Economic inequality and the threat of the climate emergency has inspired some thinking about fundamental reorganization of our social and political systems.
 |
| Some synthesis of ideas |
The Economist has written that Elizabeth Warren wants to remake American capitalism. As remarkable as Ms Warren’s story is the sheer scope of her ambition to remake American capitalism. She has an admirably detailed plan to transform a system she believes is corrupt and fails ordinary people. Plenty of her ideas are good. She is right to try to limit giant firms’ efforts to influence politics and gobble up rivals. But at its heart, her plan reveals a systematic reliance on regulation and protectionism.
And over time Ms Warren’s agenda would entrench two dubious philosophies about the economy that would sap its vitality. The first is her faith in government as benign and effective. Government is capable of doing great good but, like any big organisation, it is prone to incompetence, capture by powerful insiders and Kafkaesque indifference to the plight of the ordinary men and women Ms Warren most cares about. When telecoms firms and airline companies were heavily regulated in the 1970s, they were notorious for their stodginess and inefficiency. Ms Warren’s signature achievement is the creation in 2011 of a body to protect consumers of financial services. It has done good work, but has unusual powers, has at times been heavy handed and has become a political football. The other dubious philosophy is a vilification of business. She underrates the dynamic power of markets to help middle-class Americans, invisibly guiding the diverse and spontaneous actions of people and firms, moving capital and labour from dying industries to growing ones and innovating at the expense of lazy incumbents.1
Charles Eisenstein, a fascinating public speaker, author, and advocate for gift economies shares his bio.
This is the part of a bio where one implies that one has arrived at some exalted state of success, all mistakes safely in the past. Well, I’m not the guy who has got it all figured out. I know that my books and other work comes from a deep, inspired source, but that source is not me! It is more like I’m connecting to a field of knowledge, or to a story that wants to be told. This knowledge is as much my teacher as it is anyone else’s. I’m kind of ordinary, compared to some of the amazing people I keep meeting. I’m just as much in the learning as anyone else, wandering as best I can toward “the more beautiful world my heart knows is possible,” encumbered by the programming and the wounds of our civilization2.
The conclusion of the Extraordinary Effect article in the Stories from Plummer blog (https://davmacit.blogspot.com/2019/11/extraordinary-effect.html ) opens a view of Charles Eisenstein’s philosophy by spiritual leader Richard Rohr, OFM.
A world without weapons, without McMansions in sprawling suburbs, without mountains of unnecessary packaging, without giant mechanized monofarms, without energy-hogging big-box stores, without electronic billboards, without endless piles of throw-away junk, without the overconsumption of consumer goods no one really needs is not an impoverished world. I disagree with those environmentalists who say we are going to have to make do with less. In fact, we are going to make do with more: more beauty, more community, more fulfillment, more art, more music, and material objects that are fewer in number but superior in utility and aesthetics. . . .
Part of the healing that a sacred economy represents is the healing of the divide we have created between spirit and matter. In keeping with the sacredness of all things, I advocate an embrace, not an eschewing, of materialism. I think we will love our things more and not less. We will treasure our material possessions, honor where they came from and where they will go. . . . The cheapness of our things is part of their devaluation, casting us into a cheap world where everything is generic and expendable.3
The Resource Based Economy (a 501(c)(3) Non-Profit Organization) is working on designing, testing and implementing a new socio-economic system called a Global Resource Based Economy.
Accepting that humanity's problems are global in nature, this concept is a bold proposal that seeks to provide a higher quality of life for all, through the intelligent management of Earth's resources. What is required is the redesign of our culture to operate within the carrying capacity of the Earth’s resources and in accordance with the wellbeing of people and protection of the environment. This could usher in an age of collaboration, progress, and security between people and nations.4
The synthesis of some of these ideas may form the transition to the economic and political structure best suited to the challenges of the next decades.
References
No comments:
Post a Comment