Mr. Jayaswal and Mr. Dadra both had their ethical behaviors tested. It seems in India that in order to prosper and succeed, you have to behave in a manner that many Americans would consider unethical. Politicans tend to have a negative conotation regardless of their country of origion. However, politicans cultural values in India far surpass the negativity of the United States'. It is very apparent that Indian businessmen are aware of what it takes to succeed in India, regardless of how their behavior is percieved. “If you were in his position, you would do the same thing,” the businessman said, asking not to be identified because his company also received coal fields and did not want to draw attention to himself. “In this country, it’s difficult to survive. Whoever has a master key wants to eat up all of India. Whoever doesn’t have a key is struggling to survive.”
Mr. Jayaswal doesn't believe he did anything "unethically". However, others would view him negatively for having ownership of natural resources and using them to benefit himself financially rather than India's overall prosperity. Mr. Jayaswal also probably views the situation as, if I do not have ownership of a coal mine, someone else will, and they will gain financially instead of myself. The Indian government, including Mr. Dadra also had their ethical behavior tested. The Indian government did not use competitive bidding for ownership of the country's coal mine. Instead, they based their decision on the popularity of applicants. They could have originally sold the mines to electrical companies or individuals who were willing to better India.
Mr. Jayaswal is known as an individual who likes to flaunt his assets and who has also prospered increasingly in recent years. Having light on this corruption scandal proves to others who were doubtful of Mr. Jayaswal's recent upcoming success, that he is involved in the scandal with India's government. It perceives him as an untrustworthy individual who is only concerned about himself, rather than using his financial gains to better the 300 million currently living with no electricity in India. However, other businessmen that own coal mines like himself, understand how the road to success works in India.
I believe Article 23 is most prevalent to Mr. Jayaswal's moral reasoning - "Everyone has the right to work, to free choice of employment, to just and favorable conditions of work". I think Mr. Jayaswal views owning a piece of India's natural resources and profiting from them are his form of "work". Also, how he builds his network of relationships with fellow Indian politicians and government officials is part of his road to success - those being his form of working conditions.
"Despite a strong legal framework, the anti-corruption agency is perceived as ineffective." [Globalintegrity.org] If India's government is majorly involved in corruption, it will be very difficult to turn the system around unless the current government is evoked and new officials are instated. However, I do feel that citizens of India are making the Indian government aware that they are extremely unhappy with the government's denial of India's current and ongoing problems. That because of their awareness, led the government to reclaim four coal fields from companies that did not make sufficient mining process. If the Indian government continues to act in that manner, coal mining owners will feel the need to use the mines in a benefical way to the country of India.
http://www.globalintegrity.org/report/India/2011
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/18/world/asia/18iht-letter18.html
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you about the government and making maybe a wrong approach to distributing the coal mines if they are wanting the good of the nation but I feel that maybe the receivers like Mr Jayaswal are also unethical as it seems they are not helping the nations problems like the electricity shortage. The fact that if he didn't benefit, someone else might doesn't take away from the argument that he still may be unethical in putting his financial success first before the good of the nation, especially since he has the opportunity to help so much. But on the other hand I suppose you could use the analogy that why doesn't the richest man feed all the poor people. So I am torn on what to think but keep an open mind. I think Mr Jayaswal has a social responsibility that he may not be living up to because would it be such an issue if what Mr Jayaswal was actually doing good for the country?
ReplyDeleteI agree that many businessman and politicians in India, and not only in India, are applying individualism view as main component of moral reasoning. They place their own long-term self-interests ahead of interests and needs of Indian people, disregarding ethics and socially responsible norms of conduct. There primary goal is self-enrichment supported by such moral reasoning as “if everybody does it, than I can do it too” or “if I don’t get these coal fields, than someone else will”. To end the custom of bribery and corruption in the country where it has been taking place for a long period of time, will require a lot of effort and commitment, and the fact that cases of corruption become publicly criticized and many people of India are no longer willing to accept it, may demand government to make initial steps towards tackling corruption.
ReplyDeleteI am glad that you took a more optimistic answer to this articles question and you are right that the reclaimed coal fields are evidence of progress, maybe it is possible. I definitely agree that these businessmen are clearly following the individualist view as their moral reasoning. You are right that Mr. Jayaswal probably doesn't think he is being unethical, that is a very interesting point. He has probably always lived and worked in this kind of competitive environment, this "step on others to get to the top" idea is probably hardwired into his mentality.
ReplyDeleteIt is sad that India's politics is in it's current state, where businessmen and government officials can blatantly commit fraud. This practice must have been around for a long period of time for everyone to know that they must have close connections to the government if they want to survive. I agree that the citizens should continue to voice their grievances to get the governments attention
ReplyDeleteI agree with you saying that" it will be very difficult to turn the system around unless the current government is evoked and new officials are instated."The current government will do everything to stop this from happening.
ReplyDeleteThe misleading social enviornment may help explain Mr. Jayaswal's behavior. Buliding relationship with government offical seems to be only fast and effective way to success. If he did not do it he would be like other peole " struggle to survive." Once you get it, you want more and make sure no one can take your power away from you because you are not long afford it.
I think that India is going through a rapid social and economic transition that other developing conturies such as China and South American countries,are having currently. It seems to be the corrupted government which is unmindful of social responsibility seems to be common..As you mentions the citizens of India is unhappy with the ongoing problems of the government.Hopefully, they will raise their voices and stand up for themselves...
ReplyDeleteI love the way you looked at this article in a positive way. When i read it i was shocked and you made me understand where Mr. Jayaswal was coming from. I also agree very strongly with the last pharagraph.If the citizens continue to say what they feel im sure that they can over power what is going on.
ReplyDeleteThe individual's greed is surpassing the societal essential needs. The acquisition of power has redefined the ethical values of our society, where for example in "Scandal Poses a Riddle: Will India Ever Be Able to Tackle Corruption?" in The New York Times, where Mr. Jayaswal has opted to create an empire of wealth by in a way depriving the more needed with essential necessities such as coal to produce electricity. As the article states, India depends 57% on coal to generate electricity for its citizens. Now due to the lack ethical values in a global market, the Indian citizens are paying the price for the greed of Mr Jayaswal in partnership with bureaucrats and politicians. Can the voice of the many have an impact on the few?
ReplyDeleteI also agree Mr. Jaysawal's moral reasoning was from article 23 "having the right to work". Mr. Jayaswal saw what he was doing as work. He knew the industry and took it among himself to do what he saw as working to make money to support himself and his family. Although he should have acted differently he probably saw this as a opportunity to help India, but instead the only people who benefited was his family and members involved. It is terrible that in India people will act so immorally because that is the only way they believe they can truly get by and create success for themselves and their family.
ReplyDeleteYou're rights when you say that the best way to change the governement is to revoke its current officials. With the excessive about of bribary and persuasion that resulted from Jayaswal's conspiracy, it would be difficult to know which political and economic figures had the country's best intrest at hand or their hands in someone else's pockets.
ReplyDeleteJaysawal and other political figures were looking for an expedited way to incur wealth and power. Unfortunaltely, it was at the expense of residents. Even though sources mentioned that it is difficult to survive in India if you aren't willing to be savy enough to do so, it does not justify Jaysawal's actions. The distribution of the resources that Jaysawal and other figures had would have allowed themselves and many others to "survive", yet they were too concernmed with greed and optimizing their own wealth.