The geographic area which is now known as Bangladesh has been underdeveloped for a long period of time. Poverty was a common phenomenon in this region. Most of the people here were generally poor, where natural calamities like floods, drought, cyclones, and famine struck the land now and then.
The great famine of 1770, the famine of 1943 and 1970, the storm of 1970, and 1991 are the notable disastrous events in the history of Bengal. Apart from the famines, it is said that people sometimes died due to starvation.
We get the picture of a miserable economy in Bengal for centuries by going through research work, novels, plays, newspapers, movies, etc. The scenario did not change even after the emergence of Bangladesh.
For a considerable period of time, even after the birth of this country, people used to suffer from similar disasters. But in course of time, the situation has changed.
Bangladesh is about to be recognized as a developing country soon.
It is a glorious achievement of the ruling government. Many people are financially solvent now and many of them rose to the wealthy classes from middle or lower income strata. Though “goodbye poverty,” the most desired and frequently repeated slogan is still far from being materialized, this change is undoubtedly very positive. But can we say that people have become solvent in all respects?
Just have a look back. The 1960s were eventful, and life for the masses was quite challenging in the then East Pakistan. People were poor compared to the present time, but always concerned and conscious about their rights.
They used to protest against any type of injustice and inequality or any wrong-doing made by any government or anybody. In course of time, the poor became solvent and rich. But at the same time, it is not unclear why they gradually became timid and selfish. People slowly but surely got isolated and did not think of protesting against any unfairness carried out by any of the social forces.
The question is: Why?
Some economists argue that economic growth brings dramatic changes to human life. The person who has prospered economically can be isolated, and may suffer from a superiority complex.
The argument is that a person is solvent not only financially, but in many ways. Economic freedom makes his life comfortable. Earlier, he was always dependent upon others during the days of his economic hardship.
He used to borrow money from the solvent near and dear ones to run his family. He thought himself quite subservient. He could not send his children to a standard school. He was unable to buy clothes for his family during festivals. Getting unwell was a curse for him.
For all these and many other reasons, his life was miserable, and for that, he had to depend on others. Now, he can take care of himself along with his family, because of financial freedom.
It is apparent, however, that in Bangladesh, many people tried to break the cycle of poverty by getting involved in corruption. Economic freedom came through corruption in many cases; and it made them selfish, self-centred, and morally bankrupt.
It seems, therefore, that economic development, economic freedom, corruption, moral bankruptcy, egocentrism, and selfishness are related terms. Aren’t they?
It is difficult to answer the question, raised above, in a word; yet it is true that a person who attains solvency through corruption will be always selfish and morally weak. “Industry is the key to success” is an old saying, but it is as though it does not apply in Bangladesh.
The life of an honest and diligent person is usually in limbo here. People want to be rich overnight. But if you consider the developed countries around the globe, you will see a different picture. Most of the rich people in other corners of the world did not become rich overnight.
According to the corruption perceptions index (CPI), Bangladesh is one of the most corrupt countries in the world. This is not just a 21st-century scenario, Bengal has been perceived as corrupt for a long time.
In Riyaz-us-Salatin (1788), writer Ghulam Hussain Salim depicts the characters of Bengali people in this way: “… but in affairs relating to bargains of giving and taking and purchases and sales and worldly matters, no race in all four quarters of the globe is equal to the Bengalis in wickedness, duplicity, knavery, and villainy.
“They do not consider loans repayable, and the promises, which they pledge to perform in one day, they do not fulfill in one year.”
Yet, this statement is not clearly justified or corroborated by other contemporary sources. Anyway, it does not indicate that people in those days were too crazy to become wealthy overnight like today.
Many people of this country are apparently undergoing class changes, sacrificing virtues to vices; they are climbing up from lower to middle and from middle to upper classes. Most of the honest and dedicated workers of this country suffer from inferiority complex where people of moneyed class exhibit superiority complex. In this backdrop, making a balanced society requires practicing “industry plus honesty as the key to success” in all areas of life.
My observation may make me appear as someone who does not want to see people solvent and the country a prosperous one. I should not be misread. I want a more prosperous Bangladesh full of happy people.
But I want people to overcome their hurdles through hard work and honesty, so that they can realize others’ miseries and pain. We need patriotic, courageous, committed, united, honest, and hard-working people to build a prosperous nation with a balanced society.
Mohammad Zahidur Rahman teaches history at Chittagong University.