This chapter is from Life, Money & Illusion;
Living on Earth as if we want to stay
Directly to Question of Direction section.
Chapter 15
How to Get There From Here:
A Question of Direction
Legitimacy
Legitimacy is a key ingredient of civilization; perhaps it is the key ingredient.
A biological analogy can help illustrate the role legitimacy plays in cultural
evolution. If, in a society, the shared patterns of understanding and belief,
as described in the last chapter, fulfill the role of DNA, legitimacy is
the life force. DNA molecules are chains of atoms arranged in a specific
order. Each life form has a unique DNA that contains within it (or resonates
with it) all the information that is necessary for a single fertile cell
to grow into a mature organism, providing that the cell is alive. Without
life force, biological DNA is only a complex assembly of chemicals prone
to decomposition. When life is present, the DNA serves as a template, guiding
the growth and maintenance of the life form it encodes. Whether it is a
plant, animal, fungus or bacterium as cells divide, the DNA for that particular
life form is reproduced so that each new cell has a copy. Depending on the
position that various cells find themselves in, they will grow into an arm
or an eye, a root or a flower. Using the foundation "understanding"
embodied in their DNA, different cells and clusters of cells follow the
basic code and, together, grow and maintain a complete, mature organism.
A society grows in ways that are informed by the philosophy of the people.
Until a system of understanding and beliefs is animated by legitimacy, it
is only a philosophy. When people subscribe to such a system, their life
energy works through that system. How they live their lives, the views they
express, what they work at, how they invest, and how they vote, create the
structure and form of the society embodied in the philosophy. Each person
and organization follows the basic premise of their culture, varying depending
on whether they find themselves as builders, caregivers, miners, managers
or retailers. Together they produce and trade the complex array of goods
and services that enable the civilization to proceed.
When accepted and acted upon, different world-views produce different worlds.
Legitimacy is the animating power and it is the product of our many individual
wills. That said, we have looked at how our choices are extensively influenced
by what others think, the religion of our times and the legal structure.
While legitimacy is affected by all these things, the form into which society
evolves is ultimately a product of individual wills: yours, your friends,
your family, your colleagues, your neighbours. If we want to resolve the
mounting tension between the perpetual expansion model and the requirements
of long-term well-being on our finite planet, it is the freedom of our wills
that can define the new direction.
In the mental cosmology identified by Freud, the tendency to adhere to social
order has a permanent position in our subconscious psychic makeup. Within
each individual, there is an instinctual, impulsive "id," which
seeks only personal satisfaction. The id is moderated by the "ego."
While one's id may want to cross a street, the ego seeks to protect the
individual by looking into reality for circumstances, such as oncoming cars
that might threaten well-being. To avoid danger, the ego restricts the rudimentary
urges of the id. Similarly, the "super-ego" exerts an influence
on individual behaviour to have us maintain personal well-being by heeding
the factors of well-being, as perceived by the larger society. Parents,
teachers, religious spokespeople, politicians, legal codes, advertising
and media imagery all contribute to forming the super-ego's version of what
it is to be good and secure.
The super-ego's influence on individual behaviour may be for the good of
all, or for the good of some elite, which has used its advantage to influence
conventional wisdom to serve its own ends. Nevertheless, once the conventional
wisdom is established, it guides most individual action and requires a long
evolution or willful effort to change. Moving one's individual "vote"
of legitimacy from economic expansion and placing it with long-term well-being
is the basic move. When enough people make this move, legitimacy will shift
to reflect new realities and priorities.
We do not lack the ability to transform our world. The problems we face
are understood and most of their solutions known. Transformation will proceed
with remarkable speed once the balance of legitimacy tips toward long-term
well-being. This chapter proposes a technique for tipping that balance focusing
on one point. It is the point of contrast between the dangers of continuing
to expand the existing order and the possibilities for long-term stability
should we choose to apply our creative potential to that end. By focusing
attention on this contrast, the balance of legitimacy can be tipped.
Those who apply their will to extending the old order have the advantages
of inertia and wealth. Those promoting sustainability have the advantage
of growing necessity. The increasing contrast between the two views will
inevitably require reconciliation. Our inclination is always toward self-preservation
and it is becoming increasingly clear that change is essential. How many
opportunities will be lost before the shift takes place depends on how long
it takes to rally enough individual wills to counteract the persuasive influences
employed to promote the illusion of Growth Everlasting?
Fluctuations in the Super-Ego: Getting Even
Tensions between old and new perspectives have existed throughout the ages.
Looking at how legitimacy has fluctuated in the past can help us understand
the present. The issue of retribution is a case in point. It has been an
issue for thousands of years and the tension continues today.
An "eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth" was the accepted ethic
20 centuries ago. If someone did harm to another, inflicting equivalent
harm on the perpetrator was seen as just settlement of the score. It relieved
resentment and served as a deterrent for others who might cause harm. At
the same time, however, it could cultivate enduring rivalries perpetuated
by cycles of revenge so complex that the origins are lost and offense and
retaliation become indistinguishable. This dangerous custom was countered
by potent imagery spread through the stories of Christ and other prophets.
A new vision challenged the convention. It promoted forgiving the trespasses
of others and thereby, offered a resolution to violent cycles of revenge.
With this ethical shift, "we-versus-them" identities of independent
small communities could more easily fade away, expanding the possibilities
for cooperation over broader territories.
This progressive step toward better cooperation has been set back in recent
decades. Note how often people on television and in movies shout condemnation
at, and otherwise aggressively confront, those who cross their interests.
As individuals, when resentment and rage are directed at us, turmoil erupts
inside as adrenaline enters our blood and we prepare to fight or flee. When
such scenes are portrayed in moving pictures our moods are stimulated in
resonance. The stimulus catches our attention, time passes and we are entertained;
eventually, we are trained.
The prevalence of such violence may be attributed to the relative ease with
which such scenes can be produced. The circumstance need only be acted out
with appropriate music and sound effects and moods are affected. We are
naturally curious about and stimulated by danger. We want to recognize it
so we can avoid it ourselves. By contrast, portraying situations that trigger
feelings of wonder, gratitude, honour, love or respect require far more
talent to conceive and enact, and more discernment to appreciate.
Entertainment value aside, the role model of people "getting even"
seems to cripple many in their social interactions. Nothing causes us to
become defensive quicker than an attack. One may defend with a quick counterattack,
or just leave the scene physically or emotionally. None of these responses
gets those involved any closer to understanding their differences or finding
common ground for cooperation. Time and again, I see people in social movements
taking issue with their colleagues in the style portrayed so frequently
by the mass media. Such gestures almost guarantee misunderstanding. How
much more effective could we be if we had more models for the cooperative
resolution of differences?
So frequently have I seen such confrontations between allies, that I imagine
a conspiracy on the part of those who control the media. What better way
to render their opponents impotent than to implant futile means for settling
differences in the public's subconscious? In any case, ineffective styles
of communication deflect a large amount of positive effort that would otherwise
help make the world a better place.
Some wise advice I heard years ago said that any action taken to "get
even" was a mistake. I have remembered this frequently when responding
to situations that disturb me. Often I have edited out caustic comments
from my writing only to find that, although mellowed considerably, I still
have the tone of putting the other person down. Several edits are sometimes
needed to identify and remove ever more subtle attempts to "get even."
On a good day, I can render the writing to the point that it simply calls
attention to the offending action and asks for clarification in the interest
of common concerns and better solutions. In the cases where I could not
bring myself to mellow the reproach completely, more often than not, I found
that I had stimulated obstructions that would not have arisen had I succeeded
in removing the retributive tone.
Within the movements working for justice, environmental health, community
development, peace and self-realization, there is so much common ground
that differences need not be destructive. Even between real adversaries,
those wishing to do things others consider harmful and the communities trying
to stop them, there is often enough common interest for progress to be made,
providing acrimony is not stirred up with insults and personal accusations.
On occasion, a "poison pen" letter of condemnation will stimulate
a sense of urgency and purpose, attracting allies in order to right a wrong,
but it is as likely to inspire those who had created the "wrong"
to build defenses, or even to mount a counter attack.
We would do well to identify and eliminate retribution as a legitimate way
of responding to difficulties. Mahatma Gandhi showed the way with his non-violence
movement. If we want to increase well-being into the future, I believe his
tactics of clear, principled, respectful, non-violent confrontation of mistaken
attitudes and actions to be the appropriate approach. Though Gandhi was
not a Christian, his inspiration re-energizes the same shift in values that
Christ promoted two thousand years ago.
The Golden Rule or the Rule of Gold
Among the elements to be honoured from the distant past is the well-known
imperative, to treat others as we would like to be treated ourselves. This
is the essence of self-regulation in a society. Present in practically all
cultures, it is perhaps the tap root of civilization. Through this ethic,
the collective organism comes into existence. Treating another as one treats
oneself provides a foundation for trust and cooperation. When this value
is shared by a population, its ability to co-create understanding and to
act as one, resembles the mutual support of the cells, organs and limbs
of a single organism cooperating to be something greater than it could possibly
be as many parts. With this ethic, the collective human organism comes into
being with the superhuman capability that enables us to thrive as societies.
In some ways, the ethic of serving society by pursuing individual self-interest
is a corollary of this "golden rule." When people improve their
individual lots by producing goods and services for trade, their individual
efforts merge into a social entity. One person subscribing to this ethic
would treat others as potential customers and, in turn, wish to be treated
the same. That is, he or she would want to be offered the goods and services
of others in trade.
While this invisible hand version of the golden rule has enabled huge economic
advances, it has also produced the growing gap between rich and poor. The
philosophy of self-interest has inspired and excused manipulation of the
system in ways that provide further advantage for a few over the many. With
time, the system has become lopsided.
Ultimately living only for personal self-interest has to end in tragedy.
Individual lives end with death. When people grasp that their own well-being
depends on the well-being of those around them and begin to identify with
their community, death is no longer as terminal as it is in isolation. An
individual will inevitably pass from the scene. A community can aspire toward
everlasting life.
The Choice Before Us
With several hundred years of re-enforcement, the perspective that material
expansion is the ultimate good is well entrenched at the subconscious level.
Its inertia is immense and efforts to perpetuate it are well funded. In
some situations, expanding economic activity may still be a means to necessary
ends, but the time has passed for expansion to be an end in itself. The
present and future well-being of individuals, communities and ecosystems
must be clearly seen as legitimate goals. Concentrating less on consuming
and focusing more on living, designing for durability, recycling basic resources
and eliminating toxic releases must find permanent legitimacy. The means
have to be developed to share the rewards of increased efficiency, minimal
material throughput and the consequent reduction in the amount of work necessary
to maintain humankind.
The present tensions between the steady state and the material expansion
models has been growing for many decades, but the first substantial response
in the conventional wisdom wasn't until the glimpse of hope that surfaced
in the late 1980s, with the Brundtland Commission Report. For the brief
period before the economic downturn legitimacy shifted to the ethic of sustainability.
That episode ended because the solution of reducing human impacts on the
environment fundamentally contradicted the conventional goal of exponential
economic expansion. Steps were quickly taken by the cheerleaders of growth
everlasting, to reclaim the focus of legitimacy.
Along with the problems of resource depletion, pollution and ecosystem disruption,
the Brundtland Commission recognized the problems of poverty and underdevelopment.
For those with insufficient food, clean water, shelter, education, health
care and livelihoods, development is critical. Enabling people to work within
their own territories to provide necessities for each other, shared the
new legitimacy with reducing the destructive impacts of the highly industrialized
world. It was on this development hook that the deposed orthodoxy staged
its comeback.
After the Commission's report, Our Common Future, was tabled, the countries
of the world were to experiment with ways of providing for the needs of
the present without reducing the ability of future generations to meet their
own needs. The global community was to meet in five years to share related
experiences. That UN Conference on Environment and Development took place
in Rio de Janeiro in 1992. By the time the conference was convened, the
recession of the early 1990s had turned a lot of attention toward getting
the economy growing again. At the conference, "development" (confused
totally with growth) shared center stage with the need to find environmental
stability. From there, the old legitimacy reasserted itself using the rhetoric
of aiding underdeveloped nations, and then catapulted the money-serving
mechanisms of corporate globalization on to the well-meaning aspirations
of a concerned world.
Sufficiency in basic necessities is an important requisite of long-term
well-being; meeting the mathematical expectation of exponential money growth
is not. The legitimacy held by sustainability for a short time in the late
1980s was subverted. When it again rises as our legitimate goal, we will
want to secure it there. Individually, by will, we can each establish our
"vote" for a sustainable order. For that order to regain and hold
on to legitimacy, it will take a large number of people applying their wills,
and reinforcing each other by letting it be known where they stand.
Sifting Through Traditions
Having individual impulses moderated by the super-ego has two sides. It
is both a tremendous asset that has guided us through the ages, and a shackle
that now binds us to ways of doing things that are leading toward disaster.
Those who seek to transform society have the critical task of assessing
the composition of our super-ego and separating those elements that threaten
us from those that can help secure the future.
A distinction has to be made between the elements that have been relayed
over generations because they improve our common lot, and those that have
followed a similar path, but are no longer relevant in our full world. In
particular, we need to identify and moderate the inflated values that have
been given to greed and self-interest in the name of the invisible hand.
In order for the internal, super-ego moderator to serve a positive role
in today's world, the exploitation of disadvantaged people and the degradation
of the environment have to be widely recognized as antisocial.
As the present model of progress delivers us deeper into environmental disaster
and social disruption, individual dissonance will increase. If the Monopoly
winners insist on continuing "the game" to its bitter end, the
urge to rebellion will grow. We need to offer an understanding of how legitimacy
is assigned by the will of individuals, and to initiate open debate about
what is and what is not acceptable. Such a process to sort through the "right"
and "wrong" of the present value set could avert the chaos that
might easily arise as people see their future being destroyed by a power
structure that does not see the problems it is causing and seems unwilling
to look. We need a "Reformation." We cannot afford the huge setback
that would come from pursuing the present system until it either breaks
of its own negligence or is disrupted by violent rebellion.
Human Purpose in a Changing World
The super-ego's subconscious role in supporting the human purpose, hasn't
changed. It promotes behaviours understood to enhance the common good. When
that purpose is usurped by elite power groups, they must, nonetheless, profess
the common good, if not in terms of overall well-being, at least, in that
of security. Without effective propaganda, it would become obvious that
the end result did not serve a viable and inclusive mutual provision. If
they cannot convince the people that we are all served by serving their
goals, active repression through violence and fear becomes the only way
for them to maintain control.
As circumstances and opportunities change, understanding about what best
serves the common good also changes. Attitudes about retribution, lending
money at interest, slavery, the role of women in society, democracy, sexuality,
and many other issues have shifted over the centuries. Always we evolve.
Problems inspire visions of change and those so inspired share their thoughts.
As a growing number of people come to see well-being in the new way, the
paradigm begins to shift. At first the new ideas are opposed, sometimes
violently. But gradually, if the vision is true to the human condition and
how the world appears, the number of people who understand it grows. Finally,
as the new perspective becomes established, the attitude and consequent
ways of being become second nature. As surely as we have come to know that
the Earth revolves around the Sun, we will come to understand that our well-being
depends on integrating human culture within the flows and limitations of
ecological reality.
How long will it take for the subconscious shift to take place? This is
a question of huge relevance. Each one of us influences the answer by how
we apply our will. If we act with the resolve of one who sees a car speeding
ever closer on a collision course, we may yet preserve well-being for our
childrens' children.
The change process is well under way in terms of public awareness of the
problems at hand. Unfortunately, the fundamental belief in growth everlasting
looms ominously. The belief is a roadblock propped up and defended autocratically
by people with enormous means, and more than enough interests vested to
trigger deep denial about the problems and solutions of our time. Until
the need for change is seen to be widely understood, most people will not
resist the pressures to conform. As long as economic growth is recognized
as the goal of society, "good" citizens will seek satisfaction
through consumption. Most people do not have the conviction to resist what
appears legitimate. As long as our governing institutions proceed to adjust
the law to accommodate expansion, we will have work to do to convince people
that legitimacy should be assigned elsewhere.
Capitalism is the extraordinary belief that the nastiest
of men, for the nastiest of reasons, will somehow work for the benefit of
us all.
Economist, John Maynard Keynes
The idea of letting society self-organize through competition between unrestrained,
self-interested, ambitious people is a recent addition to the conventional
wisdom. At most, it is a few hundred years old - practically newborn compared
to the hundreds of thousands of years that people have cooperated in mutual
provision. As a lifestyle, self-interest tends to create lonely people and
competition creates losers. Nevertheless, the ideology asserts that the
common good is best served by these potent motivators. Even if it were once
true, it is no longer so. Only in terms of its self-selected measure of
expanding gross wealth does it continue to produce results, and that only
in some quarters.
By other measures, the present order is failing. Many of those who have
benefited in recent decades have cause for anxiety. Without warning, distant
shifts in the globalized economy can undermine their livelihoods. Even for
those with "secured" wealth - everything paid for and money in
the bank - the underlying processes upon which their lives depend are in
danger. Fuel for the machines that drive our world is in precarious supply.
Chemical pollutants contaminate the air we breath, the water we drink and
the food we eat. Many types of cancer stalk rich and poor alike; families
and communities are disintegrating and resentment spreads. Amidst mountains
of material goods, we cannot assure our children a secure and healthy future.
We live in a parody of the joke about the surgeons who, upon emerging from
a very complex medical procedure, announce that the operation was a success,
but the patient died. It speaks of misplaced priorities. People need things,
and it is the purpose of business and industry to produce those things.
However, if the productive process undermines well-being, it is not successful.
It is a misplaced priority to say that activities are successful simply
because they make money.
A Three Fold Social Order
Fascism should rightly be called Corporatism as it is a merge
of state and corporate power.
Benito Mussolini
Writing in Germany in 1919, Rudolf Steiner recognized the danger of wealth
concentrating under the control of one sector of society. He saw problems
brewing in the power that business was exercising over government, and he
saw further problems arising for social well-being as a result of the control
that the business/government combination was exercising over the cultural
life of society.
Steiner understood why the business sector had access to the material and
financial resources of the community; producing material goods was what
they did. It was not in the interest of society, however, for the business
sector to have control over all aspects of human activity. In his book The
Three Fold Social Order, reprinted as Toward Social Renewal, Steiner makes
a case for recognizing that society is made up of economic, political and
cultural sectors. These three, Steiner saw respectively as the cultural
manifestations of willing, thinking, and feeling. Each sector has particular
areas of concern and in each area, the people involved are the ones best
informed for making decisions in those areas.
As Steiner saw it, the economic or business sector would manage the production
and distribution of goods and services. The business community understands
what has to be done to meet people's needs and the necessary work. They
are also accustomed to applying the will to getting it done. At the same
time their natural assertiveness needs to be tempered by the "rights"
or political sector.
The political sector would be responsible for justice in the relationships
between people. By thinking through the implications of various sorts of
advantage, and assisted by the democratic process, this sector would work
to maintain balance between different groups of people and between the rights
and responsibilities of individuals, communities and institutions. This
sector might, for example, determine that everyone needs opportunities to
work, and that view would be weighed against the advantage of allowing unemployment
as a means to keep the cost of labour down and profits up.
The final sector is that which encompasses the potentials of people as feeling
individuals: education, religion, the arts and other cultural activities.
It is not in the long-term interest of society for its children to be raised
as fodder for production and consumption, nor to fit into the master plan
of some political vision. The cultural sector would see to it that children
were nurtured with the best of opportunities to grow into strong, capable
and confidently independent individuals able to give meaning to their lives
from within themselves. Training for particular vocations would come after
nurturing the greatness of individual humanness and would be directed by
personal observation of the needs of their communities. The ongoing education
of adults and the support of theater, art, literature, music, dance and
other expressions of culture would be accommodated with resources from the
sector where wealth is produced.
With the wealth of society distributed among the various sectors to be managed
and worked with by the people most familiar with and affected by the functions
of each sector, each area of society could flourish, adding its potential
to the health of the whole.
In his day, Steiner's Three Fold Social Order could have prevented the calamity
of the fascist power that sought to impose its political ideology on civilization.
It could serve us as well today.
Steps in Transition
The shift in priorities that our civilization needs to undergo to accomplish
long-term well-being will not take place in a single bound. Grasping the
nature of a sustainable economic order will come in stages. Industries adopting
the Natural Step, Extended Producer Responsibility or programs, as described
in Chapter 12, can move us toward sustainability by reducing fossil-fuel
use and the waste they produce, while at the same time conforming to the
principles of the economic expansion model. Renewable energy provides a
further bridge. With its foundation in the material production of equipment,
its positive effects can be multiplied by the application of intent through
conservation. Health care and education are of unquestionable importance.
They will have a presence in any social structure and they provide an exemplary
way to move the focus of society away from the limited realm of material
processing and toward the unlimited realm of life-based potentials.
By stepping away from accumulation and consumption as the purpose of life,
security would become the product of working respectfully with natural cycles.
By extending respect to other people, adversarial competitiveness would
give way to caring cooperation and the possibility would expand for creating
a truly elegant culture through co-intelligence and participatory democracy.
Renewable Energy
Renewable energy provides a toehold for the new legitimacy. Unlike petroleum,
where long ago the energy was captured and rendered almost ready for use,
renewable energy and storage systems require sophisticated, manufactured
equipment making them expensive. A cost benefit analysis would show that
more comfort and service can be derived from investing in conservation measures
than in building additional equipment. Understanding that conservation can
accommodate human need better than expanding production is crucial.
Energy conservation combines elements from both paradigms. From one perspective,
it is a full participant in the "investment-production-compete-for-market-share"
world of the growth economy. energy-efficient light bulbs, motors, appliances
and vehicles are all products of profit motivated businesses. From the other
perspective, conservation involves recognizing limits and taking steps to
live within them. While this impulse can still lead to product purchases,
it gives legitimacy to considering one's life style and choosing less consumptive
activities. Through this window, the focus shifts toward the sustainability
perspective.
The conventional wisdom around energy supply has oscillated notably since
the early 1970s. Up until then, energy was strictly a growth industry. Following
the 1973 Oil Crisis, concern for energy conservation reached a high point.
Programs were instituted to encourage the insulation of homes and businesses,
speed limits were reduced to boost fuel efficiency and subsidy programs
were initiated to advance the development of wind, solar and small-scale
hydro electric generation. Pioneering low consumption lifestyles was not
part of the official response to the energy crunch but it was a natural
inclination for conscientious people. The vision has been growing ever since.
Between the high price of fossil energy and encouragement to conserve, consumption
levels did drop, and the energy producers were not pleased. Among the first
things that Ronald Reagan did after his election in 1980 was to cancel the
funding for alternative energy programs, slowing progress in those fields
to a crawl. Speed limits were increased and a blind eye was turned to the
promotion of sport utility vehicles and 4X4 trucks for personal transportation.
Exempt from the fuel efficiency requirements of personal transport, yet
sold by the millions, these heavyweight vehicles ended energy conservation
in transportation. Claims of increased safety have since unraveled, leaving
the public with inefficient transport and increased danger of pollution,
fuel depletion and large volumes of steel traveling at high speeds. A review
of the Ford Motor Company's 2003 vehicle line-up, showed that only one of
those models gets better mileage than the 35 miles per gallon with which
their 1912 Model T cruised the highways.
Such was the first oscillation of legitimacy between producing energy to
maximize monetary returns and extending the utility of a resource through
conservation and the development of alternative energy sources: one was
driven by monetary growth and the other, carried within it, the seeds of
the "life perspective."
As anxiety mounts again over petroleum reserves, another oscillation is
presently taking place. With well over 500 billion barrels of oil consumed
since 1973, most oil fields outside the Middle East are past their peak
of production and in decline. Those who still believe in perpetual expansion
continue to muster vast military forces to secure remaining supplies so
that they can continue with business as usual. Those who view the world
from the sustainability perspective are moving slowly forward, developing
energy-efficient and renewable energy producing equipment. These new businesses
fit inconspicuously into the old legitimacy as ambitious growth industries
preparing to fill a growing need. At the same time, they are important components
of a sustainable economy and are increasing the legitimacy of their compliment
- conservation.
Health Care and Education
The scope for shifting paradigms expands further in the fields of education
and health care. Critical to any society, the way these sectors are developed
changes significantly depending on which values a society holds. Despite
the seemingly self-evident truth that a population is far more productive
when it is healthy and well-educated, the money paradigm considers health
care and education expendable when accounts get tight: the returns are less
concrete and often longer-term than suits conventional monetary expedience.
Loan payments are due monthly, economic performance is measured quarterly,
and governments are reviewed on their performance every four years or so.
A basic education, on the other hand, can take a decade or more, and, like
health care, is most effective as a life-long process. Unfortunately, from
a monetary perspective, which legitimizes only profit, the gains from industry
and speculation are more tangible than the returns from good health and
education.
Unlike material production where technical innovation can increase the amount
of work each person can do, the work of teachers, doctors and nurses requires
dealing one-on-one with students and patients. Efforts to increase "productivity"
end up lowering the quality of the service. When the measure of all things
is money, working directly with people suffers. Technological innovations
in manufacturing and some services enable higher pay through increased productivity
per person, without disrupting the customary balances between wages, profit
and prices. For the wages of teachers and health care personnel to keep
up with that of their peers in manufacturing, however, additional revenue
must be found or other services cut. The money paradigm says the additional
costs should be carried by those receiving the services. Such policy in
health care and education, however, creates serious divisions. In health
care, those who would receive treatment for a serious illness contrast with
those who might die for lack of care. In education, those who must study
long years to take on challenging jobs are contrasted with those who must
live by menial labour. Such harshly divided classes frequently lead to deep
resentment and social instability.
Education in the money paradigm aims to train people for jobs. Raising the
price of education limits the number of people who might seek jobs in professional
fields, virtually assuring that only the children of those already well
off will fill those jobs. Education for life aims instead to produce emotionally
stable, confident citizens, with a variety of knowledge. While skills by
which individuals can contribute to mutual provision are important, so too
are history, philosophy and the arts. These subjects help people understand
the world, make informed choices about democratic options and increase the
quality of human experience. The sciences are learned, not simply to expand
production, but to assure that such production can coexist harmlessly within
the social and natural environments. Furthermore, education is a bountiful
component of the life paradigm. By pursuing education for the wonder of
knowledge itself, satisfaction can be gained for entire lifetimes with almost
no additional material throughput.
Except for the cost of living for the teachers, from the sustainability
perspective, education costs almost nothing to deliver compared to a transportation
system or consumer products. Once developed, knowledge is free. A teacher
can explain a topic to many people. While all will know more than they did
before, the teacher loses nothing for passing the knowledge along. It is
possible for poor countries to have a very well-educated population. Once
basic support for those who enjoy learning is provided, they will be able
to absorb and share the bounty of information that humankind has produced.
Unfortunately in the Money End Game, developing countries are told to reduce
investments in education when lending agencies pressure them to gather money
for interest payments.
In the realm of health care, the economic growth model finds opportunity
in sickness. Diabetes was mentioned earlier, and drug prices are another
infamous example. The extension of patent protection for drugs was a concrete
action to accommodate economic growth. Patented drugs are often sold for
hundreds and, in some cases, thousands of times as much as it costs to produce
them. This makes drug companies among the most profitable investments around
and assures that their sales will continue to inflate the GDP for years
to come. While the resulting increases in GDP, with minimal increase in
material throughput, is promoted as a win-win solution for growth and sustainability,
the moral repercussions of charging inflated prices for badly needed medication
are compromising.
Cancer is a growth industry. Tens of billions of dollars are spent annually
treating the poor souls whom it afflicts, and many millions more are spent
studying the disease and looking for a cure. In all the research, however,
the obvious connections between increasing concentrations of cancer-causing
chemicals in the environment and the increasing incidence of cancer is largely
ignored. Making money doing practically anything is so revered that it is
considered almost anti-social to try to solve the problem at the prevention
level. It does not bode well for preventative solutions as long as we are
entrenched in the value structure of growth everlasting.
Nevertheless, the new paradigm is making appearances here and there. The
successful legal suit against the tobacco industry mentioned in connection
with full-cost accounting is a landmark example. The legitimacy gained for
prevention in that one case will make it easier for future cases where money-making
activities threaten well-being.
The expensive equipment and complex procedures that drive medical costs
up are the tools necessary for curing illness after it has taken hold. Maintaining
good health is not an expensive undertaking when it is approached from the
angle of prevention. Mostly what good health requires is knowledge about
the factors that contribute to individual well-being, and the will to encourage
each other to lead healthy lives, rather than promoting the consumption
of products and lifestyles that undermine our health. Knowledge, as discussed
above is the product of attention, thought, communication and goodwill.
Research to determine the causes of problems can be expensive, but once
it has been conducted, the understanding can be reproduced indefinitely
at little or no additional cost. Nourishing food, exercise, a community
of friends, and the opportunity to participate in mutual provision and the
decisions that affect one's life will keep most people in good health.
Cuba provides an excellent example here. The island has been under an economic
blockade since 1962. Without the benefits of unrestricted trade and finance,
the most abundant resource available has been the life-based capabilities
of the people. Even so, in 1988, Cuba was awarded the Health for All medal
by the World Health Organization (WHO). The medal recognized it as the only
developing country to attain the health goals that the WHO hoped all third
world countries would achieve by 2000. Cuba received the medal again 10
years later for having more doctors serving in other countries than the
WHO itself, and for having lowered its infant mortality rate from 60 per
thousand births in 1959 to 6.5 presently. By comparison, the U.S. has an
infant mortality rate of 6.9 per thousand births.
A recent edition of the New England Journal of Medicine said of the Latin
American School of Medicine in Havana: "[It is] sponsored by the Cuban
government and dedicated to training doctors to treat the poor of the Western
hemisphere and Africa. Twenty-seven countries and 60 ethnic groups are represented
among [the school's] eight thousand students." Of these, 88 are from
disadvantaged parts of the U.S. In exchange for free education, students
are required to commit to practicing medicine back in the poor communities
from which they came.
Another example is China's "barefoot doctors." China's present
medical system was started during their revolution in 1935, by a Canadian,
Dr. Norman Bethune. Bethune had already achieved notoriety for a variety
of things. These included the procedure - which he first performed on himself
- for curing tuberculosis by collapsing a lung, and the creation of the
first mobile medical unit upon which Mobile Army Surgical Hospitals (MASH)
are now modeled. Before going to China Bethune had been a professor at McGill
University in Montreal. To this day, in his honour, each year two professors
are chosen from the McGill Faculty of Medicine to tour China and lecture
at medical schools there.
My father, Dr. Mark Nickerson, was head of the Department of Pharmacology
at McGill when he was chosen in 1975, to be one of the "Bethune Professors."
One of my dad's specialties was post traumatic shock - the sort of complication
that sets in after a severe injury, such as a very bad burn. In China, he
was expecting to deliver a talk on the methods he had been developing, but
before the lecture he was given a tour through a large hospital. To his
surprise, the post traumatic shock complications he was accustomed to dealing
with here in Canada were almost nonexistent there. In North America, 20%
of serious burn victims might develop such complications. In China, the
figure was around one-half of one percent. The "barefoot doctors"
were responsible for the difference.
Because the new order arising in 1935 had almost no medical services available,
Bethune trained people to train others in medical procedures. A kind of
voluntary pyramid scheme of medical information sharing developed. By the
time of my father's visit, if someone in China didn't have a job, he or
she received first aid training. If there was still no work, they received
more sophisticated training. Over time, a great many Chinese have been trained
in all manner of medical procedures. One in every 80 people there is a health
care provider. What this means to accident victims is that sophisticated
first aid is available anywhere in the country soon after an accident. The
shock complications don't develop because of the speed with which accident
victims are treated. My father's specialty was irrelevant and it was necessary
for him to quickly come up with another topic for his lecture.
Even today, China is not yet rich by Western standards, but 30 years ago
it was far less so. The difference in this health care system, at that time
at least, was that medical procedures did not have to respond to the structural
scarcity of a debt-based money system. Human ingenuity could be directed
toward other ends.
We have some of the advantages of the life-based approach with Canada's
Medicare system. Although it is heavily influenced by a profit seeking drug
manufacturing industry, and tight restrictions on who can provide medical
care, the services are primarily in the interest of a healthy population.
Even as powerful lobbies campaign to allow "for-profit" medical
facilities, there is a trend to shift Medicare's focus from treating illness
to promoting wellness. While we aren't training welfare recipients to give
their neighbours first aid yet, there is a growing effort to keep people
out of the "medical treatment market."
Many communities in Ontario are fortunate to have community health centers.
The doctors on staff are paid a salary rather than per visit and, as a result,
have nothing to gain from people getting, or staying, sick. The primary
focus of these centers is to encourage healthy living. By helping people
to understand how health is affected by stress, pollution, quality of employment,
income distribution, exercise, nutrition, participation in decision-making
and the like, communities are prompted to work toward improving the quality
of life for everyone.
Health care straddles the line between the material focus, which can be
lucratively harnessed for monetary expansion, and the life focus, which
can provide significant increases in well-being with almost no material
requirements beyond the sustenance of those providing the services. The
economic growth approach might be seen, from the life-based perspective,
as taking undue advantage of people's weaknesses, while the life-based approach
would be considered worthless, distracting or counterproductive where monetary
expansion is the measure of success.
Life-based Activity
Renewable energy systems support the sustainability perspective by introducing
conservation. Education and health care can take this a step further by
showing some advantages of focusing on well-being, rather than profit. Both
of these can, and presently are, managed in ways that also serve monetary
expansion. Shifting one's focus from consumption to life-based activities
takes one completely out of the money perspective and into the life model.
When we make this move, we can expect opposition as it challenges the present
order's deepest illusion - that material things are the essence of wealth,
well-being and satisfaction.
Once basic nutrition and shelter are secured, the illusion that life depends
on material things is a trap. Until we realize how, we too, are caught by
the materialist illusion, there will be a tendency to dismiss life-based
solutions as lacking legitimate content.
Material goods have built-in tollgates. Those who possess the material can
demand money from anyone who wants what they have. Satisfaction derived
from life, and from developing the capabilities of aliveness, offer few
such tollgates. One might, for example, be able to charge for giving music
lessons, but once a student catches on, he or she could well derive pleasure
from music for the rest of his or her life without ever paying again. The
case is even more pronounced when it comes to gaining satisfaction from
a good friendship, or the appreciation of the things we can see, hear, taste,
feel, smell and understand. Even when lessons introducing such things are
purchased, the return business can be minimal.
Because of our material focus, modern education often neglects the basics
of how to be a good friend, what makes relationships work, and how to raise
children to be creative, self-motivated, responsible citizens. We are not
taught how to eliminate the undue influence that past traumas can have on
present circumstances. Such lessons would produce huge benefits in terms
of long-term well-being, but they could also cause a serious setback for
GDP. Psychiatrists, lawyers, prison guards and physicians would lose a lot
of business and, if people had fulfilling lives with less residual trauma,
far less gratification would be sought through consuming material goods
and other addictive behaviours. The economic expansion model could be in
serious trouble. Investing in such education would only pay off if we measured
progress in terms of well-being.
I think again of my friend John's comment about the "poor" Asians
he visited in the early 1970s. When things got tough, they "just huddled
closer together in the great love they had for each other and it was okay."
One wonders whether or not such people are actually poor? With access to
traditional lands, they could support each other forever, cycling their
nutritional needs through natural processes and working together to maintain
their shelters and other necessities. In the closeness of community, the
gratification that comes from helping those one knows can transform work
into passing time with friends. There are few in our money culture who enjoy
such security.
One who is content with little, has much.
Lao Tsu
Financial security always seems to be an issue. The debt-based money contrivance
keeps everyone on the edge. After generations of pursuing self-interest,
and with television claiming our time and teaching us to want so many things,
community bonds are all-too-often absent and the sense of needing something
never far away. The material dream requires a lifetime of hard work or exploitation,
yet seldom does it provide the sense of having arrived. If our purpose was
mutual provision without having to compete over a monetary supply kept scarce
by design, a whole new world of possibilities could open up. By recognizing
security as having enough to get by in the material realm, it is possible
to become still inside and breathe in the wonders of life. Time to live
and to help those close by is available to anyone - no gate, no ticket.
All that is required is to appreciate sufficiency and open up to what life
offers. There is a security bonus in that civilization based on enjoying
life has a far greater chance of enduring than one seeking perpetual material
growth.
Voluntary Simplicity
One of the growing trends in North America today is the movement of people
to simplify their lives. Working long hours can be stressful on individuals
and alienating for their families. By avoiding the trap of materialism and,
instead, enjoying what life offers, one can have far more time for living
and do less harm to the Earth in the process.
A trip to your local garbage dump can provide a firm grasp of this concept.
The tradition of "dumping" garbage lost some of its legitimacy
in the 1980s, so the facility is now called a "landfill site."
Now, there is likely an associated recycling program and the garbage will
be carefully covered so that rain water runs off and away, rather than percolating
through the often toxic contents. Whatever the improvements, however, your
experience will be the same; you will still find huge volumes of used goods
and truckload after truckload of things upon which people spent good money,
days, weeks or months earlier, coming to be buried. Imagine how much was
paid for the contents of each of those truckloads. People worked hard for
that money; by spending it, they willed the conversion of the natural world
into products that they possessed for a time and then threw away. While
doing their bit for an obsolete economy, the futility of their efforts is
obvious as one watches the trucks unload.
Material security, in the form of excellent nutrition, comfortable, energy-efficient
homes, sufficient clothing, excellent tools, close families and communities,
and lots of time to be creative and enjoy the wonders all around, can be
achieved for all, if we so choose. Even the basic physical gear of education,
health care, sports and the arts is within our grasp. What cannot be maintained
is the steady and increasing flow of goods that are produced with the intent
of being used up and discarded to make way for more of the same.
"Voluntary simplicity" costs far less than a life pursuing material
goods; it is more satisfying because the enjoyment is real in the way our
lives are real. It is a vision that we can realistically offer our children
and grandchildren. A sense of knowing that we are passing a world of fulfilling
possibilities on to our children would be priceless, in and of itself.
A Step in Good Faith
Both feminine and masculine are found in each of us, in varying proportions.
Nevertheless, the underlying dichotomy exists and provides a useful reference.
While the statements in this paragraph and those following are broad, with
many exceptions, "feminine" attributes are most frequently found
in women and "masculine" attributes most frequently found in men.
Most of the present order is run by men; we are strong, stable and motivated.
We are also full of personal ambitions; just the thing for a system that
promotes self-interest and competition as the best way to serve the common
good.
As the collective human condition shifts from adolescence toward maturity,
the qualities of cooperation and inclusiveness become more appropriate.
These qualities are more commonly found in women. When making decisions
there is a tendency for women to think, "What will work for the children?"
rather than "How can I win." Considerations of pride, power or
conquest are less likely to distract their focus from the common good. Feminine
attitudes are the essence of the Seven Generations perspective. We need
more of them.
There are women in positions of power today who got there by competing with
and winning over men. With women, as with men, there is a full spectrum
of qualities. Within the current structures, it takes masculine qualities
to get to "the top." Think back to Prime Ministers Margaret Thatcher
of Britain and Golda Mier of Israel, both of whom demonstrated that they
had "the balls" to wage war. This is not the conciliatory attitude
I'm suggesting would surface if women filled more positions of power. Gro
Brundtland provides a different example. As the Prime Minster of Norway,
she chaired the World Commission on Environment and Development that produced
Our Common Future described in Chapter 1. That statement of concerns led
to the great hope that humankind might rise to the challenges of our times.
George Mully became a friend and mentor as we worked together in the late
1980s on the video in the Guideposts for a Sustainable Future discussion
kit. Earlier in his career he did projects for native communities where
he learned how leaders were chosen within the Six Nations Confederacy. He
explained that while the leaders were men, they were chosen by the women.
If someone was ambitious and wanted to lead, he was disqualified. Leadership
wasn't about personal ambition, it was about service to the community. How
was it known which men harbored personal ambitions and which did not? The
women knew, because they had known them since they were babies.
It will take a strong sense of trust, fair play and the will to survive
to raise the feminine influence on decision-making up to par with the masculine.
A healthy balance is needed.
There must be ways for the masculine and the feminine perspectives to coexist.
Among mature, responsible adults, it is unnecessary for the boisterous to
submerge the accommodating. If a commitment to democratic process exists,
opportunities to speak should be possible for those who prefer to let a
moment pass after one person has finished talking, before adding another
perspective. The technique of consultation (see the Appendix) provides suggestions.
Marilyn Waring is the godmother of the well-being measurement movement.
She served three terms in the New Zealand Government - the first, as the
only woman Member of Parliament. In her second term she chaired the Public
Expenditures Committee. There she learned how disconnected the GDP measure
was from much of what is valuable in society. Most of what women traditionally
do is ignored in GDP tallies. Raising and educating young children, keeping
peace in the home and community and the care of aging parents, to name a
few critical activities, are not counted. Because they do not contribute
to the GDP, those essential services are officially invisible and few public
resources are made available to assist those providing such services. The
lack of compensation, or even social recognition, causes some to feel it
is not legitimate work. With people seeking to contribute in ways that are
recognized, these critical roles in society are increasingly neglected.
Proponents of economic expansion argue that people express their will through
how they spend money. Marilyn Waring believes that our will is more accurately
expressed by how we spend our time. If public resources were distributed
relative to where helpful time is spent, rather than where money is made,
our world would evolve differently.
In the southwestern Indian state of Kerala, in part because of the traditional
custom where women were responsible for family wealth and men married into
families, but not into control, the women have had a definite say in how
that society's resources are allocated. This has resulted in European standards
of literacy and health, along with population stability, all on an average
income of $330 per year. This, and other examples of what happens when women
are empowered, led to the 1994 United Nations Conference on Population making
the education of young women a central part of the global population stabilization
strategy.
The attitudes of cooperation, and of caring for those who cannot fully care
for themselves, are important elements of what we must accomplish. Whether
through genetic propensity, cultural training or from the long and loving
work of raising children, these are qualities most consistently found in
women. The more women are empowered to make decisions in society, and the
more comfortable that men become with their own capacity for nurturing,
the more influence these qualities will have on the world our children will
inherit.
Managing Public Opinion
The twentieth century has been characterized by three developments
of great political importance: the growth of democracy; the growth of corporate
power; and the growth of propaganda as a means of protecting corporate power
against democracy.
Alex Carey
Understanding the world is a product of thought, which is a product of experience.
Experience comes from two sources; the world as we see it and, what other
people tell of their experiences. This latter source includes the experience
embodied in the conventional wisdom as delivered through our language and
culture, topics from our education, the experiences of our peers, and presentations
by the media. Most people relay experiences as accurately as they are able,
subtly participating in the collective mind by which an open, trusting society
makes its way through time. Sometimes, however, people feed information
into our experience that is selected or contrived so that we think what
they want us to think.
The promotion of material acquisition in the conventional wisdom poses a
major obstacle. To rise effectively to the sustainability challenge, as
many people as possible must have a clear understanding of what the problems
and opportunities are. While much information is being distributed, vested
interests employ a great deal of creative effort to divert attention from
the challenges and proposed solutions, and to reinforce the goal of perpetual
expansion.
Manipulation of public opinion is not a new situation. It was well established
in 1915 when the major financial houses of the U.S. were afraid that $1.5
billion in "Rothschild Formula" type war loans to Britain and
France were in danger of going bad. German U-boats had successfully cut
off shipping to Britain and food supplies for the civilian population were
estimated to be sufficient for only six to eight weeks. In The Creature
from Jekyll Island Edward Griffin gives extensive details about news media
control and how, with some cooperation from Britain, the U.S. was ushered
into World War I.
Early in the 1900s, financial interests were buying up newspapers to gain
control of editorial policy. In 1905, a cooperative Congressional Representative
from Pennsylvania, Joseph Sibley, wrote about the need for media control:
"An efficient literary bureau is needed, not for a day or a crisis
but a permanent healthy control of the Associated Press and kindred avenues."
On February 9, 1917, another Representative, Oscar Callaway, from Texas,
reported to the U.S. Congress. The J. P. Morgan interests had taken steps:
... to control generally the policy of the daily press. ...
They found it was only necessary to purchase the control of 25 of the greatest
papers. ... An agreement was reached; the policy of the papers was bought,
to be paid for by the month; an editor was furnished for each paper to properly
supervise and edit information "regarding the questions of preparedness,
militarism, financial policies, and other things of national and international
nature considered vital to the interests of the purchasers."
Through the network of public information so acquired, considerable editorial
space was invested to inspire the U.S. participation in the war. Even so,
the public didn't buy it. Ten to one, they opposed entering "Europe's
war." Additional tactics were then added to the effort.
The Lusitania was a British passenger ship that had been retrofitted so
that the lower decks could carry military cargo. For its May 1915 voyage
from New York to Britain, in addition to its passengers, it was loaded with
a large amount of military supplies for the British war effort. The German
Embassy in Washington protested the breach of international neutrality treaties
and sent prepaid ads to 50 newspapers in the U.S., for their travel sections,
warning potential travelers that they were at war and that British ships
traveling in British waters were targeted for destruction. Of the 50 papers
to whom it was sent, only the Des Moines Register printed the notice. Under
the pretense of saving fuel, the Lusitania was ordered to travel at three-quarter
speed. When it entered the war zone, its rendezvous for escort with the
British Destroyer Juno was canceled and the captain was left to sail, unprotected,
right into waters known to be occupied by German U-Boats. Not surprisingly,
the slow moving target was sunk, killing the 195 American passengers aboard.
Then, predictably, the newspapers took up the cry. Americans had been killed;
the nation must enter the war. And they did.
Quoting Lundberg from his book, America's Sixty Families: "The declaration
of war by the United States, in addition to extricating the wealthiest American
families from a dangerous [financial] situation, also opened new vistas
of profits." Some $35 billion were created and spent by the U.S. as
the war progressed, nearly doubling the money supply and consequently lowering
the purchasing power of the dollar by nearly 50%. With net profits of nearly
$38 billion, wartime industries were the winners, while the whole population
shared in the hidden tax through inflation.
Of course the people don't want war. But after all, it's
the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it's always a simple
matter to drag the people along whether it's a democracy, a fascist dictatorship,
or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people
can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. All you have to do
is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack
of patriotism, and for exposing the country to greater danger.
Nazi Reich Marshal Herman Goering, at the Nuremberg trials
News reporting, or withholding, and its ability to mold public opinion aside,
the media - television in particular - is dedicated to cultivating consumer
demand. In The Last Hours of Ancient Sunshine, Thom Hartmann describes many
aspects of our culture that keep us ignorant about how we live on Earth
today. His main theme is that over the last few generations we've developed
an almost total dependency on fossil-fuel - oil in particular. Ancient sunshine
is a lyrical description of fossil-fuels; literally, the energy in petroleum
is sunshine that was absorbed by plants hundreds of millions of years ago.
The information media has only begun to acknowledge that this resource will
be practically exhausted within the lifetime of today's children. It would
seem a message of importance, as this one detail renders all decisions about
increasing dependency on long-distance trade and travel mistaken, yet it
is not an issue considered suitable for media attention.
What the commercial media does consider important is for people to buy things;
commercialism thrives on short-term thinking. Using the analogy between
individual stages of maturity and the behaviour of society, Hartmann points
out that young children have not the slightest awareness or concern about
the future; "Gimme now" encapsulates their attitude. "The
primary immature cultural concept that - 'you are the most important person
in the world' - is shouted at us daily through TV, the primary spokesvehicle
of our culture," Hartmann continues. The constant reinforcement of
this message keeps us immature. The reason he gives for, "the persistence
and intensity of these messages is simple: when people behave like children,
wanting immediate gratification for their every desire, they are ideal consumers."
Premonitions in the late 1940s about control of public opinion led George
Orwell to write his famous novel, Nineteen Eighty Four. In the world he
described, every aspect of life was centrally controlled. Fiction was broadcast
as truth and history was re-written to maintain control of the public mind
and serve the political aspirations of the rulers.
After reading that book in the 1960s, I remember counting down the years
as 1984 approached. The year arrived, and with it, in Canada, the election
of a government that gave us the first of the "Free Trade" agreements.
Ninteen-eighty-four is now two decades past. In 2003, 50 million people
assembled on a single day, for common purpose, in dozens of countries around
the world. Never had an event taken place of such size and geographical
diversity. It was an event of globally historic proportions. However, since
its purpose was to protest against the American establishment's war plans
for Iraq, it received only passing mention in mainstream news. With very
few exceptions, that media has been purchased by wealthy interests and it
is diligent in presenting views of the world that support its owners. It
is no coincidence that these people are from the same small community that
is intent on winning the Global Monopoly Game.
It is timely that, for many of us, the Internet has arrived, providing a
source of information that is not controlled by commercial interests. It
has already breached monopoly control of the news. The stark differences
between what is reported by individuals on the spot and what the commercial
media says, has stimulated the critical faculties of many. The ranks of
those who would change the focus of our culture are swelling as the self-serving
motives of the Monopoly winners come to light. The goal of "shopping-until-we-drop"
is giving way to sustaining the land and life.
The Internet was designed by the U.S. military to provide dependable communications,
even if large portions of the infrastructure were destroyed. The robust
design makes it safe from disruption, at least, so far. However, as we attempt
to prevent blind commercialism from driving civilization to overshoot and
collapse, we are well advised not to put all our communications eggs in
the Internet, or any other basket. As that medium proves effective, we can
count on steps being taken to limit its usefulness for opposing the Global
Monopoly Game. For good measure, keep an eye out for other means of communicating.
In particular, look for opportunities for personal encounters. Person to
person communication remains the most secure, direct and trusted means of
sharing experiences.
Reframing Legitimacy
Across many cultures and through many centuries, ostentatious displays of
wealth by those at the top have helped cement the social hierarchy and stabilize
power. While in the past these affluent displays have been too small to
damage ecosystems, their expansion through the middle class dream have grown
into a highly destructive custom.
Every step of economic expansion comes at the expense of
wildlife habitat and the health of ecosystems.
Dr. Brian Czech, Author of "Shoveling Fuel for a Runaway Train"
Brian Czech is a Ph.D. wildlife biologist working in the U.S. He also serves
as an adjunct professor at Virginia Tech. After years of documenting environmental
degradation and thinking about the social order causing it, he wrote a book
titled, Shoveling Fuel for a Runaway Train. Czech explains "that every
step of economic growth comes at the expense of wildlife habitat and the
health of ecosystems," and that after a good standard of living is
provided for, further economic growth is actually uneconomic. "To say
the economy is growing sounds like something good," he explains. When
children or crops grow it is a good thing. When an economy is already more
than big enough to provide for all its people's needs, further growth is
not a good thing. Were it reported that the economy is "bloating"
rather than growing, we would be more inclined to recognize the problem
and do something about it.
Dr. Czech suggests that such a reframing of our language could help direct
our culture away from self-destruction. Using language, like "the bloating
economy" to more closely reflect reality is a start. So frequently
in the media conspicuous consumption is presented as admirable, encouraging
viewers to wish it for themselves. In fact, Czech asserts that consuming
beyond what is needed for a secure and healthy life is "a narcissistic
disregard for posterity," and recommends social pressure as a means
to discourage such dangerous behaviour. He suggests identifying the wealthiest
1% of the population - those who consume the most resources - as "the
liquidating class," and says they ought to be "castigated"
for "the wanton destruction of the grandkids' natural environment."
Czech is sensitive to the danger of alienating those who might be allies
in reframing public opinion. Hence, the 1% focus. At the time he wrote his
book, (published in 2000) the top 1% in the United States were gathering
to themselves 62% of all the new wealth being created. Their net worth was
equivalent to that of the bottom 90%. Conspicuous indeed.
On the other side of the "public opinion revolution" are those
who act with respect and restraint. Whether their restraint be out of choice
or necessity, if they feel good about what they are doing, they won't strive
to join those who needlessly destroy the natural world. They can take pride
in their frugality and enthusiastically pioneer the wonders of seeking satisfaction
from their lives rather than from stuff. Those who are capable and wise
enough to live with minimal disruption of our living planet could be called
the "steady state class." Those who excel at living lightly on
the Earth will be the new heroes and our young will look up to the best
of them, seeking to emulate and surpass their feats.
It could happen, but it will take considerable creativity on the part of
those who presently grasp the challenges we face. Of special importance
to the success of this "Steady State Revolution" is how the act
of castigation is borne out. "Acts of violence," says Czech, "will
only backfire, especially in the post 9/11 world."
Resistance to Change
If material acquisition were truly the dominant value of
the human species, then surely capital