The New Nation - Internet Edition

Dr. M. S. Haq

It appears from a print media report of today, 19 August 2007, Noble Laureate Prof. Dr. M. Yunus repeated again yesterday - at the sixth conference of South Asian Free Media Association - one of his 'recently' configured anti-poverty propositions which is associated with sending poverty to museum.

The message contained in above proposition would have been fine if it, for example, did not interfere improperly, unjustly and naively, in varying degrees though, with apparent present day truth, knowledge, information and understanding associated with poverty.

Poverty is, among other things, a one time fixed reality when it comes to one of its many faces and phases at a given time in the context of a particular living being or a group of living beings under certain circumstances. It is also a variable, as well as moving reality because it is not for example, immune from changes and transformations that have been taking place - in known, suspected and other ways - within and beyond its domain on a continuous basis through existing time continuum.

Ramifications of poverty related cause, effect and causality at individual, collective and other levels have so far, relative to time, space and other variables, found their critical paths (used in an operations management sense, per se) - through human and other systems that include inter alia their sub-atomic components (used in an equivalent sense of life sciences) and components beyond sub-atomic levels and through environmental domains, known, suspected or otherwise, that transact on a regular basis, positively or otherwise, with life, living and continuity - both within and beyond a given generation in the universe.

Interplays of poverty and living beings can, among other things, be examined and explained, either in part or in a near full manner or otherwise, in the context of several things. For example: the Newton's third law of motion, every action has an opposite and equal reaction; relevant principals of fluid mechanics; Einstein's theories of relativity, as applicable; pertinent laws of thermodynamics; relevant components of laws of conservation of mass and energy; behaviors of human immune systems in pertinent areas; transactional analysis of human behaviors in relevant areas; relevant mathematical formulas; pertinent principles of developmental economics and environmental economics; global commons related controversies; governance and public administration practices, as appropriate; pertinent human rights laws; political theories and theories of political economy as applicable; relevant theories of management; faith; and morality.

Poverty can, among other things, be created, imposed, reduced, promoted and regenerated by agencies internal and external to human beings, per se. It atacks people, with varying intensities, at different levels of their need (including inter alia a self actualization need) and want hierarchies, as applicable, and consequences of atacks can be life long or beyond in one form or another. People, on the other hand, have been atacking poverty at different levels of its cycle either consciously or otherwise (including inter alia, human immune system responses) on a continuous basis, per se. The botom line is: the atacks and the counter atacks go on; affecting, in varying degrees, inter-generational transfers at human and other levels and creating opportunities for persons concerned to run anti-poverty businesses on a "more for less" basis for the poor, among other things.

An analysis of say, present day people-poverty interplays, poverty-people interplays, and outcomes of those interplays, whether tangible or otherwise, would reveal, inter alia: people are entering into the poverty cycle; continuing their stay therein; coming out of the cycle; re-entering into the cycle; and infecting and re-infecting others in the process; all relative to time, space and other variables, though. It should be noted here: products of atacks and counter atacks do not necessarily result always in bad or semi bad things but in good things like, discoveries, inventions and innovations in relevant areas, whether pro-people or not

In light of maters discussed and not discussed so far in the article, it can now be said more specifically: the suggestion does not appear to represent the outcome of a time-sensitive, as well as comprehensive appreciation of poverty as a subject, an object, a realism, a substance (including inter alia in a virtual sense) and a goal, to mention a few; the suggestion appears to be, in many respects, a product of peripheral thinking and conceptualization and not a product of in-depth intellectual exploration and deeper scholarly work in relevant areas; it can be considered as a cheap motivational item or a politically spirited slogan or both but it could mislead people especially, when it comes to challenges and opportunities associated with efforts towards positioning and repositioning poverty in its truer perspectives, facilitating a more solid, more pragmatic and clearer understanding of world people (to whom it may concern) about poverty and about strategies for its reduction on the bases of currently known, as well as suspected parameters and perimeters of poverty; among other things. Kindly note the terms "truth", "true" and other relevant ones have been used in the article in a relative sense, for an instance. Nothing is absolute save and except God (those who believe in that).

Let me now share with the readers a few of my present day concerns about the suggestion of Noble Laureate Dr. M. Yunus:

One, despite developments and breakthroughs in the domain of knowledge and information on a daily basis virtually, world people have been suffering on a continuous basis (in varying degrees though) from say, knowledge and information related insufficiency, relative to time, space and other variables. They are increasingly becoming, in many respects and in pertinent areas, victims of knowledge and information related infections, as well as diseases due for example, to consumption of: a half of a knowledge or information or both; a quarter of a knowledge or information or both; cooked up or false knowledge or information or both; contaminated knowledge or information or both; knowledge or information or both that are inaccurate either in part or in full; and knowledge or information or both that do not represent apparent realities either moving or fixed, in part or in full or otherwise in relevant areas.

Against the backdrop of above developments and developments in other relevant areas, it is now being observed: an increasing application of knowledge and information with and without the help and assistance of relevant technologies plus other things to areas of life, living and continuity in the universe has, among other things and as appropriate, been instrumental in facilitating the use of knowledge and information as: a tool for cheating and misguiding people; a tool for justifying unfair and unjust practices in relevant areas; a tool for exploiting poor and hungry; a tool for promoting and sustaining terrorism; a tool for plagiarism and other malpractices in relevant knowledge areas; a tool for disrupting genuine and purposeful efforts towards promoting human freedom and liberty; and a tool for facilitating intellectual dishonesty.

I have avoided mentioning deliberately in the foregoing paragraph numerous good contributions of knowledge and information to areas of human welfare, for example. Instead, I presented therein only a number of soft sides of present day knowledge and information for the consumption of readers. One of the purposes for that is to trigger readers' interest in exploring and establishing: To what extend and how, soft sides of relevant knowledge and information have influenced and polluted the museum related suggestion of Prof. Yunus?

Two, contemporary transactions that have been taking place between and among say, knowledge and information users at various stages of human life cycle are not, in many respects and on an average sense, conducive to promoting and sustaining a free-mind approach to explore and understand knowledge and information in relevant areas. There can be several reasons for that For example: impacts of heavily subscribed societal traditions and practices - such as, wise persons cannot be wrong, bosses cannot be wrong and arrogance on the part of wise persons not to accept the truth even after it is revealed to them - on relevant human minds; the tendency to establish and promote apparently wrong or nearly wrong ideas in societies by powerful persons, whether consciously or otherwise as part of power games, per se; deliberate atempts of sponsors and supporters of powerful persons to transform their (I mean, powerful persons') emotional outbursts or uterances that may contain a half of a truth or a quarter of a truth into full truths, per se; apparent inabilities of human minds to recover on relevant occasions from influences of knowledge and understanding imposed by academicians and others due to their knowledge and understanding related inadequacies or unfair knowledge related practices on their part or their knowledge related inferiority or superiority complexes or non-fulfillment of their unfair expectations, expressed or not, from students and other clients, per se; and barriers of different types to express and exchange ideas due to say, liberty and freedom related constraints at local, national and other levels.

Further, a less than required availability, as well as use (as applicable) of true knowledge and information in pertinent areas at family levels, deficiencies associated with knowledge delivery at primary school levels, and inefficiencies, as well as ineffectiveness associated with atracting and harnessing learning opportunities from respective environments have, among other things, been instrumental in affecting knowledge related foundation building of children in the formative years, in varying degrees though - relative to time and space.

In light of above, if, for example, a child is given the understanding, poverty could be sent to museum, number of things, could happen. For example: she or he would be deprived of her or his right to know the truth about the mater unless she or he comes across the truth in pertinent areas as an outcome of her or his explorations in pertinent areas or otherwise at any future stage of the human development process (used in both medical and non-medical senses); he or she could join the crowd that believes in and promotes truths that are challengeable easily, unsustainable logically and unacceptable scientifically, per se; she or he could elect, in the subsequent part of life, to spend time, efforts and other resources for something that is not realizable. One might in that respect argue that a windfall from his or her contributions might facilitate a further advancement in anti-poverty work at any future time. It could be fine in some respects.

But people will then have to decide or determine or both for example: whether or not they will work towards a more realistic and achievable anti-poverty goal or a less realistic or unrealistic anti-poverty goal based on suggestions such as, "sending poverty to museum"? Whether or not they will commit their resources for running behind a mirage or for running behind something that that has an apparent potential for ensuring a maximum return from scarce resources? To what extent, pertinent ramifications of the suggestion could be instrumental in creating, sustaining and promoting a kind of lethargy and a lack of motivation in anti-poverty efforts over periods of time? To what extent, the suggestion will be instrumental in enhancing uncertainties associated with anti-poverty efforts? To what extent, the suggestion could be instrumental in promoting abstractions (used not in an apparent and wholesome positive sense) in the path towards the future of anti-poverty work? How would it affect knowledge and understanding in anti-poverty and related areas at intra and inter-generational levels, per se?

A brief analysis of concerns and points raised and discussed in the article so far would reveal, among other things and as applicable, Prof. Yunus's slogan is not immune, in varying degrees though, from knowledge, information and understanding related pollution, inflation, inflammation, corruption, misplaced political motivation, naïve realism, immaturity, and misinterpretations of pertinent laws of nature and religion.

The last word: the existence and continuance of say, human beings in the world is relative to time, space and other variables and such are their products, products of environment and other known things created by Almighty God - used in a widest sense of the meaning. The suggestion "sending poverty to museum" is no exception to that unless Almighty God decides other wise in that respect Under the circumstances, it will not be probably appropriate to say the suggestion offered by Noble Laureate Prof. Dr. M. Yunus to world people is apparently right at least at this point in time. Let us continue our fight against poverty in a more collective, purposeful, realistic and result-oriented manner.