The "tentacles of the elite" may also be advocates of post-growth and common good economics, whose studies are paid for by foundations and large corporations?
It is easy for many to overlook the fact that the global economy is a completely autonomous system. The invisible hand is the reason why we have known for 50 years how harmful growth is, but we are unable to slow it down. Certainly there have been many political successes by progressive and responsible forces, such as in equality, the provision of alternative energy or in waste separation. But none of this has any influence on growth. The invisible hand doesn't care about the well-being of the earth. We would have had the opportunity to rebuild the economy one year ago. After all, there were no protests from people about insufficient growth. But all politicians serve the invisible hand and do everything possible and release gigantic amounts of money to bring growth back to pre-Corona levels.
There is only one possibility, by intervening in this economic system from outside. Put simply, the market consists of money and goods. If you remove one of them, you've outsmarted the market. The goods cannot be removed, but removing the money would be a breeze. All that was needed was a decision by a central body on global currency devaluation. That could be done with a simple stroke of the pen. There have been several devaluations in history. I'll get to the consequences in a moment. A global referendum could trigger such a devaluation. All people would just have to vote on that all of their debts would be paid off unconditionally. Who should refuse to do this? I would like to ask you not to put this in the category of conspiracy theory, but to see it as an idea for solving our global problem.
I've been trying to spread this idea on Twitter for a year, but nobody can imagine that it will work. Most people say we are not ready yet and that society would have to change beforehand in order for this to be possible. But it's that simple. We continue to go to work as usual and get everything we have bought so far for free. Just as our attention is drawn to covering our face every 3 minutes on public transport, in shops we are urged not to take ourselves any more, as we would otherwise. The stability of the production of everyday goods was increased during the first lockdowns last year have been sufficiently proven. Despite serious cuts in the economy, the supply was guaranteed at all times. And nothing prevents people from working without getting paid for it. We do this for our family and for our hobbies and without the many volunteers our society would not function.
What is the main effect now? There will be no more growth and still people will be happier than they are now. After all, despite constantly increasing purchasing power, our feeling of happiness has not really grown in the last few decades. And our scientific and technical achievements will remain with us. Why no more growth? Very easily. The investments are then free because the people who produce them work without having to get any money. Nevertheless, these people are provided with everything they need. It sounds illogical at first, but it is a simple logical conclusion. Just like the fact that the disappearance of money will not harm anyone because you won't need any more money afterwards.
Since there is no longer any profit due to the lack of money, there is no need for advertising and people are no longer encouraged to consume unnecessarily. Planned obsolescence is superfluous, weapons are no longer manufactured, human and drug trafficking is disappearing due to the inability to make a profit. Humanitarian aid is free and can simply be given away to those in need. Nobody has to sleep on the street anymore because they cannot pay for their accommodation and everyone receives medical help. Since there is no longer any “paid” work, voluntary or “care” work or voluntary work are suddenly worth the same. This will have a great positive impact on equity between the genders and probably also on the development of the human population. There does not have to be expropriations like in a Marxist revolution, but property will lose its attribute because you can no longer make a profit with it.
All of this would be possible within a short time without any prerequisites having to be created. Only our politicians could prepare us for it and take away our fear of it. We have been proving that humanity is disciplined and show solidarity for almost two years in coping with the Corona crisis. We are ready to step into a new age.
There are more explanations on my website https://letusbe.one and also a detailed FAQ section.
I don't think of the people you reference as "friends" but more as enablers. They go along because of their job responsibilities, which results in their paychecks. If their "superior" directs them to ignore a certain corporation from regulatory oversight then that is what they do. Since there is little to no accountability this "turn a blind eye" mentality keeps the agencies operating and cranking out reports that very few read. But the destruction continues. There have been examples of the accountability system working. The last time was probably during the Savings and Loan crime wave when William Black, federal regulator for the Federal Savings and Loan Insurance Corp put over a thousand senior banking people behind bars. http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/04232010/profile.html Since then, the banks have upped their bribery of elected officials like Obama and Eric Holder who embraced the mantra of "too big to jail" and now that phrase has been expanded to all major corporations from Facebook to BP to Pfizer. I don't agree that there will be mobs and unrest. I prefer to note the times of immense change when the police refused to follow orders to arrest protestors or the army disobeyed orders to kill their fellow citizens. That is when power falls. When the enablers refuse to go against what is in their hearts any longer then the corruption will no longer be supported. It takes an agreeable community to perpetuate such criminality.
I believe that one of the most important elements you neglected to touch upon is accountability. There are literally hundreds of rules, laws and regulations to protect the environment and workers from the ravages of corporations, almost none of which are enforced. For example, thousands of oil rigs have been abandoned and left to emit methane and toxic substances into groundwater. Why? Because of bankruptcy laws that must be changed. At the heart of this is that both parties in the US have gutted the enforcement arms of environmental and financial agencies to go after corporations that are blatantly flaunting these laws. It's way beyond time to start enforcing the laws and shutting down corporation by revoking their charters to exist. Exxon's lying about climate change should result in a loss of their charter. BPs destruction of the Gulf of Mexico shouldn't be just a tax deductible fine but loss of their charter. It is time to weed out the destructive corporations from the mix and with them their vast amount of pollution that is killing us all. This is the truth.
Excellent point you make. The deeper problem will be, who will work to enforce these laws to the level of the intended spirit of those laws? The existing political dynasties are the friends and colleagues of the owners/CEO's and their lawyers. Friends helping friends as it were. People are wired with a tendency to support those around them, and few find the courage to hold a "friend" accountable. The problem now becomes turning them against one another. This also explains the almost complete absence of any action on climate thus far. If the 0.001% really believe this is even a problem to begin with, they think that they will be able to 'ride it out' (and oh, too bad about the collateral loss of billions of lives and even more ecology).
At some point it'll come to either a number of influential leaders defecting and attempting to correct things by removing/jailing those opposed to action (accompanied by the unrest arising from their forces of resistance), or this being done by angry mobs. Either way it appears that there will be absolutely no peaceful linearly managed mitigation: there is no precedent for it. There is however many many precedents for civil unrest, social collapse, and war. This is the way of humanity, always has been. We've barely evolved beyond "This is mine. You touch, I kill you." This is the pervasive sentiment, even for many so-called activists, "visionaries", and "truth-seekers" (ever try suggesting to Bendell's group that they might be missing something? lol).
Any suggestion that politicians and corps "need to do something" is an almost willful blindness to history, precedent, and the bond of entitled comraderie. As a meme circulating goes, "Listen, smile, agree. And then do whatever the f*k you were going to do anyway."
Hi John, neglect might be the wrong word but you make a good point. The simple solution are eco-side laws (that are strictly enforced) that put c-suite ecosystem-destroyers into prison.
This is so insightful and tea lot inspires a person to action, but why did you limit your critic to carbon emissions? The elite are systematically poisoning us and Nature. CO2 is a Long horizon subset to the toxic impacts we are experiencing today from forever chemicals, tagricultural chemicals, rampant EMF, toxic plastics, over medication, sewage, mining, land use change, stress, overurbanisation, Nature destruction through renewable, etc. Do you not see these other immediate impacts or how does it work?
I receive a dozen or so newsletters from different orgs working to raise awareness about CC. Has there been any effort into combining forces to speak with a single voice rather than dozens and hundreds of different voices, divided and uncoordinated. If these groups cannot work together towards a common aim resulting in a stronger presence, then it underscores the impossible challenge of getting corps and govt's to work together; it demonstrates humanity's inability to resolve the issues that got us here.
Every newsletter days the very same thing, and we no longer benefit from having it repeated every day a dozen or more times. The various groups need to merge into as single force that can corral the 99.9% into coordinated action. It shouldn't need to be said that without such unification all effort will amount to seven billion farts in the wind. And the simile with GH gas emissions is intended.
That's a big problem for sure. The first step is get us all on the same page about just what the problem is based on science and not the delusional views of the elite so that they can protect their predatory system.
Yes, but I just wonder how long should (not 'would') it take to get us all on the same page? Most that are receptive have been on this page for years and decades. The rest will need to follow. If we wait until "us all", or "everyone" are on the same page, we'll be doing this merry-go-round until 2050 and likely longer. There are enough people cognizant of the problem. Time to move this to the next level. I wouldn't be surprised to see a movement in this direction provoke increasingly more dangerous responses from those opposed. The responses from govt and police in the fight for land and water protection on Indigenous territory are a good indication of the kind of responses we'll see as the movement hits nerves.
As I wrote in the article... "if we’re going to build a strategy that has any chance of protecting our ecosystems from unravelling I’d just as soon rely on the truth as the foundation that shapes our response. Only when that happens will we be able to truly harness the collective ingenuity of our species and find solutions. The clock is ticking...for the sake of future generations, let’s leave fiction to the movies."
The "tentacles of the elite" may also be advocates of post-growth and common good economics, whose studies are paid for by foundations and large corporations?
It is easy for many to overlook the fact that the global economy is a completely autonomous system. The invisible hand is the reason why we have known for 50 years how harmful growth is, but we are unable to slow it down. Certainly there have been many political successes by progressive and responsible forces, such as in equality, the provision of alternative energy or in waste separation. But none of this has any influence on growth. The invisible hand doesn't care about the well-being of the earth. We would have had the opportunity to rebuild the economy one year ago. After all, there were no protests from people about insufficient growth. But all politicians serve the invisible hand and do everything possible and release gigantic amounts of money to bring growth back to pre-Corona levels.
There is only one possibility, by intervening in this economic system from outside. Put simply, the market consists of money and goods. If you remove one of them, you've outsmarted the market. The goods cannot be removed, but removing the money would be a breeze. All that was needed was a decision by a central body on global currency devaluation. That could be done with a simple stroke of the pen. There have been several devaluations in history. I'll get to the consequences in a moment. A global referendum could trigger such a devaluation. All people would just have to vote on that all of their debts would be paid off unconditionally. Who should refuse to do this? I would like to ask you not to put this in the category of conspiracy theory, but to see it as an idea for solving our global problem.
I've been trying to spread this idea on Twitter for a year, but nobody can imagine that it will work. Most people say we are not ready yet and that society would have to change beforehand in order for this to be possible. But it's that simple. We continue to go to work as usual and get everything we have bought so far for free. Just as our attention is drawn to covering our face every 3 minutes on public transport, in shops we are urged not to take ourselves any more, as we would otherwise. The stability of the production of everyday goods was increased during the first lockdowns last year have been sufficiently proven. Despite serious cuts in the economy, the supply was guaranteed at all times. And nothing prevents people from working without getting paid for it. We do this for our family and for our hobbies and without the many volunteers our society would not function.
What is the main effect now? There will be no more growth and still people will be happier than they are now. After all, despite constantly increasing purchasing power, our feeling of happiness has not really grown in the last few decades. And our scientific and technical achievements will remain with us. Why no more growth? Very easily. The investments are then free because the people who produce them work without having to get any money. Nevertheless, these people are provided with everything they need. It sounds illogical at first, but it is a simple logical conclusion. Just like the fact that the disappearance of money will not harm anyone because you won't need any more money afterwards.
Since there is no longer any profit due to the lack of money, there is no need for advertising and people are no longer encouraged to consume unnecessarily. Planned obsolescence is superfluous, weapons are no longer manufactured, human and drug trafficking is disappearing due to the inability to make a profit. Humanitarian aid is free and can simply be given away to those in need. Nobody has to sleep on the street anymore because they cannot pay for their accommodation and everyone receives medical help. Since there is no longer any “paid” work, voluntary or “care” work or voluntary work are suddenly worth the same. This will have a great positive impact on equity between the genders and probably also on the development of the human population. There does not have to be expropriations like in a Marxist revolution, but property will lose its attribute because you can no longer make a profit with it.
All of this would be possible within a short time without any prerequisites having to be created. Only our politicians could prepare us for it and take away our fear of it. We have been proving that humanity is disciplined and show solidarity for almost two years in coping with the Corona crisis. We are ready to step into a new age.
There are more explanations on my website https://letusbe.one and also a detailed FAQ section.
I don't think of the people you reference as "friends" but more as enablers. They go along because of their job responsibilities, which results in their paychecks. If their "superior" directs them to ignore a certain corporation from regulatory oversight then that is what they do. Since there is little to no accountability this "turn a blind eye" mentality keeps the agencies operating and cranking out reports that very few read. But the destruction continues. There have been examples of the accountability system working. The last time was probably during the Savings and Loan crime wave when William Black, federal regulator for the Federal Savings and Loan Insurance Corp put over a thousand senior banking people behind bars. http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/04232010/profile.html Since then, the banks have upped their bribery of elected officials like Obama and Eric Holder who embraced the mantra of "too big to jail" and now that phrase has been expanded to all major corporations from Facebook to BP to Pfizer. I don't agree that there will be mobs and unrest. I prefer to note the times of immense change when the police refused to follow orders to arrest protestors or the army disobeyed orders to kill their fellow citizens. That is when power falls. When the enablers refuse to go against what is in their hearts any longer then the corruption will no longer be supported. It takes an agreeable community to perpetuate such criminality.
I believe that one of the most important elements you neglected to touch upon is accountability. There are literally hundreds of rules, laws and regulations to protect the environment and workers from the ravages of corporations, almost none of which are enforced. For example, thousands of oil rigs have been abandoned and left to emit methane and toxic substances into groundwater. Why? Because of bankruptcy laws that must be changed. At the heart of this is that both parties in the US have gutted the enforcement arms of environmental and financial agencies to go after corporations that are blatantly flaunting these laws. It's way beyond time to start enforcing the laws and shutting down corporation by revoking their charters to exist. Exxon's lying about climate change should result in a loss of their charter. BPs destruction of the Gulf of Mexico shouldn't be just a tax deductible fine but loss of their charter. It is time to weed out the destructive corporations from the mix and with them their vast amount of pollution that is killing us all. This is the truth.
Excellent point you make. The deeper problem will be, who will work to enforce these laws to the level of the intended spirit of those laws? The existing political dynasties are the friends and colleagues of the owners/CEO's and their lawyers. Friends helping friends as it were. People are wired with a tendency to support those around them, and few find the courage to hold a "friend" accountable. The problem now becomes turning them against one another. This also explains the almost complete absence of any action on climate thus far. If the 0.001% really believe this is even a problem to begin with, they think that they will be able to 'ride it out' (and oh, too bad about the collateral loss of billions of lives and even more ecology).
At some point it'll come to either a number of influential leaders defecting and attempting to correct things by removing/jailing those opposed to action (accompanied by the unrest arising from their forces of resistance), or this being done by angry mobs. Either way it appears that there will be absolutely no peaceful linearly managed mitigation: there is no precedent for it. There is however many many precedents for civil unrest, social collapse, and war. This is the way of humanity, always has been. We've barely evolved beyond "This is mine. You touch, I kill you." This is the pervasive sentiment, even for many so-called activists, "visionaries", and "truth-seekers" (ever try suggesting to Bendell's group that they might be missing something? lol).
Any suggestion that politicians and corps "need to do something" is an almost willful blindness to history, precedent, and the bond of entitled comraderie. As a meme circulating goes, "Listen, smile, agree. And then do whatever the f*k you were going to do anyway."
Hi John, neglect might be the wrong word but you make a good point. The simple solution are eco-side laws (that are strictly enforced) that put c-suite ecosystem-destroyers into prison.
"eco-side"? Did you mean 'ecocide'?
Yes...oops
This is so insightful and tea lot inspires a person to action, but why did you limit your critic to carbon emissions? The elite are systematically poisoning us and Nature. CO2 is a Long horizon subset to the toxic impacts we are experiencing today from forever chemicals, tagricultural chemicals, rampant EMF, toxic plastics, over medication, sewage, mining, land use change, stress, overurbanisation, Nature destruction through renewable, etc. Do you not see these other immediate impacts or how does it work?
Alexander, the article was nearing 2000 words...I thought I'd keep it simple 😉
I receive a dozen or so newsletters from different orgs working to raise awareness about CC. Has there been any effort into combining forces to speak with a single voice rather than dozens and hundreds of different voices, divided and uncoordinated. If these groups cannot work together towards a common aim resulting in a stronger presence, then it underscores the impossible challenge of getting corps and govt's to work together; it demonstrates humanity's inability to resolve the issues that got us here.
Every newsletter days the very same thing, and we no longer benefit from having it repeated every day a dozen or more times. The various groups need to merge into as single force that can corral the 99.9% into coordinated action. It shouldn't need to be said that without such unification all effort will amount to seven billion farts in the wind. And the simile with GH gas emissions is intended.
That's a big problem for sure. The first step is get us all on the same page about just what the problem is based on science and not the delusional views of the elite so that they can protect their predatory system.
Yes, but I just wonder how long should (not 'would') it take to get us all on the same page? Most that are receptive have been on this page for years and decades. The rest will need to follow. If we wait until "us all", or "everyone" are on the same page, we'll be doing this merry-go-round until 2050 and likely longer. There are enough people cognizant of the problem. Time to move this to the next level. I wouldn't be surprised to see a movement in this direction provoke increasingly more dangerous responses from those opposed. The responses from govt and police in the fight for land and water protection on Indigenous territory are a good indication of the kind of responses we'll see as the movement hits nerves.
Some truths may be too uncomfortable to accept. I am reminded of Stanislaw Lem and the Cyberiad.
Part of the task might be to help those that can accept the reality we face.
As I wrote in the article... "if we’re going to build a strategy that has any chance of protecting our ecosystems from unravelling I’d just as soon rely on the truth as the foundation that shapes our response. Only when that happens will we be able to truly harness the collective ingenuity of our species and find solutions. The clock is ticking...for the sake of future generations, let’s leave fiction to the movies."