Economics Made Simple

I have been asked why I feel it is so important to avoid technical terms when discussing economics, and whether I think this approach changes how people engage with these ideas. We all have different approaches to topics, and we must be on constant watch that our egos don’t prevent us from seeing what is best. When egos take over, we may resort to complicated language to outdo each other. In economics, as in every subject, there is a language used to communicate economic ideas, particularly the theories, and it has its place.

I tend to simplify things so I can understand them. It’s my process. I’m not very intelligent. I also tend to use metaphors because they convey the essence or real meaning.

Of course, if you are among economists, you tend to use some of the terms to have a common language. But we can go to the fundamentals of the topic and speak from the heart.

And there’s an example I sometimes use that’s kind of a stereotype, but we can generally see how much the West has contributed to advancing science. And when we look to the East, we can see that it is the origin of all religions, a source of spiritual inspiration, and home to holy books. If you give a piece of cheese, for example, to a Westerner, he will put it under a microscope and tell you what elements it contains. But if you give it to an Easterner, he will put it in his mouth and eat it, commenting on its taste. This, of course, is an exaggeration of how differently we can approach life. There can be a balance between the scientific method and approaching a theme from the heart first, then the brain seconds it. The difficulty is that complicated words can be used to impress others and to prove our level of knowledge, which is really the voice of ego, or, on the other hand, to speak honestly from a point of humility and simply share what we know.

This reminds me of a comment made by a Baha’i that we are not really in favour of elitism within the Baha’i Faith. Yes, we have learners in the Faith, and we need them. But the Baha’i Writings are for everyone. Elitism is against the spirit of unity and oneness.

The history of the Faith is full of examples of how the villages’ illiterate, including my parents, became Baha’is and the perfect example of their Faith. My mother cannot even sign her name. My father was self-taught because he couldn’t go to school. They understood what the Baha’i Faith asked of them and fulfilled it in their lives.

Our prime example, Abdu’l-Baha, knew about the sciences. He knew about philosophy. He knew about history. He spoke in such a way that whether you were highly educated in a certain field or worked as a labourer, you could understand. And I read that he wanted to look at the faces in the crowd, to reach their hearts and souls and accordingly adjust the topic, his language or his examples.

And that has been my role model. And personally, as I said, because I’m not intelligent, I cannot remember all the words or learn to use them, so I basically parroted what Abdu’l-Baha did and tried to simplify it for myself so that I could understand. But, of course, English is not my mother tongue, and I studied German in Iran before going to India and learning English there. And I have dyslexia. So, those are compelling reasons to avoid technical terms.

But it’s also a personal choice. If you want to follow this, remember you are following Abdu’l-Baha’s example. Also, by using simple language, I am fighting my own ego, so I am not impressing anyone with my words but expressing what is in my heart and soul.

And at times it’s not easy, for example, in writing my second book, The Economics of the Future Begins Today, I had to discuss the history of economics and different kinds of economics. My way of reaching those who didn’t understand the terms was to include a dictionary at the end of the book, with the most common economic terms explained in simplified terms. I wanted to be sure that everyone could understand.

But the other part of this theme is whether this approach changes how people engage with the ideas. That can be deep-rooted, depending on how you look at it. I think the purpose of all creation has been the oneness of mankind, and all the manifestations came to build the idea of oneness. But humanity has taken a long time to progress from childhood to adolescence. We have not yet reached maturity. To achieve oneness, we have to remove all barriers, whether racial, religious, or national. Another barrier is language. We need a universal language to communicate with each other. But in the meantime, we can look at how we communicate with each other in our own languages.

So when we express our feelings, ideas, or teachings of the Faith, we can do so in a way that is good for everyone. Whether they are in Africa or Asia, whether they are educated or not, whether they have degrees or not, they can understand. I believe that is a tool for the unity of mankind. When we understand what we are talking about, whether it is economics or the environment or any other subject, and we talk in a way that everybody understands, then it will affect humanity as a whole. So we are in it, in a sense, together. Otherwise, perhaps only 10% of society will understand.

We say that the Fund is the lifeblood of the Baha’i Faith because we need it. The material is essential for the progress of the Faith. It is not the goal of our creation. But without material means, what can we achieve? The economy has its role to play. And economic justice is essential. One of the important things we must do to achieve the unity of mankind is to eliminate poverty and achieve a more equitable balance among all peoples. Right now, a small percentage of people hold the most wealth, while many people struggle to survive below the poverty line.

I understand that economists attending a conference on their subject need a common language. But in general, I believe we have to start saying and writing things in a way that everybody understands. And that is something I take pride in because whenever I talk to people, they say, “Oh, I read your article or book, and it was so easy to understand.”

It works for me, and many people may find it useful and want to adopt it. One way we are sure is that if we follow Abdu’l-Baha’s example, we can do no wrong.

Some people are proficient in their field of study, for example, in economics, mathematics, or statistics. They use the specialized language that people in that field understand. They write amazing papers to enhance the understanding of the subject and also benefit mankind, and I think we should recognize that. And I don’t want to come across as criticizing people who use technical language. I have to emphasize I am not against big words. I think there is a time and place for it in universities and research institutions. We just need to learn to read our audience, whether they are people from different religions, backgrounds and economic levels. And we need to remember that we are here to help the poor, to take care of each other, and that’s the foundation of economics, that’s our responsibility. So we need action and receptive hearts to be open to the suffering of a poor person. And the language of the heart always reaches others first, with simple words that can open hearts and help them understand that we can each play our part in the economic system, and that we can understand what is needed to make a difference.