My first thought when considering how we change direction to move towards a 'better' world is that I need to have some idea of what that 'better' world would look like. I guess that at least the answer to that is reasonably simple: a world where the needs of human beings are met within the physical constraints of the planet at the same time protecting the needs of other animal species and those yet unborn.
What I've discovered so far it that:
Destroying capitalism just doesn't seem to be an option because it would mean massive social upheaval
Capitalism is deeply ingrained in the very fabric of societies worldwide and we have yet to find an alternative way of organising human society (Tim Jackson, see post May 18th) AND
Any change which goes against the interests of big business will be resisted by international companies which wield massive power and have, many think, taken over power from national governments and trading groups (May 22nd post)
Another feature of 21st century capitalism to throw into the melting pot is that it comes in many forms, a major difference being the degree to which government restraint is brought to bear on the market. Free-market economics got a massive boost during the reigns of Margaret Thatcher in the UK and Ronald Reagan in the US during the 1980's.
Is it free-market unregulated capitalism which is the baddy, could it work for us if restraint was brought to bear and the needs of the majority and of the planet were given priority over the needs of the elite few at the top? And if so, how can that restraint be brought to bear? I'm in deep water now!
No comments:
Post a Comment
Good to have your feedback. Thanks for commenting.