|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
Introduction:
Current privatization efforts dwarf all which have gone before. In general, the "less developed" nations, including peoples of the Muslim faith, seem to have attracted the advocates of privatization. Disturbing results are obtained when the substance and process of privatization are juxtaposed to the teaching of Islam.
In certain cases, privatization may result in the transfer of wealth from relatively weak hands (i.e., from the debtor governments of the less developed nations) to relatively strong hands (i.e., consortia of international entrepreneurs). Islam teaches the opposite: It recognizes the right of the less able in the wealth of those who have greater ability or the opportunity to produce greater wealth (Mirakhor, 1989).
The outcomes of privatization are important to peace and security. Consequently, the emergence of privatization as a cat's paw in political discourse is not a good omen. For example, Abdelhak Benhamouda, Algeria's labor leader, "opposes any privatizations undertaken on the 'back' of the workers and demanded (sic) 'guarantees' from the government" (AFX News, 1995).
The article defines privatization and discusses its structural and operational problems in light of religious imperatives.
|
|
||||||||
|
||||||||
|
