BNP-AL and contestable markets

After my articles about BNP and AL were published in January, I received several inquiries about my ideological orientation and political aspirations. My commentaries are intended to have an impact on political discourse and the endemic economic illiteracies of our politicians. In the process, I criticize party leaders and their policies as they relate to politics and economics while fearing or favouring no one. I have absolutely no political affiliation, although some readers thought it otherwise.

Don't forget that editorials and columns also reflect the views of many politicians who are often in servitude and dare not to speak out against their leaders. For example, Jamaat is taking away MP seats and cabinet positions from diehard BNP politicians. The PM is maneuvering Jamaat to strengthen her grip on both parties so as to perpetuate political power within family which I call family-tisation of country's governance. BNP politicians all prattle about these but no one has the pluck to speak out. So they tacitly cheer for editors and columnists for doing the job on their behalf.

Tap here to add The Daily Star as a trusted source

There has long been a widespread notion that political orientation is genetic. But no academically defensible theories would propound this view today. However, political literature advances three main sources of influence that moulds political upbringing and orientation of an individual with long-term effects.

• The primary influence stems from family. Children will often espouse their parents' ideological values. Family's imprints on young minds have the strongest and most lasting influences. Experiences from developing countries show that corrupt parents often produce corrupt children if they join politics and government.
• Teachers and educated extended family figures also have a significant impact on political orientation. From age 4 up until 18, children in the US spend about 25 percent of their time in academic pursuits. Post-secondary education has significant impact on political awareness and orientation. In fact, this is the stage when students in Bangladesh are drawn into politics (mostly those who are not succeeding) through the lures of various incentives and promises by professional student agents of various political parties
• Peers also influence political behaviour. Friends often have the benefit of being part of the same generation, which collectively develops a unique set of political and societal issues.
• There are two core short-term factors which also effect political behaviour of leaders and voters. Their influence often relies on the individuals' specific political ideology formed by the long term factors explicated above.
• The broadcast media, newspapers, and columnists often offer commentaries on issues which can cause ideological shifts but not transformation. The analyses of events and issues verbally or visually can also affect individual political orientation.
• Election-issues such as campaign pledges, debates, and commercials sometimes influence voters. Political campaigns can shift certain political behaviours based on the candidates involved, which have different degrees of influences on voters and would be politicians.

The ruling BANJIP appears too dogged to adhere to any constructive comments and criticisms regardless of where they stem from. To govern a country the PM must not always depend on advisers briefings about events and issues. To get a real feel of the country's pulse, the day must start with a sumptuous breakfast and a scan through the newspapers, particularly those critical of the administration.

Our politicians are always subject to incessant public ridicule and gossip both inside and outside the country for being undereducated or ill-educated. Then there is the mismatch between the ignorant and the knowledgeable, where the former pretend to be jack of all trades and create problems for the latter because the ignorant are generally the majority.

My columns are intended for political parties which harbour wheeler-dealer type political elements and are guided by the well known Contestable Markets Theory (CMT).

This theory is about competitive versus monopoly behaviour of firms and businesses. A monopolist is a single seller of a product who maximizes profit by producing less and charging higher prices compared to many competitive firms producing the same product. Keep in mind that monopoly and competition are mutually exclusive. In the US, mergers within industries such as banking, telecommunications, and airlines have created a stir among consumers who accuse that economic freedom and efficiency are being compromised (by withering competition) in favour of corporate profits.

Princeton University economics professor William Baumal, author of CMT, argues that mergers and monopolization of firms may not be a serious problem. The theory upholds that even if there is one seller of a product, that seller may be self-motivated to act as if there were many more. The threat of potential entry of new firms (assuming entry is not cost prohibitive) may induce the single seller to keep the industry operating at or close to competitive prices and output thus benefiting the consumers while discouraging new entrants.

I argue that CMT may also produce an analogous outcome if pursued in politics. The fear of being unseated from power may force the BANJIP to govern with transparency, accountability and rule of law. To create that fear a strong and worthy opposition party under able and dynamic leadership must exist.

Columnists thus focus on wrongdoings of politicians and if possible, modify their behaviour and in the process wish for the opposition party to get some steam to become competitive and marshal a threat to depose the ruling party. Columnists and media's role will reverse if the ruling party reverses its status from ruler to loser after the election.

Whichever party rules the country is not of any personal interest to me. But whoever wins must be fit to rule. As Prime Minister, Hasina gave an impression that her party comes ahead of the country while Khaleda showed that her family and friends get precedence over that of the country. This is the reason why the country has dipped in international image (corruption, alliance with religious extremists, terrorism, politicisation, marginalizing the oppositions, and media bashing.) Some of the same have started during Hasina's reign but Khaleda, instead of curbing them, let loose family, friends and party cronies with full vigotr which brought the country to the disrepute of the most corrupt country.

If re-elected, Khaleda and Nizami will claim BANJIP has the verdict to do more of the same. If BANJIP loses, BNP may dislodge from Jamaat, and Khaleda may become a transformed leader next time around which we hope to happen if Hasina wins this time. Unfortunately, when the people of a country, under the reign of 'most corrupt' administration say "they are the happiest in the world" how can you dispute what Khaleda-Nizami regime claims?

Dr Abdullah A Dewan is Professor of Economics, Eastern Michigan University.