Islam Politik, Ekonomi Syariah
dan
Imperialisme
.
Bagian III. Ekonomi Islam dalam Tilikan Teori Nilai Kerja
.
Oleh HM Isbakh
.
.
[Alinea-alinea terakhir tulisan sebelumnya hlm 142b-III — Red DK *]
.
Sistem kredit kapitalisme merupakan perkembangan kekuatan produksi yang menglobal yang jauh melampau kekuatan-kekuatan produksi dari corak-corak produksi sebelumnya seperti feodalisme dan perbudakan.
.
Marx menunjukan bahwa dalam perkembangan tersebut terdapat potensi untuk mengabolisi sistem kapitalisme di mana alat-alat produksi kini mustahil dimiliki oleh seorang kapitalis.
.
Dengan demikian solusi mengatasi krisis kapitalisme sudah terdapat dalam sistem kapitalisme itu sendiri dalam bentuk sosialisasi alat-alat produksi sehingga tidak perlu didatangkan dari luar sistem sebagaimana diusung oleh ekonom-ekonom Islam dalam teologi dan moralitasnya.
.
Kapitalisme dengan kontradiksinya menggali liang kuburnya sendiri.
.
Yang diperlukan adalah kajian ilmiah untuk memahami proses keruntuhan tersebut dan yang memberikan arahan praksis menyiapkan dunia baru dari benih yang mulai tumbuh dari sistem yang sudah sekarat itu.
.
Pandangan Ekonomi Islam tentang Risiko dan Solusinya
.
[Berlanjut ke … simak/klik hlm 142c-III — Red DK]
.
__________________
.
Serial Tulisan HM Isbakh:
Islam Politik, Ekonomi Syariah dan Imperialisme
(Empat Bagian/Bagian IV 3-Sub-Bagian)
.
Bagian I. Islam Politik dan Imperialisme
Bagian II. Syariah Dipandang dari Perspektif Sejarah Material
hlm 135a-II, hlm 135b-II & hlm 135c-II
Bagian III. Ekonomi Islam dalam Tilikan Teori Nilai Kerja
hlm 142a-III, hlm 142b-III & hlm 142c-III
Sub-Bagian IVa. Asal-Usul dan Transformasi Islam Politik di Indonesia Dari Abad ke-13 Hingga Abad ke-19
Sub-Bagian IVb. Sastra Melayu: Islamisasi dan Ideologi
Sub-Bagian IVc. Perkembangan Politik Islam Indonesia Abad ke-20
.
__________________
.
Pandangan Ekonomi Islam tentang Risiko dan Solusinya
Bertolak dari ajaran larangan terhadap Riba, Ekonom Islam dari Bank Dunia seperti Abbas Mirakhor menalar lanjut bahwa keuangan Islam pada hakikatnya adalah tentang pembagian risiko (risk sharing) (Mirakhor & Bao, 2013)17.
Karena riba ditolak dan karena bank tidak menarik bunga, maka pembagian keuntungan tidak ditetapkan di depan (ex ante), melainkan berdasarkan hasil real yang diperoleh. Demikian pula bila terjadi kerugian (risiko), yang juga ditanggung bersama antara pihak-pihak yang mendanai suatu usaha.
Dari gambaran tersebut bisnis berdasarkan syariah Islam dapat disebut sebagai sistem pembagian untung atau rugi (profit loss sharing/PLS).
Bisnis dan perdagangan berada selalu dalam ketidakpastian dan risiko.
Transaksi yang berlangsung saat itu juga (spot exchange) berisiko mengalami perubahan harga setelah transaksi selesai. Apalagi suatu investasi atau komitmen jangka panjang yang berada dalam risiko perubahan harga terus menerus. Risiko tersebut sudah disadari, tinggal bagaimana solusi untuk mengantisipasinya.
Kemudian Mirakhor mengembangkan argumen bahwa riba ditolak karena tidak memberikan mekanisme solusi mengatasi risiko dalam bentuk pembagian risiko kepada pihak-pihak terlibat. Dalam praktik yang terjadi pada riba selama ini hanyalah pengeseran risiko (risk shifting) kepada salah satu pihak secara tidak adil.
“It is also worth noting that all Islamic contractual forms, except spot exchange, involve time. From an economic point of view, time transactions involve a commitment to do something today in exchange for a promise of a commitment to do something in the future. All transactions involving time are subject to uncertainty, and uncertainty involves risk. Risk exists whenever more than one outcome is possible.
Consider, for example, a contract in which a seller commits to deliver a product in the future against payments today. There are a number of risks involved.
First, there is a price risk for both sides of the exchange; the price may be higher or lower in the future. In that case, the two sides are at risk, which they share once they enter into the contract agreement.
If the price in the future is higher, the buyer would be better off and the price risk has been shed to the seller. The converse is true if the price is lower.
Under uncertainty, the buyer and seller have, through the contract, shared the price risk.
There are other risks that buyer takes, including the risks of nondelivery and substandard quality. The seller faces additional risks, including the risk that the price of raw material, and cost of transportation and delivery, may be higher in the future. These risks may also be lower. Again, these risks have been shared through the contract. The same argument applies to deferred payment contracts.
Second, it may appear that spot exchange or cash sale involves no risk. But price changes can change after the completion of spot exchange is completed. The two sides of a spot exchange share this risk.
Moreover, from the time of the classical economists, it has been recognized that specialization through comparative advantage provides the basis for gains from trade.
But in specializing, a producer takes the risk of becoming dependent on other producers specialized in production of what he needs.
Again, through exchange, the two sides to a transaction share the risk of specialization. Additionally, there are pre-exchange risks of production and transportation that are shared through the exchange.
It is clear that the contracts at the other end of the spectrum— mudarabah and musharakah—are risk-sharing transactions. Therefore, it can be inferred that by mandating Al-Bay’, Allah (swt) ordained risk sharing in all exchange activities.
Third, it appears that the reason for the prohibition of Al-Riba contracts is the fact that opportunities for risk sharing do not exist in this type of contract. It may be argued that the creditor does take on risk—the risk of default. But it is not risk taking per se that makes a transaction permissible.
A gambler takes risk as well, but gambling is not permitted. Instead, what seems to matter is opportunity for risk sharing.
Al-Riba is a contract of risk transfer. As John Maynard Keynes emphasized in his writings, if the interest rate did not exist, the financier would have to share in all the risks that the entrepreneur faces in producing, marketing, and selling a product (see Mirakhor and Krichene 2009).
But by decoupling his or her future gains, by loaning money today for more money in the future, the financier transfers all risks to the entrepreneur.
Fourth, it is clear that by declaring the contract of Al-Riba nonpermissible, the Qur’an intends for humans to shift their focus to risk-sharing contracts of exchange.” [Mirakhor & Bao, 2013, hal. 34 – 35]17
(Al bay’ diartikan sebagai perdagangan atau transaksi tanpa riba yang merupakan aktivitas bisnis yang dioposisikan dengan Al-Riba)
Setelah konsep tentang riba dan larangannya, konsep tentang risiko dan solusinya merupakan pandangan penting yang dikupas oleh ekonom Islam.
Dalam hal ini ekonom Islam mengembangkan pandangan teologis mengapa ada ketidakpastian dan bahwa risiko dalam ekonomi disebabkan karena pengambilan keputusan dalam ketidakpastian tersebut adalah sesuatu yang baik bagi pertumbuhan manusia karena diciptakan oleh Allah.
“Questions may arise as to how the existence of uncertainty and its overwhelming Influence in human life can be explained within the context of Islamic thought.
Why is life subject to so much uncertainty, necessitating risk taking? Since Allah (swt) is the Creator of all things, why create uncertainty? A full discussion of possible answers is beyond the task of this chapter.
Suffice it to say that in a number of verses, the Qur’an makes reference to the fact that this temporary existence is a crucible of constant testing, trials, and tribulations (see, for example, 2:155 and 2:76).
Not even the believers are spared. In verse 2 of chapter 29, the Qur’an asks: ‘Do humans think that they will be left alone when they say, ‘We believe,’ and they therefore will not be tested?’
The fact that this testing is a continuous process is reflected in verse 126 of chapter 9: ‘Do they not see that they are tried every year once or twice? Even then they do to turn repentant to Allah, not do they remember’ (see also chapter 2, verse 155).
To every test, trial, and tribulation in their lives, humans respond, and in doing so, they demonstrate their measure of self-awareness and consciousness of Allah.
If the response-action is in compliance with the rules of behavior prescribed by the Supreme Creator, that is, it is ‘Ahsanu ‘Amala,’ the ‘best action’ (11:7), meaning it is completely rule-compliant; then the trial becomes an occasion for self-development and strengthened awareness of Allah (swt).
Even then, uncertainty remains. No one can be fully certain of the total payoff to one’s life within the horizon of birth to eternity.
It is recommended that Muslims never assume they are absolutely certain of the consequences of their actions. They are to live in a state of mind and heart suspended between fear (khawf) of consequences of their actions and thoughts, and the hope (raja’) in the Mercy of the All-merciful Lord Creator.
All actions are risky because the full spectrum of future consequences of action is not known.
The Qur’an refers to this idea of uncertainty by suggesting that ‘at times you may dislike a thing when it is good for you and at times you like a thing and it is bad for you. Allah knows and you do not’ (2:216).” [Mirakhor & Bao, 2013, hal. 42]17
Ketidakpastian berasal dari Allah dan berfungsi untuk menguji (testing) umatnya, dan karena itu risiko akibat ketidakpastian tersebut baik bagi perkembangan individu.
Hal tersebut juga terkait dengan kebebasan manusia, sehingga ketidakpastian dan risiko yang berasal dari Allah, mengandaikan juga kebebasan manusia untuk menentukan pilihan.
Jadi kita disodorkan pada pandangan liberal tentang kebebasan (freedom) dalam ketidakpastian dan konsekuensi risiko yang diakibatkannya.
“It follows from the preceding discussion that it would be difficult to imagine that the crucible of testing can proceed without uncertainty and risk.
Statistician David Bartholomew, in his book, God, Chance, and Purpose (2008), asserts that ‘it could be plausibly argued that risk is a necessary ingredient for full human development. It provides the richness and diversity of experience necessary to develop our skills and personalities’ (Bartholomew 2008, 230).
He speculates that ‘the development of human freedom requires that there be sufficient space for that freedom to be exercised. Chance seems to provide just the flexibility required and therefore to be a precondition of free will’ (Bartholomew 2008, 200).
Further, he suggests that ‘we value our free will above almost everything; our human dignity depends upon it and it is that which sets us apart from the rest of the creation. But if we are all individuals free, then so is everyone else, and that means the risks created by their behavior, foolish or otherwise, are unavoidable. To forgo risk is to forgo freedom; risk is the price we pay for freedom’ (Bartholomew 2008, 239–40).
While life and freedom are gifts of the Supreme Creator to humans, and uncertainty and risk are there to test and try humans to facilitate their growth and development, humans are not left unaided to face the uncertainty of life to suffer its consequences.
Books, prophets, and Messengers have brought guidance as to how to best make decisions and take actions to mitigate the risks of this life and to improve the chances of a felicitous everlasting life.
Islam, in particular, has provided the ways and means by which uncertainties of life can be mitigated. First, it has provided rules of behavior and a taxonomy of decisions—actions and their commensurate payoffs—as stated in the Qur’an. Complying with these reduces uncertainty. Clearly, individuals exercise their freedom in choosing to comply with these rules or not to comply.” [Mirakhor & Bao, 2013, hal. 42 – 43]17
Karena ketidakpastian berasal dari Allah, maka solusi untuk menghadapi risiko akibat ketidakpastian tersebut juga berasal dari Allah yang dapat dicari dalam kitab-kitab suci dan pesan-pesan dari Nabi berupa kaidah-kaidah atau peraturan-peraturan yang berasal dari Allah.
Manusia memiliki kebebasan untuk memilih patuh kepada kaidah yang disampaikan tersebut atau tidak. Dalam bidang bisnis dan perdagangan solusi atas risiko yang buruk berdasarkan aturan perintah Allah tersebut adalah perintah kepada yang kaya untuk menanggung risiko si miskin. Adapun bentuk bantuan si kaya terhadap yang miskin dilegalkan dalam bentuk wajib pajak (zakat), sedekah, dan bantuan keuangan.
“Instruments of Islamic finance allow risk sharing and risk diversification, through which individuals can mitigate their idiosyncratic risks. On the other hand, mandated levies, such as zakat, are means through which the idiosyncratic risks of the poor are shared by the rich as an act of redemption of the former’s property rights in the income and wealth of the latter.
Other recommended levies, beyond those mandated, such as sadaqat (plural of sadaqah) and Qard-al-Hassan, play the same role. They help reduce the poor’s income-consumption correlation. In other words, the poor are not forced to rely on their meager income (if they even have an income) to maintain a decent level of subsistence living for themselves and their families.” [Mirakhor & Bao, 2013, hal. 44]17
Terlepas dengan adanya bantuan orang kaya kepada orang miskin, Mirakhor dkk berpendapat bahwa instrumen terbaik untuk melaksanakan prinsip PLS adalah bursa saham atau ekuitas.
Dalam saham bisnis yang dijalankan adalah investasi jangka panjang dan dianggap dapat mengurangi risiko idiosinkratik [idiosinkratik — Red DK] terkait likuiditas jangka pendek.
“If there is validity to the conclusion that Islamic finance is all about risk sharing, then the “first-best” instrument of risk sharing is a stock market, “which is arguably the most sophisticated market-based risk-sharing mechanism” (Brav, Constantinides, and Geczy 2002).
Developing an efficient stock market can effectively complement and supplement the existing array of other Islamic finance instruments, as well as those to be developed. It would provide the means for business and industry to raise long-term capital.
A vibrant stock market would allow risk diversification necessary for managing aggregate and idiosyncratic risks. Such an active market would reduce the dominance of banks and debt financing, where risks become concentrated, making the financial system more fragile (Sheng, 2009).
Idiosyncratic risks impact the liquidity of individuals and firms when they materialize. With an active stock market, individuals can buffer idiosyncratic liquidity stocks by selling equity shares they own on the stock market.
Firms can also reduce their own idiosyncratic and liquidity risk through active participation in the stock market. They can reduce risk to the rate of return to their own operation, such as productivity risk, by holding a well-diversified portfolio of shares of stocks.
Thus incentives are created for investment in more long-term, productive projects.
Importantly, by actively participating in the stock market, individuals and firms can mitigate the risk of unnecessary and premature liquidation of their assets due to liquidity and productivity shocks (Pagano 1993).
Moreover, an active and vibrant stock market creates strong incentives for higher degrees of technological specialization, through which the overall productivity of the economy is increased.
This happens because without sufficiently strong risk sharing in the financial system through the stock market, firms avoid deeper specialization, fearing the risk from sectoral demand shocks (Saint-Paul 1992).
The reason stock markets are such effective tools of risk sharing is because each share represents a contingent residual equity claim.” [Mirakhor & Bao, 2013, hal. 44 – 45]17
Dengan masuknya campur tangan Allah dalam aktivitas perekonomian, Mirakhor kembali kepada dan menafsirkan kembali Adam Smith sebagai ekonom liberal yang percaya akan adanya intervensi adi kodrati melalui konsep intervensi tangan yang tak terlihat (invisible hand) ke dalam perekonomian. Intervensi adi kodrati tersebut membawa perekonomian ke dalam kemakmuran yang sudah didesain sebelumnya.
“Whereas conventional economics considered Smith’s notion of the ‘invisible hand’ as a coordinator of independent decisions of market participants, in both The Theory of Moral Sentiments and in the Wealth of Nations, the metaphor refers to the design of the Creator, ‘who arranged the connecting principles such that the actions of all those seeking their own advantage could produce the most efficient allocation of resources, and thus the greatest possible wealth for the nation. This is indeed a benevolent designer’ (Evensky 1993, 9).
Smith contended that the objective of the Divine Design must have been the happiness of humans “when he brought them into existence. No other end seems worthy of that supreme wisdom and divine benignity which we necessarily ascribe to him…” (Smith [1759] 2006, 186–89).
Smith’s major contribution in his Theory of Moral Sentiments is to envision a coherent moral-ethical social system consistent with the Creator’s design and show how each member of society would enforce ethical principles. Recognition of human frailties led Smith to recognition of the need for an organic coevolution of individual and society in a stage-wise process of accumulation of ethical system of values from one generation to next.
While it is possible for any given society to move forward or stagnate and even regress, the benevolence of the invisible hand of the ‘Author of nature’ guides the totality of humanity in its movement toward the ideal human society.
Compliance with and commitment to a set of values—virtues of prudence, concern for other people, justice, and benevolence—would insure social order and cohesion (Mirakhor and Askari 2010; Mirakhor and Hamid 2009; Smith [1759] 2006).” [Mirakhor & Bao, 2013, hal. 26]17
Karena intervensi datang dari Allah maka secara logis bidang tersebut tidak cocok dimasuki oleh intervensi manusia.
Tampak bahwa upaya Ekonom Islam merestorasi Adam Smith secara logis sejalan dengan semangat neoliberal yang menolak intervensi negara dalam perekonomian.
Perekonomian adalah suatu aktivitas bebas dalam pasar tanpa intervensi manusia (negara) yang perlu dijalankan dengan moral dan keimanan kepada Allah.
Sikap yang (neo)liberal tersebut berbeda dengan pandangan Keynesian yang menganggap intervensi negara itu penting untuk mengatasi ketidakseimbangan dalam perekonomian.
Ada persamaan beberapa prinsip ekonomi Islam dan kaum monetaris yang mengusung neoliberalisme seperti Milton Friedman dkk.
Sikap menyolok kaum moneteris adalah menolak intervensi negara dalam mengatasi krisis-krisis atau ketidakseimbangan ekonomi sebagaimana diajukan oleh ekonom John Maynard Keynes (1883 – 1946).
Begawan ekonomi Indonesia, Sumitro Djojohadikusumo dalam bukunya Perkembangan Pemikiran Ekonomi (1991) menjelaskan pemikiran ekonom aliran monetaris sebagai berikut:
“Kontra-revolusi terhadap mazhab Keynes.
Monetarisme Friedman bersumber pada pemikiran dasar Irving Fisher perihal teori kuantitas tentang uang dan harga.
Kebijaksanaan fiskal harus dialihkan kepada kebijaksanaan moneter. Goncangan-goncangan ekonomi hendaknya ditanggulangi melalui langkah tindakan untuk mempengaruhi pasok volume uang. Tingkat pertambahan pada pasok volume uang agar disesuaikan dengan bertambahnya kebutuhan dunia usaha.
Dilemma tentang hubungan sebab-akibat antara pasok volume uang dan perubahan ekonomi. Kesulitan untuk melakukan kuantifikasi operasional terhadap konsep pengertian pasok jumlah uang.
Dalam kenyataan kebijaksanaan untuk menguasai pasok volume uang dilakukan hampir semata-mata melalui pengendalian tingkat bunga. Kembali pada laissez faire, laissez aller: di luar pengelolaan moneter oleh bank sentral tidak boleh dilakukan intervensi aktif dalam kebijaksanaan ekonomi-keuangan.
Ekspektasi rasional sebagai aliran monetaris generasi baru.
Pelaku-pelaku ekonomi dianggap bersikap rasional dalam pilihannya dan keputusannya di bidang ekonomi.
Keputusan-keputusan dipengaruhi oleh persepsi pelaku ekonomi tentang apa yang diperkirakan akan terjadi di masa depan. Dengan disediakannya segenap informasi data dan didukung oleh penyusunan model ekonometrik yang canggih, perkiraan tentang masa depan (ekspektasi) dapat dipastikan secara kualitatif.
Jika semua pelaku bisa dibekali dengan hasil informatika canggih dan jika semua mampu untuk menggunakannya secara rasional, maka akan terwujud persaingan bebas di pasar yang sempurna.
Akan tetapi persyaratan dan saranan pendapat para ahli teori ekspektasi rasional itu dalam kenyataan justru tidak berlaku dan tidak pernah terwujud. Sebaliknya pasar dan persaingan yang menyangkut informatika merupakan pasar yang paling tidak sempurna dengan persaingan yang bersifat sangat monopolistik.” [Djojohadikusumo, 1991, hal. xvii – xviii]18
Keynes ekonom borjuis yang realistis. Ia menolak pandangan bahwa dalam kapitalisme pasar akan selalu bergulir ke arah titik keseimbangan sebagaimana dinyatakan oleh Jean Baptist Say (1767 – 1832) si pengikut Adam Smith.
Gangguan keseimbangan ekonomi tersebut dapat muncul dalam keadaan tingginya angka pengangguran. Oleh karena itu intervensi pemerintah (negara) dalam meningkatkan permintaan agregat dalam bentuk belanja pemerintah yang menciptakan lapangan pekerjaan perlu dilakukan.
Akan tetapi resep Keynes mengalami masalah pada tahun 70-an dan 60-an di mana peningkatan belanja pemerintah yang pengurangan pengangguran pada kenyataannya akan menyebabkan inflasi, yang merupakan suatu keadaan yang ditakuti dalam perekonomian. Hal ini ditunjukan oleh kurva Phillips di mana tingkat pengangguran tertinggi terjadi justru terjadi pada saat upah atau harga barang menurun dan sebaliknya (Meltzer, 1981, hal 54)19. Kaum monetaris hadir sebagai respon atas kegagalan ekonomi Keynesian sejak tahun 60-an.
Ada keserupaan dalam tekanan pemikiran, kalau tidak mau dikatakan kesamaan (!), antara ekonomi Islam dan kaum monetaris.
Selain kesepakatan atas dasar pemikiran Adam Smith yang liberal dan Say sebagai pengikutnya (dalam bentuk yang lebih canggih terdapat apresiasi ekonomi Islam terhadap teori keseimbangan modern Arrow-Debreu-Hahn meski ada sedikit kritik mereka terhadap acuan Arrow dkk terhadap sekuritas bebas risiko yang dianggap seperti bunga tetap)15 ekonomi Islam dan kaum monetaris sama-sama menekankan peran finansial dalam perekonomian.
Dari segi historis pun eksistensi pemikiran mereka muncul bersamaan yakni pascaperiode kemakmuran pascaperang dunia kedua, di mana imperialis AS menolak mematok nilai mata uang dolarnya terhadap emas (sistem Bretton Wood) dan tentu saja bersamaan dengan banjir petrodollar di Timur-Tengah.
Karena pasar saham adalah sistem perekonomian yang diidealkan ekonomi Islam, maka fungsi negara pun terkait dengan penciptaan pasar saham tersebut.
“Professor Abbas Mirakhor, a leading scholar of Islamic finance, has recently urged government intervention to develop stock markets in Islamic countries. In his view, the stock market is not only a principal means of risk sharing, but is probably the best available instrument.
The establishment of stock markets on a sound basis can benefit international and national risk sharing and thereby make the whole system much more stable. The stock market would thus be a useful addition to complete the Islamic sequence of markets to enhance economic efficiency.” [Sheng & Singh, 2013, hal. 83]20
Bila ada intervensi pemerintah hal itu terjadi bukan dalam pengertian Keynesian meningkatkan konsumsi agregat, melainkan mendorong syarat-syarat bagi pasar saham yakni:
“… create to remedy the deficit in informational, enforcement, and governance behavior to reduce the cost of participation in stock markets must be stronger and more comprehensive than exist today.
These policies, actions, and institutions should have the competence, efficiency, and enforcement capabilities to elicit the kind of behavior and results that replicate or closely approximate those expected if market participants behaved in compliance with Islamic rules. These would include:
-
- Policies to create a level playing field for equities to compete fairly with debtbased instruments; this means removing all legal, administrative, economic, financial, and regulatory biases that favor debt and put equity holding at a disadvantage;
- Creating positive incentives for risk sharing through the stock market;
- Investing in massive public education campaigns to familiarize the population with the benefits of stock market participation: the kind of campaign that Prime Minister Thatcher’s government ran in the United Kingdom, which substantially increased stock market participation in a short span of time;
- Investing in human capital to produce competent, well-educated, and trained reputational intermediaries—lawyers, accountants, financial journalists, and religious scholars—which means investing in the creation of world class business and law schools;
- Limiting short sales and leverage (including margin operations) of nonbank financial institutions and the credit-creation ability of banks through prudential rules that effectively cap the total credit the banking system can create;
- Developing a strong and dynamic regulatory and supervisory system for stock exchanges that not only continuously monitors the behavior of markets and participants but stays a few steps ahead of those with a penchant and motivation to use regulatory arbitrage to get around rules and regulations;
- Finding ways and means of regulating and supervising reputational intermediaries, or at least mandating that they become self-regulating to ensure that false reporting or misreporting, or both, are minimized, under threat of liability to market participants;
- Ensuring completely transparent and accurate reporting of the day’s trade by all exchanges; and • Instituting legal requirements for the protection of the rights of minority shareholders.” [Mirakor & Bao, 2013, hal. 49 – 50]17
Terlihat bahwa peran negara yang dipromosikan oleh ekonomi Islam sejalan dengan pandangan kaum moneteris dan aliran ekspektasi rasional dalam hal pandangan bahwa pelaku ekonomi akan bertindak rasional jika diberikan informasi yang dipercayai.
Mengapa orang tidak mau berinvestasi dalam bursa saham? Karena tidak diberikan informasi yang memadai! Karena itu solusinya ciptakan sistem ekonomi yang dapat menjamin penyebaran dan pemanfaatan informasi.
Meski Sumitro Djojohadikusumo (1991) sebenarnya telah mengkritik kemustahilan diseminasi informasi yang egaliter ke semua pihak dalam pasar yang monopolistis18, bagi penulis tetap saja masih mengundang misteri bagaimana rakyat di negara-negara Islam yang notabene masih banyak yang berada dalam kemiskinan memeroleh akses untuk berpartisipasi dalam pasar saham sebagaimana yang diadvokasi oleh para ekonom Islam.
Dan, masih dalam hal intervensi negara, suatu kebijakan yang “sosialistis” seperti redistribusi pendapatan dari yang kaya dalam bentuk pajak-pajak yang progresif dianggap pelanggaran atas milik privat yang diakui dalam ekonomi Islam.
Segala bentuk penarikan pendapatan yang diperbolehkan hanya yang diijinkan dalam Islam yakni dalam bentuk zakat dan sedekah.
Erbaş dan Mirakhor (2013)19 memberikan justifikasi teoritis terhadap pandangan ini dengan argumen yang lebih halus di mana pajak dianggap mengurangi insentif orang (kapitalis) untuk bekerja keras dan berinovasi, sedangkan zakat yang berasal dari perintah Allah dipercayai dapat mengharmonisasi konflik antara redistribusi dengan insentif.
“Market economies predicated on private property and free enterprise cannot thrive without protections for property rights and without rewards to individual effort and entrepreneurship.
As wealth is redistributed, the collateral impact on incentives for innovation and investment may be so adverse that the society ends up with more equally distributed but less total wealth over time.
We are reminded of the failure of command economies ostensibly aiming at income equality, while creating very little incentive for hard work and innovation.
Islam does not prescribe that temporal wealth is to be divided equally between the rich and the poor.
From the point of view of the donor, this view addresses the problem of adverse incentive effects that curb wealth accumulation. As noted, wealth is to be shared not only through prescribed and voluntary giving but also by enabling those who are not able to access resources or work or education.
So, the rules also address disincentives to work effort by encouraging and enabling work and enterprise to overcome deprivation and poverty. In this sense, zakat has a “workfare” aspect.
This view of economic justice appears to be incentives-based, aiming at harmonizing economic justice with incentives. That harmonization is one of the fundamental issues that preoccupy the contemporary public finance and labor economics literature, as well as the political discourse on taxation, welfare, health care, and other transfer schemes.” [Erbaş & Mirakhor, 2013, hal. 118]21
Implisit dalam uraian ekonomi Islam di atas terdapat pandangan bahwa ketidaksetaraan ekonomi atau finansial berasal dari ketidaksetaraan dalam kerja keras dan inovasi.
Orang bekerja keras dan berinovasi akan memiliki pendapatan atau kekayaan lebih banyak daripada orang yang malas dan tidak kreatif.
Menarik untuk menyandingkan pandangan ekonomi Islam ini dengan etika protestan dan kapitalisme dalam kajian Weber. Yang kaya pekerja keras, yang miskin pemalas.
Setelah doktrin teoritis ekonomi Islam yang sejalan dengan neoliberalisme, kita pun semakin diyakinkan akan kesejajaran ideologis ekonomi Islam dengan etika protestan imperialis.
Kritik Pendekatan Sejarah Material terhadap Pandangan Ekonomi Islam tentang Risiko
Spekulasi dan Ketidakstabilan Keuangan Sebagai Sifat yang Melekat dalam Kapitalisme
Dari uraian Mirakhor dkk di atas tentang risiko, terlihat bahwa cara pandang ekonomi Islam terhadap masalah perekonomian seperti ketidakpastian dan risiko serta solusinya ditautkan pada pandangan teologis dan moralis sehingga ahistoris.
Konsekuensi logisnya ekonomi Islam memandang krisis-krisis ekonomi muncul sebagai resultan dari perilaku amoral pelaku-pelaku ekonomi.
Asal-usul ketidakpastian, sebagaimana dijelaskan oleh Mirakhor dkk di atas, adalah dari Allah. Solusi terhadap ketidakpastian tersebut adalah petunjuk dari Allah, melalui Nabi dan Kitab Suci.
Dalam hal ini manusia diberikan kebebasan untuk memilih jalan Allah atau tidak. Tidak memilih jalan Allah berarti menanggung risiko. Mengikuti jalan Allah (yang diterjemahkan sebagai melaksanakan keuangan tanpa riba dan sistem bagi hasil – rugi) berarti mengurangi risiko.
Dari penalaran tersebut maka berspekulasi adalah tindakan memilih jalan di luar Allah sehingga akibatnya orang yang bersangkutan menanggung risiko.
Apa yang dihindari oleh ekonomi Islam adalah risiko dan ketidakpastian bukan aktivitas perdagangan itu sendiri. Dengan demikian dari sudut pandang tersebut adalah mungkin untuk mewujudkan perdagangan dengan meminimalisir ketidakpastian dan risiko.
Namun demikian para ekonom Eropa di masa lampau sudah menyadari bahwa aktivitas dagang itu sendiri adalah spekulasi. Jadi perdagangan sulit dilepaskan dari ketidakpastian dan risiko karena esensinya itu sendiri spekulasi.
Teori nilai kerja memodelkan sirkuit sirkulasi kapital dagang sebagai M – C – M’.
Pedagang mulai dari membeli barang (M – C) kemudian menjual barang tersebut untuk memperoleh uang yang lebih banyak lagi (C – M’, di mana M’ > M). Dari mana pedagang memperoleh untung kalau bukan spekulasi atau membeli murah menjual mahal?
“In a work, which, ex professo treat ‘trade’ and ‘speculation’, occurs the following: ‘All trade consist in the exchange of things of different kinds; and the advantage’ (to merchant?) ‘arises out of this difference.
To exchange a pound of bread against a pound of bread … would be attended with no advantage; ….
Hence trade is advantageously contrasted with gambling, which consists in a mere exchange of money for money.’
(Corbet, ‘An Inquiry in the Causes and Modes of the Wealth of Individuals; or the Principles of Trade and Speculation Explained’ London, 1841, p.5)
Although Corbet does not see that M – M, the exchange of money for money, is characteristic form of circulation, not only of Merchant’s capital but of all capital, yet at least he acknowledges that this form is common to gambling and to one species of trade, viz., speculation: but then comes MacCulloch and makes out, that to buy in order to sell, is to speculate, and thus the difference between Speculation and Trade vanishes.
‘Every transaction in which an individual buys produce in order to sell it again, is, in fact, a speculation.’ (MacCulloch: ‘ A Dictionary Practical, &c., of Commerce.’ Lond, 1847, p. 1009)” [Marx, Capital 1, hal. 150, catatan kaki 1]14
Dari kutipan Marx di atas, kita harus memerhatikan bahwa penyamaan perdagangan dengan spekulasi yang dimaksud terpisahkan dari sirkuit kapital produktif.
Karena kita membahas asal-usul spekulasi yang identik dengan perdagangan, aktivitas dagang yang dikaji belumlah memasuki fase historis yang terintegrasi dengan sirkuit kapital produktif yang telah kita bahas pada topik larangan Riba di atas.
Sebelumnya kita telah memelajari bahwa dalam perdagangan terjadi pertukaran antar kesetaraan. Tetapi hal tersebut terjadi pada sirkulasi komoditas yang telah terintegrasi dalam sirkuit kapital produktif di mana penciptaan nilai lebih telah berlangsung selama proses produksi dalam kapitalisme modern.
Saat kapitalisme industri belum berkembang perdagangan dijalankan dengan prinsip beli murah jual mahal. Pedagang memeroleh barang murah dapat dengan melalui cara-cara yang amoral seperti kekerasan, perampokan, penipuan, dsb (lihat bagian 1 seri artikel ini tentang akumulasi primitif) kemudian menjualnya dengan harga mahal.
Keuntungan belumlah diperoleh melalui eksploitasi tenaga kerja.
Dengan demikian solusi untuk melenyapkan ketidakpastian dan risiko dari suatu aktivitas yang pada hakikatnya spekulatif adalah absurd.
Apakah anda ingin menghilangkan risiko dan spekulasi? Karena dagang adalah spekulasi maka solusi logisnya adalah penghapusan perdagangan!
Tapi bukankah Nabi berasal dari kelas pedagang? Oleh karena itu solusi ekonomi Islam: perdagangan tetap dapat dilakukan asal dimoralkan atau dijalankan sesuai dengan petunjuk Allah.
Dan apabila kita memasuki fase historis di mana kapitalisme industri berkembang, ranah sirkulasi di mana aktivitas perdagangan berlangsung merupakan daerah di mana pertukaran komoditas dalam kesetaraan nilai seperti yang telah dijelaskan di atas.
Aktivitas perdagangan tetaplah merupakan suatu spekulasi. Spekulasi dalam memilih barang atau bidang perdagangan apa yang akan dimasuki. Tidak ada jaminan pun bahwa barang yang sudah dibeli akan terjual. Artinya sirkuit konversi komoditi menjadi uang (C – M) belum tentu lancar oleh karena berbagai hal.
Bahwa spekulasi, risiko dan ketidakpastian sudah melekat dalam kapitalisme tercermin dalam konsep instabilitas keuangan (financial instability) dari Hyman P. Minsky (1991 & 1992)22,23. Minsky membagi aktivitas keuangan atau relasi pendapatan-hutang (income-debt relation) dalam 3 jenis berdasarkan risikonya yakni keuangan hedge, spekulatif dan Ponzi22,23.
Dalam keuangan hedge suatu arus kas (cash flow) unit ekonomi mampu menutupi baik hutang pokok (principal) maupun bunganya.
Pada keuangan spekulatif unit ekonomi hanya mampu memenuhi bunga namun tidak hutang pokok.
Sedangkan keuangan Ponzi tidak dapat memenuhi keduanya. Perekonomian akan stabil bila struktur keuangannya didominasi oleh keuangan hedge dan semakin tidak stabil apabila bergeser ke keuangan Ponzi.22,23
Tesis Minsky menyatakan bahwa perekonominan (kapitalisme) selalu memiliki unsur tidak stabil (spekulatif dan Ponzi) dan perekonomian yang awalnya stabil akan senantiasa bergeser ke arah tidak stabil.
“It can be shown that if hedge financing dominates, then the economy may well be an equilibrium seeking and containing system. In contrast, the greater the weight of speculative and pozi finance, the greater likelihood that the economy is a deviation amplifying system.
The first theorem of the financial instability hypothesis is that the economy has financing regimes under which it is stable, and financing regimes under which it is unstable.
The second theorem of financial instability hypothesis is that over periods of prolonged prosperity, the economy transits from financial relations that make for a stable system to financial relations that make for an unstable system.
In particular, over a protracted period of good times, capitalist economies tend to move from a financial structure dominated by hedge finance units to a structure in which there is large weight to units engaged in speculative and Ponzi finance.
Furthermore, if an economy with a sizesable body of speculative financial units is in an inflationary state, and the authorities attempt to exorcise inflation by monetary constraint, then speculative units will become Ponzi units and the net worth of previously Ponzi units and the net worth of previously Ponzi units will quickly evaporate.
Consequently, units with cash flow shortfalls will be forced to try to make position by selling out postion. This is likely to lead to a collapse asset values.” [Minsky, 1992]23
Tesis Minsky yang menyatakan eksistensi unsur yang tidak stabil dalam ekonomi serta “hukum” perkembangan ekonomi yang stabil senantiasa bergerak ke arah tak stabil mematahkan pandangan ekonomi Islam bahwa krisis terjadi akibat perilaku amoral pelaku-pelaku ekonomi.
Spekulasi dan krisis sudah merupakan hakikat kapitalisme, tidak dipengaruhi oleh moralitas kapitalis. Ia juga mematahkan pandangan (neo)liberal bahwa ekonomi senantiasa bergerak ke arah titik keseimbangan karena adanya intervensi invisible hand yang adi kodrati.
Pada dasarnya perdagangan yang dipromosikan ekonomi Islam adalah perdagangan yang bebas dengan mekanisme campur tangan yang tak terlihat dari Allah dalam pasar yang membawa ekonomi kepada keseimbangan dan kemudian kemakmuran.
Akan tetapi sejarah perekonomian mengafirmasis tesis Minsky dan menunjukan intervensi adi kodrati tidak bekerja seperti yang diidealkan tersebut.
Kapitalisme senantiasa memerlihatkan krisis-krisis periodik yang penjelasannya tidak dapat dicari dengan mereduksi sebab krisis ke faktor moral yakni karena kerusakan moral kapitalis.
Justru sebaliknya kami telah menunjukan bahwa kapitalis (imperialis) senantiasa menggunakan doktrin-doktrin teologis dalam membenarkan tindakannya (lihat bagian pertama serial artikel ini tentang imperialisme AS dan doktrin-doktrin teologis [simak/klik hlm 132a-I — Red DK], serta bagian kedua serial artikel ini tentang Max Weber dan hubungan antara etika protestan dengan kapitalisme.[simak/klik hlm 135b-IVa — Red DK]).
Pendek kata bertolak belakang dari apa yang diyakini ekonomi Islam bahwa mengikuti kehendak Allah membawa kepada kemakmuran, para kapitalis yang sudah mengimani kehendak Allah tidak kuasa menghindari krisis-krisis yang, kata Marx dan Engels dalam MPK [Manifesto Partai Komunis, 1848–Red DK], lebih luas dan lebih merusak. Oleh karena itu penjelasan krisis-krisis ekonomi perlu dicari dengan pendekatan ilmiah daripada teologis atau moral.
Pandangan Materialisme Historis tentang Krisis
Pada kesempatan ini kami akan mengeksposisi pandangan sejarah material yang memiliki pendekatan dan asumsi dasar yang bertolak belakang daripada ekonomi Islam.
Menolak asumsi dasar ekonomi Islam adalah sejalan dengan menolak asumsi dasar kaum neoliberal karena dasar inspirasi mereka bertolak dari prinsip yang sama yakni liberalisme Adam Smith yang ditafsirkan dalam semangat ekonomi pasca-keynesian dengan tujuan menolak intervensi negara.
Sebagai bagian penting di mana kritik dilancarkan adalah terhadap pandangan Say yang merupakan pengikut Adam Smith yang menyebutkan bahwa dalam perekonomian pasokan (suplai) selalu menciptakan permintaannya.
Pandangan ini secara implisit dianut dalam ekonomi Islam yang mengakui eksistensi intervensi adi kodrati dalam mekanisme tangan tak terlihat (invisible hand).
Jika pelaku-pelaku ekonomi mengikuti kaidah dari Allah (Syariah Islam), maka mekanisme tangan tak terlihat berjalan sehingga pasokan senantisa sesuai dengan permintaan dalam keseimbangan ekonomi dan krisis-krisis tidak terjadi.
Pada kenyataannya yang terjadi sebaliknya. Krisis-krisis selalu terjadi dan keadaan seimbang jarang terjadi bila tidak mau dikatakan tidak pernah terjadi.
Yang terjadi adalah pasokan (suplai) terlalu banyak (overproduction) kemudian konsumsi (permintaan) pada kenyataannya terlalu rendah (underconsumption). Yang terjadi adalah kapitalisme selalu berada dalam keadaan disproporsi antara pasokan dan permintaan.
Pandangan tidak ada disproporsi antara permintaan dan pasokan, antara pembelian dan penjualan, diusung oleh Say yang merupakan pengikut Adam Smith, kemudian dilanjutkan oleh James Mill (1773 – 1836) sebelum diterima oleh David Ricardo (1772 – 1823).
Pandangan bahwa pasokan otomatis menciptakan permintaannya sendiri seakan-akan bahwa proses tersebut selalu berhubungan dengan harmonis.
Marx memperlihatkan bahwa kedua proses tersebut, permintaan dan pasokan atau pembelian dan penjual, merupakan dua proses yang independen.
Kapitalis memang berproduksi, tapi tidak ada jaminan bahwa komoditas yang diproduksi akan terbeli. Bukankah hal itu ditandai dengan fenomena iklan yang marak sebagai sarana untuk menciptakan efek psikologis kepada konsumen untuk membeli?
Marx memberikan penjelasan panjang lebar tentang putusnya hubungan antara penjualan dan pembelian, permintaan dan pasokan, di mana krisis terjadi justru ketika hubungan kedua fase tersebut terputus.
Keterputusan tersebut menyanggah pandangan keseimbangan umum yang menyangkal eksistensi krisis serta pandangan pasokan menciptakan permintaannya sendiri oleh Say (yang melanjutkan Smith) dan diikuti oleh Ricardo.
“So far as crises are concerned, all those writers who describe the real movement of prices, or all experts, who write in the actual situation of a crisis, have been right in ignoring the allegedly theoretical twaddle and in contenting themselves with the idea that what may be true in abstract theory —namely, that no gluts of the market and so forth are possible—is, nevertheless, wrong in practice.
The constant recurrence of crises has in fact reduced the rigmarole of Say and others to a phraseology which is now only used in times of prosperity but is cast aside in times of crises.
In the crises of the world market, the contradictions and antagonisms of bourgeois production are strikingly revealed.
Instead of investigating the nature of the conflicting elements which errupt in the catastrophe, the apologists content themselves with denying the catastrophe itself and insisting, in the face of their regular and periodic recurrence, that if production were carried on according to the textbooks, crises would never occur.
Thus the apologetics consist in the falsification of the simplest economic relations, and particularly in clinging to the concept of unity in the face of contradiction.
If, for example, purchase and sale—or the metamorphosis of commodities—represent the unity of two processes, or rather the movement of one process through two opposite phases, and thus essentially the unity of the two phases, the movement is essentially just as much the separation of these two phases and their becoming independent of each other.
Since, however, they belong together, the independence of the two correlated aspects can only show itself forcibly, as a destructive process.
It is just the crisis in which they assert their unity, the unity of the different aspects. The independence which these two linked and complimentary phases assume in relation to each other is forcibly destroyed.
Thus the crisis manifests the unity of the two phases that have become independent of each other.
There would be no crisis without this inner unity of factors that are apparently indifferent to each other. But no, says the apologetic economist. Because there is this unity, there can be no crises. Which in turn means nothing but that the unity of contradictory factors excludes contradiction.
In order to prove that capitalist production cannot lead to general crises, all its conditions and distinct forms, all its principles and specific features—in short capitalist production itself—are denied.
In fact it is demonstrated that if the capitalist mode of production had not developed in a specific way and become a unique form of social production, but were a mode of production dating back to the most rudimentary stages, then its peculiar contradictions and conflicts and hence also their eruption in crises would not exist.
Following Say, Ricardo writes: “Productions are always bought by productions, or by services; money is only the medium by which the exchange is effected”.
Here, therefore, firstly commodity, in which the contradiction between exchange-value and use-value exists, becomes mere product (use-value) and therefore the exchange of commodities is transformed into mere barter of products, of simple use-values.
This is a return not only to the time before capitalist production, but even to the time before there was simple commodity production; and the most complicated phenomenon of capitalist production—the world market crisis—is flatly denied, by denying the first condition of capitalist production, namely, that the product must be a commodity and therefore express itself as money and undergo the process of metamorphosis.
Instead of speaking of wage-labour, the term “services” is used. This word again omits the specific characteristic of wagelabour and of its use—namely, that it increases the value of the commodities against which it is exchanged, that it creates surplus-value—and in doing so, it disregards the specific relationship through which money and commodities are transformed into capital.
“Service” is labour seen only as use-value (which is a side issue in capitalist production) just as the term “productions” fails to express the essence of commodity and its inherent contradiction.
It is quite consistent that money is then regarded merely as an intermediary in the exchange of products, and not as an essential and necessary form of existence of the commodity which must manifest itself as exchange-value, as general social labour.
Since the transformation of the commodity into mere use-value (product) obliterates the essence of exchange-value, it is just as easy to deny, or rather it is necessary to deny, that money is an essential aspect of the commodity and that in the process of metamorphosis it is independent of the original form of the commodity.
Crises are thus reasoned out of existence here by forgetting or denying the first elements of capitalist production: the existence of the product as a commodity, the duplication of the commodity in commodity and money, the consequent separation which takes place in the exchange of commodities and finally the relation of money or commodities to wage-labour.
Incidentally, those economists are no better, who (like John Stuart Mill) want to explain the crises by these simple possibilities of crisis contained in the metamorphosis of commodities—such as the separation between purchase and sale.
These factors which explain the possibility of crises, by no means explain their actual occurrence.
They do not explain why the phases of the process come into such conflict that their inner unity can only assert itself through a crisis, through a violent process.
This separation appears in the crisis; it is the elementary form of the crisis. To explain the crisis on the basis of this, its elementary form, is to explain the existence of the crisis by describing its most abstract form, that is to say, to explain the crisis by the crisis. Ricardo says:
‘No man produces, but with a view to consume or sell, and he never sells, but with an intention to purchase some other commodity, which may be immediately useful to him, or which may contribute to future production.
By producing, then, he necessarily becomes either the consumer of his own goods, or the purchaser and consumer of the goods of some person.
It is not to be supposed that be should, for any length of time, be ill-informed of the commodities which he can most advantageously produce, to attain the object which he has in view, namely, the possession of other goods; and, therefore, it is not probable that he will continually produce a commodity for which there is no demand’.
This is the childish babble of a Say, but it is not worthy of Ricardo.
In the first place, no capitalist produces in order to consume his product. And when speaking of capitalist production, it is right to say that: “no man produces with a view to consume his own product”, even if he uses portions of his product for industrial consumption.
But here the point in question is private consumption. Previously it was forgotten that the product is a commodity. Now even the social division of labour is forgotten.
In a situation where men produce for themselves, there are indeed no crises, but neither is there capitalist production. Nor have we ever heard that the ancients, with their slave production ever knew crises, although individual producers among the ancients too, did go bankrupt.
The first part of the alternative is nonsense. The second as well. A man who has produced, does not have the choice of selling or not selling. He must sell.
In the crisis there arises the very situation in which he cannot sell or can only sell below the cost-price or must even sell at a positive loss.
What difference does it make, therefore, to him or to us that he has produced in order to sell? The very question we want to solve is what has thwarted this good intention of his?
Further: he ‘never sells, but with an intention to purchase some other commodity, which may he immediately useful to him, or which may contribute to future production’.
What a cosy description of bourgeois conditions!
Ricardo even forgets that a person may sell in order to pay, and that these forced sales play a very significant role in the crises.
The capitalist’s immediate object in selling, is to turn his commodity, or rather his commodity capital, back into money capital, and thereby to realise his profit.
Consumption—revenue—is by no means the guiding motive in this process, although it is for the person who only sells commodities in order to transform them into means of subsistence. But this is not capitalist production, in which revenue appears as the result and not as the determining purpose. Everyone sells first of all in order to sell, that is to say, in order to transform commodities into money.
During the crisis, a man may be very pleased, if he has sold his commodities without immediately thinking of a purchase. On the other hand, if the value that has been realised is again to be used as capital, it must go through the process of reproduction, that is, it must be exchanged for labour and commodities.
But the crisis is precisely the phase of disturbance and interruption of the process of reproduction. And this disturbance cannot be explained by the fact that it does not occur in those times when there is no crisis.
There is no doubt that no one ‘will continually produce a commodity for which there is no demand’, but no one is talking about such an absurd hypothesis. Nor has it anything to do with the problem.
The immediate purpose of capitalist production is not ‘the possession of other goods’, but the appropriation of value, of money, of abstract wealth.
Ricardo’s statements here are also based on James Mills’s proposition on the ‘metaphysical equilibrium of purchases and sales’, which I examined previously—an equilibrium which sees only the unity, but not the separation in the processes of purchase and sale, Hence also Ricardo’s assertion (following James Mill): ‘Too much of a particular commodity may he produced, of which there may be such a glut in the market, as not to repay the capital expended on it; but this cannot be the case with respect to all commodities’.
Money is not only ‘the medium by which the exchange is effected’, but at the same time the medium by which the exchange of product with product is divided into two acts, which are independent of each other, and separate in time and space.
With Ricardo, however, this false conception of money is due to the fact that he concentrates exclusively on the quantitative determination of exchange-value, namely, that it is equal to a definite quantity of labour-time, forgetting on the other hand the qualitative characteristic, that individual labour must present itself as abstract, general social labour only through its alienation.
That only particular commodities, and not all kinds of commodities, can form “a glut in the market” and that therefore over-production can always only be partial, is a poor way out.
In the first place, if we consider only the nature of the commodity, there is nothing to prevent all commodities from being superabundant on the market, and therefore all falling below their price. We are here only concerned with the factor of crisis. That is all commodities, apart from money [may be superabundant]. [The proposition] the commodity must be converted into money, only means that: all commodities must do so.
And just as the difficulty of undergoing this metamorphosis exists for an individual commodity, so it can exist for all commodities.
The general nature of the metamorphosis of commodities—which includes the separation of purchase and sale just as it does their unity—instead of excluding the possibility of a general glut, on the contrary, contains the possibility of a general glut.
Ricardo’s and similar types of reasoning are moreover based not only on the relation of purchase and sale, but also on that of demand and supply, which we have to examine only when considering the competition of capitals.
As Mill says purchase is sale etc., therefore demand is supply and supply demand. But they also fall apart and can become independent of each other.
At a given moment, the supply of all commodities can be greater than the demand for all commodities, since the demand for the general commodity, money, exchange-value, is greater than the demand for all particular commodities, in other words the motive to turn the commodity into money, to realise its exchange value, prevails over the motive to transform the commodity again into use-value.
If the relation of demand and supply is taken in a wider and more concrete sense, then it comprises the relation of production and consumption as well.
Here again, the unity of these two phases, which does exist and which forcibly asserts itself during the crisis, must be seen as opposed to the separation and antagonism of these two phases, separation and antagonism which exist just as much, and are moreover typical of bourgeois production.
With regard to the contradiction between partial and universal over-production, in so far as the existence of the former is affirmed in order to evade the latter, the following observation may be made:
Firstly: Crises are usually preceded by a general inflation in prices of all articles of capitalist production. All of them therefore participate in the subsequent crash and at their former prices they cause a glut in the market.
The market can absorb a larger volume of commodities at falling prices, at prices which have fallen below their cost-prices, than it could absorb at their former prices.
The excess of commodities is always relative; in other words it is an excess at particular prices. The prices at which the commodities are then absorbed are ruinous for the producer or merchant.
Secondly: For a crisis (and therefore also for over-production) to be general, it suffices for it to affect the principal commercial goods.” [Marx, Theory of Surplus Value, hal. 709 – 712]24
Ekonomi Islam dan Kemiskinan Rakyat Negara Berkembang
Menanggapi kenyataan bahwa negara Islam atau negara dengan mayoritas umat Islam menghadapi beban kemiskinan dan sebagian besar memiliki indeks pembangunan manusia yang rendah, ekonom Islam memiliki argument apologetik dengan menyangkal bahwa keadaan tersebut bukan merupakan hasil dari penerapan syariah Islam, melainkan sebaliknya justru karena tidak melaksanakan syariah Islam dengan konsisten (lihat Askari & Rehman, 2013)25.
Bagaimana ekonomi Islam menjawab masalah pengentasan kemiskinan di negara-negara berkembang?
Pertama-tama sebagaimana disebutkan dalam Erbaş dan Mirakhor di atas, bahwa Islam tidak mengenal tindakan redistribusi kekayaan seperti katakanlah pajak di luar zakat yang diwajibkan agama. Terdapat instrumen redistribusi lain yang lain berupa sedekah dan wakaf akan tetapi sifatnya sukarela.
Bila dikatakan bahwa sukuk (kredit atau pinjaman yang diakui syariah Islam) merupakan salah satu instrumen utama penggerak ekonomi Islam, maka kita perlu memeriksa struktur pemanfaatan dana sukuk.
Meski agak kasar, namun kita bisa berharap bahwa ekonomi real akan bertumbuh bila terdapat investasi dalam bidang industri penghasil komoditas yang dicerminkan dalam bentuk bisnis mudarabah. Dalam mudarabah terdapat pihak pendana (investor) dan pihak pelaksana (operator) sehingga kita dapat mengasumsikan bentuk bisnis Islam ini membuka lapangan pekerjaan.
Bacha & Mirakor (2013) memerlihatkan bahwa pada skala internasional dalam periode 2001 – 2007 proporsi pemanfaatan dana sukuk yang terbesar adalah untuk jenis salam (49%), kemudian disusul oleh Ijarah (27%), musyarakah (13%), mudarabah (4%), dan murabahah (1%)8.
Kemudian dalam periode 2008 – 2010 proporsinya menjadi ijarah (64%), musyarakah (9%), murabahah (5%), mudarabah tidak disebutkan secara eksplisit8.
Jelaslah bahwa pemanfaatan dana sukuk sebagian besar dimanfaatkan untuk bisnis jenis ijarah atau salam yang esensinya merupakan transaksi jual-beli barang bukan untuk membangun industri produktif penghasil komoditas yang membuka lapangan pekerjaan.
Menjauhnya fungsi lembaga keuangan Islam untuk mendorong pertumbuhan industri produktif real dan sebagai penyerap tenaga kerja ternyata sudah diamati Kuran pada periode sebelumnya:
“On the whole, the sectoral composition of the Islamic banks’ investments does not differ significantly from that of conventional commercial banks. Their clients tend to be established producers and merchants, as opposed to new comers.
They generally favor urbanites, as opposed to villagers, who in many parts of the Islamic world remain dependent on moneylenders charging notoriously high rates.
The banks have shown no inclination to favor labor-intensive firms. Many have invested in real estate, and a few have speculated in international currency and commodity markets. With few exceptions, they have preferred trade financing to project financing. Insofar as they have engaged in project financing, they have favored safe short-term projects over long-term projects fraught with uncertainty.
Even the Islamic Development Bank, an intergovernmental organization established in 1975 to promote economic development using Islamic financial instruments, has evolved into an export-import bank.
It uses funds at its disposal largely to finance international trade, in particular, oil exports to poor countries of the Islamic world.
Revealingly, from 1975 to 1986 the portion of profit and loss sharing in the Islamic Development Bank’s portfolio fell from 55 percent to 1 percent, while that of murabaha rose from nil to over 80 percent.
Lease financing has also increased sharply, although this mode of business is not even mentioned in the bank’s charter.
Like its commercial counterparts, the Islamic Development Bank now goes to great lengths to avoid risk. Through governmental guarantees and client-financed private insurance, it absolves itself of risk, in violation of its own principles. If a machine purchased on behalf of a Bangladeshi company is damaged in transit,the loss falls on the company, or some insurance agency, or the government of Bangladesh, but never on the bank itself.” [Kuran, 2004, hal. 11]3
Namun terlepas dari temuan Kuran tersebut, ekonom Islam tidak berhenti mengangkat ide pentingnya menyalurkan uang kepada orang miskin untuk diinvestasikan. Hal ini terjewantahkan pada praktik keuangan mikro Islam di mana lembaga keuangan Islam memberikan “pinjaman” kepada orang miskin untuk diinvestasikan dalam usaha (lihat Ahmed, 2013)26.
Singkat kata pendekatan keuangan mikro Islam ini memberikan modal kepada orang miskin untuk berusaha. Di samping ada permasalahan berat dalam hal bagaimana orang miskin dilatih untuk mengelola uang dan kesinambungan usaha, program semacam ini paling-paling hanya menumbuhkan usaha kecil menengah.
Goud (2013) mengamati bahwa keuangan mikro Islam ternyata juga didominasi bentuk murabahah (jual-beli barang) daripada mudarabah atau musyarakah (yang diidealkan dalam sistem bagi hasil)27.
Di samping itu ia juga menunjukan bahwa biaya keuangan mikro tinggi dan akan semakin tinggi jika produknya rumit sehingga mengancam keberlangsungannya25.
Tentunya hal itu dikarenakan kecilnya modal yang erat hubungannya dengan rendahnya teknologi sehingga menurunkan produktivitas dan pada akhirnya menyebabkan harga komoditi hasil produksi keuangan mikro akan lebih mahal daripada komoditi sejenis yang dihasilkan oleh industri imperialis.
Ujung-ujungnya bentuk usaha keuangan mikro menjauhi produksi komoditas (dalam murabah atau musyarakah) dan merangkul usaha retail kecil yang pada esensinya sekedar jual-beli barang (murabahah).
Problem di negara-negara berkembang ialah bagaimana menciptakan lapangan pekerjaan dalam industri dan teknologi modern yang kompetitif terhadap industri imperialis bukan mengajak si miskin membuka toko kelontong.
Program penguatan tenaga produktif tersebut lebih mungkin terwujud dalam suatu perencanaan menyeluruh daripada diserahkan kepada mekanisme pasar.
Pada akhirnya ekonomi Islam tidak memberikan solusi yang lebih baik dalam mengatasi eksploitasi dan krisis kapitalisme dari pada sosialisme.
Penolakan riba yang diusung tidak menjamin penghapusan eksploitasi tenaga kerja buruh dalam sistem produksi kapitalisme. Sistem bagi hasil tidak berhasil menyelesaikan masalah kemiskinan dunia ketiga yang sebagian dialami oleh rakyat di negara-negara Islam atau negara dengan mayoritas beragama Islam.
Tentu saja, sistem bagi hasil tidak berbicara apa-apa bila tidak disertakan dengan rencana konkret untuk mendongkrak tenaga produktif rakyat di dunia ketiga.
Dan mendongkrak kekuatan produksi rakyat yang tidak mungkin dipisahkan dari industrialisasi dan pembangunan infrastruktur yang menjadi syarat-syarat produksinya.
Program tersebut akan meniscayakan suatu konfrontasi terhadap negara-negara imperialis yang sama sekali tidak berbunyi suaranya dalam ekonomi Islam.
Jika Nabi memiliki perhatian terhadap orang-orang marginal yang tertindas dan tersingkir oleh sistem, jika Islam menolak riba atau tambahan yang tidak adil atas nilai komoditas, bukankah abolisi terhadap sistem yang mengeksploitasi buruh melalui tambahan waktu kerja yang tidak adil (sehingga dapat dianggap sebagai Riba yang sesungguhnya) merupakan ibadah yang sangat Islami?
***
[Selesai Bagian III berlanjut ke Bagian IV … silakan klik/simak IVa hlm 153a-IVa — Red DK]
.
Referensi
- https://www.youthmanual.com/index.php/post/dunia-kuliah/jurusan-dan-perkuliahan/program-studi-ekonomi-islam-dengan-prospek-kerja-terbaik-beserta-pilihan-kampusnya, diakses 17 Juli 2019.
- Munrokhim Misanam, Priyonggo Suseno, M. Bhekti Hendrieanto, Ekonomi Islam, Ditulis oleh Pusat Pengkajian dan Pengembangan Ekonomi Islam (P3EI) Universitas Islam Indonesia Yogyakarta atas kerja sama dengan Bank Indonesia, Rajawali Press, Depok, 2013.
- Timur Kuran, Islam and Mammon. The Economic Predicament of Islamism, Princeton University Press, Princeton & Oxford, 2004.
- Nagaoka Shinsuke, Critical Overview of the History of Islamic Economics: Formation, Transformation, and New Horizons, Asian and African Area Studies, 11(2): 114-136, 2012.
- Mohammad Omar Farooq, Contemporary Islamic Economic Thought, dalam Contemporary Islamic Finance. Innovation, Application, and Best Practice, Karen Hunt-Ahmed (Ed.), The Kolb Series in Finance, John Wiley and Sons, New Jersey, 2013.
- Adiwarman A. Karim, Ekonomi Mikro Islami, Penerbit Rajawali, 2007.
- Adiwarman A. Karim, Ekonomi Makro Islami, Penerbit Rajawali, 2014
- Obiyathulla Ismath Bacha & Abbas Mirakhor, Islamic Capital Market, John Wiley & Sons, Singapore, 2013
- Mohammad Yusuf & Wiroso, Bisnis Syariah, Edisi 2, Mitra Wacana Media, 2011
- I. Bacha & A. Mirakhor, Islamic Capital Market and Development, dalam Economic Development and Islamic Finance, Zamir Iqbal & Abbas Mirakhor (Editor), The World Bank, 2013.
- Maxim Rodinson, Islam dan Kapitalisme, Penerbit Iqra, Bandung, 1982.
- Cynthia Shawamreh, The Legal Framework of Islamic Finance, dalam Contemporary Islamic Finance. Innovation, Application, and Best Practice, Karen Hunt-Ahmed (Ed.), The Kolb Series in Finance, John Wiley and Sons, New Jersey, 2013.
- Muhammad Nejatullah Siddiqi, Issues in Islamic Banking. Selected Papers, The Islamic Foundation, Leceister, 1983 (Reprinted 1994).
- Karl Marx, Capital Volume I, Foreign Publisher, Moscow, tanpa tahun.
- Karl Marx, Capital Volume III, versi ebook diunduh dari https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/download/pdf/Capital-Volume-III.pdf
- Karl Marx, Capital Volume II, Foreign Publisher, Moscow, tanpa tahun.
- Abbas Mirakhor & Wang Yong Bao, Epistemological Foundation of Finance: Islamic and Conventional, dalam Economic Development and Islamic Finance, Zamir Iqbal & Abbas Mirakhor (Editor), The World Bank, 2013.
- Sumitro Djojohadikusumo, Perkembangan Pemikiran Ekonomi. Buku I. Dasar Teori dalam Ekonomi Umum, Edisi 1, Cet. 1, Yayasan Obor Indonesia, Jakarta, 1991.
- Allan H. Meltzer, Moneterisme dan Krisis Ilmu Ekonomi, dalam Krisis Teori Ekonomi, Daniel Bell & Irving Kristol (Ed.), Umar Juoro (Terj.), LP3ES, Jakarta, 1981
- Andrew Sheng & Ajit Singh, Islamic Financial Revisited: Conceptual and Analitical Issues from The Perspective of Conventional Economics, dalam Economic Development and Islamic Finance, Zamir Iqbal & Abbas Mirakhor (Editor), The World Bank, 2013.
- Nuri Erbaş & Abbas Mirakhor, The Foundational Market Principal of Islam, Knightian Uncertainty, and Economic Justice, dalam Economic Development and Islamic Finance, Zamir Iqbal & Abbas Mirakhor (Editor), The World Bank, 2013.
- Hyman P. Minsky, Finantial Crises: Systemic or Idiosyncratic, Working Paper No. 51, (Prepared for presentation at “The Crises in Finance,” a Conference of The Jerome Levy Economics Institute Bard College), April 1991.
- Hyman P. Minsky, The Financial Instability Hypothesis, Working Paper No. 74, (Prepared for Handbook of Radical Political Economy, edited by Philip Arestis and Malcolm Sawyer, Edward Elgar: Aldershot, 1993), May 1992.
- Karl Marx, Theory of Surplus Value, ditulis tahun 1863, Ebook disiapkan J. Eduardo Brissos
- Hossein Askari & Scheherazade Rehman, A Survey of the Economic Development of OIC Countries, dalam Economic Development and Islamic Finance, Zamir Iqbal & Abbas Mirakhor (Editor), The World Bank, 2013.
- Habib Ahmed, Financial Inclusion and Islamic Finance: Organizational Formats, Products, Outreach and Sustainability, , dalam Economic Development and Islamic Finance, Zamir Iqbal & Abbas Mirakhor (Editor), The World Bank, 2013.
- Blake Goud, Islamic Microfinance, dalam Contemporary Islamic Finance. Innovation, Application, and Best Practice, Karen Hunt-Ahmed (Ed.), The Kolb Series in Finance, John Wiley and Sons, New Jersey, 2013.
——–
* Tulisan HM Isbakh Bagian III ini aslinya adalah utuh. Seperti halnya pada Bagian I dan Bagian II, di Bagian III ini kami sengaja membaginya, di sini, atas tiga halaman (hlm 142a-III, hlm 142b-III dan hlm 142c-III), seijin penulisnya, semata untuk memberikan semacam jeda, waktu mengaso sebentar, pada perangkat pembaca budiman. Meski Referensi kami cantumkan pula bukan saja di akhir hlm 142c-III ini, tapi juga pada hlm 142a-III dan hlm 142b-III.
Juga perlu kami jelaskan, bahwa alinea-alinea baru, kutipan-kutipan yang indent (masuk beberapa spasi ke arah kanan di awal alinea) termasuk cetak tebal (bila tidak ada keterangan dari penulis) adalah dari kami. Tanpa menyentuh isi sama sekali, lagi-lagi semata untuk “menyesuaikan” dengan perangkat (Red DK).
DASAR KITA 