At
times a Marxist must look ahead with some new and modern ideas. One such an
idea is in moving away from a growth economy to a maintenance economy. Many
political activists call it simply the “no growth economy.”
While
intellectuals have heard of it, for many common citizens is totally over their
heads. I ran as a local town councilmember and I called for a "controlled
growth economy" over the traditional "growth economy." I'm sure
that those who read it were scratching their heads and wondering:
"WHAT!"
It
is time to bring about the debate over a maintenance economy vs. growth. To
most people abandoning a growth economy seems insane. Who ever heard of such a
thing? How can a local economy be healthy without growth?
And
yet this debate rose up during the rise of the Green Party of Germany, in
the late 1970s, with discussions on “Sustainable Living.”
The
reasons to abandon growth based economies are really simple. Growth requires
resources that have to expand, and keep expanding in order to work. That means
more power (gasoline, electricity) more land, more building of structures, more
water, more sewer, more roads, vehicles and everything else we need to live. It
can't remain stable, it has to grow. The problem is that all these resources
will run out eventually. And that day is probably sooner than most people
realize.
One
thing that needs to be looked at is population growth. For many Americans
putting the breaks on population is the equivalent to devil worship. Many
Christians will quote the Bible; "As for you, be
fruitful and multiply; Populate the earth abundantly and multiply in it."
In Kansas and other parts of the Bible Belt people take that book seriously and
would never hear of challenging it. But for those people who believe that
science has a place in our lives, it is time to challenge the idea of unlimited
population growth. Once again, we must consider all the resources needed for a
growing population, including homes, food and jobs.
There
are a few people who will argue that this issue has nothing to do with Marxism.
I really don't care if it does. We have to share the world and if we grow
beyond our means we will die out as a species, or we will end up in a barbaric
war over simple resources. In some ways we see that through today’s
imperialism. Much of our so called “terrorism problem” stems from the lack
of basic needs of people in less developed third world countries. So I
don't care what Karl Marx had to say about this. No growth is what we need. It
is a lot like blowing up a balloon. If seeing the balloon get bigger all the
time is the point of having it, eventually it will pop. There is no way I can
keep putting air in a balloon indefinitely. That idea defies simple scientific
logic.
The
debate has already begun. For example from Population Matters:
"On 19 April, an
audience gathered in the House of Commons for the launch event of the All-Party
Parliamentary Group (APPG) on Limits to Growth.
Speaking first,
Caroline Lucas, Green Party MP for Brighton Pavilion and chair of the new APPG,
discussed the group’s aim of bringing discussion of limits on economic growth
into the political mainstream by hosting debates, generating new policy ideas
for a post-growth economy, and commissioning new secondary research.
In essence, this is
meant to be an insurgent think tank within Westminster.
Ms. Lucas emphasized
the political challenge of convincing other politicians, and the public, who
are so accustomed to promises of growth, that we as a society have enough
already. Beyond a certain level of prosperity, economic growth does not
lead to greater societal or personal wellbeing. Moreover, economic growth is
becoming uneconomic on its own terms, she argued, in that the cost of repairing
its social and environmental side-effects, such as climate change, is greater
than the primary value growth delivers.
Ms. Lucas argued that
efficiency improvements alone will not be sufficient to cope with increasing
consumption alongside a growing population; the economy needs to stabilize and
maybe even contract."
So
the idea is getting around. It is still in the discussion stage. “No growth” is
among the many ideas that the capitalist system, and all of its industrial
leaders, politicians and pundits are working hard to suppress. An example of
that is the present day capitalist thinkers the Koch Brothers, David and
Charles. They funded a massive
climate denial machine to help keep them and other industrialists from
having to spend their money on changing the way they do business. Surely as
educated as they are they realize that climate change is real. But, as I have
often heard people say; "Why worry about that? You will be dead long
before that becomes a problem." And there is a clear connection between a
no growth economy and cleaning up the environment. Both issues include
painfully needed changes in the way the economy works. Both may lead to smaller
profits in the short run. However, without changes our economy eventually
implodes and humanity is doomed. And some of us do care what happens to the
people who live hundreds of years into the future after we are gone.
As
long as we adopt a sustainable world, let’s adopt a fair one. Let’s not have $billionaires
and wealthy people getting everything they want in and above abundance while
others settle for a few crumbs or even less that what they need. There is no
excuse of the US, the wealthiest country in the world, using its empire to make
sure its people have all the best, and yet we have people going without health care
and dying from that.
We
need a FAIR sustainable future for all of humanity.
-សតិវអតុ
No comments:
Post a Comment