Omid Ghaempanah's essay “Why Are Open Societies More Resilient in the Face of Crises?”

Why Are Open Societies More Resilient in the Face of Crises?

Omid Ghaempanah

In his book Violence and Social Orders, Douglass North distinguishes between open-access and limited-access countries, arguing that perhaps the primary factor in a country's development or underdevelopment should be sought in this very distinction. But what do these two mean? Briefly, in a limited-access order, the elite or dominant class restricts access to privileges such as property rights, resources, competition, and organizations solely to its own dominant members. Here, the economic system is a tool of this dominant body to generate rent and, through it, also provide political security. However, it should be noted that this creation of rent is not merely to line the pockets of the dominant members; it is also a tool for controlling violence, and in a sense, as long as there is a balance of rent among the dominant members, peace prevails. In fact, it can be said that in these types of societies, violence is prevented by creating monopolies and rents and granting privileges to groups or individuals who can generate violence, and thus (unstable) peace is achieved.

But in an open-access order, access to resources, organizations, private property, etc., is open, meaning the economic system is no longer a tool of the political system. Furthermore, the administration and control of the political system is possible for any group through formal and competitive means, taking on a competitive character. In an open-access order, all spheres of society are open, and citizens can freely participate in structuring and relationships with individuals and other organizations. Moreover, an open-access order requires impersonal relationships, meaning everyone is treated the same, and it does not matter who you are. Whereas in a limited-access order, relationships are personal, meaning it matters who you are; for instance, if you were part of the dominant body or had connections with them, then you would have access to resources and organizations. Thus, the personal or impersonal nature fundamentally transforms the basis of competition. In impersonal relationships, rents cannot persist for long, as they will be eliminated in economic and political competition. In this open-access environment, both economic entrepreneurs and political activists constantly compete with each other to compete for and capture these rents, and in this competition, the winners are those individuals or groups who can win the approval of their audience. In this open environment, the distribution of economic resources and political positions is constantly shifting, and indeed, this constant change and shifting makes the creation of rent difficult. And unlike limited-access societies, in open societies, violence is resolved through a competitive environment and the creation of an open space for all. Now that a general description of these two orders has been presented, it is easier to understand why crises in countries with an open-access order are resolved more quickly and easily than in countries with limited access. As stated in the aforementioned book, the most important of these reasons can be outlined as follows:

1- Open Society and Competition: Open access and the free flow of ideas bring about a competitive environment that encourages the solving of new problems. Political parties compete with each other to solve problems. In this way, those in power strive to solve problems in order to stay in power. Because power is not guaranteed, as in a limited-access government, to be solely in the hands of the dominant coalition. And those who are not in power, in order to win the approval of citizens and to attain power themselves, constantly point out the wrong decisions and policies of the ruling power, and through this continuous criticism and the pressure of public opinion, decision-making is corrected.

۲- Credible and impersonal commitments: As stated, impersonal means that “who you are” does not matter, but rather “what you do” matters. This characteristic causes the set of solutions in the face of crises and conflicts to expand. In limited-access orders, resources, facilities, and equipment are only available to individuals who are close to the dominant coalition or benefit from a rent. But in open-access orders, this is not the case, because opportunities are not only available to a specific few but are available to everyone, and anyone who wishes can take advantage of these opportunities. So, it does not matter who you are; what matters is that you can solve problems.

۳- The market system: Entrepreneurs in market economies are in search of new profitable opportunities. Companies and institutions compete with each other to achieve profit, and this competition causes the time to reach solutions to problems to become shorter and shorter, and, for example, to offer a product with better quality and lower cost than the competitor. When entrepreneurs innovate and exercise creativity to create a higher-quality, cheaper, faster, and more interesting product, then, in order not to be eliminated or fall behind, they seek to create a product that is better in other respects and can satisfy consumers. Ultimately, this evolutionary and progressive process will benefit consumers.

۴- Facing fewer problems: Open orders face fewer problems than limited-access orders. Because limited-access orders face problems such as major economic imbalances (like inflation, recession, corruption, and social and political tensions, etc.) that cause instability in the governance system. In addition, one can point to internal political and social disputes and crises, as well as international crises. Usually, limited-access societies grapple with more problems of this kind, which themselves lead to the waste of costs, opportunities, and facilities, and in other words, it can be said that in limited-access countries, there is no suitable focus and calm for solving problems; rather, there is a multitude of issues that are disruptive, and the decision-making system must scatter its attention among a multitude of other issues and problems. For example, an issue that is purely economic in an open society can simultaneously be social, political, and security-related in a limited-access society, and attention to those dimensions is also considered by decision-makers. Of course, this point can be a matter of dispute, but even if we accept that the problems of open societies are no fewer than those of limited-access societies, at least it can be said that they have more solutions and tools. In addition to these, as Ahmad Meydari has stated in the introduction to the book “Empowering Government,” the administrative system of these societies is on the verge of collapse under the burden of heavy and numerous duties (like a weary army at war). These heavy duties can have various origins. On one hand, due to the information explosion, the people of these societies have expectations similar to the people of a developed country, and the government also proposes programs to operationalize these expectations, but in the most optimistic scenario, fulfilling all expectations in the short term is impossible. On the other hand, pressure groups impose new duties on the government every day. And from another side, experts also propose a new institution or regulation every day to expand the duties of the government. All of these together cause a simple problem to become a complex and multidimensional problem.