By Professor Mahfuz R. Chowdhury

Economics has been defined in a number of different ways. All definitions however lead to its central theme that it is an art of accumulating material wealth. The main objective is how to achieve a comfortable life. As such, the idea of economics is nothing new to people. Although Adam Smith, who published The Wealth of Nations in 1776, is regarded as the father of modern economics, its subject matter is as old as the human race itself. It was not by any choice that people started to practice economics; their very survival practically forced them to engage in economic activities. The main difference between ancient and modern economics is that people have learned to practice economics in a more scientific and organized manner.

The fundamental idea of economics is that economic resources are limited, but human wants are unlimited. So, to get the greatest fulfillment of their wants, people need to utilize their limited resources in the most efficient and economic way. Also, people need to choose what satisfies them most, since they cannot get everything they want. This concept of economics was as true when people lived in caves as it is today. People have come a long way from the time of cave dwelling, and have made tremendous progress in raising their living standards. Unquestionably, people are now better fed, better clothed and better informed. They can enjoy life more and live longer. In other words, there has been tremendous economic progress over time. More importantly, along with many technological innovations, this progress is continuously changing for the better. But alas, while human society is making such achievements, not everybody in society is getting the opportunity to share the benefits equally. The opportunity gap among people is staggering - some live in great luxury, while others find it hard to even feed themselves properly.

From World Bank and other United Nations data one can see that about 75 percent of the total world GDP is concentrated in 20 percent of the richest countries of the world whose average annual per capita income is about $30,000, while the average income of the poorest 20 percent of the countries is hardly $1,000. Nearly three billion people of the world live on less than $2 a day, and approximately one billion of them live on less than $1 a day. These one billion people in the lower income group are deprived of even clean drinking water let alone other necessities of life. What is more amazing, the gap in the ratio of income between the top 20 percent and the poorest 20 percent of people in the world is not shrinking, but widening. In 1960 the ratio was thought to be 30 to 1, but by 1994 that ratio increased to 78 to 1. What an anomaly!

Now, the important lesson of economics is that in a situation where resources are limited and wants are unlimited, one cannot get rich without leaving others poor. What this basically means is that, for wealth to be concentrated in the hands of few, many others will have to be deprived of their due shares. From such an economic and logical point of view, the disparities that currently exist in society could only be achieved through the perpetration of economic exploitation. It is true that some countries of the world are endowed with more natural resources than others, and part of the income disparity that exists between nations may thus be attributed to the possession of such resources. But that is only part of the story, because the origin of disparity clearly lies in the economic oppression of people. Let us briefly examine the situation from a historical perspective to see if this argument holds.

Early Economics and the Role of Family:

The initial economic problem people faced was how best to utilize their time to collect food or build shelter. There was simply not enough time to do everything they wished done. For example, if they spent the whole day catching fish they would have to forgo meat. From an economic point of view, the opportunity cost of having more fish would be the meat. So, people had to decide what they wanted most - fish or meat. If they wanted both fish and meat they would have to allocate their time accordingly. The choice would be made based on the cost and benefit of having one as opposed to the other. Even after making a choice, people needed to economize on their time and energy in order to improve their output. This theme or idea eventually led each person to do the things that he/she was best suited for. Thus, people learned things by doing, and went on building things using their experience. In fact, the things we see around us today, besides the gifts of nature, are all built by people with their bare hands. The learning process is continuing and more and better things are being built with each knowledge and experience gained.

In the early days of the human race, the two most significant elements of economics - production and distribution of goods and services - did not seem to pose too much of a problem for people. Typically, the head of the family would direct other members to specific tasks, and in the end he/she would distribute the output among the family members. The weak and the sick members would be provided for. Thus, the family was the center of every economic activity wherein each member had a part. After the family had grown in size and age, it was dispersed and each of its members began a new family. The process would repeat itself, and gradually with increased populations, communities began to form in different areas. The formation of communities brought changes in people?s lives; but it has not quite dampened the spirit of a family. Even in modern times, the family continues to remain the main center of economic activities in many parts of the world.

From their experience people began to learn that their demand for goods and services would not end. The fulfillment of one demand was followed by the creation of another demand. The more the people got the more they wanted. There was simply no end to their demand. So, their struggle to obtain more goods and services was perpetuated. The involvement and cooperation of immediate family members might be sufficient in fulfilling certain parts of their demand. But continual increase in the community population steadily brought changes to people?s lives, which in essence brought changes to the nature and scope of their demand. Increasing community populations created more and newer opportunities, but at the same time it also brought new challenges - how to share the available limited resources and the produce. So, in order to meet such challenges people sought and made various alliances with their community members. With changing circumstances, people had to accommodate by widening their alliances. It was mainly through these kinds of developments in society that people gradually came to unite under the banner of one?s clan, community, region, and lastly the state.

The Rise of Social Ruling Class:

Economics has primarily worked as the motivating force for bringing together various segments of society. The main purpose of each social alliance was to accumulate wealth both individually and collectively. But the outcome of that very process in which people made alliances affected society in a most astounding way. Instead of the wealth accruing evenly in society, a few privileged people gained more wealth than others. This is how it came about: in every stage of their alliance, people were uniting under one leadership. This leadership customarily went to those in society who were manipulative and at the same time possessed political and organizing power. But, after having gained the leadership position, the leader then proceeded to establish special rules to seize extra wealth for himself. Subsequently, by means of collaborating with each other, the leaders succeeded in creating a ruling class, which then continued to pursue the practice of accumulating wealth, in even greater proportions. To accomplish their goals, as evidenced by historical facts, members of the ruling class often perpetrated extortion, brutality and oppression over others. In early days, it was basically in this way that wealth in society followed power. The stronger the power, the more wealth it had accumulated.

Then again, the emerging ruling class did not always get everything "on a silver platter." They faced competition from others aspiring to accumulate wealth. As people fought each other for wealth, each person earned his privilege by defeating the competing forces in society. To be sure, human history is filled with tales of various warring factions and of enmity among different groups as well as the fierceness of their conflicts. In other words, there were conflicts everywhere. How did those conflicts then get resolved in the end? The answer is quite simple. They were resolved by the supreme law of the land - the law of survival of the fittest. Through this law, the feeble and the weak were eliminated, while the powerful continued to prosper. One very remarkable outcome of this process was the rise of slavery in which people were bought and sold like commodities. As a matter of fact, slavery used to be considered the main pillar of economic society in ancient times. The system of slavery developed and prospered on the very concept of oppression. As to the extent of brutality and oppression that existed during slavery, it is already well documented.

The Rise of Kingdoms:

Human society has undergone innumerable changes. Most of the changes were initiated by the members of the so-called social ruling class. Their intense desire to accumulate additional wealth and to achieve greater control of society led them to continually undertake many new adventures. Among other initiatives, these adventures included the expansion of their power base from localities to regions and beyond. But success in such endeavors would clearly depend on their ability to consolidate power. It was precisely for this reason that society experienced power consolidation, which in essence became an ongoing phenomenon. Thus, there were power struggles in all places, and these struggles frequently put one society against another. In the end, it was the dominant power which prevailed and continued to maintain control.

In the not too distant past, societies used to be ruled by kings. Some of these kingdoms were small, while others were very extensive and exerted tremendous power. It mainly depended on which kingdom could amass the most power and the social relationships of the kingdoms. Regardless of the position of the kingdoms, there should be no delusion about their kings being mystical or supernatural beings. These kings were pure and simple the products of the social ruling class. The emergence of kingdoms in society was the direct result of consolidation of power. With the consolidation of power came the elimination of weaker factions. Ostensibly, society underwent a succession of power consolidations. At each succession, the victor amassed more power, which was then used to further expand its power. It was essentially through this process that the most manipulative and powerful emerged as the kings and monarchs, who then ruled authoritatively.

As with everything in life, every societal conflict extracted a price. No matter how it began, it was the common people who ended up paying the price for each conflict. The bigger the conflict or consolidation of power, the higher was the price people had to pay. For the establishment of kingdoms, a greater mobilization of social forces was needed, which then extracted a much heavier price. Again, it was the people who took the full brunt of all such costs. Indeed, the common people not only paid for the establishment of each kingdom but also for its maintenance. The kings and their cronies always managed to lead a comfortable life at the expense of common people. History clearly reveals the kind of brutality and oppression which the kingdoms of the world have perpetrated on mankind.

Birth of Democracy and Capitalism:

As many of the kings were ruthless rulers, resistance against them was slowly brewing in society. With the increase of awareness among people, it was only a matter time before the kings would lose their power. Europe actually pioneered the movement to dethrone the kings of the world. In ancient Greece there were city-states headed by basileus, or hereditary kings. With growing discontent among the people, many of those kings were successfully overthrown in the eighth century BC. This was followed by a period of experimentation with a number of political alternatives like oligarchy, timocracy, tyranny, and finally with democracy. The idea of democracy in Greece was believed to have originated sometime in the sixth century BC. The Greek democracies, however, were not at all true representative governments; they were governments run by the free male citizens only.

After the fall of the Roman Empire in the fifth century AD, when Europe was practically thrown into disarray, various small-scale political entities began to form in the Roman held areas. From the fifth to fifteenth century, a period known as the Middle Ages, Europe underwent numerous changes. With the large-scale political organization broken down, the economic structure of Europe was rapidly changing. It eventually settled in a system of governance which came to be known as feudalism. Feudalism was primarily characterized by a political and economic system in which a king shared his power with the nobility, who required services from the common people in return for allowing them to use his land. In the country, the basic unit of economic organization was the manorial estate, where the noble was the lord. While in the town centers, there were the institutions of guilds, which were the remnant manufacturing and business units from the Roman era, such as trade, professional, and craft organizations. The guild masters in the town centers would run their own affairs. In any case, during mediaeval times economics was not the most important aspect of people?s lives. Religion largely dominated their lives, and the churches wielded ultimate authority on all social as well as economic matters. The feudal system was nevertheless responsible for generating a social middle class, which soon began to exert its influence in society.

By the 16th century, various democratic movements in line with earlier Greek experiments began to develop in Europe. These movements principally grew to challenge the entrenched power of the church and the feudal aristocracy. Eventually, these movements succeeded in transforming society from feudalism to capitalism. It is important to note that the ultimate transformation from feudalism to capitalism was the result of the struggle between the aristocratic elites and the emerging middle class men, who wanted to share power in society. The primary objective of the advocates of democracy was thus to replace the power of autocratic regimes with that of the well-to-do middle class men, and not necessarily by the public as a whole.

The next two centuries witnessed the effects of democratic revolutions that swept the countries of Europe and the then British Colony of America, which became the United States of America in 1776. The democratic movements may have proliferated under different circumstances in different areas, but the overriding fact remains that democratic ideas grew primarily to facilitate the growth of capitalism. Capitalism itself has been defined in a number of ways as it encompasses a number of ideas. In common usage, however, it refers to an economic system in which the means of production are predominantly privately owned and are operated for profit. In the beginning, the term capitalism was mostly used to describe a system that would promote private investment and industry with little or no governmental control. The prevailing feudal system in Europe was thought to work against the development and expansion of capitalism. The contention was that a free individual, as opposed to a serf bound to his landlord's land in the feudal system, was essential for the growth of capitalism. It was through this process that the democratic movement succeeded in creating a working class for the functioning of capitalism.

Colonization and the Industrial Revolution:

By the middle of the fifteenth century, the kingdoms of Europe were gearing up for various expeditions around the world. They were essentially being driven by the idea of mercantilism. Mercantilism has been defined as a system of political economy prevailing in Europe after the decline of feudalism, based on national policies of accumulating bullion, establishing colonies and a merchant marine, and developing industry and mining to attain a favorable balance of trade. The European race for expeditions went into full swing after Christopher Columbus accidentally discovered America in 1492. Their initial voyages were undertaken in the name of trade. But when the opportunity for colonization presented itself the Europeans immediately grabbed it. By the middle of the eighteenth century, most of the countries of Asia, Africa, North and South Americas as well as Australia were converted into European colonies. Having established their authority, they then engaged in siphoning off wealth from the colonies under their rule. As the colonies provided lucrative jobs to many European citizens, the system promptly gave rise to a strong bourgeois class, which then provided the last push needed to make capitalism the dominant system in Europe. Indeed, these colonies provided what was fundamentally needed for the expansion of a capitalist system: a captive market and the source of raw materials.

Among the European countries, Great Britain emerged as the strongest and largest of all colonial powers. At its height, the British colonies were so widespread that the sun was said not to set on the British Empire. Thus, as a colonial power they clearly reaped the most benefit. By utilizing their newly acquired wealth, the British were able to forge the great industrial revolution in the late eighteenth century. This revolution was brought on by several discoveries: the steam engine, the spinning machine, the mechanical loom, and a whole series of other mechanical devices. By forging this revolution the British achieved enormous economic success, and their vast colonies helped them to achieve it rapidly. The colonies readily provided them with necessary raw materials, and gave them a huge market for their manufactured products. It was only a matter of time before other powers would jump on the bandwagon. In fact, while most of the world still remained colonized, the European and North American countries underwent swift industrialization, which immediately put their economies on the path to rapid growth. The economic growth that these powers achieved through industrialization later changed the scope of capitalism itself.

As a general rule, all colonial powers, by establishing a system of trade, brought raw materials from their colonies and then used those colonies as markets for their finished products. With such a system in place, European capitalism continued to flourish through the end of nineteenth century. Subsequently however, United States' productivity began to outstrip that of Europe. America?s vast natural resources as well as its expanding vibrant immigrant labor force quickly gave the country a great advantage over Europe. As a matter of fact, with the rapid increase in productivity, America quickly achieved its economic superiority over the rest of the world, and eventually emerged as the world super power both economically as well as militarily.

Today, the United States with a population of about 300 million possesses the largest economy in the world; its total GDP is more than $12 trillion while the total world GDP is about $56 trillion. About 25 million of the richest Americans enjoy as much income as the poorest 2 billion people in the world. The United States is now the primary benefactor of modern capitalism; but at the same time the country has also earned the reputation of being an imperialist. Imperialism normally refers to a policy of extending control or authority over foreign entities as a means of acquisition and/or maintenance of empires. The United States does not, however, call itself an empire. It is being labeled an imperialist country because it exercises its superior economic and military power to maintain dominance over distant lands and to promote capitalist policies.

The Rise of Communism:

While Europe was virtually undergoing dramatic change as a result of the industrial revolution, cynicism about capitalism itself was also growing. This was mainly because the capitalist system was creating a disparity within society. The factory owners were gaining wealth and political influence, while the living conditions of the average urban industrial laborer were deteriorating. As the gap between the rich and poor was widening, many social thinkers began to imagine a more equitable society, and specifically how to achieve such a society. The most famous of all such thinkers turned out to be the German philosopher Karl Marx (1818-1883). Having observed the capitalist system first hand, he saw how capitalism was promoting exploitation by transforming the laborers into tradable commodities; and through this process of exploitation, wealth was quickly being concentrated in the hands of a few.

Marx then envisioned a society where all wealth would be shared equally. The way to achieve such a goal, he thought, was by eliminating private ownership of property and by establishing a social system to protect the citizens from the exploitation and instability of the market economy. His prescription was communism. Communism refers to a type of government where the main goal is for workers to take control of factories and business, and to share things more equitably. Marx in collaboration with Friedrich Engels published the basic ideas and principles of communism in the form of The Communist Manifesto in 1848. They maintained that the way to achieve communism was through socialism. In other words, to attain communism a country would first need to achieve socialism. Socialism itself refers to a socio-economic system in which property and distribution of wealth are subject to social control. This control may be exercised directly through popular collectives such as workers' councils, or it may be exercised indirectly by the state. For Karl Marx, who helped establish and define the modern socialist movement, socialism implied the abolition of markets, capital, and labor as a commodity.

The Marx's proposed system was later put to test. In fact, until quite recently about half of the world's population lived under so-called communist rule. Marx's original ideas were, however, modified to suit various political circumstances. Russia was the first country to try the system, although it never became communist in the way that Marx and Engels described. China was another country that adopted the system. It largely tried to establish its own brand of communism. But ultimately neither system succeeded. At the onset, central planning system under communist rule succeeded in transforming these and other distressed societies by putting their economies on the right track. But after a while, communism stumbled as it failed to achieve the desired economic prosperity. Modern communism thus failed to live up to Marx's grand ideals. Theories abound why these systems failed.

From an economic point of view, communism would appear to have failed because it lacked procedures to motivate people to achieve the efficiency that it needed to produce goods and services with fewer resources. Here is the main contrast between communism and capitalism in respect to achieving efficiency. Capitalism promotes economic efficiency through competition by eliminating inefficiency, though it also creates monopolies and widens inequality. Communism, on the other hand, tries to maintain social equality by creating an egalitarian or a classless society with less or no competition. The communist system does not adequately provide for the elimination of inefficiency. As a result, the communist countries failed to match the economic prosperity of the capitalist countries. However, it should be noted that it was the social inequality created by capitalism which brought about the birth of communism; and later capitalism itself changed under the pressure of communism. The emergence of welfare states in Europe where people now enjoy a much better safety net in life should give an idea about the kind of change communism brought to capitalism. The overall communist system may have collapsed, but its ideals continue to linger. Whether it will revive again as a viable system in some different form depends entirely on how capitalism behaves in the future.

The Problem with Developing Countries:

There are a host of reasons why some countries continue to remain poor. The main problems may, however, be grouped into three categories: extreme poverty, lack of political vision, and the level of corruption in these countries. Industrialization is the key to economic development. But the successes of industrialization are dependant, in addition to appropriate government policies, on the education and health of the country's workers. Now, without having met the basic human requirements of food, clothing and shelter, how does a country proceed to industrialize or achieve success in industrialization? So, the situation of extreme poverty is quite a serious drawback for some countries. The roots of poverty in these countries could be traced to the era of colonial rule. Many years of neglect and economic oppression by the colonial powers have created such a negative impact there that they find themselves in a serious deadlock from which they cannot easily break out. In order to reduce the impact of poverty in these countries, a social and cultural revolutionary change is needed. But, to bring about such a change in traditional societies where most people are illiterate, would require very intelligent political guidance. This is precisely what these developing countries have so far failed to achieve.

These countries may be politically free from their colonial powers, but most have yet to establish a responsible political system which is needed in order to adopt policies for poverty reduction, improve education, build infrastructure, and nurture economic development. On the contrary, their corrupt leaders have engaged in siphoning whatever wealth they can muster for their personal benefit. Some of these countries are so poor that they depend on foreign aid for survival. But, since their corrupt officials grab the lion's share of the aid, the general public hardly benefit from such aid. So the level of corruption is another major impediment to their progress. What is even more surprising is that members of their ruling class fail to invest their monies in the industrialization of their own country. They often find it prudent to invest their ill-gotten money in a much safer environment in western countries. As a result, many of these countries? industrial bases continue to remain very weak.

Some countries such as Brazil, India, Malaysia, South Africa, South Korea, and a few others, which have succeeded in establishing a somewhat responsible political system and have taken measures to modernize their production facilities, are making progress. Though it is true that industrialization is not benefiting everybody in these countries equally, the hope is that any progress made will bring some benefit to the poor. However, as evidence clearly points out, a number of South Asian, African and Latin American countries, even after so many years of political freedom, have failed to adopt a political system for implementing the changes necessary for achieving industrial growth. As a result, their economies remain very depressed and their people, it seems, are hopelessly trapped in poverty. Until such time that the political leadership of these countries is prepared to implement the changes needed, there will be no escape from their present predicament.

Globalization and Its Effect:

The world today is known to be gripped in the process of globalization, and this process is influencing the worldwide wealth distribution. The term "globalization" refers to the changes in societies and the world economy that are the result of greatly increased trade and cultural exchange. In the context of economics, it is understood to refer almost exclusively to the effects of trade, specifically trade liberalization or free trade. Although trade between nations is not in any way a new phenomenon, the term "globalization" has come to be used extensively since the late 1990s as a result of the rapid increase in world-wide integration of markets of goods, services, and capital. Technology has in effect brought about this dramatic change. With modern technology such as the internet, quick communication, and rapid transportation, money as well as economic resources can now move from one country to another almost in a flash.

Capitalism and market system are two sides of the same coin. The growth of capitalism depends entirely on markets and trade, and the wider and freer that trade is, the faster it can grow. As the benefactor of modern capitalism, the United States adopted the policy of free trade to basically promote and preserve the economic superiority it had already achieved. But, what is favorable to the United States economically may not be good for others, especially when it involves the economies of the poor developing countries. By adopting the policy of free trade a country openly subjects itself to international competition for all goods and services. Since the economies of poor countries are weak to begin with, their outmoded industries cannot withstand competitive pressure from outside. So, the race for business competition in these developing countries may be over before it can begin.

The usual argument has been that developing countries have an advantage in labor intensive industries. But it has been proven that cheap labor is not quite as good a substitute for capital goods. With capital goods such as tools, and modern machineries, the developed countries have achieved a much higher productivity per worker. And they are able to increase this productivity with better education, improved healthcare as well as other amenities. So, globalization is likely to worsen the unemployment situation in developing countries. In other words, the playing field for free trade is not level for all countries; the developed countries come out ahead under globalization. Thus, instead of reducing inequality between nations, trade liberalization is having the opposite effect - it is widening the economic gap in the world. It is precisely for this reason that globalization in its true sense is being resisted in various corners of the world, especially in South America.

However, despite the resistance, some countries such as China, India and a few others seem to be benefiting greatly from globalization. In the case of China and India, currently the fastest growing economies in the world, both countries initially took different routes to development and kept their economies mostly closed to outside competition. And in so doing they were able to put their "houses in order" and brought a kind of economic stability to their society. When they finally embraced the capitalist game, they were pretty much prepared to take advantage of the free trade that the United States was promoting. Today, with improved education and better technology these countries are able to achieve much faster economic growth than others. According to historian Peter Stearns, the trend has been successfully turned. He maintains that although the United States will still remain an economic factor, the economies of China and India will become very dominant by 2050. Now, even if his prediction comes true, it must be noted that the economic growth that these countries are achieving is not benefiting everybody equally. As capitalism has done elsewhere, a big gap between the rich and poor has already been created there and this gap is steadily growing wider.

Conclusion:

Human society has come a long way from the Stone Age to the modern age. Slavery and monarchy have supposedly ended in society. Democracy has since been established, and it is being promoted as the best system. No doubt, society has made tremendous achievements in every conceivable field. It has even invalidated Thomas Malthus? theory of "doomsday" by acquiring the technological know-how to produce enough food to feed the world. Yet, the very problem of hunger, poverty, oppression, injustice, and inequality in the world remains unresolved. The system may have changed, but economic exploitation nevertheless continues. Not only does a serious disparity exist among different countries of the world, it even exists within each country whether it is developed or undeveloped.

Take the example of the United States of America, the richest country in the world. Here, the richest 20 percent of people own close to 80 percent of America and receive 50 percent of national income, while the bottom 20 percent hardly receives 5 percent of national income. Tens of millions of Americans still live in poverty despite decades of economic growth and technological progress. United States currently spends about $8 billion a month to fight a controversial war in Iraq, while it fails to provide healthcare coverage to more than 45 million of its citizens. Warren Buffett, who is billed as the second richest man in the world and arguably one of the most influential in American business in recent years, while commenting on his latest donation of more than $30 billion to a charity said: ?the market system has not worked in terms of poor people?. His simple statement should speak for itself on the impact of capitalism on society.

Thus, one can see how extortion, brutality and oppression established by the emerging ruling class in the early days have been institutionalized under capitalism in the name of democracy. When the monarchs of the world lost power, a new breed of elites took over, who now control democracy. Today these elites are being accused of perpetrating similar acts of exploitation within society. There may be differences in the make-up of these elites, but their characters essentially remain the same. Economic power rests with them and they use that power to further their wealth. Earlier the wealth in society mostly followed power, now power tends to follow wealth since power nowadays is bought by wealth. At one time, colonization was used to accumulate wealth, now it is being accomplished in the name of democracy and free market system. The end result remains the same - the rich are getting richer and the poor are staying poor; and at the same time the gap between the rich and poor nations of the world gets wider and wider.

As it has done in the past, economics will still shape the future. Capitalism is now dominating. But, for reasons of inequality, capitalism is also fueling a kind of social unrest the world has never seen before. The September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks on America at the World Trade Center Towers in New York City and the Pentagon in Washington as well as subsequent bombing attacks in Madrid and London draw a clear picture of the kind of unrest the world is now facing. Religious fanaticism is blamed for these atrocities, but underneath it is economics which is turning people into fanatics. The world always experienced social unrest as it struggled with the law of survival of the fittest, social dominance, religious and political issues. When religion was first introduced, it had a profound effect on human lives. Since religious ideas fell short of fulfilling people?s economic expectations, its dominance gradually diminished. The apparent revival of religious fervor does not necessarily mean that religion is going to dominate again. It should be seen, however, as a clear indication that people, especially in developing countries, are losing their patience with the existing system and want change. For lack of any other viable system, people are simply falling back on religion or using it as a uniting force.

The underlying cause of the acute problems of the world today, such as the rise of fundamentalism, increased insurgency and terrorism, and the plight of immigration, is the widening economic disparity between the rich and poor countries. These problems cannot be solved without addressing their root cause - poverty. Poverty exists everywhere, but it is much more prevalent and severe in developing countries. Chronic poverty and depression lead people to desperation. Economic deprivation is an impetus for people to commit crime, and crime is also subject to globalization. Modern technology has greatly increased communication and awareness among all peoples of the world. Every incident no matter how small or where it happens is now having an immediate worldwide effect. Therefore, unless the world moves to establish a more equitable distribution of wealth, enforces greater accountability, provides equal opportunity for everybody, and institutes a better safety net for common people, the present unrest in the world is not likely to go away but will intensify with much more force. So, what lies ahead for mankind depends entirely on how capitalism meets these and other challenges.
__________________________
The writer teaches economics at C.W. Post Campus of Long Island University, USA.