Farrukh Khosru:
Despite their regional distinctions, today’s global crises reveal striking structural similarities rooted in the inherent weaknesses of dominant economic paradigms. The prevailing capitalist system — upheld by institutional and ideological mechanisms — has consistently failed to secure distributive justice and equitable ownership.
Highlights:
- Reinvention of capitalism and its contradictions
- Ethics, Equity, and Structural Reform
- Rethinking Ownership Models
- Reforming fiscal, financial, and legal frameworks
- Realising Economic Democracy
Exploitation arises when the value generated by labour exceeds the remuneration received by workers, encapsulated in the notion of surplus value.
While central to Marx’s critique of capitalist accumulation, the theory of surplus value inadequately addresses the distributive dynamics and ethical claims of the diverse actors and stakeholders who contribute to the creation of surplus in contemporary economies. Moreover, the collapse of the communist bloc in the 1990s exposed how bureaucratic centralisation and theoretical distortion could undermine Marxist economic models.
In response to earlier crises, capitalism reinvented itself through globalisation and financial liberalisation. Yet, unregulated markets have repeatedly produced instability and widened inequality. To preserve its dominance, modern capitalism has often constructed ideological adversaries — most notably through the spread of “Islamophobia” — while simultaneously appropriating elements of Islamic economic thought, such as riba-free banking, into profit-driven frameworks like the so-called Sharia Banking Window.
In many Muslim-majority countries, “Islamic banking” has largely mirrored conventional interest-based systems under alternative contractual arrangements, thereby perpetuating existing patterns of wealth concentration. Without economic democracy, political democracy risks devolving into an oligarchic process that perpetuates elite control, while governance devoid of distributive justice remains fundamentally unstable. Hence, the democratisation of ownership and profit-sharing is essential to building a society free from exploitation.
As a postcolonial nation with a predominantly Muslim population, Bangladesh faces the dual challenges of weak governance and economic dependency. The equitable distribution of surplus among all stakeholders—investors, workers, consumers, and entrepreneurs — must therefore be prioritised as the foundation of any structural transformation.
This principle is consistent with the values enshrined in the Medina Charter and the Prophet Muhammad’s (PBUH) Farewell Sermon, both of which emphasise justice, social responsibility, and moral accountability as cornerstones of governance. Accordingly, economic policy should give equal importance to material prosperity and ethical well-being.
At its core, the economy functions as a structure that regulates ownership, production, and consumption within society. Understanding the interdependence between economic and political life is vital for sustainable development, since economic systems inherently engage with questions of governance and social organisation.
Article 13 of the Constitution of Bangladesh recognises three forms of ownership — individual, state, and cooperative. However, each possesses intrinsic limitations. Cooperative ownership often fails to ensure meaningful participation; state ownership, as observed under socialism, risks authoritarian control and inefficiency; and individual ownership, as practised under capitalism, encourages predatory accumulation.
Hybrid models such as public–private partnerships, rather than decentralising power, often entrench elite interests. Consequently, it is necessary to conceptualise social ownership, in which all stakeholders participate in decision-making and share profits within a moral and democratic framework.
Under modern capitalist systems, real wages frequently stagnate or decline in the face of inflation and currency depreciation, concentrating profits among financiers and corporate elites. This process diminishes purchasing power and erodes the welfare of working people.
To build a fairer and more democratic economic order, the state should consider reclassifying essential sectors — such as food, healthcare, and education — as public goods rather than profit-oriented commodities. It should also promote social ownership within the production and service sectors to enable equitable profit-sharing and wider stakeholder involvement.
Bangladesh’s business and corporate laws — many of which originate from colonial-era legislation such as the British East India Company Act — require comprehensive review and reform to align with participatory and representative management practices. Similarly, revising the monetary framework to include asset-based standards, such as gold, could help stabilise currency values and mitigate inflationary pressures.
Taxation systems could be simplified through proportional wealth and income tax rates, with thresholds linked to tangible measures of value — such as 87.5 grams of 24-karat gold. Prioritising the taxation of net wealth rather than debt would ensure a more balanced distribution of fiscal responsibility between debtors and creditors.
The establishment of interest-free or ethically grounded banking systems, with profits tied to real economic value, should be encouraged to broaden financial inclusion. Furthermore, the state could enhance social welfare and economic resilience by offering publicly guaranteed, interest-free financing for essential goods and services.
Bangladesh’s corporate framework, still influenced by the colonial Companies Act of 1881, was originally designed to protect imperial commercial interests. In the postcolonial era, building democratic corporate governance — founded on social ownership and fair profit distribution — must become a central reform priority.
A representative approach to management and profit-sharing, applied at both macro and local levels, would allow for genuine stakeholder participation. A balanced surplus distribution model might, for instance, allocate 10 per cent to entrepreneurs, 40 per cent to investors or financial contributors, 20 per cent to human resources (including labour, expertise, and time), 10 per cent to consumers as participatory stakeholders, and 20 per cent to reserves and depreciation funds.
This framework aligns with both modern theories of effective demand and Islamic principles of distributive justice, ensuring balanced income circulation and social stability.
Political democracy cannot thrive without economic democracy. The rhetoric of freedom is rendered meaningless when ownership and control over production remain concentrated among a privileged few. This reflects the unfulfilled socio-economic aspirations that accompanied Bangladesh’s independence.
To transform the post-2024 period into a genuine socio-economic renaissance, Bangladesh must move beyond piecemeal reforms and adopt a structurally democratic economy. By harmonising the egalitarian ideals of modern political economy with the ethical imperatives of Islam, the nation can finally realise its long-deferred promise of economic justice, human dignity, and collective prosperity.
(The writer is a researcher).
