Systems for how societies are, not how they should be
Lazy thinking fights reality. Lazy thinking tries to create utopian societies. Lazy thinking tries to expect behaviours from people they may not be capable of
Former Indian Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi had once acknowledged that for every rupee that the Govt of India spends, only Rs. 0.14 (or 14 Paise) reaches the intended beneficiary. The rest is eaten up mid-way in both corruption and in inefficiencies.
The reason i highlight ‘both’ above is to emphasise the point about loss incurred due to inefficiencies created by the government via bureaucratic structures.
We lazily tend to blame only corruption and corrupt government officials and middlemen for all such problems.
Chanakya in his master treatise, “The Arthashastra” speaks candidly of tendency of government officials to be corrupt.
it is possible to ascertain the movements of bird flying in the sky, it is difficult to gauge the corrupt activities of government officials ~ Arthashastra
Chankaya believes that people, in general, have a tendency to become corrupt.
He believed that “men are naturally fickle minded” and are comparable to “horses at work [who] exhibit constant change in their temper”. This means that honesty is not a virtue that would remain consistent lifelong and the temptation to make easy gains through corrupt means can override the trait of honesty any time.
And therefore Chanakya designs systems for tax collection, delivering justice, revenue management, etc. based on his practical understanding of human behaviour.
He does not try to fix society or work towards creating an ideal corruption-free society.
Only lazy thinking fights reality
Lazy thinking fights reality. Lazy thinking tries to create utopian societies. Lazy thinking tries to expect behaviours from people they may not be capable of.
This is why Marxism or Socialism does not work. Humans are naturally oriented towards profit-motives. Attempts to define an equal society is nothing but fighting reality.
Dr. Thomas Sowell, arguably among the greatest thinkers of economics and policy, says:
If there is not equality of outcomes among people born to the same parents and raised under the same roof, why should equality of outcomes be expected – or assumed – when conditions are not nearly so comparable?
Conclusion
It is my argument, based on my evolving understanding of these realities of life, that all systems at workplaces just as in governments must be designed keeping human behaviours and natural motives in mind.
Therefore designing systems for delivering good software OR for delivering financial benefits to the poor in India, all must fall under the gamut of this framework of thinking.
This is why i admire Prime Minister Narendra Modi so much. He did not try to fix his government officials. He bypassed them. He forced these government officials to get banking access to over 4 Crore (40 million) families. He then started the worlds largest Direct Benefits Transfer scheme – sending money directly into the banks of these families.
