We Can Surmount The Barrier To Our Survival
By Lionel Anet
28 May, 2011
Countercurrents.org
Thinking about reducing carbon emission is almost sedition for the carbon sceptic's politicians, Even the Australian ABC journalists are instructed give equal time to sceptics while the media corporations and their journalist live off any controversy and the sceptics provide the worst aspect of that. This is a part of a strong flow of misinformation and outright lies mixed in with a generous quantity of trivia has obscured and overwhelmed any chance for society to establish itself on fairness and living within nature's ability of renewal. That deluge of misinformation is increasing to counter the rising urgent need for a drastic reduction of carbon emissions and consumption of resources. Since the acceptance of those reductions would jeopardise the aimed of corporations to maximise profits and power.
The wealthy multinationals and their lackeys need to increase economic growth, as a means of increasing their wealth, this in defiance of the science, which has amassed and firmed up its facts and thinking on the dire situation we are going to face with a growing economy. Unfortunately, since it's easier to create doubt and confusion than clarify a situation, it will not be possible to change from the present extinction course of growth, to a survival one unless we can convince those wealthy people to see their demise in that flow of confusion and misinformation.
What we need to do is reverse the direction of that stream of misinformation and lies, by convincing those who control the direction and intensity of that flow to reverse it to fulfil their self-interest . Although we all have become accustomed to the consumer life style, it won't be possible to live that way, for much longer; the required resources are not there. Moreover, the longer we try to keep the consumer economy going, the less chance of surviving we will have and wealth might not help.
The main motivation to date for reducing carbon emission is the protection of the environment and concern for vulnerable people's welfare. This has never and can't divert the people who control the corporations from their need to extract the maximum wealth they can from whatever source. The education they received has trained them to accept that the ideology of self-interest and competition will attain the best possible outcome for the economy. With that attitude firmly indoctrinated in our master's head, we can only use what has meaning for them; this is their self-interest, which comprises foremost their wealth, then his or her family and self. However, without family and self nothing really matters for those who are motivated by self-interest. It's useless to expect those people to abandon their game of gaining the most wealth and power for the sake of poor people or the environment.
To convince a majority of the population that nation must convert to renewable energy, reduce economic activities, and at the same time improve the quality life, all of it seams impossible, and for many well off people unnecessary. To expect a different outcome means that people would have to overcome a very successful strong current of propaganda and trivia, this, only very few people can do.
The solution to major global problems requires transition to “The Simpler Way” Says Ted Trainer, also his latest book “ RENEWABLE ENERGY – CANNOT SUSTAIN AN ENERGY-INTENSIVE SOCIETY . ” Where he shows that, it would not be possible for our capitalist society to have enough energy from renewable. Web address: http://www.countercurrents.org/trainer240411.htm http://ssis,arts.unsw.edu.au/tsw/RE.html
That “ Simpler Way ” is also a way that would conform to our human genetic make up and thereby our life will be more harmonious, and secure. For a low energy society to be tenable, it has to be fair. To achieve a fair society it's necessary to maximise agreement on policies and to do that we need a common interest. For the first time in civilisation, we can have a common interest for everyone in the world, which at first will be survival.
It will be very problematic to survive the effect of runaway capitalist consumption. One source of the problem the community is facing, in the industrialised countries, is the education in and out of schools, and continuing later from the “information-entertainment” Medias. They have formulated attitudes tuned to program people for a consumer economy. In addition, the Media taught us that with our technology and knowledge, we can control nature and see ourself as masters of the planet and as it belongs only to our species, we therefore do, as we like. One of the major problem is decisions are taken by very few people. The other is those attitude formulated before capitalism, could only inflict minimal damage to our planet but today we can destroy all life without even trying.
Capitalism bases itself on the self-interest of individuals and competition between different interests. This has become the culture but that way of life is doomed, consequently we are attempting to humanise and live within the natures constrains by appealing to individuals or by changing the economic system using conflicts in competitive arguments in democratic institutions, or the use of violence to overthrow the dominating power, but all to no avail. The reason for our failure to change and live in a sustainable way is we are using methodology of that system, which automatically produced the unsustainable system that we are trying to remove for our survival.
To change from an exploitative system to a survival one requires different attitudes and methods. Instead of the supremacy of the individual, we must use our social nature, which give enduring satisfaction and instead of competition and conflicts, we would have cooperation and compassion, which gives the security and the sanctuary to change ourselves.
To do that our whole information media has to change totally its direction from producing controversies that spreads conflicts and confusion, to increasing clarity, and spreading harmony in the world. The sooner the media can do that the less distress and mortality we will have. Global capitalism has land itself in a desperately dangerous situation, which once the people controlling the multinationals become aware of the position they are in, they may cooperate to save themselves. We should see them as a different servant but like us, we are working for a destructive system. If we see those corporate people as enemies, they will try to save themselves by the only way they know, which is to fight. For humanity to survive it has to deal with the difficulty of a completely new danger, which life had never encountered before, thus the method to manage that will be new and unfamiliar for civilised people.
We have two aspects we must urgently deal with; one is how can we only use renewable energy, and then two is, living within the planets ability to renew itself. To achieve that quickly to minimise the sever consequences of the system's excesses, we must and can live a simpler life. We need to workout ways of changing from today's unsustainable, wasteful, and unfair economy to a sustainable, economical, and fair economy. We can only do this if the C E O of corporations can see their demise in business as usual.
Solution
We can start to achieve this with the least turmoil, by just changing the tax system from taxing wages to taxing carbon emissions and non-renewable resources. The use of labour and the earnings from the work must be free of taxes and charges, but we must have a corresponding increasing tax on burning fossil fuels and the use of resources. This would automatically reduce the use of carbon and ensure full employment.
We have no other option but to change the economic system that's geared to increasing consumption to an economical one that uses the least resources and produces the least pollution. That tax change will promote the repairs of products instead of the through away system; it will also help the smaller family farms and small business, because they use more labour and less energy. In addition, society must charge for the use of infrastructure, the use of land and any damage done to the ecosystem and social life. The earnings from investments are a legitimate taxable income. We can't prolong living with business as usual, we have to change our way of life by using a smooth tax swap, which is simple, and it will transform societies. The money we exchange for the goods and services will give us a more accurate cost that society will bear. The market can then be a venue where people can evaluate the true cost for future people and us from our consumption. To give trade its accurate cost of moving stuff and people around the world it must have a carbon tax and its freight need a tax on arrival if the goods don't carry a carbon tax. This would keep the accuracy on the cost of imported goods.
Conclusion
It makes little difference if the economy employs all able individuals or not, to the quantity of resources used or greenhouse gas emitted provided the work doesn't involve the use of non-renewable resources and there's no fossil fuel involved. Therefore, it will be necessary to change what we taxed, to reverse the pass two centuries of increasingly replacing activities carry out with labour by burning fossil fuel. Increasing the price on fossil fuels and an equivalent-lowering price of labour by removing taxes and charges on employing workers and their wages would automatically take us to a carbon free economy.
Communities have to do that from the present economic system that has welded itself to society, which destroys more than it produces. Increase taxes on carbon emission and non-renewable resources until we stop the destruction, and reduce taxes on labour until we have full engagement in societies. The ideal state is where there's little difference between voluntary and paid work. We do what we do because we like it, interested or and feel good doing something that's helpful for the community or someone.
The new taxes will directly eliminate the use of fossil fuels except in exceptional circumstances and enable every one to be engage in the maintenance of society. However, it will do far more than that, because money as a measure it will inform us of a truer cost of what we are doing. Then money can become a catalyst for survival and human welfare. Instead of using the money as a catalyst to maximise the exploitation of the planet, as much of the ecosystem and people as the corporation can manage.
The new taxes will reduce waste, pollution, and environmental destruction. Life can then become a happier more secure one. But its not possible to attain that if we are mainly activating for it, it can only be achieved as a result of a strong targeted campaign for the survival of the people who are at present dictating the content of school syllabus, the information media, and the entertainment industries. Those wealthy powerful people are doing what civilisation expected them to do, that's, to dominate and become the most powerful. Charges for services that are essential like electricity, water, and in some way food, must start at a very low per capita price and the per capita price must increase as the amount used increases.
The advertisers, the backbone of the entertainment industries, the high priest of spin, and the promoters of excess consumption, had a free-for-all competition to attain the maximum effect for their client. They need different client, and we in societies need advertisers to promote a sustainable life. The first step should be the abandonment of tax deduction for advertising expenses and government must be encouraged to spend more on education and advices to help our survival.
Lionel Anet is a member of Sydney U3A University of the Third Age, of 20 years standing and now a life member
Comments are not moderated. Please be responsible and civil in your postings and stay within the topic discussed in the article too. If you find inappropriate comments, just Flag (Report) them and they will move into moderation que.
