Where small is not beautiful

Raking my ageing cerebral cortex for subject matter to enliven (or torment?) the readers, I noticed that a fairly generous portion of it has been devoted to “heretical” thoughts. Hence, the title of this column. Heretical, however, is only in relation to my milieu and not heretical per se.

Let’s start off with a small idea. We, Sri Lankans, being natives of a small island in the vast Indian Ocean seem to abhor whatever that is small. We want to talk large, even if they don’t work large.

Anything we want to do, say for example the erection of a statue of a reclining or a standing Buddha, we want to ensure that it is the largest in the world. Even some builders of Vesak lanterns claim their creations to be the biggest or the tallest.

They do not subscribe to the idea “small is beautiful” except of course, in the field of procreation, where there is such a success that the rate of birth is actually declining. Whether that is a result of physical or economic impotency, war or migration of women to the Middle East, has not been explored yet.

Emulating the large nations that dominate the world we have always given priority to mega projects and mega proposals reaping mega losses in consequence. Just take development.

We have been running after big cities to emulate them. We need skyscrapers or condominiums in local parlance, perhaps to beat New York one fine day. Yet the requisite infrastructures, both physical and social, are missing. All we get are drainage lines that burst at the seam, long traffic jams, wasted man hours and frustration.

It is prestigious for us Liliputians to import and drive a large gas guzzlers irrespective of cost so that your ego would take a quantum upward leap vis a vis your neighbours and the rest of hoi polloi.

In agriculture we have happily abandoned the small village tank, small farming communities and gone for large reservoirs and large-scale agriculture, for which there are no takers. Given the present world food crisis we see the folly of such negligence of small farming and the small farmer. We are compelled to import food materials at extraordinary high prices.

In economics we have no economy and thrift. Quantity overrides quality. We would not be content with public enterprises of manageable size but would happily fill the work force and maintain a large number of idlers irrespective of the drain on the public exchequer.

Marketing is the buzz word now. Every project, every event is marketed through the media, cut-outs and billboards so that “over-kill” is the fitting description for such propaganda. Wastage is colossal as sometimes it is a case of carrying coal to Newcastle.

And who pays for this extravaganza? The people, of course. They are indirectly taxed up to the nose that they submerge in poverty.

In education we close small schools by enlarging the already large schools. We burden the child with large chunks of ‘borrowed and antiquated knowledge’ which becomes out of date no sooner he leaves school.

We leave no room for the students to think over what has been taught or to critically assess knowledge, leaving them with no option but cramming in order to pass examinations that no longer test the child’s knowledge and intelligence but only test his memory and conformity to orthodoxy.

In management our revulsion for smallness makes enterprises, establishments, governing bodies and structures top heavy so that we have a superabundance of Heads, Deputy Heads, Consultants, Directors doing practically nothing except feeding on the public exchequer like parasites.

The institutions themselves keep multiplying faster than the splitting of amoebas.

Even in eliminating fraud we pursue only the small fry sparing the big sharks. Scams of VAT proportions have a greater possibility of avoiding justice for we have a soft corner in our hearts for the big guys.

Even in our growth strategy we favour the large Vs. small.

It is the highest income deciles that have fattened themselves fastest at the expense of the lowest. The so-called trickle-down effect is non-existent. What has been evidenced is an accumulation at the top.

Should we abandon this growth strategy? It would be heretical to answer ‘yes.’ Long live heresy!