opinion In Genoa, the developed nations held meetings behind high walls, while underdeveloped nations stood idly by, watching and waiting for a bigger piece of the international pie. The people inside were politicians, that is to say they were not corporate executives.

The people making the din outside were neither politicians nor executives. They represent, to one degree or another, the endangered ideals of youth. They are in conflict with the political leaders inside.

To a degree, this confrontation between idealistic youth and political leadership is worldwide. Probably it has always been so, but now the youth are more mobile, more organised, more vocal.

A study of Political Science gives one a background in the forms of government a country may put into place. Economics teaches the law of supply and demand, along with a theory for developing and managing large commercial ventures.

Neither school gives adequate preparation for the real world controlled by politicians. Economic activity takes place in a political milieu, as suggested by the politician's Golden Rule. Enter the discipline of study known as Political Economy.

The familiar Golden Rule tells us we each must treat others as we wish to be treated. Cynics re-phrase this as, 'He who has the gold, makes the rules'. In reality, it is, 'He who makes the rules can take the gold'. Politicians in office, as lawmakers, 'make the rules'.

Competing interests

An excessively strong Executive, in the absence of checks to balance things, can always make rules that will bring them the gold. To do so may make them unpopular. Thus, they must camouflage their greed, keeping a wary eye on the omnipresent competing interests. Even a lion at feed can be driven into the bush if there are enough hyenas at his ribs.

As protection, politicians collect allies by promising to share the loot. The loot is attractive, being the lion's share (all). This explains the energy and money men put into achieving high office, both as active up-front actors and behind-the-scenes king makers.

Political office has monetary value, and it is generally worth what it costs. That explains why people will spend five million ringgit to get a political office that pays an official salary of only ten thousand ringgit a month. Once in office they plan to get their money back, one way or another.

In some respects, government and business have competing interests. The free enterprise system, as the foundation of capitalism, prefers to operate in an unregulated, unfettered manner, keeping all the profits to itself. This can lead to abuses.

As Karl Marx pointed out, the profits may not be distributed to the shareholders and owners as agreed, but retained and accumulated by the managers to acquire other profit-making enterprises.

Natural resentment

Eventually, all profit centers are owned and controlled by a few owners, who may then eliminate all competition by merger or unfair competition. Capital, and the economic power it represents, thus tends to concentrate.

Government, in the form of taxes and licence fees, insinuates itself as a silent partner, often taking half or more of the profits without owning a share or providing an iota of management.

Businessmen have a natural resentment of this, and hire expensive accountants to minimise the portion taken by government. There is an interplay between business and government, with government providing a favorable environment to foster business, and in exchange receiving a portion of the proceeds. It is a symbiotic relationship in which the citizen, employee and consumer plays only the smallest part.

In Malaysia the government and business relationship is not clearly defined. Business interests are commingled among government, politicians in power, their friends and families, and their political party.

Loyalties are thus mixed, and the citizen, employee or consumer rarely participates in making the rules, in the form of laws, which in a democracy are made in the general interest. This inability to participate exists even though it is often the savings of the employee which are being used to gain control of the business.

Businessmen who should be devoted to the efficient operation and management of their business spend valuable time defending against the personal and political depredations of greedy politicians. In Malaysia, money greases the wheel of bureaucracy.

Debt eyesore

Malaysia has a stock exchange, where many shares are owned by the government and politicians. They thus have a keen common interest in keeping the value of the shares high, and an even stronger incentive to attract foreign funds to aid in the effort. This interest translates into interference.

The entire structure of free enterprise has been compromised by the incursions of politicians into the business enterprises of the country. They have taken up majority positions in the larger corporations, installing management executives loyal not to the business, but subordinate to a telephone call from the top.

Recent bailouts using public funds have led to the removal of the ex-finance minister. The prime minister has taken over the job, and has been given by his party and the government the task of recovering their money, along with other assets deemed to have been diverted into private hands.

The prime minister is thus under pressure to improve an impossible situation, as there is no way these possibly large sums can be earned in such a short time.

One solution could be to try to prop up the market sufficiently to attract foreign funds, at the same time removing the eyesore of debt by shifting it from public scrutiny on the open share exchange to the secrecy of private status.

It is a futile effort. The debt will remain for the bleeding wounds of interest due will not heal.

HARUN RASHID is a scientist avidly interested in the application of Islamic principles in international affairs. The promotion of goodwill through civilisational dialogue motivates his writing. His Worldview column is a personal analysis of Malaysian affairs from a global perspective.