Cader Sayed Hossen, who is looking at ways of injecting some democratic measures in the economy, wants to reduce the concentration of wealth from the current 10% of Mauritians controlling 90% of the national wealth to 60% within one generation. The bigger chunk of national wealth is arguably land ownership and the wealth it generates.

This is the first time in our history that this issue is examined although it has always been on many people?s minds. The only difference: it is now in the open. Give Sayed Hossen the credit he deserves to be frank enough to say out loud what many others only think.

Mauritius is not unique in the world to want a more equitable system in the way it distributes its wealth. Many countries have had to go through this painful experience at some point in their life. History is replete with examples of struggles for a fairer distribution of land starting from the Greek and Roman periods, through the Middle Ages until the French revolution in the 18th century . Japan?s land reform started in 1868 while the Russian Revolution in the early 20th century gave a new meaning to agrarian reform. In 1949, it was China?s turn to redistribute land to peasant farmers. Closer to our recollection, in 1972, Philippines? Marcos embarked on an ambitious land reform program. And the latest twist is even closer to home in Zimbabwe. Throughout the world, redistribution of land remains an explosive political issue wherever and whenever it is an item on the agenda, perhaps tacitly echoing the words of Mexican Emiliano Zapata: "land and liberty", or in common parlance the opposite of landless and slavery.

The 10-90 proportion used by Syed Hossen is not an isolated case. In the 60s, 3% of the people owned 90% of the land in Venezuela, 2% owned a whopping 52% in Chile, and a slim 2% owned 50% of Brazil.

And so time travels and has now reached us. But where Mauritius differs is in the historical context. Unlike Latin America or Africa, where the indigenous and black population were forcibly removed from land they occupied to make room for European settlers, large white landowners in Mauritius didn?t take the land from anyone. They were the first to settle and cannot be accused of taking what was not theirs. This historical fact cannot be denied.

That being said, it is no less important to note that, as we move towards the fair and just society we want to develop and live in, it is imperative that everyone shares in the national wealth. Although it is next to humanly impossible to guarantee equality to all at all times, the flip side should not be the huge imbalance in the distribution of wealth either. This, I think, is where the general resentment lies.

But this resentment should not be directed at the white people of Mauritius, for they too live in accordance with human dispositions, meaning that they want to maintain their economic supremacy and earn as much money as they can. It is a natural reaction, applicable to all people of all races, albeit a practice that creates an unfair amount of inequality in a free society.

Instead, this feeling of being left in the economic shadow should be directed at those in whom power was vested to make changes that include everybody in the economic decision-making process. It is the duty of governments to see to it that more economic opportunities are available to a wider range of people. As representatives chosen by the people to act on their behalf, they ought to have created openings and institutions dedicated to promoting business opportunities and areas for everyone. That it was not done until now remains an indelible blot on previous governments since independence.

Striking a balance is the only way forward and the adopted methodology should not harm the economy. On the contrary, democratizing the economy should be undertaken solely as economic measures and ensuring continuous viable productivity. Any attempt to redistribute land to destroy a social class would be a disaster. We should rememeber that white Mauritians have a place in this country as much as everyone else.

The medium is indeed the message.

Saoud BACCUS - [email protected]