'Take out' in the sense of the Sopranos is probably inappropriate, but to be candid, over the past twenty years I've heard so many self-righteous capitialist wankers tell me unequivocally that the market is the only arbiter and the only measure, that I want to see many of them jobless, humiliated, and pilloried.
As you so rightly say we live in a world full of human stupidity: wherein the major indicators of success, leadership, and influence are wealth and power. It doesn't matter how the wealth or power is achieved, all that matters is...the market. When the Capitalist paradigm finally falls over (as is beginning) and the process of expansion and development reaches its logical conclusion, I hope the children and grandchildren of these capitalists are more forgiving.
Raping the world in order to fuel growth (which is what has been, and is happening under our best of all possible worlds system) is eventually unsustainable. It takes neither Popper nor Malthus to realise this.
The late 20th Century/early 21st Century struggle for resources is going to draw a good number of lines in the sand, and folk are going to sit and analyse our economic policies for some time to come. If there is a history, history will judge us all.
Of the many folk who have informed me that politics are subservient to economics, you were possibly the most reasonable. However, the view that economics drive politics will become unsustainable very soon, as it does in a Von Clauswitz Total War scenario. Capitalism is now beginning the process of, like Horace, eating itself. (Much to his Mum and Dad's dismay...) Given the stupidity you describe in the human population, is unfettered capitalism worse for society at large than widespread herion addiction? Heroin only kills one at a time.
As an irritating aside, the same folk who once claimed that Economics ran politics are now complaining that climate change, the scrambling for resources, and emission controls are Political Problems. And waiting for mechanisms like epidemics to 'cull' the human population to manageable numbers is profoundly more cynical than anything I've suggested. 'It doesn't matter, the extras will all eventually die off': is perhaps more callous than suggesting the high priests of capitalism, who preached the doctrine of the unfettered market should sit in the stocks and face a few rotten tomatos. But at least it's consistant and non-interventionist. And the rich can maybe afford the ameliorative treatments.
If growth is a good thing, the management of growth is surely essential. In an unfettered market (as we have now) we have financed investment by borrowing against continuing growth. We are only now adjusting to the fact the growth cannot be continuous, and if it could be, it would wipe us all out and destroy our host as completely as the Rabies virus does to those unfortunates infected. Ergo, we live high, on the fat of our grandchildren's land, knowing that they shal never be as well off as us, because by slight of hand, we've already spent their profit/excess for our needless luxuries...which have admittedly driven growth. But wastage drives growth too, and we would not consider such to be a morally good thing.
When it comes to doing something....This is a forum. I have neither money nor power. In order to have either I'd have to engage in a process that I despise, and I regard as damaging to the environment. Jansenist of me, I know, but... Perhaps in this case I should be advocating revolution, or the violent overthrow of the present system....but I haven't quite got there yet. No doubt that will be next week.
Hope Em is well and will see the two of you sometime over the weekend.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
Much to his Mum and Dad's Dismay...
Date: 2007-06-23 10:12 am (UTC)As you so rightly say we live in a world full of human stupidity: wherein the major indicators of success, leadership, and influence are wealth and power. It doesn't matter how the wealth or power is achieved, all that matters is...the market. When the Capitalist paradigm finally falls over (as is beginning) and the process of expansion and development reaches its logical conclusion, I hope the children and grandchildren of these capitalists are more forgiving.
Raping the world in order to fuel growth (which is what has been, and is happening under our best of all possible worlds system) is eventually unsustainable. It takes neither Popper nor Malthus to realise this.
The late 20th Century/early 21st Century struggle for resources is going to draw a good number of lines in the sand, and folk are going to sit and analyse our economic policies for some time to come. If there is a history, history will judge us all.
Of the many folk who have informed me that politics are subservient to economics, you were possibly the most reasonable. However, the view that economics drive politics will become unsustainable very soon, as it does in a Von Clauswitz Total War scenario. Capitalism is now beginning the process of, like Horace, eating itself. (Much to his Mum and Dad's dismay...)
Given the stupidity you describe in the human population, is unfettered capitalism worse for society at large than widespread herion addiction? Heroin only kills one at a time.
As an irritating aside, the same folk who once claimed that Economics ran politics are now complaining that climate change, the scrambling for resources, and emission controls are Political Problems.
And waiting for mechanisms like epidemics to 'cull' the human population to manageable numbers is profoundly more cynical than anything I've suggested. 'It doesn't matter, the extras will all eventually die off': is perhaps more callous than suggesting the high priests of capitalism, who preached the doctrine of the unfettered market should sit in the stocks and face a few rotten tomatos. But at least it's consistant and non-interventionist. And the rich can maybe afford the ameliorative treatments.
If growth is a good thing, the management of growth is surely essential. In an unfettered market (as we have now) we have financed investment by borrowing against continuing growth. We are only now adjusting to the fact the growth cannot be continuous, and if it could be, it would wipe us all out and destroy our host as completely as the Rabies virus does to those unfortunates infected. Ergo, we live high, on the fat of our grandchildren's land, knowing that they shal never be as well off as us, because by slight of hand, we've already spent their profit/excess for our needless luxuries...which have admittedly driven growth. But wastage drives growth too, and we would not consider such to be a morally good thing.
When it comes to doing something....This is a forum. I have neither money nor power. In order to have either I'd have to engage in a process that I despise, and I regard as damaging to the environment. Jansenist of me, I know, but...
Perhaps in this case I should be advocating revolution, or the violent overthrow of the present system....but I haven't quite got there yet. No doubt that will be next week.
Hope Em is well and will see the two of you sometime over the weekend.