Home


Crowdfunding Countercurrents

Submission Policy

Popularise CC

Join News Letter

Defend Indian Constitution

CounterSolutions

CounterImages

CounterVideos

CC Youtube Channel

Editor's Picks

Press Releases

Action Alert

Feed Burner

Read CC In Your
Own Language

Bradley Manning

India Burning

Mumbai Terror

Financial Crisis

Iraq

AfPak War

Peak Oil

Globalisation

Localism

Alternative Energy

Climate Change

US Imperialism

US Elections

Palestine

Latin America

Communalism

Gender/Feminism

Dalit

Humanrights

Economy

India-pakistan

Kashmir

Environment

Book Review

Gujarat Pogrom

Kandhamal Violence

Arts/Culture

India Elections

Archives

Links

About Us

Disclaimer

Fair Use Notice

Contact Us

Subscribe To Our
News Letter

Name:
E-mail:

Search Our Archive



Our Site

Web

 

Order the book

A Publication
on The Status of
Adivasi Populations
of India

 

 

 

The Economy Is Wasteful, Unfair, But It Suits The 1%

By Lionel Anet

17 February, 2015
Countercurrents.org

Civilisation was created by warriors to ensure the wealth attained by society was divided in a way to maximise the conquerors’ wealth and power. In pre-capitalist democracy, the justification was power, or it was ordained by priest. The difference with today’s capitalist democracies is in the way the 1% justifies their theft. Today that power is wealth, mainly financial. Hypothetically, anyone can attain wealth, like winning the lottery. With capitalism the justification for having so much more than anyone else is tricky; it therefore needs a major educational and media outlets’ effort to convince the multitude that it’s impossible to have fairness. Although there are many contradictions in the theories of neoliberalism and its practice, nevertheless for people who strive for a better life, it’s best not to dwell on that.

Censorship applied by authoritarian governments is unacceptable. So, democratic nations use covert censorship. That’s why we now have a mountain of trivia such as sport that most people are now involved in trifles. The power-that-be hardly needs to use economic arguments to justify the gross unfairness in the economic system; the basic problems are always kept well covered up and diverted with that trivia.

For many centuries people have fought for freedom and fairness with no or very little success. That’s due to the few individuals who can deal with tyrants have in themselves the nature the tyrants have to get power over people. On the other hand, we now have a bigger and more serious one of depleting resources, over population, pollution, and global warming. They are all connected in some ways; each one is a severe difficulty and seemingly impossible to overcome in the current system let alone the combination.

To deal with that dilemma it will be essential to have unity, or else we are finished. To get the required fairness - the core of cooperation, the power-that-be must see the threats to their existence, but not from the people they exploit, as they must see them as their saviours, but how? The 1% must see the dangers they and their offspring are facing is coming from their control and our exploitation of the planet. This may persuade the 1% to consider something more important than their wealth. The threats, to our survival, have already started to become obvious, with violent weather, rising sea levels, and depleting resources. If we continue to exploit the planet the likely outcome will be a death throe lasting a century or so, unless we can convince those in the 1% that their life is also at stake. Those threats are the result of a social system whose economy must keep growing. The dangers to society from economic and environmental problems are now obvious, but it’s not seen as yet, especially by that 1%. That’s partially due to the environmentalists who don’t see the danger the 1% are facing either, but see them as enemies.

If we keep our economic system it will eventually destroy us all, includes the 1%. The scientific information is available for all to see, but it’s not seen by the multitude due to the media and educational institution, which covers up and distorts. The more of the same in education, which is advocated by the left, will only speed up our demise regardless of technological abilities. As well, wealth gives a misconception of security, and that’s now affecting most people, as we have super, but super can only be of benefit if the resources are at hand when needed. This applies more to the 1%, as they only feel secure due to their wealth. Altogether, the fact are diluted with nonsenses, and as the only alarm express so far, is about poor people, who the system regard as expendable, in the pursuit of wealth. We still care but feel helpless.

It’s necessary to be aware that the 1% has about the same wealth as the rest of us, that’s due to legal and illegal robbery; that unfairness dates back to the first warriors who took over community’s resources. But instead of priests it’s now the ‘commercial economists’ who rationalizes the theft and disseminate it through educational institutes and the media.

Most of us who have a satisfactory job or super are mainly concern in maintaining and improving ones position. We probably see global warming mainly a threat for the poor people of the third world and a few who are losing their island. As well the feelings that it’s not possible to do much about our carbon emissions, or it’s impossible for the 1% to be concern for anyone else as they’ll be OK. That feeling is what the 1% managed to allow circulating. Today’s children will be the unfortunate victims.

It’s easy to see the world that way, it’s an outcome derived from the ideology of neoliberalism. Nevertheless, it’s also due to the reductionist thinking, where it shouldn’t be used. In this aspect science is failing us. Specialising is necessary for individuals in the competitive ideology of capitalism. But it can’t give us a true depiction of outcomes. What’s needed is a holistic approach using the information from the reductionist work of scientist. This may need a new form of science that evaluates a wide range of aspect as they interact to be able to predict future changes. We need to estimate the correlation of the many factors that would influence our future, but foremost, is how we interact with the socioeconomic system and nature. We can then start with ERA’s reforms to the financial system as a prerequisite to fair and viable societies.

Lionel Anet is a member of Sydney U3A University of the Third Age, of 20 years standing and now a life member






.

 

 

 




 

Share on Tumblr

 

 


Comments are moderated