Share . . .

Bookmark and Share

Saturday, September 24, 2011

CORRUPTION: Are we Immune?

Contributed the following article to the August 2011 issue of VANAMUTHAM,
a Tamil Christian Monthly magazine published by Serve India Mission,
that attempts to connect the world (with its events and practical issues) to God's word.


Year 2010 saw several scandals break out and much corruption in high places coming to light.  Scams around expenses made for organizing the Common Wealth Games, around allocation of 2G spectrum to mobile service providers, around politicians, bureaucrats and even ex-army officials procuring Adarsh flats meant for 26/11 martyrs, around land grabbing in the mineral-rich parts of Karnataka and so on.

Just the previous year, India saw the biggest fraud in the corporate history – Ramalinga Raju of Satyam Computers had fudged account books over a decade.  It is not that corruption has suddenly let out shoots.  It has been there for eons and what we see reflected in the highest places of political, social and corporate power is but a reflection of the social fabric that these individuals come from. We are all guilty of corruption and if we do not watch out, we could end up like them in our own spheres of influence and activity.

How do we stay away from becoming perpetrators of such corruption that often has a small insignificant start but slowly begins to work out like rust and finally leads to rot?  We need to protect ourselves like Daniel and his three friends Hananiah, Mishael and Azariah better known as Shadrach, Mesach and Abednego.  They determined that they would not defile themselves with the King’s food.  To many of us, had we been put in the same predicament, it would not even have looked like defilement.  We would have come up with 10 reasons why we cannot forego the King’s food.  We might even have come up with 10 good reasons why we need to indeed partake of the Royal Menu with the rest of the Jewish Royalty that was undergoing training.  Most of us try to see how closer we can get to the line separating evil from good, and stay uncontaminated.  Daniel on the other hand, was one who tried to stay as far as he could from the thin dividing line so that he does not even by a remote chance pollute himself.

Eric Liddell, the famed sprinter-missionary had similar discipline.  His moral conviction did not permit him to participate in Sports on the Lord’s Day.  He therefore refused to participate in the Heat for the 100 meters race which he was widely expected to win at the 1924 Paris Olympics, having set a record of 9.7 sec in the AAA championship the previous year.  He instead regimentally prepared for the 400 meters event, even while having already decided to go to China as a Missionary. He would pummel himself so much in preparation for an event that he was not used to, even against a strong possibility of not succeeding at it, but would not compromise on his commitment concerning Sundays.  As history would have it, he broke the previous Olympic record and won the middle-distance event of 400 meters in style, though he was not expected to win in this category.

The point is not about whether it is wrong to play on Sunday.  With Daniel too, the point is not about  whether it was a sin to eat the King’s food that probably did not adhere to Kosher rules, or had likely been offered to idols or had intoxicating drink.  It is about whether we stick to our moral convictions or do we sidestep them for some allurements.  Most people who have long gone into the wrong side of life have trained their appetite with ideas and decisions that have restructured their thought of what they need. By redefining in their minds what it is they think they need, they end up hungering after the wrong things and these wrong things end up ultimately devouring them.  Daniel decided to train his appetite by not letting it get used to the lavishness of the King’s table and getting his taste spoiled.

Clayton M. Christensen, a 1979 Harvard Business School graduate and author of ‘Innovator’s Dilemma’ says that everyone has to address the question, “How can I be sure I’ll stay out of Jail?” He reminds us that 2 out of 32 people in his Rhodes Scholar class of 1977 (Awards for outstanding all-round students at the University of Oxford) spent time in Jail.  He tells us that we often unconsciously employ the ‘marginal cost’ economics doctrine in our personal lives when we choose between right and wrong.  We think, “I know that as a general rule, most people shouldn’t do this.  But in this particular extenuating circumstance, just this once, it’s OK.” The marginal cost of doing a wrong thing ‘just this once’ seems alluringly low.  It sucks you in and you fail to look at where the path is ultimately headed and at the full costs that the choice entails.  Justification for infidelity and dishonesty in all their manifestations lies in the marginal cost economics of “just this once”.

Clayton too has had a ‘Eric Liddell’ like experience and discipline about what he will do on Sundays.  The Oxford University varsity basketball team that he played on had become the best of friends and had made it to the final four in the British equivalent of the NCAA tournament. While it turned out that the championship game was to be played on a Sunday, he went to the coach and explained that he had made a personal commitment at age 16 never to play ball on Sunday. The coach and the teammates just could not believe it and said “You’ve got to play. Can’t you break the rule just this one time?”  He went away, prayed about it and decided that he shouldn’t break his commitment.

Looking back at that small decision, involving just one of several thousand Sundays in his life, he says, resisting the temptation of ‘Just this once in this extenuating circumstance’ has proven to be one of the most important decisions of his life.  His life as anyone else’s has been one unending stream on circumstances justifying mistakes.  Had he crossed the line that one time, he would have done it over and over in the years that followed.  He learned that it is easier to hold to your principles 100% of the time than it is to hold to them 98% of the time.  If we give in to “just this once” we’ll regret where we end up.  That’s what happened to Jeff Skilling of Enron fame, Clayton’s classmate at Harvard Business School.

We do not have to look far.  We have our own examples in this nation - Satyam’s Ramalinga Raju, Harshad Mehta and the likes.  We better define for ourselves what we stand for as Christians and draw the line in a safe place. In each transaction that we make, let us keep our integrity intact - be it paying Tax, making expense claims, or filing reports.  Let us not make minor compromises, lest we soon find ourselves compromising large and wide.  It is easier to say NO before you have tasted it than to say NO after you have tasted it. The life of a Raju or a Mehta had gone wrong not when he chose to cross the line but possibly when he failed to draw a line well before the line that he ultimately crossed.  Like the frog that is slowly roasted to death when the vessel is gradually heated, we too will get sucked into the quicksand of corruption before we know it, if we allow ourselves to be dishonest even just once. May the Lord give us the strength of character and help us live true to the light that we have received. Let your light so shine before men that they may see your good works and glorify your father which is in heaven.