A Tale of Two Banks

Everybody is aware that the great and powerful banking institutions run by the new class of “masters of the universe” have failed, and now exist only by their privileged access to the public purse. And you will no doubt be happy to know that they are once again profitable and paying big bonuses. Of course, they are not profitable due to their lending activities, which largely they aren't doing, but by the same sort of financial speculation that got them—and us—into this mess in the first place. The banks won't lend because they can't find borrowers who will pay them back, and the borrowers can't pay them back precisely because of the way the banks wrecked the financial system and the economy along with it.

Yet through all this there is a bank that did not fail, that is not in trouble, that has no difficulty in finding borrowers and in getting repaid. That bank is the Grameen Bank, the institution that practically invented micro-finance. I had the distinct pleasure last night of hearing an address by its founder and guiding light, the Nobel-laureate Dr. Muhammad Yunus. The Grameen banks lends 100's of millions of dollars to poor people in Bangladesh and around the world. The good doctor now heads a vast organization which employs 27,000 bankers in Bangladesh. Yet he was not a banker, but an economist. So how did he learn to run a bank, to set up the complex procedures and safeguards that such institutions require? It was very simple, he explains. They just went to the existing banks, the experts who have been in the business for a long time and who know how to get they job done. They examined all their practices and procedures, and then did exactly the opposite.

The banks lend to the rich; Grameen lends to the poor. The banks require collateral; Grameen's borrowers have none. The banks require complex legal documents and teams of lawyers; Grameen has no such documents, nor any lawyers. The banks lend mostly to men; Grameen lends mostly to women. But there is an even more fundamental distinction between Grameen and Citibank. The too big to fail banks are mostly in the business of creating money and investing it in financial speculation; their activities have only a remote connection with the real economy, the economy of production and jobs and the creation of real wealth. Yet their speculative activities have the power to wreck the real economy. Grameen, on the other hand, is connected with the real economy. When they lend $50 to a women, she buys chickens, or goats, or a sewing machine, or some actually productive asset, something that actually adds to the real wealth of the borrower and the nation.

There is of course another distinction. Grameen is not in business to make a profit. It does in fact make a profit, but that is not the point. Making a profit only allows it to continue in being so that it can continue to fulfill its function, which is to bring people out of grinding poverty into self-sufficiency and self-reliance. It aims at building strong families, strong communities, a strong economy, one centered on the lowest rather than the highest. That is to say, it is a social business, a business that has a social point and helps to create a particular kind of social environment.

Looked at in that way, all businesses are social businesses; they all contribute to a particular kind of social order. But different kinds of businesses presume—and build up—different kinds of social order. Citibank has its own view of what a just society ought to be. Of course, they would never articulate this vision in polite company. They will fall back on the libertarian rhetoric of “freedom,” even as they work to destroy the material basis of that freedom. Liberty in this view is a commodity like any other, one that has a price. Think of our Supreme Court, which has ruled that “money is speech,” and hence those with more money have more rights to free speech, and the corporations, with nearly limitless access to money, have nearly infinite rights to “free speech,” surely more rights than any mere citizen, any real person.

Dr. Yunus is familiar with talk. He was formerly the Chairman of the department of economics at Chittagong University. Yet it was contact with the villages surrounding his university that made him realize that all the complex formulas, all the high finance and foreign borrowing were not working. Or rather they were working, but only to increase the poverty and misery of the people. He discovered that he could solve the dependence on loan sharks in one village with a mere $27 in capital. For a man who was used to working in millions and billions, this was a real revelation. And that was the beginning of the Grameen Bank.

What Dr. Yunus came to realize is that all economic theory was built on considering only half of what men really are. It is built on the fact that men are selfish. And so they are. But that is not all that they are. Men are also unselfish, because without that, no social order—and no economy—would be possible or sustainable. So the good Dr. set out to found an economics, and a bank, built on the whole man, and not just the half-human.

In his most recent encyclical, Caritas in Veritate, Benedict insisted on the Principle of Gratuitousness as a necessary principle of economic order. This makes no sense, indeed, has no meaning, to the economist. Business and economics is merely about wealth creation, and no principles of love and gift are involved. Further, the introduction of such a principle can only compromise the “scientific” basis of economics, and only hamper the “efficiency” of the business. And yet, it is Grameen that is standing on the strength of its borrowers, while Citibank stands on the public purse. Citibank grinds us all down with their debts; Grameen lifts up its borrowers to real freedom.

I believe that Dr. Yunus, and Pope Benedict, are right and the bankers are wrong. Man is indeed selfish, but he is more than that. A banking system that is built only on selfishness will only build up a social order of selfishness. But this order will turn out to be disordered, and in constant danger of collapse. Further, this disorder privileges the possessors of capital, who must always be few, and sets them at war with those who possess only their labor, who will always be the many. But Grameen unites capital with labor to make the person and the family productive and self-reliant. Like other businesses, it makes a profit, which it distributes to its owner-depositors, but its purpose is to make a gift. The gift is funded by an exchange, but is not reducible to that exchange.

The social order needs to be funded; we all need to eat. But it cannot be reduced to mere eating, or soon we will be eating each other. Indeed, banking reducible to greed alone is a kind of eating of the other, or at least eating their substance and reducing their livelihood. But there is not the slightest reason it has to be that way, and the distinction between Citibank and Grameen Bank proves this. Indeed, it is the difference between greed and gift; between business understood as a taking of all you can get, and business as a means of giving all that you can.


Anonymous,  Friday, February 26, 2010 at 2:13:00 PM CST  

"The State which would provide everything, absorbing everything into itself, would ultimately become a mere bureaucracy incapable of guaranteeing the very thing which the suffering person--every person--needs: namely, loving personal concern." - Pope Benedict XVI, Deus Caritas Est

Nice post. I have a book on Grameen called "The Poor Always Pay Back"

The Poor Always Pay Back not only uncovers how a major financial institution was able to change its system in response to the needs of its borrowers, but also how Grameen redefined and continues to redefine the basic assumptions of credit worthiness. The immense success of Grameen Bank shows a hopeful trend in the alleviation of poverty.


Anonymous,  Friday, February 26, 2010 at 7:39:00 PM CST  

Microlending is wonderful! However one thing I learned about the Grameen Bank in sociology class is that they seem to promote contraception.

Anonymous,  Saturday, February 27, 2010 at 7:00:00 AM CST  

You're right, they do, but the model could still work (better) with Catholic principles behind it. Take the best - leave the rest.

Catholic teaching (moral and social) has clearly spoken about the fallacy of tying population control to development, whether it’s a family or a country. It's a house built on sand. The "tale of two banks" could also be called a "tale of good & evil". Fortunately, as Catholics we have the Papacy and the Magesterium to teach us and help discern what is good and evil.

Unfortunately population control has been official US policy since 1974. Google "National Security Memorandum 200" (NSSM-200) also called "The Kissinger Report" for details. It laid out a policy of population control of thirteen countries to access their natural resources in the name of “National Security”.

If you look at the history of Grameen, you will see that it has its roots in the central banking system:

“With the sponsorship of the central bank of the country and support of the nationalized commercial banks, the project was extended to Tangail district (a district north of Dhaka, the capital city of Bangladesh)”


The central banking system and the oligarchs that run them are biggest players behind the population control movement. That is why the World Bank & IMF “loans” have always had the population control strings attached. Grameen is just an extension of that. That is why Yanus is the darling of the CFR:


A model of Grameen based on Catholic teaching would be more fruitful as it would address the needs of the whole person, not just the material.

Coll Monday, March 1, 2010 at 6:06:00 AM CST  

About me, I am reminded of a T-shirt that said "Hitler was right: donuts are delicious!" It is a good joke because it immediately makes you question the knee-jerk rejection of anything some who says "hitler was right" might say. But I do agree donuts can be delicious, yet I utterly reject other things hitler said.
To endorse the principles of micro-credit or aspects of them is not the same as endorsing the founder nor the organizations nor other advocates of that.
It is important that we don't compromise any principles of our own but we should be looking at a Catholic and Distributist adaption of anything we would want to adopt. As Jim says "A model of Grameen based on Catholic teaching would be more fruitful".

Anonymous,  Monday, March 1, 2010 at 3:35:00 PM CST  

Yes, I definitely agree with you all. (This is "about me"...realized that the heading of my profile is ALSO my name...heh heh.)
Anyways, I certainly didn't mean that microlending was inherently bad. I just wasn't sure if you all knew about Grameen Bank's population stuff. Excelsior, everybody! God Bless

Chris Campbell Tuesday, March 2, 2010 at 8:03:00 AM CST  

Good comments, all.The model is correct, but we do need to point out hte flaws of the bank in its social and moral policies...none the less, for those that always say "hey, that cant work", here is yet another proof it can.

yanus is likely not Catholic, probably not even Christian, so we should not be surprised if he buys into paganism....after all, 90% of Catholics have bought into sinful contraception mentality and many are pro-abort...add to that about 99% of Protestants have bought into contraception mentality (excludding the Duggars and some others).

nagendra Tuesday, March 23, 2010 at 5:39:00 AM CDT  

Hello Webmaster

I am webmaster of Diamond watches, Engagement Rings and Luxury Watches related websites; I visited your website and found your website information(http://distributism.blogspot.com/ )and advice to be a very good fit for our visitors so could you please give us the best price for a site wide link on your esteemed website for a period of half and 1 Year? We will make payments via PayPal so if interested

If we are happy with your price, then we will send you the Link details that you can place on your website and we will make the payments to the PayPal id provided by you.

Nagendra singh

bullion gold bars Tuesday, May 4, 2010 at 6:44:00 PM CDT  

that is wonderfull.....it is amazing,,,,,,i like it

Bank Accounts For Bankrupts,  Friday, May 21, 2010 at 6:45:00 AM CDT  

Here is lots of useful information about Bank Accounts For Bankrupts also you can directly apply for prepaid MasterCard, credit cards and debit cards.

Post a Comment

  © Blogger template Werd by Ourblogtemplates.com 2009

Back to TOP