More on the Dow Jones Dharma Index:
List of Advisors
includes Francis X Clooney
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->http://www.theindianstar.com/index.php?uan=3075
The article in the link above raises some serious concerns about a recent announcement by Wall Street Journal, owned by Rupert Murdock a self-awowed born-again Christian evangelist.
I first became aware of such a project last year when one prominent Hindu swamis was approached to join their advisory board and he asked for my input. Unlike many other Hindu leaders approached, both religious and academic, this swami decided to do some serious due diligence before making a choice. He declined their inviation to become a part of the Dharma Index movement.
This Index is being promoted as a way to rate businesses worldwide as to how "dharmic" they are. But the control ultimately lies with the Wall Street Journal, both at the level of the criteria used as well as the individual ratings of various companies. There is no conflict resolution or complaint resolution public mechanism in place through which one may challenge these ratings. In the end its corporate financial might and media power that will prevail in passing sweeping judgments to legitimize/delegitimize corporate conduct.
One effect they hope is to get Indian businessmen sucking up to them, looking for favorable ratings, because that would help their share price in the eye of the naive Hindu investors. Conversely, a downgrading of "dharma rating" for a stock would be damaging. Naturally, many Indian businessmen would be tempted to fall in line.
Interestingly, Wall Street Journal has no Christian Index or Jewish Index that evaluates industries by biblical criteria. It is the dharmic traditions that need monitoring, and likewise there is an Islamic Index (run by Murdock's folks) that has been criticized by Muslim leaders.
While Islam has One Book with a canonized approach to right/wrong, the dhrmic traditions are far too diverse to be collapsed into a simple set of yes/no rules that someone sitting in the West could use to control the market. Which "authority" would the Dharma Index folks rely upon to pass judgment on a given company's practices of serving meat, exploiting the poor, exploiting the environment, using up non-renewable energy and mineral sources, polluting the earth, etc. Among the criteria listed by the Dharmic Index, I did not find vegetarianism or animal rights, nor the environment.
The Index serves to alleviate guilt among the exploiters, in the same manner as the British were civilizing the colonies for the upliftment of the poor.
Would Murdock's media support for misionaries who go and exploit poor "heathens" be a reason to give his companies a negative rating?
The scope for bias and misuse is too vast and blatant to be discussed in this very quick reaction that I am able to write at this time. What is striking is how many "Hindu voices" have got sucked into lending their names for such a dubious initiative, which is elitist by the very fact that there has not been a public debate in the dharmic tradition style to address the matter.
The dharma ratings of the acdemicians involved in paticular are questionable, because they have opted for prestige and potantially some high-class travel and other perks, while selling out so easily. The advisors roped in included many of the usual RISA suspects, both Indians and whites, some for lending their names to give the Index clout, and others aspiring to boost their personal brand name. Advisors include faculty members from Harvard University, the School of Oriental and African Studies in London, Britain's Oxford Center for Hindu Studies and the Oxford Center for Buddhist Studies, Yokohama University, Japan, Columbia University in the US, Thammasat University, Bangkok, and Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi.
Religious figures involved include such as the venerable monks Dr Ashin Nyanissara, chancellor of Sitagu International Buddhist Academy, Myanmar, and the venerable Sangharaja, the patriarch of Cambodia, chief spiritual advisor to the king of Cambodia.
The whole affair smacks of a lack of transparency, and big business style marketing and self-promotion.
Rajiv Malhotra<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
List of Advisors
includes Francis X Clooney
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->http://www.theindianstar.com/index.php?uan=3075
The article in the link above raises some serious concerns about a recent announcement by Wall Street Journal, owned by Rupert Murdock a self-awowed born-again Christian evangelist.
I first became aware of such a project last year when one prominent Hindu swamis was approached to join their advisory board and he asked for my input. Unlike many other Hindu leaders approached, both religious and academic, this swami decided to do some serious due diligence before making a choice. He declined their inviation to become a part of the Dharma Index movement.
This Index is being promoted as a way to rate businesses worldwide as to how "dharmic" they are. But the control ultimately lies with the Wall Street Journal, both at the level of the criteria used as well as the individual ratings of various companies. There is no conflict resolution or complaint resolution public mechanism in place through which one may challenge these ratings. In the end its corporate financial might and media power that will prevail in passing sweeping judgments to legitimize/delegitimize corporate conduct.
One effect they hope is to get Indian businessmen sucking up to them, looking for favorable ratings, because that would help their share price in the eye of the naive Hindu investors. Conversely, a downgrading of "dharma rating" for a stock would be damaging. Naturally, many Indian businessmen would be tempted to fall in line.
Interestingly, Wall Street Journal has no Christian Index or Jewish Index that evaluates industries by biblical criteria. It is the dharmic traditions that need monitoring, and likewise there is an Islamic Index (run by Murdock's folks) that has been criticized by Muslim leaders.
While Islam has One Book with a canonized approach to right/wrong, the dhrmic traditions are far too diverse to be collapsed into a simple set of yes/no rules that someone sitting in the West could use to control the market. Which "authority" would the Dharma Index folks rely upon to pass judgment on a given company's practices of serving meat, exploiting the poor, exploiting the environment, using up non-renewable energy and mineral sources, polluting the earth, etc. Among the criteria listed by the Dharmic Index, I did not find vegetarianism or animal rights, nor the environment.
The Index serves to alleviate guilt among the exploiters, in the same manner as the British were civilizing the colonies for the upliftment of the poor.
Would Murdock's media support for misionaries who go and exploit poor "heathens" be a reason to give his companies a negative rating?
The scope for bias and misuse is too vast and blatant to be discussed in this very quick reaction that I am able to write at this time. What is striking is how many "Hindu voices" have got sucked into lending their names for such a dubious initiative, which is elitist by the very fact that there has not been a public debate in the dharmic tradition style to address the matter.
The dharma ratings of the acdemicians involved in paticular are questionable, because they have opted for prestige and potantially some high-class travel and other perks, while selling out so easily. The advisors roped in included many of the usual RISA suspects, both Indians and whites, some for lending their names to give the Index clout, and others aspiring to boost their personal brand name. Advisors include faculty members from Harvard University, the School of Oriental and African Studies in London, Britain's Oxford Center for Hindu Studies and the Oxford Center for Buddhist Studies, Yokohama University, Japan, Columbia University in the US, Thammasat University, Bangkok, and Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi.
Religious figures involved include such as the venerable monks Dr Ashin Nyanissara, chancellor of Sitagu International Buddhist Academy, Myanmar, and the venerable Sangharaja, the patriarch of Cambodia, chief spiritual advisor to the king of Cambodia.
The whole affair smacks of a lack of transparency, and big business style marketing and self-promotion.
Rajiv Malhotra<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->