Discuss: Change Everything Now

The concept of a “corporation” really is a state-created concept, designed to make it possible to do things (mainly raise capital and avoid personal risk) otherwise impossible for an individual to do.  Is it feasible for the government to roll in requirements that protect the public and promote the public good? What would those requirements look like? Could they ever be specific enough to be actually useful, yet flexible or broad enough that it’s not just a huge beurocratic/regulatory burden that wastes everyones time and money in the process?

So few are willing to take on economic growth as the root cause of our current and potential future problems. It is rooted more deeply in our society than any of the traditional religions. It takes real vision and it takes courage. Bravo to Gus Speth for being so bold, so visionary, and so articulate.

We have our work cut out for us, but there is hope when people like Gus Speth lead the charge.

Dave Gardner
Producer/Director  
Hooked on Growth: Our Misguided Quest for Prosperity
[url=http://www.growthbusters.com]http://www.growthbusters.com[/url]

As the economy continues in downward spiral in terms of the lives of common folk, the eco-awareness that would be needed to create a million person march on DC is very unlikely.  Millions are just struggling to survive and keep their homes.  Forclosure rates will skyrocket in the coming months.  Speth’s ideas are lovely but the ever growing greed of hedge-fund managers, bankers and others on Wall St. who keep creating money out of the air with silly algorithms are a force we have to reckon with if we want to change the economy to something resembling carefully _managed_ capitalism. The only way that will happen is if political will exists to get their attention. They are invisible and very powerful.

  Check out the works of Elias Capriles at the U. of the Andes. Search his name. Many choices and his perception is well beyond the “wal-mart-ization” of the human mind.  Orion should consider doing a special of his output.

  ananda

The directive in the title certainly applies to that 8% of the world’s population that causes more than half the emissions (see: Sacala et.al.), and nearly all the bloody wars for resources. The rest of humanity is getting tired of everything being changed from a subsistance economy into a service economy for the remote benefits of a privileged master race. Again.

I thought that Speth’s realization that buying Priuses and CF bulbs didn’t solve any problems was long long overdue.

I am so tired of hearing the “earth is overpopulated” whine.  This lowers Speth’s credibility, and wavers towards opening the eugenics door:  Gee, where are the highest populations on the planet, and what is their skin colour as compared to most of the rich people? (You can tell I’m one of the rich ones: I am literate and I have a computer)

The world is only overpopulated by people living “the Rich American Lifestyle” (be it anywhere in the world)  Most of the world’s population lives a lifestyle with a tenth of the typical American’s footprint.  Time for us rich folk to own-up.

I’m glad Speth acknowledges that all the energy saving and emissions balancing isn’t enough and causes a false sense of progress and effort.  I’m glad he acknowledges that there needs to be a drastic change in politics.  I hope he physically leads the march he’s calling for.

NaTasha Shastan Bertrand
http://connect.bioneers.org/profile/NaTashaShastanBertrand

NaTasha wrote “I am so tired of hearing the “earth is overpopulated” whine.  This lowers Speth’s credibility, and wavers towards opening the eugenics door….The world is only overpopulated by people living “the Rich American Lifestyle.”

I’m frankly a little tired of having eugenics brought up whenever someone promotes sensible population policies. Please don’t put words in Gus Speth’s mouth.

News flash: every low-consumption developing nation on the planet is on a quest to become overconsumers just like the U.S. See China. It would be utter foolishness to focus only on the very difficult task of changing our desire to consume, while ignoring the number of us on the planet doing the consuming.

Dave Gardner
Producer/Director
Hooked on Growth: Our Misguided Quest for Prosperity
http://www.growthbusters.com

It is telling that Reed could wonder what appropriate limits to corporations might entail, for we Americans know so little of our own history.

The Founders were as concerned about concentrations of economic power as they were about unchecked political power.

“The end of democracy, and the defeat of the American Revolution will occur when government falls into the hands of the lending institutions and moneyed incorporations.” - Thomas Jefferson

For this reason, corporate charters were for a limited time and for a public purpose. Corporate “lobbying” was prosecuted as bribery, and corporations lost their charters if they strayed.

It wasn’t until the 1886 Supreme Court decision in Santa Clara vs Southern Pacific that corporations were granted not only civil rights as legal “persons” but also immortality.

Lincoln’s war consolidated political power in Washington DC, and the Court cemented economic power in the corporations. From that moment on, Jefferson’s fears were faithfully realized and the death of democracy ensued.

Dave Gardner calls those concerned about overpopulation “whiners”, and puts Speth in this category.

Speth, in fact, makes the same point as Gardner that it is the wealthy populations that have the most detrimental impact on the ecosphere. But even Speth woefully underestimates the population problem if he thinks that the 1950s world was in balance.

Dividing the Earth’s productive land mass among all humans, leaves about 4 acres per person, with only 3/4 acre arable. Ignoring the needs (one might say rights) of the myriad other species, we are now consuming the equivalent of 1.25 planets.

If we were to grant 3/4 of the Earth’s livable land mass to the other species with whom we share the planet (and on whom we rely for our own lives), then even the poorest regions have far surpassed their “fair share” because of the enormity of their populations and in spite of their extremely low economic level.

No “natural” population can long overshoot the carrying capacity of its local environment. Homo (non)Sapiens has artificially and temporarily exceeded this capacity by the exploitation of stores of ancient sunlight in the form of fossil fuels. We are now both reaching the end of this resource and the ecological (and geo-political) consequences of our foolishness.

If we don’t dramatically reduce our numbers by choice, it will be done for us - not by eugenicists but by the implacable tendency toward ecological balance. In the meantime, I agree with Speth, the “privileged” populations will have to voluntarily relinquish our lifestyle, but in a revolution much more profound than the simple reformation of capitalism that he suggests.