would be dictatorial in eliminating privilege.   The Juggernaut to undo privilege, however, marched on.  The privilege creators in USA had to “Modyfy” their views of India nder Mr. Modi in November 2013.  President Obama then removed the American ambassador in India and Mr. Modi appeared invincible as he won election after election. 
  • After occupying a position of privilege, Mr. Modi dilly-dallied on his pledges, hobnobbed with the same sources of privilege and, thus, appeared to retract from his positions.  This led to a spectacular rise of a decimated Aam Admi Party headed by Mr. Arvind Kejriwal who pledged credibly to remain an unprivileged common man, even after winning the Delhi election resoundingly. 
  • Mr. Kejriwal’s opponents have expressed fear that he is dictatorial, which is detrimental to democracy for the AAP as well as India.  If Mr. Kejriwal, however, becomes a “dictator,” to follow the diktat of No-Subsidy Mantra in governance, he will be unanimously adored.  We will then have super-democracy or Ram-Rajya with absolute support of most, if not all, voting for him in future polls. 
  • Mr. Kejriwal has not so far committed to the No-Subsidy Mantra in governance.  His pledge to have a corruption-free rule is subsumed within the No-Subsidy Mantra in governance, but this is not enough for people AAP to win elections for ever. USA and Europe too have had such corruption-free governance.  Why did the American and European economies crash in 2008 with millions of good jobs lost and trillions of dollars of hard earned wealth wiped out?  It is because of surreptitious usurpation of private wealth through laws, acts and policies of the government with the robbed wealth flowing to the privileged class. 
  • Thus, Mr. Kejriwal’s or Mr. Modi’s pledges for a corruption-free India will do nothing to stop the massive legalized robbery of private and public wealth by the privileged class through laws, policies, procedures adopted in parliament.
  • India like China may see rapid economic growth as their wealth creators are lured to produce and serve with their animal instincts.  But until the surreptitious system of robbery is repealed thoroughly, the economy (whether in rising India or China) will crash just like it has in USA, Europe and Japan. 
  • Indians have already detected the surreptitious system of robbery of their hard-earned wealth and have resorted to savings in gold and real-estate that they think could not be robbed.  But the manipulation of gold, real estate and rupee prices will shock Indians and Chinese (as it was to Americans and Europeans), if it already has not.

Congress Party of India can rise again by reviving its
March Towards Unanimously Agreeable Governance

A paramount test/implication of the No-Subsidy Mantra in Governance is to ban private funding (small or large) of elections and to let the public/government exchequer bear a candidate’s election expenses up to a fixed sum plus a variable amount pegged to the number of votes received. 

The only political leader ever to speak before an elected body of representatives anywhere in the world for public funding of elections is Mr. Rahul Gandhi of Indian Congress Party.  Mr. Gandhi was even supported by the opposition leader in Indian Parliament, Mr. L.K. Advani.  A tide of No-Subsidy Mantra thus surged.  But it ebbed with a rising Modi wave, founded with a hope that an individual with modest upbringing could transform India, akin to the hope underlying the Obama wave in USA in 2008.  

Mr. Modi has embraced the constitution as his religious script.  He has, however, not expressed volition to repeal any existing law, act, policy, rule or procedure which facilitates surreptitious usurpation of public and private wealth.   Any such volition would have led him to amend the constitutional preamble to stop all laws and policies that facilitate usurpation of public and private wealth, now and in future. 

Lack of such volition on the part of Mr. Modi and his party must have led to a resounding Delhi poll verdict in favor of the Aam Admi Party by wiping out established parties like the BJP and Congress from the state.  The AAP and its leader, Mr. Kejriwal, sounded sincere in their pledge for corruption free governance.  Common people continue to dread corporate funding and takeover of established parties.  The Delhi verdict shows that no charisma or wave can any longer countervail the thirst of people to eliminate subsidizes, especially, to corporations. 

The issue that AAP has to resolve now is whether it can survive by subsidizing its non-corporate constituents with largesse like free water and cheap electricity.  Those producing water and electricity will not toil to subsidize AAP voters.  This issue maybe why AAP got barely above 50% of the vote in Delhi.  The AAP will eventually lose its charm in Delhi, let alone become a pan-Indian winner, if it relies on subsidizes for its constituents by penalizing the rest and by taxing the public exchequer. 

This means that a vigorous revival of Congress Party of India is still possible if the party can shed its past and credibly articulate the No-Subsidy Mantra as the only unanimously agreeable principle of governance available for sustainable welfare of people.  This will enlighten people that not seeking doles from politicians is the only way to eliminate legalized privilege thriving from surreptitious robbery of their public and private wealth.  The recent budget presented by the BJP reduced subsidies somewhat.  But ex-PM Dr. Manmohan Singh has correctly criticized that this budget failed to take advantage of the current current economic tailwind to cut deficit by further reduction of subsidies. 

Being the only political leader to speak forcefully in the parliament for public funding of elections, Mr. Gandhi is the only credible leader who can pledge a stop in the flow of private funds to elections and political parties.  He can, thus, be the only credible global political leader to champion the No-Subsidy Mantra in governance to be unanimously acceptable among people.  People will not hold him responsible for lapses of erstwhile Congress leaders if Mr. Gandhi credibly pledges to repeal all laws and policies that now facilitate usurpation of public and private wealth and avers to amend the constitutional preamble to prevent enactment of any such law in future.  By doing so, he will effectively convert the Indian National Congress to an “Unprivileged People’s Party,” which could attract even non-political individuals like me as members.       

Dawn of A Unifying Philosophy to Attain Individual Freedom

Humans pine for freedom.  Fighting among various communities–based on nationality, privilege, race, skin color, class, caste or religious beliefs (including scientific and agnostic)–has, however, stifled individual freedom.  Communal leaders have artificially created the divisions to command people within their communities.  People remaining beholden to their communal leaders tend to provide free serving and produce to the kith, kin and cronies of their leaders. The leaders devise ways and means of preserving the identities of their communities to enjoy free goods and services. The leaders, their kith, kin and cronies thus enjoy freedom through subjugation of people within each community. Communalism dilutes individual freedom. Individual freedom is antithetic to the mission of communal leaders. 

Self-serving communal leaders foist moral hazard (blackmailing) tactics to keep individuals confined to their respective communities to provide free goods and service to the kith, kin and cronies of their leaders. The moral hazard of communal leaders include the following: 

  • Ostracizing for deviation from communal norms.
  • Punishing for blasphemy.
  • Prosecuting for treason of individuals who transcend communalism to enhance individual freedom.
  • Inducing people within a community to fight for their freedom from shenanigans of other communities.
  • Indoctrinating masses of people that they are inferior to a few annointed Masters of Universe (god's children) with the power to rob public and private wealth for first-best status by subjugating the rest (those robbed of their hard-earned wealth) to second-best sustenance..

Research shows that moral hazard stifles liberty and supports the current unconstitutional, unstable and inefficient system of money and finance The only way for individuals to attain freedom from moral hazard shenanigans of their self-serving communal leaders is to (a) embrace a unified philosophically (or universalism) and to (b) demand institution of unanimously agreeable No-Subsidy Mantra in Governance. Individuals can then resolve moral hazard efficiently and, simultaneously, obviate alibis of communal leaders to prosecute or penalize any individual. Universalism is the only efficient antidote to subjugation through moral hazard shenanigans of communal leaders.

Universalism is thus inherently desired by all humans longing for their freedom. 

Common people have of late recognized how moral hazard stifles their freedom and how universalism can beget their liberty.  The recent spate of reversals in poll verdicts worldwide and concurrent confrontation (violent and verbal) among communal leaders of all hues harbinger a triumph of universalism over communalism, 

The unifying philosophy and the unanimously agreeable principle of civilized coexistence of humans have been discovered (through decades of selfless research since 1991) to beget individual freedom from surreptitious subjugation going on through the current system of money and finance.  Established communal leaders have been, however, working overtime to block dissemination of such research discoveries.  Their obvious mission is to perpetuate self interests by suppressing innate human longing for freedom through a commonly acceptable principles of governance and unified philosophy of coexistence.  The self-serving leaders want to enjoy first0best status by keeping the vast majority of wealth creators financially (invisibly) bonded.  Empirically, the kith, kin and cronies of communal leaders have become richer than the rest.  The current unprecedented degree of inequality shows rampant financial bondage of the vast majority of people.  This is unsustainable in equilibrium and will inevitably crash as people march towards financial freedom.     

Absolute knowledge on universalism has been permeating rapidly, despite the efforts of self-serving leaders to suppress spread of such knowledge. Recent poll verdicts globally indicate that people are marching towards a moral hazard free system of money and finance for stability, fundamental fairness and efficient survival.  This march will eventually undo the artificial divisions foisted on people by self-serving communal leaders of all hues.  It is, therefore, prudent for self-serving communal leaders to give up their designs and facilitate a moral hazard free system of money and finance for coexistence of humans.

History of Subjugation and Prohibitive Cost of Obfuscation
of Fundamental Truth paramount to Individual Freedom

Even though the discovery of a moral hazard free system of coexistence is unprecedented, self-serving leaders suppressing public dissemination of such discoveries is not: 

  • Ancient Indian texts describe how self-serving leaders (narrated as devils) frequently disturbed saints meditating to discover fundamentally fair rules for coexistence of humanity and how those (such as Krishna) that demolished the devils to establish fair rules for co-existence (such as Gita) were later revered as ‘god.’  The word ‘god’ stems from German got which appears to stem from Krishna’s family name ‘Goud.’
  • The devilish genes did not obviously perish even after the humans carrying them were vanquished in the epic Mahabharat war, which was actually won by Krishna.  These genes simply mutated to improvise newer systems of subjugation.  They formed more sophisticated avenues that appeared to be unanimously acceptable and, hence, fundamentally fair.  For instance, they established temples dedicated to Krishna–who was revered as a reincarnation of the almighty–to invoke people to offer their hard-earned produce for salvation and union with god after death. 
  • The Church formalized the ancient Indian temple guidelines as tithe by which people offering one-tenth of their produce would reach god through Christianity.  The late Pope John Paul has publicly stated that Christianity is the best path to reach god.  People have eventually discovered, however, such rules of temples and churches as designs to rob their hard-earned wealth before death, just like the modern system of money and finance does.  
  • A new leader (Mohammed) emerged to exploit the emerging abhorrence of people to idolizing and worshipping human saviors like Krishna and Jesus as reincarnation or son of god.  Mohammed claimed to be the prophet designated by the almighty god to script new rules (Sunnah, Sariat and Quoran) for governance of humanity. Mohammed was so confident about him being the only messenger of god designated to script how the humanity should be governed that he deemed anyone not accepting his scripts as infidels with no right to exist without conversion to Islam.  Mohammed made his scripture sacrosanct, not amenable to amendment by evolving wisdom of humanity.
  • Mohammed’s wisdom that everyone is equal synchronized with the then emerging chorus against the worshippers of reincarnations and sons of god.  Ironically, though, Mohammed made himself superior by making himself the sole prophet of god.  He never substantiated, though, his tryst with almighty god (his Allah).  He never defined Allah rationally, but asked everyone to believe in his rendition of the message from Allah. 
  • Mohammad ushered an era of invasion to usurp others’ hard earned wealth and to force people to accept Islam.  The loot and mayhem of Mogul invaders in India and their forcible conversion of people to Mohammedan religion (Islam) does not prove superiority of the Islamic system of governance.  It rather proves that Islam too became another system of usurpation of others’ hard earned wealth.   
  • Mohammed’s point that no one was superior to others perhaps shaped the idea of democracy with equal votes for every individual.  Islam, however, did not become a superior religion.  Most Islamic countries have abandoned Prophet’s idea of equality to be ruled by monarchs.
  • Humanity could not see rational rendition of god in any religion. Science being shaped rationally then engulfed human thinking.  An Oxford University Professor and Nobel Prize winner, Bertrand Russell, has claimed that rationality of science triumphed over every religion and god.  But Russell too failed to define god rationally.  Comparing something rational (science) with another (god) not defined rationally is obviously incoherent and irrational.  The system of scientific beliefs cannot, therefore, be proclaimed to be superior to beliefs based on religion and god.  The dogma that science is superior has has helped establish a new system of beliefs, Academic Religion.  
  • Academic Religion has shaped the currently established second-best system of governance of humanity.  The Academic Religion has been shaped by erstwhile Christian missionaries like Oxford, Cambridge, Harvard and Yale after their transformation as elite universities.  The elite universities have anointed themselves as the keepers of Academic Religion.  Other universities had to follow the elite to be counted as propagators of superiority of Academic Religion. 
  • The epicenter of Academic Religion has been top gurus or experts designated to prepare disciples (students) to work hard and create wealth with inspiration from and dedication to the gurus as well as to a few specially chosen star students anointed as the Masters of the Universe (MoU).  The MoU collaborate with lawmakers to enact laws supported by academic papers published in journals controlled by the gurus to facilitate surreptitious robbery of public and private wealth.  The MoU then share the loot with the elite Academy as charitable donations and with the lawmakers as political contributions.  Anyone in the academy who challenges the foundation of Academic Religion is ostracized and eventually eliminated from the academy. 
  • The Academic Religion like all other religions has crashed in 2008. The 2008 financial crash was worse than the Great Depression, according to the Federal Reserve Board.  This crash involved a panic-driven run on $7.8 trillion of previously uninsured bank debt and $3.5 trillion in previously uninsured money market funds.  It caused loss of trillions of dollars of hard-earned wealth and millions of good paying jobs. 
  • The Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission appointed by the US Congress has found in its report released in 2011 that the 2008 financial crash was caused by the failure of the established experts and Masters of the Universe, i.e., the guardians of the Academic Religion.  The academy has indebted students with $1.4 trillion of debt that they cannot easily repay.  This debt does not count the loss of hard-earned savings of parents spent in training their children in Academic Religion which has failed according to the US Congress.
  • The Academic Religion chooses a few to become the Masters of the Universe to enjoy first-best status by robbing hard-earned wealth of others and to share the loot with the elite academy and lawmakers to spread the punditry to the rest of humanity.  This keeps the vast majority perpetually robbed of their hard-earned wealth so that they have no wherewithal to challenge the robbery in court or otherwise.
  • The origin and spread of Academic Religion and associated system of robbery can be traced back to ancient India which founded the organized university education in Ratnagiri of Odisha (my birthplace that nurtured me for 22 years) and Nalanda and Taxila in Bihar: 
  • Before the advent of organized education, the privileged Kings and princes were educated by Brahmin saints who meditated to discover new knowledge.
  • Being superior due to knowledge acquired from meditating saints, Kings wielded enormous power among their uneducated subjects and established a system of robbery of wealth created by the hard-working subjects.  As mega robbers, kings appointed provincial lords who would loot private wealth through divisional collectors. 
  • British merchants (Masters) discovered the ancient Indian system and improvised it through commercial enterprises called companies.  Companies became repertoires of wealth in forms of debt and equity securities.  Companies generated profits (allocated to debt and equity) by employing people at wages significantly lower than the prices of products and services sold to people.
  • When unprivileged people got used to investing in the same companies to become rich, the privileged Masters devised financial market shenanigans to loot such investments.
  • The Masters shared the loot with monarchs (rulers) who, during a depression caused by rampant looting, distributed food and cloth to the surreptitiously robbed and deprived wealth creators and energized fresh blood (youngsters) to create wealth to be looted again.
  • The rulers ostensibly penalized the collectors (to please the public) while authorizing the latter to keep robbing the wealth creators surreptitiously.  The collectors allowed to share such loot could not rise to speak against the rulers.  Those that spoke or did not want to rob were shunted out of the system, 
  • Everyone has been, thus, allowed to rob others and no one dared to voice loud enough against an obviously unstable system.  The system crashed on its own when wealth creators stopped persevering. 
  • This is how the once-wealthiest country in the world (India) turned indolent and idolatrous with perpetual prayers for reemergence of another savior to change the system. 
  • The usurping ‘foreign’ monarchs then turned inwards to turn their developed nations indolent. 

 

Systemic crash of 2008 has paved the path towards
fundamental fairness, efficiency and stability

The lesson of the 2008 crash is that no one (including robbers) would like to be robbed and that systemic robbery causes indolence of wealth creators.  For stability (equilibrium) and efficiency, if not fundamental fairness, therefore, the system of robbery will have to be dismantled.  This epistemic truth (unanimously agreeable to all) has triumphed and will prevail, thanks to the selfless discoveries. 

The course towards restoration of equilibrium (stability), fundamental fairness and efficiency is as follows:  wealth creators will stop creating wealth for the robbers (i.e., avoid playing the game of robbers), demand a return of their surreptitiously stolen wealth, and pursue for dismantling of the system of robbery.  The robbers will then have no wherewithal to challenge the public demand.  This course has already started in numerous lawsuits against the US government.

Conclusions

1. Crash of the modern doctrine or Academic Religion
has significant precedents

The hubris of modern punditry/doctrine/academics-designed for robbery of public and private wealth-has ultimately turned out to be no different from the bygone religious dogmas about reaching heaven and god through a temple, a mosque, or a church:

  • As stated earlier, Pope John Paul II once claimed that the best path to heaven and god was Christianity.  It sounded as if only the Pope had a tryst with God, though he never could rationally define god, let alone outline him physically.  Such religious dogma underlay merciless killing of numerous Brahmins in Goa, who refused to accept superiority of an irrationally ordained path to heaven and god through only Christianity.  Many of those Brahmins that became Christians for survival still call themselves Saraswat-Brahmin-Christians and maintain their tradition of searching and spreading new knowledge. 
  • The next major religion (Islam) was scripted by someone who claimed that he was the sole prophet of Allah/god and, thus, arrogated the authority from his god to script new rules for humanity to obey without defining his Allah rationally.  Those who did not embrace Islam were disgraced as infidels and subjected to strictures.
  • Even a top-notch mathematician (an Oxford University Professor and Nobel Prize winner Bertrand Russell) claimed that rationality of science triumphed over every religion and its associated god without defining god rationally.  How can one compare something (science) defined rationally an undefined object (god), let alone assert that the former is superior to the latter? 
  • Modern monarchs have exploited the pseudo-triumph of science over religion (i) to induce people to revere the academy (the latest temple of worship for humanity) and part their hard-earned wealth in form of hefty tuition and (ii) to designate a few students as gendarmes of the system of robbery.  The 2008 crash bared the fallacy of this Academic Religion through mountains of debt at unseemly rates of interest laden on the students with insufficient post-graduation income to repay their obligations.  The debt burden of students is a small part of the massive loss of savings and debt of their parents beholden to meet the educational needs of their children.   

2. The Design of Modern Academic Religion

The Academic Religion is a design for send-best status of principals (citizens) that have the talents and skills to persevere and create globally competitive goods and services: 

  • The Academic Religion now gripping humanity has permitted only a select few to become rulers of states and chief executives of companies and academic institutions to enjoy first-best status with all kinds of privileges by subjecting the rest to second-best sustenance.  Erstwhile religious missionaries have been converted to be temples for propagation of Academic Religion to indoctrinate a selected group of people to serve as dedicated gendarmes of this religion. 
  • Ordinary people are driven by the lure of “achievements” of the selected few gendarmes without deciphering that most such achievements are based on wealth robbed from wealth creators.  The embedded media publicizes the achievers and suppresses the truth about the loss to the vast majority.  Cooperating academics are rewarded to suppress discoveries that this system of robbery is fundamentally unfair (unconstitutional), inefficient and unsustainable.  Most people have to cooperate for their survival. 
  • Robber Barons ensure that they (a) periodically decimate any significant wealth accumulated by middle-rung self-made successful entrepreneurs (like dissociated hedge funds and money managers) and (b) destroys career of any academic researcher that dares to expose the truth about instability, inefficiency and unconstitutionality of this system in order to thwart potential challenge and throw crumbs at the keepers of the system in the academy and government that indoctrinate people to keep faith in this religion.

3. Lessons for Individuals

Every doctrine/punditry/sophistry designed to subjugate humanity has crashed eventually. The financial catastrophe of 2008 publicly bared the underlying instability of the punditry behind the current system of robbery.  In fact, the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission Report released in 2011 finds that the 2008 crisis was manmade (avoidable) due to a failure of established academic pundits in the industry, academy and government. 

The pundits behind the current Academic Religion were fully aware of the instability of the established system since at least 1991, when my research paper on efficient resolution of moral hazard was first mimeographed at the Federal Reserve Board.  They and their counterparts in industry and government simply made hay while it shone by presuming that the robbed public was either stupid or lacked the wherewithal to protest. Most of the academic models published in so-called esteemed journals presume that the public is stupid.  Most crucial government policies they have enforced, based on their published research, are predicated on stupidity of the public. 

I learnt early on from a top revered academic guru about how the crucial results (conclusions) of his models were predicated on tacitly presumed stupidity of the public.  Since then I worked on models in which the public could not be fooled.  This is why my models were not published in academic journals controlled by the top gurus with a hope that I would vanish from the academy or perish before anyone ever knew of the profound truths discovered in my research. 

It is perhaps the tacit support of the public for my selfless research that the discoveries from it could not remain blacked out for ever. This is notwithstanding my expectations to the contrary.  Once I discovered the modus operandi of the Academic Religion, I became inured to any reward from the system of robbery it fostered. 

The established gurus could block publication of my models on begetting first-best status for principals (citizens) in the journals they controlled.  They could even have a temporal pyrrhic victory until 2008. They could not, however, prevent the truths discovered in my models from being bared by the 2008 collapse of Academic Relision. The truths have now permeated among the principals. The principals can now undo the established system to prevent robbery of their hard-earned wealth.  To serve their best interests, i.e., to not be robbed of their hard-earned wealth, the principals can appoint appropriate governors, presidents and chief executives of companies and regulatory agencies.  Their ability to do so is rapidly gaining momentum among principals comprising the rich, the middle-class and the poor among all castes, religions, races and nationality.  It seems to be the dawn of a new era of proscription of any rule, law, act, policy or procedure that facilitates even surreptitious usurpation of public and private wealth.