Skip to main content

Mathew Effect




“The poor are poor not because the rich are rich,” says Robert J. Samuelson in his Washington Post column reproduced in The Hindu. 

In 1968, the sociologist Robert K. Merton coined the phrase ‘the Mathew Effect’ for the phenomenon of the rich getting richer and the poor getting poorer.  The name Mathew came from the Bible.  Jesus said, according to Mathew’s gospel, “For to him who has more will be given, and he will have abundance; but from him who has not, even what he has will be taken away” [Mathew 13:12]. 

Jesus did not live in a time which promoted capitalism and its wealth-creating ideology.  Jesus was far, far from being a capitalist.  In fact, he would have been the ideal communist, had he been allowed to have his way by the various leaders of his time (political as well as religious).  What he meant was that those who have the spirit of life in them will be given more of that, and those who are just bullshit will get lost.

But religious scriptures can be interpreted in myriad ways.  Even as I did above.  And Robert K. Merton interpreted it the way Robert J. Samuelson does it now, half a century later.  All interpretations are correct so long as the frameworks are prepared by a carpenter who knows his job.

So, the poor are poor not because the rich are rich.  Samuelson’s argument is that the rich got richer and the poor got poorer because of the situation prevailing in the world.  The rich flourished because of the access they have/had to wealth-creating avenues such as car dealership, real estate business, and computer software business.  More people wanted cars, houses and the digital technology.  So those who had access to such business ventures got richer. 

Who remain poor today?  Those who don’t know how to exploit the prevailing situation?  Or those who don’t have the resources?

The answer may be ‘both’.

Samuelson doesn’t say why such people have no right to live their life.  Isn’t this coming down to Darwin’s theory of the survival of the fittest? 

If only the fit can survive, what does human civilisation mean?
Who are the fit?  Those who have the resources to manipulate the given system? 
Was the savage the fit person in the olden days?
Was the witch-hunter and the heretic-burner the fit person in the medieval days?
Is the property-dealer the fit person today?

I’m attaching the link to a video which I had put up in my blog earlier too.  I’m putting it up again because it is more, far more articulate than I can ever be ...
Gaaon Chhodab Nahin

It asks the same question: Who is fit?
Will I be more fit a writer if I can get some businessperson to sponsor my writing so that I can quit teaching?  [I intend to do it!]
Is the forest dweller less fit a person because he doesn’t know how to use the digital technology?


Top post on IndiBlogger.in, the community of Indian Bloggers
Labels:

Comments

  1. Mon.EspritFebruary 5, 2014 at 9:31 PM

    I agree to what you are saying - it might well be true that poor are getting poorer because they don't have the resource rich people can avail with resources.

    The failure of our society has been the ineptness in creating a social balance, utilize the potential.

    I have heard the song myself before - love it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Tomichan MatheikalFebruary 6, 2014 at 12:19 PM

      All that talk about corporate responsibility, Abhra, I wonder what happened to it. The new CEO of Microsoft is to be paid Rs112 crore, according to the latest news. See the kind of inequality that the system creates. Its fallout is terrible: we create a group of people who will start stealing, cheating, plundering...

      Delete
  2. PurbaFebruary 6, 2014 at 5:02 AM

    And God forbid if you're poor in India, you're not even treated as a human being.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Tomichan MatheikalFebruary 6, 2014 at 12:20 PM

      Exactly, Purba. And they start asserting their humanity, start demanding dignity, in socially undesirable ways...

      Delete
  3. UnknownFebruary 6, 2014 at 12:47 PM

    Well Said.
    Who remain poor today? Those who don’t know how to exploit the prevailing situation? Or those who don’t have the resources? I agree with you on this. Poor are poor always and nobody cares to uplift them.

    Politicians say that minimum amount to survive in a city is Rs.32 or whatever. But we the common man knows how much we need to survive here and we are all fighting to survive. (Survival of the fittest)

    Ultimately those who knows how to exploit the system will win !!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Tomichan MatheikalFebruary 6, 2014 at 3:31 PM

      And quite a lot of the ordinary people don't know how to exploit the system...

      Perhaps, exploitation existed in one form or another throughout human history. In the present situation, with its rapid changes, people become quickly rich and quickly poor. There must be a way of protecting the interests of the vulnerable sections.

      Delete
  4. AnonymousFebruary 6, 2014 at 1:03 PM

    I don't thnk society is entirely to be blamed here. Yes there is no balance but a poor man doesn't have to remain poor. Hard work, intelligence and opportunity does play a role.
    I am speaking of experience. My father has a huge constructions company today. And he had started from "zero".
    No I am not boasting. Just saying,the rich do get richer but poor not necessarily have to be poorer.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Tomichan MatheikalFebruary 6, 2014 at 3:33 PM

      thanks for the example from personal experience. But I'm sure it wasn't all that easy for your father. First of all, he must have had the necessary backing from a few sectors - finance, connections, and some expertise.

      Delete
  5. UnknownFebruary 6, 2014 at 2:27 PM

    I totally agree to your post!!
    www.eatoutsdelhi.net

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Tomichan MatheikalFebruary 6, 2014 at 3:54 PM

      Thanks, Aditya. You're most welcome to disagree too :)

      Delete
  6. ekta khetanFebruary 6, 2014 at 6:28 PM

    very well written!

    ReplyDelete
  7. Saru SinghalFebruary 7, 2014 at 11:04 AM

    I was thinking just that yesterday. Are we a poor nation? No! Wealth is concentrated in few hands. Thanks for sharing 'Mathew Effect', I was not aware of it. About being fit, I think no one has an accurate answer for it. But inequality is a big misfit in our society and destroying the fabric of it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Tomichan MatheikalFebruary 7, 2014 at 4:07 PM

      We are a rich nation of poor people, Saru. A little modification of the system will solve a lot of problems. A paradigm shift will revolutionise India. But... let me not be accuse of living in utopian dreams.

      Delete
  8. Saru SinghalFebruary 7, 2014 at 11:11 AM

    I checked the video and felt really sorry when they said 'we' are drinking colas and bottled water and they are left with dirty water. :(

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Tomichan MatheikalFebruary 7, 2014 at 4:08 PM

      If you actually walk into the villages, as I sometimes do, you'll see that the video is no exaggeration.

      Delete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Adventures of Toto as a comic strip

  'The Adventures of Toto' is an amusing story by Ruskin Bond. It is prescribed as a lesson in CBSE's English course for class 9. Maggie asked her students to do a project on some of the lessons and Femi George's work is what I would like to present here. Femi converted the story into a beautiful comic strip. Her work will speak for itself and let me present it below.  Femi George Student of Carmel Public School, Vazhakulam, Kerala Similar post: The Little Girl
47 comments
Read more

The Veiled Women

One of the controversies that has been raging in Kerala for quite some time now is about a girl student’s decision to wear the hijab to school. The school run by Christian nuns did not appreciate the girl’s choice of religious identity over the school uniform and punished her by making her stand outside the classroom. The matter was taken up immediately by a fundamentalist Muslim organisation (SDPI) which created the usual sound and fury on the campus as well as outside. Kerala is a liberal state in which Hindus (55%), Muslims (27%), and Christians (18%) have been living in fair though superficial harmony even after Modi’s BJP with its cantankerous exclusivism assumed power in Delhi. Maybe, Modi created much insecurity feeling among the Muslims in Kerala too resulting in some reactionary moves like the hijab mentioned above. The school could have handled it diplomatically given the general nature of Muslims which is not quite amenable to sense and sensibility. From the time I shi...
13 comments
Read more

Insecurity and Exclusivism

“ Hindu khatare mein hai.” This was one of the first slogans that accompanied the emergence of Narendra Modi on the national scene. It means Hindus are in Danger . It reveals a deep-rooted feeling of insecurity. Hindus constitute an overwhelming majority in India – 80%. All the high positions in governance, judiciary, academics, any significant place, are occupied by Hindus. Yet the slogan was born. Strange? It will be facile to argue that Modi used this slogan and its concomitant hatred of Muslims and Christians as a political weapon for winning votes. True, he was successful in that; he rose to the highest political post in the country using minority-bashing. But the hatred did not end with that achievement; rather it spread outward and became more exclusive. Muslim and European rulers of India were booted out from the country’s history books and wherever else possible like the names of roads and institutions. With vengeance. Now there is a concerted effort going on to place In...
30 comments
Read more

The Real Enemies of India

People in general are inclined to pass the blame on to others whatever the fault.  For example, we Indians love to blame the British for their alleged ‘divide-and-rule’ policy.  Did the British really divide India into Hindus and Muslims or did the Indians do it themselves?  Was there any unified entity called India in the first place before the British unified it? Having raised those questions, I’m going to commit a further sacrilege of quoting a British journalist-cum-historian.  In his magnum opus, India: a History , John Keay says that the “stock accusations of a wider Machiavellian intent to ‘divide and rule’ and to ‘stir up Hindu-Muslim animosity’” levelled against the British Raj made little sense when the freedom struggle was going on in India because there really was no unified India until the British unified it politically.  Communal divisions existed in India despite the political unification.  In fact, they existed even before the Briti...
16 comments
Read more

The Little Girl

The Little Girl is a short story by Katherine Mansfield given in the class 9 English course of NCERT. Maggie gave an assignment to her students based on the story and one of her students, Athena Baby Sabu, presented a brilliant job. She converted the story into a delightful comic strip. Mansfield tells the story of Kezia who is the eponymous little girl. Kezia is scared of her father who wields a lot of control on the entire family. She is punished severely for an unwitting mistake which makes her even more scared of her father. Her grandmother is fond of her and is her emotional succour. The grandmother is away from home one day with Kezia's mother who is hospitalised. Kezia gets her usual nightmare and is terrified. There is no one at home to console her except her father from whom she does not expect any consolation. But the father rises to the occasion and lets the little girl sleep beside him that night. She rests her head on her father's chest and can feel his heart...
19 comments
Read more